Worth noting that Gates leads by a $10 billion margin.
Jeff Bezos Is Now the World's Second Richest Person
261–270 of 548 posts
Re: Jeff Bezos Is Now the World's Second Richest Person
#262Everytime I see these types of articles I wonder if we're still in feudalism. Should we really be celebrating that a single individual is worth more than hundreds of millions of people[1]? I dunno, it seems dystopian , like we're enslaved to the system. [1] https://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressreleases/2017-01-16/...
It might or might not be unjust, but feudalism is all about the hierarchy of oaths- it is about distribution of power - you give power to those sworn to you and in turn they give it to those beneath them. Jeff bezos having lots of money is an oligarchy, not feudalism.
Board of directors hires a CEO. Gives them funding and requires they produce a return. CEO hires upper management. Gives them funding, requires return. Upper management hires middle management. Funding, demands return. Etc...
This is a hierarchy of oaths. It's just not as ceremonial as you've put it. It's also not directly agrarian (and territorial) as you'd expect from a medieval feudalist regime, but the basic structure is still present.
Re: Jeff Bezos Is Now the World's Second Richest Person
#263Worth noting that Gates leads by a $10 billion margin.
And that's after Bloomberg weirdly adjusted his net worth down by about $12-$15 billion recently, right before he was about to cross $100 billion again for the first time since the dotcom bubble.
They left a note on his profile in the billionaires list that says:
"The net worth history for Bill Gates was changed to reflect a revised approach to the valuation that was applied on Jan. 27, 2017."
Which is probably another way of saying, that he put in a favor with Michael Bloomberg to not show him crossing $100 billion, as he doesn't want the headlines.
Re: Jeff Bezos Is Now the World's Second Richest Person
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unrelated, but I wonder what the sweet spot is height/floor wisefor developing affordable units. That is, given zero pushback from local citizenry and groups, if a locality wanted dense housing due to lack of space, at what point does adding a story make average cost per unit slightly more expensive instead of slightly less expensive (assuming it actually is cheaper to add a second or third story than a single story…
It's really a function of land cost. A high rise unit costs about $30k more per unit according to here: http://www.humphreys.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/MFT_FL-0... There are also costs that developers do not directly pay for but a city pays for. Maintaining all of the miles and miles of road, metro, pipes, power lines, police patrols and so on is more expensive than the equivalent amount of people in a smaller sp…
Thanks, that's useful information, but it looks like it's already heavy on one one of the spectrum. 40 unit and 160 unit comparisons are interesting, but I assume those are already from 6-8 floors to 30-40 floors. I'm also interested in the costs of units between 2-3 floors to 5-6 floors. As floors increase, that report shows an increase in construction costs (I assume because of the pain of building higher and the extra support needed to bear the load). If it's not always an entirely smooth curve of cost as floors increase, there may be some sweet spots (local maxima) in there were you maximize per-unit value. E.e. if an 11 floor building requires different, more costly building methods, it's entirely possible that a 10 floor building may be a better investment than 11, 12 or 13 floor building, and then at 14 floors it's a better value than 10 floors again. It would make sense to have building and ordinance codes line up with building realities, but they likely don't.
Re: Jeff Bezos Is Now the World's Second Richest Person
#265Earlier quoted context omitted.
> yet they share in very little of the value they produced. Those employees are free to start their own companies. If you take the risk of starting a business then you should get the rewards if it succeeds.
It was far less risky for Bezos to start his business than most of his current employees. He was wealthy before he started.
If you believe in your idea get a loan from family, friends or banks or get a high paying job save money and then start your business.
Starting and running a successful business is not easy which is why the rewards should go to the risk taker.
Re: Jeff Bezos Is Now the World's Second Richest Person
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think money is a good proxy for "adding utility to people's lives". It's a good proxy for "good at playing the money game". A nurse won't be paid $1B if she saves a CEO's life, and he is able to go and make his company billions as a result. A clever business person might, if she saves the CEO in some other aspect, as she can setup a provision first. That being said, I don't think money has much to do with mer…
Yes, supply comes into it too. A nurse will be paid a substantial sum if she is one of very few that can save the CEO's life.
The CEO can die and the company will continue functioning 95% as well. Or maybe 105%, or 10%, or 1,000%.
Re: Jeff Bezos Is Now the World's Second Richest Person
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
This reminds me of Nozick's Wilt Chamberlain example, which I will quote here: > Nozick's famous Wilt Chamberlain argument is an attempt to show that patterned principles of just distribution are incompatible with liberty. He asks us to assume that the original distribution in society, D1, is ordered by our choice of patterned principle, for instance Rawls's Difference Principle. Wilt Chamberlain is an extremely popu…
Interesting. the solution should be to just to tax Wilt Chamberlain at a rate high enough that the astronomical net worths become merely "stratospheric".
"Interesting. the solution should be to just to tax Wilt Chamberlain at a rate high enough that the astronomical net worths become merely "stratospheric"."
The solution to what ? Could you describe the problem in the (above) Wilt Chamberlain example ?
Re: Jeff Bezos Is Now the World's Second Richest Person
#268I know that I'll get skewered for this, but here goes: recently I've convinced myself we are on the verge of a very serious Amazon stock correction. Just today I saw three separate articles (without seeking them out) giving umpteen reasons Amazon is going to a trillion, or that Amazon is only getting started. Then I turned on CNBC during lunch and what are they talking about? Amazon. There's simply too much positive…
Amazon already went through 2 downturns. Dot com bubble and the last recession. During the recession they faired extremely well.
they've been facing tough competition from Walmart since the late 90s. Alibaba is still miles away from competing in the same areas as Amazon although that will change with time. For now, if you're a consumer, aliexpress is only good for buying cheap low quality items.
If there's something they've figured out, it's logistics and how to deliver a product as fast and cheap as possible. Everything about their system is optimized for this. Now with their venture into contract companies to deliver goods they can bypass more expensive UPS delivery.
Now do I think they're stock is overvalued? Yes, but I don't see a doomsday scenario happening.
Re: Jeff Bezos Is Now the World's Second Richest Person
#269Kudos to him, hopefully he will go all in on some crazy idea eventually. I still have this feeling amazon (as in online store) isn't all that big outside of US/english-speaking world. I do have a question though. When you have that much net worth and you get plastered all over the press about how much you have... What do you do then? What's your life then like? Seems like a nightmare, especially if you have kids and…
>hopefully he will go all in on some crazy idea eventually
Blue Origin? He does have his own space ship company.
Re: Jeff Bezos Is Now the World's Second Richest Person
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that's a little hyperbolic. In feudalism the balance of power is enforced by violence, whereas Jeff Bezos got rich because you gave him money in exchange for products. Like, "Hey, here's this cool electronic device called the Amazon Echo for $50." is a markedly different from "Farm here or I'll decapitate you." The fact that you harbor a resentment as if the former is anything like the latter is slightly terr…
Property is violence. If I try to take something that "isn't my property", the state will intervene with violence (e.g. forced imprisonment, etc.) on behalf of the person deemed to be the "lawful owner".
I'm curious to understand how you've decided that your desire to take someone else's property makes it a trivial truth that only violence prevents you from having the natural right to take it.