Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

You vs. a Billionaire: An Interactive Perspective on Wealth

budgetflow.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 73 posts

Re: You vs. a Billionaire: An Interactive Perspective on Wealth

#51

Post by finolex1 »

RIMR wrote: post #32
finolex1 wrote: post #11

Most billionaires cannot extract most of their wealth without crashing the price of their remaining assets. No doubt the gulf is still great, but it's a little smaller than the raw numbers imply.

I hear this muddy defense of billionaires every time anyone tries to compare the wealth held by the working class vs. the ruling class, and it's pure BS. A billionaire's net worth is measured in dollars. If that isn't a valid unit of measuringing their wealth, then find another way to measure it. The theoretical loss in stock price if they sell their holdings shouldn't factor in here, because it isn't universally tru…

1. It's not a defense, just an observation.

2. Transaction costs for liquidating your wealth is materially different from selling enough to significantly affect the market for an asset. As an extreme example, large holders of a meme cryptocurrency cannot sell the majority of their holdings without crashing the value of their coin.

3. Borrowing works for smaller amounts if you can spread out the sales of your assets over a long period of time (or if you don't need to sell at all, e.g. if investing in something that gives you returns).

Re: You vs. a Billionaire: An Interactive Perspective on Wealth

#52

Post by Kirby64 »

avalys wrote: post #36
spencerflem wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not theoretical, and they can borrow cash against their hoard and spend it on things.

So what?

In the same way the dragon hoarding their loot wields immense power over the peasants (strained analogy, I know), having immense amounts of wealth accessible allows for one to wield immense amounts of influence. Just look at what is happening the last few weeks. Basically explicitly buying favor with the government.

Re: You vs. a Billionaire: An Interactive Perspective on Wealth

#53

Post by spencerflem »

richwater wrote: post #15

As with most of these things, the (shallow) comparison is interesting but there is no actual justification for why it's _bad_. Why do I care how many jets an ultra wealthy person can buy? I literally am not affected by it at all. In fact, my best friend is an aircraft mechanic at a popular private airport. He directly benefits (full wage, salary and benefits) from the rise in private air travel.

One reason it's bad is because they are taking all the new wealth. Since 2020- the economy has gone up, billionaires are dramatically wealthier, and yet most peoples wealth did not change or went down.

In the USA, the wealth of the top 25 people is equal to that of the entire bottom 50%.

Re: You vs. a Billionaire: An Interactive Perspective on Wealth

#54

Post by stego-tech »

grajaganDev wrote: post #17
stego-tech wrote: post #5

An excellent visualizer. I particularly appreciate the use of text metaphors and analogies in lieu of traditional graphics, as it provides a more relatable metric to go by than just starkly different bar sizes on a chart. My only critique would be to put into perspective social problems (e.g., homelessness, medical debt, etc) to demonstrate what portion of these could be solved through the wealth of a single billiona…

Right - Musk could end world hunger.

From the World Food Program:

> Back in July of 2021, U.N. World Food Programme Executive Director David Beasley told us it would take an estimated $40 billion each year to end world hunger by 2030.

The problem is that it would mean directing his wealth and influence according to the guidance of others, which would detract from the cult of personality billionaires carefully cultivate for themselves. It’s a difference of emphasis: sure, their fortune and influence could end world hunger/buy everyone a home/pay off medical debts, but they can’t solve these problems themselves because they’re not capable of doing so.

And so they don’t. They let problems fester because they cannot get the credit they want for fixing it. They’re unconcerned with actually solving problems, and solely concerned with recognition.

Re: You vs. a Billionaire: An Interactive Perspective on Wealth

#56

Post by spencerflem »

avalys wrote: post #36
spencerflem wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not theoretical, and they can borrow cash against their hoard and spend it on things.

So what?

I could say "so what" to their wealth being in stocks. What does that change?

Re: You vs. a Billionaire: An Interactive Perspective on Wealth

#57

Post by ASalazarMX »

finolex1 wrote: post #11

Most billionaires cannot extract most of their wealth without crashing the price of their remaining assets. No doubt the gulf is still great, but it's a little smaller than the raw numbers imply.

One wonders how they can buy private jets, luxury cars, and mansions with their modest liquidity, right? It's as if they could extract their wealth over time and not all of it at once, so the remainder doesn't lose its value.

Re: You vs. a Billionaire: An Interactive Perspective on Wealth

#58

Post by legitster »

Musk is kind of a bad example. Something around half of his holdings in Tesla is currently tied up as collateral for loans into other ventures. Most of the rest of his net worth comes from his ownership of SpaceX, whose valuation is incredibly skewed by the small number of shares that have ever transacted. Simply put, I am not actually sure if he could buy a 787 with his assets right now if he wanted to.

The comparisons are still good if we look at a "normal billionaire" (Let's say Charles Koch) with "only" $65 billion dollars (but they are much more diversified and fungible). The example of him buying a 787 and wrecking it would be the equivalent of me burning $10k. But some of the elements on this page don't work right when you use that few of billions to compare against.

Re: You vs. a Billionaire: An Interactive Perspective on Wealth

#59

Post by inanutshellus »

pcthrowaway wrote: post #40
nsxwolf wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This one is rather preachy. It is unintentionally arguing the existence of Amazon itself is bad and that everyone would be better off without it, including all the people it employs and serves, directly and indirectly.

Where does it argue against the existence of Amazon. Not that I disagree with it, but it doesn't even do that. It is however, out of date. At the time of creation, the 400 richest people in the world owned $3.2T of wealth, now you only need to take the top 23 richest people to amass $3.2T of wealth.

"Updated April 3, 2021". Seems odd that 400 would go to 23 in less than 4 yrs, though.

Re: You vs. a Billionaire: An Interactive Perspective on Wealth

#60

Post by spencerflem »

inanutshellus wrote: post #59
pcthrowaway wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does it argue against the existence of Amazon. Not that I disagree with it, but it doesn't even do that. It is however, out of date. At the time of creation, the 400 richest people in the world owned $3.2T of wealth, now you only need to take the top 23 richest people to amass $3.2T of wealth.

"Updated April 3, 2021". Seems odd that 400 would go to 23 in less than 4 yrs, though.

Seems odd, but:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chasewithorn/2023/12/19/the-10-...

In that year alone, Elon gained a hundred billion dollars. Most people did not

Wealth inequality is mind boggling.

Post reply on HN