On Jan 27, 9:21*pm, Kevin Vang wrote:

I know how you feel, but here's a more positive way to look at it:
This dude clearly had at least $400,000 more than he needed, and he
just transferred all that wealth to a large group of caterers, chefs,
waiters, musicians, parking valets, photographers, seamstresses and
taylors, florists, bartenders, and probably a lot more that I can't
think of off the top of my head. *Not to mention the farmers, ranchers,
fishermen, and brewers, vintners, and distillers that produced all of
the ingredients for the food and drink, and so on and on and on...
A lot of people probably had food and medicine _because_ he was
willing to blow all his dough.

This is objectionable not because the money was spent, but that it was
spent so conspiculously, on television no less! This crass display of
materialism is like the potlach ceremonies of the Native Americans in
the Pacific Northwest. They would actually destroy valuable goods to
show how rich and powerful they were.

As a counterexample, Warren Buffett is widely admired not because he
is wealthy and knows so well how to make more money, but because
despite that he lives unostentatiously.