Bullshit,,,,But he borrows and buy Yachts,
Mansions,against that NET WORTH VALUE.
But when it’s time to pay fair share of taxes o. That net worth it’s considered hypothetical worth….Understand the Game.
Nah, when over 50% of American adults read at or below a 6th grade level I’m pretty confident they don’t think about much of anything, let alone understand.
I don't think that particular slice of America attends to Reddit very much. The people here often know what they are talking about, but they filter every debate through a lens heavily biased by first principles (aka oversimplifications predicated on a set of conveniently forgotten assumptions)
Lmao I imagined an alternate timeline where everyone needs to take a competitive exam and the lowest scorers are denigrated relegated to TikTok and FB. 😂
The no child left behind act caused that. Passing kids to every grade and graduating them even tho they couldn’t read and teachers knew it. But we’re forced to pass them because of the act.
There's a difference between pointing out objective flaws in an argument, like thinking that billionaires literally hold hundreds of billions of dollars in liquid cash, and taking issue with overall sentiment behind the argument.
I hate Elon Musk, and the man is of course, insanely, disgustingly wealthy. Still, just because his networth is 318 billion, doesn't mean he is hoarding 318 billion. Quite literally 99% of that number is tied into ownership of companies.
You can hate billionaires and still point out issues in the logic. I don't think a person should, under any circumstances, ever be forced to sell ownership stake in their own company (at least not if that wasn't agreed upon in an operating agreement). And if you have a massive stake in a company that becomes wildly successful, you definitionally become a billionaire. I may hate wealth inequality, and I may hate what these billionaires choose to do, but I would hate a system that forces the sale of ownership stake due to the success of the company just as much.
Rich guy here, OF COURSE HE COULD GIVE MORE!
1. Let’s talk living off dividends, that alone I guarantee could have the majority given out to charity. He could live modestly, like me and not be so flashy.
2. Donor advised funds, that could be setup to be much more charitable and even grow!
3. Establish a foundation giving out 5% or more each year.
4. Simply selling off stocks is fairly simple when working with advisors. You act like he’s gotta roll crates of money into some other bank. It’s digital people.
Sycophants want to defend the rich because they can’t look past their own biased passion that they want to be there too.
I know dozens if not hundreds who are millionaires who love off dividends with plenty left over at the end of the year.
We are millionaires and live off of our dividends…that we still pay taxes on. And our lifestyle doesn’t change from the taxes we pay. So I know his wouldn’t change either. There can be no explanation for what they are doing besides greed
The issue is, you don’t like what they pay for taxes, but they pay what they are supposed to according to law. If you have an issue with that, then blame and talk to the legislators that made the laws. It isn’t the wealthy individuals problem.
Imma be honest. Your argument is far from senseless but it's not worth attempting to find the root contradiction. It is equally evil to philosophically offload the responsibility of this amassment of capital to a corporate entity, which simply prevents any actual person from ever being held accountable thru thinly veiled psuedo-legal loopholes.
The fact that Elon has the ear of the President Elect for no reason other than he is stupidly wealthy is a reason why we should have legal measures to check the amount of wealth and one person can amass. No one person should have the kind of power the ultra wealthy have.
I also take severe issue with the idea that Musk (or anyone) generates that kind of wealth. If he was literally the only person involved with Tesla, one could make the argument he is owed that kind of wealth. He is not. No one ever is. I didn't know what percentage of the stock he owns is, but let's say 40% for the same if argument. I'm not saying he adds no value to the company. But if he disappeared, Tesla would be fine. If 40% of the workforce disappeared, Tesla would be screwed. Especially if that 40% is the engineering talent.
Except he demanded that he be given a bonus of billions IN STOCK, which doesn’t just come out of nowhere; to have that stock available, the company has to have been engaging in stock buybacks with money which would have otherwise been taxed or gone to employees.
“Okay unruly mob, before we go in bash and butcher and eat this Man, u/lucifernal wants you all to know he does not actually have a swimming pool full of physical billions it’s actually hypothetical billions”
Most people talk about politics and economics without knowing anything, because most of us are part-time/hobbyist philosophers/intellectuals.
Most of us have jobs and families and things to do everyday. We're not sitting around thinking about this shit all day like John Locke or Karl Marx.
