Someone else's take:
"
Something I just realized after finishing this episode: Jimmy is always at his most vengeful when people attempt to hold themselves accountable. Note how his true rage at Howard started when Howard confessed that he felt responsible for Chuck’s death. When Kim comes in to sign the divorce settlement, his performance of stone-cold indifference—“Well, have a nice life, Kim!”—is because she’s actually trying (somewhat) to take responsibility for what they’ve done. Jimmy’s actually not too bothered when people try to hold him accountable, with the exception of Chuck. He’ll still do everything in his power to weasel out of the consequences, but he generally doesn’t take it too personally. But when people try to answer for their own bad actions, that’s when Jimmy feels truly, personally attacked. That is the only kind of choice that makes him feel genuinely morally implicated because he knows it’s the one thing he’ll never voluntarily do himself. It’s even worse if Jimmy can tell himself the other person’s choice is actually just an act of self-serving hypocrisy—as when Buddy refuses to rob a man battling cancer after having robbed so many others, or when Kim resigns as a member of the bar association and turns down the Sandpiper money, but doesn’t actually turn herself in. (It’s the mark of how complex the BCS/BB ethical matrix is that the writers actually allow those kinds of actions to be both self-serving and genuinely driven by conscience at the same time.)
I think the reason for this is because of a feeling that started creeping up on me while watching “Nippy”: it doesn’t matter how sweet and kindhearted Jimmy can be at an interpersonal level, his addiction to pulling off these kinds of schemes reveals the con artist’s basically malevolent orientation toward the universe. What I mean is that, in order to do this over and over again, you have to believe, deep down in your soul, that a person’s willingness to trust you isn’t just a reason, but a justification for lying to them, stealing from them, and taking things that aren’t yours to take. If somebody trusts you, it means they deserve to be hurt by you. Remember the flashback scene where a young Jimmy watches his father get conned and then starts stealing from the register that very day? That looked an awful lot like the birth of a lifelong contempt for the world, and the thing about contempt is that it has nothing to do with affection or attachment. Contempt is about an absence of respect, not an absence of liking—you can like people just fine and still have no respect for them, or conversely, absolutely despise someone and still have a basic respect for them. (Recall what Jimmy says to Cliff Main after he manages to scam his way into getting fired and still keeping his severance: “For what it’s worth, Cliff, I think you’re a decent guy.” Cliff: “Yeah, well, for what’s it’s worth, Jimmy, I think you’re an asshole.”) What makes Jimmy’s contempt for the world different from Chuck’s is that Chuck’s vengeance and pettiness is activated when people don’t defer to him (he’s a lot like Walt that way), whereas Jimmy’s is activated by its opposite, when people act in good faith and assume he is as well.
So it makes sense that Jimmy is so infuriated by other people’s attempts to take responsibility for themselves, especially if he considers them to be just as compromised as he is. To admit that you’ve done wrong, or that there are lines you won’t cross is to agree that there are ethical and moral standards that go beyond interpersonal kindness, and that adherence to those standards might require some kind of sacrifice. When you’re willing to cross a line and the other person isn’t, who looks like the asshole?"
