If holdovers from five or ten years ago dominate the lists, as is in Russia and Mexico, it suggests that the elite are prematurely entrenched. One way to distinguish good from bad billionaires is by closely reading the lists from Forbes. No bubble is a good bubble, but commodity bubbles are the worst, because they cause a lot of pain but leave nothing of value behind. These new tycoons make money essentially by digging stuff out of the ground, and make a productive contribution only if they inspire rivals to find alternatives to oil. By 2011 the numbers had flipped: 91 in energy (mostly oil), and 36 in technology. In 2001, the world had 29 billionaires in energy, 75 in technology. Unfortunately, the 2000s saw the rise of a rawer kind of greed and a class of billionaires who make money by using political connections to corner monopolies or contracts for peddling natural resources.

They are good billionaires, driven perhaps by greed but also by the kind of genius that creates innovative products and more productive economies.

Back in the 1990 s, many of the new tycoons were tech entrepreneurs, and those who endured the dotcom crash are still delivering new smart phones, e-readers, cloud computing. There are good billionaires, but the last decade saw a worldwide rise of bad billionaires. While in countries like Mexico, popular resentment has long driven the super-rich to seek a low profile in others such as India, the billionaire class was until recently feted as a symbol of growing economic prowess, but now faces tough questions about what it contributes to that success. From Seoul to Santiago, no issue resonates more loudly today than inequality, giving credence to legendary American folk singer Arlo Guthrie ’s claim that “greed and globalization aren’t just America’s fault.” More and more, you can hear the citizens of emerging market capitals complain that the global economy is profiting the plutocrats, expanding the ranks of the poor and squeezing the middle class.

Pursuit of happiness genius