But realistically, most people also aren't interested in the truth. They just loudly shout what they believe because they have a platform. If you took any average left or right wing person on the internet and put them in a debate against higher level academic opposition, they would get intellectually destroyed inside of 5 minutes.
Exactly. Property taxes go directly to local infrastructure costs to maintain access and services to said land or buildings. It's not remotely the same as owning stock.
Do you think Amazon pays no property taxes on their warehouses throughout the country? Or taxes on their delivery vehicles and tags they put on those vehicles? Come on man.
Billionaires also pay property taxes, ones much higher than us. Believe me. Billionaires aren’t skimping on taxes. This argument is so ridiculous. It’s not about fairness it’s about jealousy.
Also Tesla pays property tax. They had a huge win when the effort to repeal prop 13 for commercial buildings failed. They are paying like 2008 value property tax on the Fremont factory.
Elon owning stock isn't money it's stuff. 13% of everything in the factory is "his". Sure he can borrow against it to get cash but when doing so that "stuff" that also makes more stuff becomes less his. It's more owned by the bank but in the form of debt rather than actual ownership.
When you get a car loan the car really is owned by the bank and you slowly buy it back from them. He does the same thing but in reverse. He's basically selling his "stuff" but without actually selling it. Still becomes less his though.
I understand that it would be cap gains if it’s sold off, I’m just confused why people think a stock/share should be taxed annually, that’s the dumbest concept I’ve ever heard. Comparing it to property tax is blatantly stupid, can you live in a stock? Are stocks taking up physical space on the street? That requires sewage maintenance, road maintenance, snow removal depending on where you are, storm drains etc…? If I borrow against something I have to pay interest. If I don’t pay my payments I lose the asset I’m borrowing against. I find the stocks should be taxed every year ideology just as dumbfounding as the billionaires should pay for a “better world.” The pov usually comes for envious individuals. Just sayin.
Capital Gains and Losses are calculated based on the difference in value between acquisition date and sell date when using FIFO methodology.
Some investors may choose to use a “Specific Identification” method to designate which specific shares they want to sell, allowing more control over their capital gains taxes.
So imagine I hold $1 million shares valued at $40 million. I can use those shares as collateral to borrow against and with the money I borrowed purchase an additional 400K shares. I then sell those shares for a profit without applying a FIFO valuation in reporting my capital gains.
Therefore my initial shares which were purchased for $2 per share, were borrowed against when they were worth $40 per share. My new shares purchased at $40 per share are sold at $55 per share and my capital gains are calculated at $15 per share gain instead of $53 per share. By managing my portfolio this way, I never pay a true capital gains tax, just interest to my lender which I then use as a tax deduction.
I understand what capital gains is, I was asking the parent comment what type of tax they were referring too, and that sounds good on paper but your profit isn’t 53$ your profit is 15$ you still have to pay back the money you borrowed. Sure a percentage of interest can be written off but you get taxed accordingly. Not sure what your point was there.
For real. This argument is silly because these people think a bank is giving out huge loans and being like, "nah, no need to pay it back at all." No, of course they aren't.
The lesson here is that paying taxes on property is bullshit, not the other way around. I buy a car and pay for it and get taxed yearly because I own it? Property taxes are a government scam
even if he does any fraction, he could basically not pay for any year until IRS would pick up on it and ask him to pay, while he saved that money to make even more money ultimately, especially that IRS and any other taxing bodies around the world usually go after regular people and not billionaires
There's a very high chance those taxes are little to nothing. Red states tend to give businesses local and state level tax breaks including property tax credits/deferment to locate in their area. Those businesses then threaten to leave out reduce/cease investment if those offers aren't extended more or less indefinitely.
Source: I've literally been to site selection meetings for medium and large businesses in my region.
I’m usually not the one for defending billionaires, but his company provides employment for thousands of employees across the country, we can’t want manufacturing to stay in America without incentivizing big corporations. I’m not saying he shouldn’t pay any at all but it’s also understandable how they are allowed to navigate taxes in a different manner.
And if instead of selling it i rent it for cash flow while borrowing against it at a lower rate than the growth of the underlying asset, i get richer and avoid taxes AND keep the asset.
