Ex-millionaire warns: "Excessive wealth is one of the greatest dangers of our time."

Ex-millionaire warns: “Excessive wealth is one of the greatest dangers
of our time.”

Sebastian Klein was once a multiple millionaire. Today, he is
committed to fighting the super-rich. On greedy start-up guys, Nazi
money, and the lie of performance.

“It's not right that average earners pay more taxes than the wealthy”
– ex-millionaire Sebastian Klein

[This interview posted on 4/21/2025 is translated from the German on
the Internet, https://taz.de/Ex-Millionaer-warnt/!6079409/.]


taz: Mr. Klein, are you a happy person?

Sebastian Klein: Yes, I am happy.

taz: Does that have anything to do with the fact that you are rich?

Klein: I have enough money to feel secure, but not enough that I have
to constantly think about what to do with my money. That makes me feel
much better than I did a few years ago when I had more wealth.


Sebastian Klein, born in 1982, grew up in the Allgäu region of Germany
and studied psychology. He is the co-founder of the knowledge platform
Blinkist, and the sale of his company made him a multimillionaire.
When he realized that extreme wealth is toxic for our society, he gave
away 90 percent of his fortune and founded the investment fund Karma
Capital, which aims to promote systemic change and supports charitable
media, among other things. He is also co-founder of the business
magazine Neue Narrative, which is run as a responsible enterprise.
Klein lives with his family in Berlin and Brandenburg.

The book

His book Toxisch reich (Toxic Rich) was recently published by oekom
verlag and is a mixture of autobiography and economic analysis.


taz: You co-founded the company Blinkist and became a multimillionaire
as a result. Was that unpleasant?

Klein: A lot of money makes you lonely. It disconnected me from the
world to a certain extent. Many rich people talk about their mistrust
that those around them only want their money. You're constantly
preoccupied with money, with material things. And then there's the
fact that you don't compare yourself to people with average incomes,
but to those who are twice or even a thousand times richer than you.
That makes you feel like a poor sod all the time. There's always
someone who's much richer.

taz: Unless your name is Elon Musk.

Klein: Yes, and he's unhappy right now because he lost around $150
billion when Tesla shares crashed. Ultimately, it's about being
satisfied with what you have. And that's certainly not the case for
people who are constantly fixated on money.

taz: You donated 90 percent of your fortune to a charitable
organization, keeping half a million dollars for yourself. Do you
still feel rich?

Klein: I feel rich, but that doesn't have much to do with money. For
me, wealth means not having financial worries, but having space and
time for the things that make me happy: relationships, nature,
meaningful work. By that measure, I feel super rich.

taz: I've read that once you have a fortune of around 15 million
euros, happiness no longer increases, but decreases. Others cite an
annual income of around 75,000 dollars as the threshold.

Klein: There are different studies, depending on who commissioned them
and what questions they asked. Some also conclude that more money
always means more happiness. The fact is, the more money you have, the
more you can assert your own will in the world. But I am convinced
that a lot of money does not make you happier than enough money.
What's more, we would all be happier in a society where everyone has
enough. When I was still very rich, at some point the sight of old
people searching through trash cans every day for deposit bottles to
get a few cents bothered me.

wochentaz

This text is from wochentaz. Our weekly newspaper from the left! Every
week, wochentaz looks at the world as it is – and as it could be. A
left-wing weekly newspaper with a voice, a stance, and the taz's
unique view of the world. Available every Saturday at newsstands and
of course by subscription.

taz: You recently published a book entitled “Toxisch reich” (Toxic
Rich). Why is wealth toxic?

Klein: Money can be like poison. It can destroy relationships, lead to
abuse of power, and fuel a dynamic that destroys society and nature.
Excessive wealth is one of the greatest dangers of our time.

taz: You obviously thought differently in the past. After studying
psychology, you became a management consultant at the Boston
Consulting Group in 2010 and earned an annual salary of around 70,000
euros plus bonuses and other privileges.

Klein: I ended up in a world of total competition, where maximum
exploitation and maximum self-exploitation reign supreme. It was a
shock, an extreme contrast to my studies. And very educational, but I
didn't last long and quit. Together with a friend, I then wanted to
become a millionaire in a year. We wanted to sell cooling scarves that
we called “Penguin Hugs.” We had a thousand made in China, and some
are still in my basement. It wasn't a big hit.

taz: Nevertheless, you made a new start.

Klein: In 2011, I started working with another acquaintance to build
the educational app Blinkist, which provides summaries of non-fiction
books. At the time, apps were considered the hot new thing in the
start-up world. However, most investors preferred simpler business
models, such as the digital sale of dog food and socks.

taz: What kind of people were in the Berlin start-up scene?

