[nathanvanfleet]

Rich people love to distinguish between old and new rich. Am I supposed to somehow be impressed by this? Old rich just use their money for pleasure and status like new rich do, they just have different more obtuse ways to do it.

[vineyardmike]

I think there are implications or reasons i see this… (this is not an endorsement)

1. “New rich” is flashy and gaudy and that’s not perceived as a positive. Flaunting wealth is seen as trying to show off for the admiration/approval/jealousy of the less rich. Being old rich is to be above it, and so comfortable with money you don’t need to show it off.

2. “Old Rich” is a separate world, it’s like royalty, no amount of success today makes you old rich yesterday. Since having the right connections is an important factor in success, it’s another way to close doors for everyone but your kids.

3. I think there’s a certain “aesthetic” that old-money is associated with (enjoyed by the not rich). A quasi-royal preppy guilded sort of image, and people seem to like that.

[gizmo]

The "new rich" counterpoints are that:

1. old money is afraid to spend frivolously because (a) they are embarrassed because they know they didn't earn it themselves and (b) they don't believe they could make it on their own if they had to. Also, old money shamelessly flaunts their wealth. Hospital naming rights, charity events, art collections, etc.

2. because old money is the opposite of meritocratic (inheritance based) they have to come up with all kinds of gatekeeping strategies to maximize the advantage of their social position.

3. social rules that keep the old monied themselves in check, to slow down the inevitable reversion to the mean.

[LightG]

New rich can sometimes be a middle finger to the old rich.

I'm thinking of some Hiphop stars.

Over the top behaviour, perhaps, but I'll always respect that more than the old rich dripping in the unearned benefits of their generational wealth, connections and status worship. But I'm not bitter.

[nonethewiser]

But new rich means people are closer to the source of wealth. Someone who built a successful business is more admirable than someone who never worked, but their ancestors were very wealthy.

[Mordisquitos]

While I believe that I mostly understand the distinction between Old Rich and New Rich (myself being neither of them), I wonder where individuals such as Warren Buffett fall in the social distinction. While it's obvious that in practice he's "new rich" in terms of family timeline, he is famously quite the opposite of the showy New Rich stereotypes. Furthermore, I'm sure there are countless more like him (though not quite so rich) that are virtually unknown precisely because they are so restrained and discreet about their wealth.

I guess what I'm getting at is that I'm curious as to how the Old Rich feel towards these non-New-Rich-but-newly-rich types. Are they still considered part of the New Rich riff-raff even if they do happen to be more sensible with their money? Or are they seen as honorary Old Rich out of respect? Or something else?

Hopefully some Old Rich HN commenter (we know you're there!) can give me some insight.

[FpUser]

>"I think there’s a certain “aesthetic” that old-money is associated with (enjoyed by the not rich). A quasi-royal preppy guilded sort of image, and people seem to like that."

Thanks. I needed something to induce vomit.

[andsoitis]

Being able to steer wealth over multiple generations vs squandering it is seen as positive and not an obviously easy thing to do.

When you’re newly rich, this ability is yet unproven…

[hahaxdxd123]

Middle class people putting old money on a pedestal and denigrating new money is so laughable to me.

The folks that do nothing but own land and raise your rent every year are oh so classy, and the folks that actually work invent things that improve your life like idk wifi are oh so gauche.

[otikik]

> Middle class people putting old money on a pedestal and denigrating new money is so laughable to me.

Both are equally laughable. We shouldn’t put others in pedestals because of their wealth, full stop.

[pnut]

I think it's more to do with what you imagine life could be, if money were no object.

Middle class people have correctly concluded that hustling is not a virtue, and that hustling more is a fool's errand.

I personally don't aspire to work any harder than I already do, and given the choice, would strongly prefer to inherit my fortune over "earning" it.

[sbm_au]

Ironically, WiFi was actually developed by an Australian public research institute. The patent earned over 400 million which went to the government.

[B1FF_PSUVM]

> do nothing but own land

Sheesh, those guys got skinned and mounted as trophies over a century ago.

Look up Pareto foxes and lions.

[qwertox]

I once read somewhere that the issue is that to the old rich money isn't a topic. It's something that exists and has existed for a long time, that gets used when needed, but doesn't get talked about.

New rich on the other hand feel the need to display the fact that "they've made it", talking about money is important to them.

So there's a certain incompatibility between old and new rich, where old rich feel bothered by the talk about money.

[cosmodisk]

I think in general money isn't a topic amongst the rich. Yes, there are exceptions, but in general it's a very boring thing to talk about once you reach a certain level.

[A4ET8a8uTh0]

I personally think of it as a pure human need to somehow feel superior to their peers. Sure, they have the same amount of money, but are how did they get them and can we make their status lower ( and at the same time ours higher ) by pointing to that. The in-group/out-group dynamic is at play for everyone including apparently people, who have a lot of money. If I was a more charitable person, I would say that is a good thing. It means they are still connected to the human race.

Note. By rich here I am talking upwards of 100MM although it would appear B would soon be replacing M as the place to be money-wise in terms of wealth recognition.

[spaceman_2020]

I think the implication is that “old money” has aristocratic roots and thus, “noble blood”. Just plain old chauvinism and bigotry, but now applied to billionaires too.

[ulfw]

New rich = often earned their money (legitimately or not) Old rich = done nothing but inherit. Getting born is their only achievement.

[TotoHorner]

They’re incredibly smug about it too, as if getting born with a silver spoon in your mouth is somehow far more commendable?

[ergocoder]

Old rich also likely earned their wealth in a lot more unethical way.