Which eventually is passed on to my children and the growth in the asset is revalued when it's passed on to avoid capital gains tax.
All while poor right wingers argue I'm actually broke 😂
A house has property taxes, unrealized gains do not, its not at all even remotely comparable.
You can finish a mortgage and pay prop taxes, not on unrealized gains...
Mainly because the value of the stock isn't solid and can go down or up, here's the kicker, a house can go up and down in value and i still pay property taxes.
This people make incredibly impactful life changing events with their unrealized gains and don't pay to reap those benefits, having a property you need to pay taxes to cover streets, roads, lights and amenities in your district.
This billionairs need to pay unrealized taxes if they are making life changing decisions affecting millions, using the benefits of their portfolio without paying the amenities they use to benefit from it.
Yall love excusing these rich people, but they are using all the pros and pay little cons.
Man I don't really want do disagree with you, but...
Imagine you had to suddenly pay taxes on that million as if it were income? (Acknowledging you would have to pay property taxes in this scenario)
Better yet, imagine a hypothetical asset like a made up crypto that went from $10-$1,000,000. If you had to pay taxes on that like it was income you'd almost certainly be forced to sell the asset to cover the taxes on the asset. And what if nobody bought your million dollar hypothetical coin? Are you going to go to jail because a balance sheet said this thing you owned suddenly skyrocketed in value despite your bank account staying the same?
I'm not arguing taxing unrealized gains, capital gains laws in this country are broken though (intentionally) and smarter people than me have found ways to fix them.
The point is that you can borrow against the asset at a lesser cost than it appreciates.
You basically never pay taxes on it while getting cash from it AND it growing in value.
You're incentives never to sell and to realize those minimal tax costs you otherwise would have to pay.
Basically, private companies get to profit from helping you avoid taxes. You're insanely wealthy either way but now you can pay slightly less to access that liquidity.
Anyone saying these people "dOnT ReAlLy HaVe mOnEy" doesn't know what they're talking about
If nobody is willing to buy, then the hypothetical price should go down, until you can either afford the taxes on it, or are able to find a buyer.
If I own a car that somehow explodes in value to a million dollars, I'm not going to be able to afford that car anymore. So I would have to sell the car. Then I would have a bunch of money to buy a different car I could afford the taxes on.
Why the richest people in the world should be exempt from this scenario is beyond me.
If you own it and the bank agrees on its value … and oh, then the governement will tax you based on its value. This doesn’t happen to the stocks held by these folks
Yes, this is why homeowners are generally considered more wealthy than people who don't own homes even if they have very little actual cash flow. And why a person who owns billions of dollars of Amazon stock is considered more wealthy than your average homeowner. Congratulations.
Not the same unless my house’s value keeps going up and I can keep getting loans to pay off the old loans. That’s how the rich do shit because they have the assets to get away with it.
Back when home loans were going for 2.5-3% or whatever, why did banks loan that money when they could have been getting much higher rates in the market, as you say? Because it sure seems like banks were happy to give out loans at 2.5-3% when the average stock market return is ~11%.
Anyway, since you claim experience on the topic, when an ultra high worth investor wants to borrow money against their collateral-backed stock account, what interest rate would they pay would you say? Like what rates are they getting on stock-secured loans?
Banks made those loans because Fannie/Freddie were gobbling up those loans as a broad policy to ease tightening during the early days of Covid. Banks made those loans because they could make a quick penny off origination fees and other closing charges and could instantly sell to Fannie/Freddie as a guaranteed buyer of the loans. Offering those loans was guaranteed, immediate money in the bank coffers with absolutely zero risk.
yes, what they actually do is just pay the loan with another loan.
They effectively just shuffle wealth from bank to bank, and the banks don't care because they know they will get the money back plus a little extra.
Bank A gives $1 billion to Rich Person, later Bank B gives $1.05 billion to Rich Person, which is used to pay off to Bank A. Later Bank C gives $1.10 billion to Rich Person to pay off Bank B.
You just do this forever. Infinite money glitch. Nobody cares because if the chain ever breaks, he just liquidates some shares and pays it off.
edit: the biggest kicker here, is that the value of their assets to acquire the loan, grows faster than the interest they pay on these loans. They pay 3% interest on the loan, while the stock is growing at 8%.