Klein: The scene was very male, very white and German, very privileged
and wealthy. Many had studied at private universities and business
schools and were able to finance their companies from their own
resources or those of their families. As a former management
consultant, I did have contacts with investors, but I didn't have any
significant savings. So we had to work with investors from the outset
and thus got caught up in the financial market early on.

taz: What happened next?

Klein: In 2016, in my early thirties, I left Blinkist, so I no longer
worked there, but I remained a co-owner. My shares subsequently became
more and more valuable. Just one year after leaving the company, I was
able to sell a few of them, and then again a year later. Then suddenly
I had a million euros, and when the company was sold in 2023, it was
over five million.

taz: A millionaire in your mid-30s – that sounds like a dream. Did you
buy things you'd always wanted?

Klein: At first, I kept checking my bank balance, which gave me a
dopamine rush every time. I bought a hi-fi system, a racing bike, a
nice suit, and had the kitchen in my rented apartment renovated.
Suddenly having no money worries was a very nice feeling, but then the
happiness faded as money took up more and more space in my life. I was
constantly thinking about how I could turn a million into two million,
and I felt less and less free.

taz: What triggered your final change of heart?

Klein: Thomas Piketty's book “Capital in the 21st Century.” I read it
in 2018. I was very shocked by his figures on inequality. Also because
hardly anyone talks about it. And I realized: I am part of the
problem! When Blinkist was sold, I therefore invested 90 percent of my
assets in a non-profit organization that I am now developing together
with others. We are working on our own solutions, but we also support
public-interest media start-ups to strengthen democracy through the
Media Forward Fund, which we helped to launch last year.

taz: How has this changed your life in concrete terms? Have you had to
give anything up?

Klein: Not really. Even before, I saw money primarily as a means to
shape things. Excessive consumption and luxury have never interested
me. I like to eat well and travel, but I can still afford to do that.
And I wouldn't dream of flying first class around the world or renting
a private jet.

taz: You write that you didn't stop believing in the meritocracy until
you were in your mid-30s.

Klein: I grew up with the principle that you only become something
through hard work. It took me a long time to realize that this isn't
true. Other people never notice it. Friedrich Merz has probably never
worked in a productive field in his entire life. People like him work
as lobbyists and corporate lawyers for large corporations and move
money around. They wrongly call themselves “high achievers.” The real
high achievers, who do care work, for example, are poorly paid. Those
who are close to the money are paid well to very well. That is a great
injustice. We have to reclaim these terms! This also applies to the
term “freedom,” which today is mainly misused to mean the free
movement of goods and capital.

taz: You work in the media sector. Many super-rich people are entering
the media, but to undermine democracy.

Klein: I wouldn't have thought this development possible in the past.
In 2012, Facebook was still a trendy new start-up; in 2025, it is
throwing democracy under the bus and causing incredible damage.
Twitter also had an excellent reputation in the beginning. Since Elon
Musk bought Twitter and turned it into X, it has mainly been spewing
hate speech. Such corporations want maximum returns for their wealthy
owners. They are guided solely by shareholder value and have no
morals.

taz: And you want to do things differently now?

Klein: Yes. I founded Karma Capital, an investment fund that aims to
support systemic change. Its goal is not maximum returns, but maximum
impact. We invest in responsibly owned companies and in non-profit
media.

taz: What is responsible ownership?

Klein: A company under responsible ownership does not belong to
shareholders, but exclusively to itself. Because its sale is legally
prohibited, it cannot become an object of speculation. In addition, it
must reinvest or donate all profits. This means that control of the
business remains with the company itself. And the company can commit
itself to the common good.

taz: What legal forms are there for this?

Klein: There is no separate legal form in Germany as yet. The lobby of
billionaire heirs in particular is fighting all efforts to create a
company with restricted assets. So far, we have had to resort to a few
tricks: Karma Capital is a limited liability company owned by a
non-profit limited liability company. And the Purpose Foundation holds
a veto share to prevent the company from being sold and profits from
being distributed. Of course, this is not the only model that offers
an alternative to shareholder capitalism. We are currently seeing a
renaissance of cooperatives, which I find very promising.

taz: Is this a prospect for society as a whole?

Klein: It is certainly an important building block for reducing
extreme inequality.

taz: Since the coronavirus pandemic began, the richest people in the
world have doubled their wealth, while 5 billion people have become
poorer. In terms of wealth inequality, we are now back to where we
were in 1870. In between, there was a much fairer distribution of
wealth through taxation of the rich in 1950. How do you explain this
development?

