The dangers of the wealthy playing into politics
How billionaires help shape American policy
American billionaires have been much more openly engaged in political matters since U.S. President Donald Trump came to office in January.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who has had a shaky relationship with Trump, pulled an “Elon Musk” and allowed users to dictate moderation on his social media platforms and prevented automated systems from scanning hate speech. Meta also gave US$1 million towards Trump’s inaugural fund.
Musk, who has an estimated net worth of US$350 billion, has been put in charge of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to slash federal spending. New officers, such as ambassadors, Cabinet secretaries and Supreme Court justices, may be appointed by the president through a confirmation vote from the Senate.
Musk was not confirmed for his position.
As billionaires gain privileged access to Trump and insider policies, everyday Americans are left to struggle with the consequences of a system that increasingly serves the wealthy elite.
Musk basically possesses the clearance from the most powerful person in the U.S. to fire as many people as he wants. More than 24,000 probationary employees have been fired from their jobs in 18 federal agencies since January 2025. Additionally, Musk has attacked important agencies such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The CFPB implements and enforces federal consumer financial laws and reviews business practices, so that financial services providers respect the law.
Ironically, the CFPB has investigated complaints about Tesla’s debt collection and loan policies. Musk’s other companies have been investigated by 12 other federal agencies, and he has dismissed critics of his position at DOGE for a conflict of interest by stating, “I’ll rescue myself.”
Musk, ever the champion of transparency, has responded to federal scrutiny not by addressing concerns but by questioning the integrity of the watchdogs themselves.
By having profit-seeking billionaires and millionaires in positions of power, it is realistically in their best interest to prioritize policy that will benefit people in their class.
Trump plans on extending most of the provisions from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in 2017, which approved US$1.5 trillion in tax cuts to US$4.5 trillion in tax cuts and US$1.5 trillion in spending cuts.
However, researchers from the London School of Economics demonstrated that large tax cuts do not help trickle down wealth to the middle class but instead help the rich increase their wealth, ultimately widening the wealth gap between rich and poor.
But the American wealth gap has always been unfair. In 2019, economists Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman found that in 2018, the 400 richest families in the U.S. paid lower taxes than people in the bottom half of American households.
As the government loses money from lowering taxes, they have to recuperate it by cutting spending. The U.S. spends most of its money on Social Security, Medicare and national defence.
It does not seem likely that the Trump administration will cut military spending, as they recently approved a nearly US$3 billion arms sale to Israel, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio noting that the administration has approved nearly US$12 billion in foreign military sales to Israel.
This is another case of appealing to interests, as a campaign committee that supported Trump received US$100 million from Israeli-American political donor Miriam Adelson.
Even though Trump promised he wouldn’t cut Social Security, his interests seem to push him to support his biggest campaign contributors’ goals and himself.
It does not matter that American foreign policy directly harms the Palestinians in Gaza or that social security is used by roughly nine out of ten Americans over the age of 65.
It is clear that American politicians like Trump ride on a wave of populism only to further deteriorate the lives of the very people who voted for them.
