Some of them will try to purchase public goodwill as well, by using crumbs from their tax savings to fund this or that charitable cause. Their "philanthropy" is really just their way of (to them) ensuring that their tax dollars get spent on exactly what they want, nothing more. (To his credit, Bloomberg's philanthropy is real, unlike Trump's, and it takes place in this country, unlike some others. Not that digging wells in Rwanda isn't important and valuable, but there are a lot of places in the US that give the Third World a run for their horrifically inflated money.)
If only we peons had the same privilege, right? I would much rather my tax dollars stayed in my own state to help out with its many issues and challenges, rather than being sent to some southern taker state that shits on my ilk with every foul breath, but eagerly cashes my fucking checks. Or being forced to subsidize the burgeoning evilangelist grifters who have taken over the White House like a swarm of cockroaches. But that's part of the deal -- everyone is paying for someone or something they personally disapprove of.
So Liz Warren has a plan for everything, and one of those plans is to institute a wealth tax (2% over $50M; 3% over $1B) to pay for something resembling a civilized health care system, like every other modern nation has. Since our media ecosystem is entirely bought and paid for by our insect corporate overlords, and exists primarily to reassure them of their innate rightness about everything, we have seen a barrage of nonsense spewing from everyone with a ten-or higher-digit net worth, fuming that they might end up with only eighty billion dollars instead of eighty-four billion dollars or whatever their fucking problem is.
(Obviously, we know what their problem is: the two simple words in the English language they refuse to understand are no and enough. And frankly, why shouldn't that be the case? If you or I were constantly surrounded by yes-people, sucked-up to and feted and cosseted by the influencers and tastemakers and power-brokers, we'd be in that epistemic bubble as well. I'm rich because I'm smart, and I'm smart because I'm rich. It's a self-reinforcing feedback loop.)
Whatever else he may be, Bloomberg is not an idiot, nor is he particularly evil. Hell, if he somehow became the Democratic nominee and went up against that fucking thing, I'd vote for Bloomie in a heartbeat. Not even a close call. Same with Tom Steyer.
But this is clearly nothing but an ego trip for these guys, rich-dude wish-fulfillment. Bloomberg and Steyer are intelligent guys; they know full well that if they wanted to do the most good with the most impact for the greatest number of American citizens of all socioeconomic strata, the most effective way for them to do that through the political system would be to find the ten most vulnerable Republicon senators up for re-election next year, and give each of their Democratic challengers $25M.
It doesn't matter if Warren or Biden or Bloomberg gets that shitbirds out of the White House, if Moscow Mitch and Leningrad Lindsey are still pushing ass out of their respective seats. Every single candidate has to know this, whether they admit it or not.
Bloomberg is simply jumping in to take the side of the Monopoly dude with the monocle and the waxed mustache, the misunderstood failsons who inherited every dime and still think they're Hank Rearden. Again, if these guys really wanted to "solve problems" they have the means to do so. No doubt the Wal-Mart heirs are watching closely, to see if one of their spoiled grandchildren might need to "help" by running for governor or senator from Arkansas.