Klein: The first phase of capital deregulation took place before the
First World War. The catastrophe of the Second World War then led to
the establishment of the welfare state, with high taxes for the rich
and corporations. This was followed in the 1980s by the second phase
of neoliberal deregulation, with privatization and tax cuts for the
rich. And today, we see the consequences of this political course in
extreme inequality and many other crises.



I wish that the heirs of these corporations would say: We have
something to make up for, we want to play a positive role in society.
I am surprised that the social demand for this is not louder.

taz: You write in your book that today the principle of “one person,
one vote” is being replaced by “one euro, one vote.” Must the rich be
expropriated to save democracy?

Klein: I am a defender of the Basic Law. Changes should take place
within the framework of existing law. The better way would be to tax
the rich heavily with the political goal of preventing individuals
from hoarding so much. That's why I joined “taxmenow” in 2023, an
association of wealthy people who are demanding that the state tax
them much more heavily.

taz: In your book, you also address the Nazi past of many
corporations. For example, BMW, Quandt/Klatten, BASF, Siemens, VW,
Kühne+Nagel ...

Klein: Günther Quandt, a member of the NSDAP, produced weapons for the
Wehrmacht and exploited concentration camp prisoners in his factories.
He was also one of the biggest profiteers of the so-called
Aryanization. With his accumulated wealth, he bought BMW shares in the
1950s. Today, his BMW shares belong to his grandchildren Susanne
Klatten and Stefan Quandt, who are among the richest people in
Germany. I wish the heirs of these corporations would say: We have
something to make up for, we want to play a positive role in society.
I'm surprised that there isn't a louder call for this in society.

taz: Are lobby organizations for the rich also responsible for the
lack of reappraisal?

Klein: Yes, and it starts with the wording. One of the most
influential lobby organizations for billionaires here is the “Stiftung
Familienunternehmen” (Family Business Foundation). It deliberately
creates a completely false impression with the cozy term “family
business.” I am constantly shocked by the extent of their
disinformation and propaganda.

taz: The wealthy often enjoy a good reputation because of their
charitable foundations. What do you object to about that?

Klein: Philanthropy is part of the system and only possible in an
unequal society. It cannot solve the problem of inequality because it
would then abolish itself. And it is undemocratic because elected
representatives should make political decisions, not individual older
men. Even if they wanted to, they would certainly not be good at
thinking for the whole of society.

taz: In your book, you talk about “extractive” versus “regenerative
professions.” What do you mean by that?

Klein: “Extractive” means: I take more than I give back. Our economy
as a whole is extractive; it is driven by the financial market and
exploits more than it gives back. It promotes private profits and
social damage. From this perspective, investment banking is an
extractive profession. Regenerative means: I give back more than I
take, I contribute to healing and building resources. Nursing is a
regenerative profession.

taz: And what is “regenerative capital”?

Klein: It is capital that contributes to the common good and to
healing. It has a long-term orientation and low return expectations.

taz: How large is the share of regenerative capital in the German economy?

Klein: It's probably less than one percent. A few banks are included,
such as GLS Bank, other companies, and our Karma Capital. Some funds
are striving for this. But you have to be careful: some promise high
returns and high benefits for the next generation at the same time.
It's impossible to have both at the same time. There is a total of 20
trillion euros in private wealth in Germany. An unimaginable sum. If
this huge amount were no longer extractive but regenerative, we could
significantly reduce all global problems!

taz: In your book, you propose a basic inheritance of a one-time
payment of 50,000 euros for all 18-year-olds. Why?

Klein: It would enable young adults to pursue career paths that would
otherwise only be open to those who have inherited wealth. It would
probably be the greatest contribution imaginable to reducing
inequality. Unfortunately, no political party has yet shown any
willingness to implement this.

taz: What would be the first steps in the right direction for you?

Klein: Massive taxation of the super-rich. The low inheritance tax on
very large fortunes is incredibly unfair. And wealth tax must finally
be reintroduced. It is unacceptable that average earners pay more tax
than the wealthy. I am counting on more and more people to speak out
on this issue and on organizations such as taxmenow, Finanzwende, and
the Steuergerechtigkeit network to exert political pressure.


Very good article, just like the interview with Grace Blakeley, and
both, if the ideas were implemented, would describe *the* antidote to
the right wing. But with a few exceptions, the political sphere is
miles away from that, because, according to Blakeley, “Political
decisions are made in the interests of capital, not for the benefit of
a better life for the population.” This has a long tradition, and I
doubt that it was ever intended to be any different. Concessions have
only ever been made under external pressure from the population.