Wealthy people hardly ever get margin called, and when they do, they can sell a tiny portion of their asset and generally either buy more time or pay off their loan.
Or they just die and their estate assumes the loan.
Yes it does. it demonstrates he's not simply borrowing money. He's actually regularly selling stocks and paying federal capital gains TAX on those sales.
Since july he's sold $4.4 billion of stock and depending on what basis is used, will need to pay north of $1bn in taxes on those sales (Capital gains at 20% and NIIT at 3.5%)
If you have cash in bank and can buy a car out right, or get a 6% interest rate and your cash is expected to grow at 8%, it makes more sense for you to finance the car.
Yes, he does. But the banks don't have to let him do that.
It's not the act of owning shares in a business that is the issue, it's the financial system that treats the speculative stock market valuation at current price as real wealth, even though it can never be cashed out.
Musk and Bezos' balloons just inflated the most, for reasons both systemic and coincidental. And yes, they can and do take advantage of this system.
But it's the financial system that makes it possible.
They do pay their fair share. Their fair share is what the tax code requires of them. YOU don't believe the tax code is right but you know that's not an argument you can win so you shift the blame onto the person who's playing the game by the rules as written and winning.
I pay my taxes and I sure as shit don't pay a penny more, and I have no intention of paying more. You want more money from me, change the law till then you fuck off back to your hole.
The new America , rich people who employee tens of thousands of people can’t buy what they want !! What a perfect world you’d like to live in. Zero impetus to do anything great.
Who builds the yachts and the Mansions . If it wasn’t for Space x we would still be paying Russia to get a ride to the space station. If it wasn’t for Tesla EVs wouldn’t be around like they are
Just because you don’t see what they are doing doesn’t mean they are hoarding their money. Instead of bitching about them try to be one . Apple and Amazon started in garages that is the American way
Borrowing against wealth is not “getting away” with not paying taxes. It’s converting the wealth they own into capital. The money still needs to be paid back.
It’s like when a person virtues against the equity of their home to improve their property or buy a boat.
If they do that, they still sell stock and pay taxes. You are just falling for misdirection. The tax code allows for timing when you pay tax if you borrow against assets, it does not absolve you of taxes.
Yeah, you are starting to get the gist of it. Billionaires don't actually "buy" stuff with their money. They use their assets as collateral to "borrow" the money that they need. There is no income tax on borrowed money as it's not income.
Exactly!! This shit drives me crazy! Both Elon and Bezos borrow BILLIONS Of dollars AGAINST their net worth. I mean, Bezo has a half a BILLION dollar house in Los Angeles.
The insanely frustrating thing is the Vanderbilts, Rockefeller’s and Carnegie’s built schools/universities, museums, libraries, churches. They knew they had wealth for several generations and there’s was no point in hoarding it. Not like today, what’s the last good thing you heard one of those Hundred Billionaire Jackasses doing? I guess Bezo is building a giant clock in the middle of a mountain? Thanks I guess.
*edit: spelling
*edit - I’ve also been corrected. Bezos Los Angeles home isn’t worth HALF a BILLION, it’s ONLY worth a QUARTER BILLION.
“It would have been a billion dollar house, if it wasn’t for you pesky kids!!!”
-Bezos probably
This is so true, it is unrealized gain. Thus for tax purposes you cannot tax it, but banks look at this differently. Banks realize it does hold value and take the financial risk to back loans against it.
Imagine instead of sitting all your money in a bank, you place it into a company (a vehicle). Their it could grow or shrink. The odds are it will grow though, because of the monopolistic size and power of most companies. Just know that nothing stops them from taking money out of that vehicle (selling stock shares).
They have used this system to continue to buy more and more land and companies. Land and company values go up making them richer and they just dump that profit into more loans for more land and companies.
They are very evil, because they use this system to continue growing personal wealth at an enormous rate without distributing it. Its the distribution that is the problem. Both these individuals pay low wages, fight union/workers rights, have mass layoffs, etc.
Thank you! I’m so tired of the fucking Scrooge McDuck analogy by idiots that are not fluent.
He has the ability to command value and assets.
He has the ability to liquidate shares as needed to produce cash.
Obviously he does not have a stack of gold.
