At least the random couple with low income that lucked into a house 40 years ago is semi sympathetic. They don't travel the world and may not be able to move somewhere else as nice after selling (especially with prop 13 tax lock ins)
But Marc can live anywhere and travel anywhere.
I knew a guy who had to know the price of everything and calculated everything by its monetary value. Whether or not he ended up really wealthy I don't know, but he was already pretty well off when I knew him.
My take away was to just keep driving my small car, and not require such hustle to fill up a Range Rover. :D
Meanwhile money doesn't spoil, takes up almost no space even if you hold it as cash, it is also risk free, it can be traded and turned into almost anything. There is no downside to having money, there is no upside to not having money, not having money is a terrible thing actually. So anytime you earn money, you just keep it until you die and then you give it to your children.
The fact that money is actually meant to be a medium of exchange, not a status symbol was completely forgotten.
It's power and superiority. It's not that they care about a relatively insignificant amount of money they might lose on paper, it's that someone else might have caused that or might have gained from it. Doubly so if that someone else is a little person.
Maybe true in some cases, but I don't think this is generally true. I think the typical behavior is to focus on oneself and not think about the little peoples interest at all.
Regardless, Andreessen probably doesn't care about his property value all that much. But it's a lot more socially acceptable to say that than to say he doesn't want poor people too close to his neighborhood. (Or even just mere single- and double-digit millionaires.)
In practice, becoming wealthy is alost a social darwinist selection process where you need an extreme adaptation to your environment to end up at the top, anything less and you end up in the upper middle class at best. Once you have structured your entire life around becoming wealthy it is hard to quit.
This is problematic because human wants and needs aren't actually infinite. One workaholic can do the work of four people, making three out of four people redundant, but the workaholic would never give up the wealth he obtained this way, so three people end up unemployed instead of everyone working 10 hours a week. Because of this all or nothing mentality, everyone feels compelled to outdo the workaholic just to stay in their job, not because they actually need all of the money.
The absurd part though is that the workaholic blames others for not doing their share, while he himself insists on doing everything, in fact, he absolutely despises anyone taking his workload off his shoulders. Somehow charity i.e. doing others work for them turned into a one sided relationship where the recipient is now the sinner through no fault of his own. People start hating each other for no reason.
The restrictive part is that lots have to remain gigantic, but the setbacks from those lot lines are gigantic as well, and this is rigorously enforced, but within that build-able footprint the homeowner has nearly complete free reign. The result is a near complete isolation from having to see or contemplate neighbors, let alone "the poors", and yet it's within driving proximity of pretty much everything; that is, it enables the real-deal modern day version of the "country manor" of which the neighborhoods that comprise over half of American housing stock are merely cheap and shitty knockoffs.
The people that become billionaires are disproportionately people inclined to care about the value of their properties beyond the point where it makes any reasonable impact on their lifestyle.
Think about what an acre of land is worth in Manhattan , and what it would be worth if it were instead restricted to single family homes.
What's hilarious is that, in this context, "poor people" probably means millionaires.
Billionaires see each other as predator that will eat them and seize the assets given a chance. They see lower classes as worse, since logically they'll need more assets than billionaires.