Why is this distressing?
Few people really want a true "classless society". I'd assume that few of the founders on HN plan on donating 100% of all income they earn above the median level.
I'm personally interested in Participatory Economics (Parecon for short), which is a model for a decentralized classless economy, which offers properties that I think many people want from their economic system. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participatory_economics
There's a difference between believing that a classless society is a worthy goal and, noticing that one is not currently in a classless society and that being in an above average class has certain benefits, seeking to achieve an elevated class for the time being.
I would like to think I am a fairly strong believer in a classless post-scarcity utopia, but giving away most of what I own is not going to bring that any closer - all I'd be doing is reducing my own power to act. Better to retain it for now and use it to work towards the long term goal.
Sounds self-serving, maybe, but what can you do?
It's important to note that I refer mainly to material classlessness here; obviously classes of intellect and culture will still exist and you wouldn't want to eradicate them anyway. I would imagine political classes would also exist but hopefully determined by will to participate, not material means.
And why? Well, egalitarianism, basically, and the belief that material means of one's parents should be neither benefit nor hindrance in life.
This is the stuff of essays, not little comments like this, but I hope you get the idea : D