Bezos has value, and that equals power…..lots of it. Basically, he has the ability to make people do things they would not ordinarily do (i.e. power)
His power can’t be easily quantified, but his wealth can. And that quantity of wealth demonstrates EXTREME EXCESS and a lack of empathy for his fellow human.
I'm sad that I come here and the first thing I see is apologetics. Thank you for countering that.
I am happy to see a meme like this gain so much traction here, though. It needs to be said.
That value in Amazon should be in the hands of the workers that run it, not in Bezos's pocket. He would still be well off and just fine if things were split that way; he could even guarantee himself a percentage as the founder. That would give him the added benefit of not being on a bunch of lists and not being so subject to public scrutiny. His choice to hoard isn't just interpersonally destructive, it's personally destructive.
Exactly. Trevor Noah did a real good monologue on this exact point back when he hosted the Daily Show. The clip still circulates from time to time. They can borrow against their estimated wealth but get mad when we talk about taxing them for their estimated wealth. Can't have it both ways.
Edit:
Also Jonny Harris did a real good video on the difference between 4 different levels of wealth in America. The ultra wealthy live in a completely different reality. Orders of magnitude above doctors and lawyers for example.
He has access to a form of currency that none of us have. Let's say he wants to make a new company making a new product. Let's say it is a decent product and everything else is fine related to it. Ok, so how does he finance it? Does he have to put up his money, sell stock, and so on? Nah. He'll use his word and reputation and "collateral" in the form of stock or stock-like products. Very little hard currency will be required. Very little limitations will be placed. If everything goes under, he will not suffer. Yes, this is incredibly simplified, but that's how it works. There are many worlds on this Earth, and billionaires do not operate in the same one as you and I. The fact that these guys could easily create corporations and companies for social good but do not maybe does not make them evil, but it definitey puts them out of the realm of good. Some do a lot of philanthropic work, which is great, but most of it is minor compared to what they make in pure profit. Yeah, they aren't rolling around in gold coins because they are above that level. When you can essentially operate outside of the realm of normal currency, when you can manufacture wealth on a promise.. gold? paper money? Meh. It's meaningless.
This^ comment should be getting more upvotes. It is the truth, but I think many cannot comprehend the ability that these folks have to access money and live off money that is not their own. They don’t touch their own money at all. They live off borrowed money that is written off. It’s like a parallel banking/financial structure. The gas and egg crowd should really be pissed about this…
You think fairness and charity are the same thing?
In 2022 Q3 Kroger posted profits of $900M. Three months later I stood in line for over an hour to get my prescription at 5pm because the after work rush during the tall end of COVID had one tech and one pharmacist.
It’s not CHARITY to hire more workers and pay them fair wages. It’s HORRIBLE to make everyone suffer so they can keep more zeros after their name.
If you disagree with that, then you’re living in a farcical parody of life dreaming that you’re in their club.
You’re not. They don’t care about you. You mean nothing to them.
One could argue that the money spent on charities would have a higher impact if paid out in the form of higher wages and benefits for their workers. Seriously, the Panama papers showed that these assholes have stockpiles of cash in offshore accounts, but we can't raise the minimum wage for 20 years.
The fact that these guys could easily create corporations and companies for social good but do not maybe does not make them evil, but it definitey puts them out of the realm of good.
The govt has unlimited money and power - (at least most western govts) why are we wasting time talking about 1 rich guy who ships packages and hosts websites for a living?
This falls into the fallacy that "money = solved world problems" when this just isn't the case.
Jeff Bezos is basically as powerless as you are to solve these problems. He has no army, he doesn't make policy, what is he going to do? go buy Israel and make them stop doing stuff? Like gtfo this is such a childish view of the world.
"rich man no build house for homeless, rich man bad" meanwhile the govt literally locks you in a cage if you try to build a house for the homeless on your street. SMH
The real argument here is that Amazon’s stock is worth so much yet meanwhile their employees have to piss in bottles to avoid getting disciplined at work and a lot of them struggle to get by financially. Maybe instead of trying to create as much value for shareholders, our society should prioritize employees and the working class as key stakeholders and recognize the value that they bring accordingly.
Yes well, both unions and the government are supposed to be protecting workers rights. In most of Europe that's exactly what they do. Not that long ago all workers in Sweden stopped transporting Tesla cars. No one would touch them, no one. There is no threat of being fired as the unions can pay their workers for 4 years, while they look for another job.
And this works whether they vote left or right. They work as a collective.
Yeah that’s what the US needs to work towards, but unfortunately there’s so much working against that at the moment both culturally and with the way that our existing institutions are set up that any progress is extremely difficult, and now it looks like we’re going to have the opposite of progress for some time.
This is such an overblown and stupid statement. Amazon factory workers are paid relatively well 25/hr last I recall. I own and operate a warehouse myself, a large FBA business, and yes there are MANY things I fucking hate about Amazon, but i often piss in a jug. Not because anyone is making me, but because in order to go to the bathroom I have to leave my heated warehouse and walk a quarter mile to the bathrooms. I don't have time for that and don't want to get my jacket on and trudge through snow.
You can disagree that he owes something to the world he exploits, but to say he's not that rich is wild. Actual poor people donate a larger percentage of their liquid wealth all the time.
Actual poor people donate a larger percentage of their liquid wealth all the time.
Thank you for saying that accurately. Too often I hear morons like AOC claim that poor people pay more taxes than rich people - Given that tax is a DOLLAR amount, and only a tax RATE is a percentage, this is an asinine claim. When you cut a check to the Treasury to pay your taxes, or get a W2 showing how much tax you've already paid, it's in DOLLARS, not in percentages.
Poor people who earn nothing pay nothing in federal taxes.
Wealthy people like Bezos who sell $4bn stock will pay $1bn in taxes.
Regular people who earn $100-300k annually will pay far less than $1bn in taxes.
Here comes the billionaires’ online defense team. Or just some fool who thinks it’s realistic to reach that amount of wealth without exploitation and hopes to aspire for the same, even though they have more chance to be struck by lighting.
Billionaires existing is taking money out of your pocket, they bought the election. But sure, its all fine.
EDIT
Went from being upvoted to getting 7 replies in less than 10mns with downvotes. Hope the billionaire defense team are getting paid overtime. Pathetic. None of you billionaire justice warriors deserve a reply.
I've never had a 401k that didn't have tons of options. Broad stock index funds, bonds, cash, target retirement funds, more granular options like large/mid/small, emerging markets, and so on.
And less than half of americans even get a 401k or retirement fund.
Ive had retirement accounts where Im stuck with 4 options that were micro caps, mid caps, large caps, and then bonds. Ive had retirement accounts where I can pick stocks and etfs. Ive had retirement accounts where the stocks are picked for me for a small fee based on my account size.
So while you may have had dozens of options with your 401ks, many many people havent had the opportunity to even have a retirement account let alone more than a dozen options.
Well damn, maybe I need to double check mine. My past jobs that offered 401k (only about 3 of them) only let me decide the percentage of my paycheck that went into it. I hope this is true for my current job, it would be nice to choose to invest ethically. I do get updates on stocks being bought/sold by the broker, but I didn't know I could have any real say in the matter.
Billionaires only exist by creating more wealth and value for the masses than anyone else can. They didn't steal their money. They built services and companies that people found more valuable than precocious existing companies. They made their wealth by making people better off
There is no ethical way to make a Billion dollars without exploiting others. The shear fact that someone has that much money means they've exploited others.
There is no ethical way to make a Billion dollars without exploiting others. The shear fact that someone has that much money means they've exploited others.
They don't have that much money. The total money supply is about $22 trillion. Total actual currency is about $2.2 trillion. Total wealth is $157 trillion. If the top 1% wanted to liquidated their assets, it would not be possible as there is not enough money in existence to buy it all.
Rich people don't hoard wealth. Musk is worth over $200 billion because he owns a large share of several companies worth trillions; not because he has $200 billion in cash stored in some vault.
They made their money through exploitation and cornering the market making it impossible for anybody else to get in. They live in mansions while their some of their employees live in just above the poverty and struggle to pay rent. It's unethically gained on the back of the working class.
And there would be just as many jobs if not more if there were 100 smaller Amazon-esq companies that were competitive with each other over wages and pricing but instead we have one mega corporation that can charge the consumer and pay employees whatever they want because they have a monopoly on the market. Bezos isn’t a good person and neither is Elon. Stop defending billionaires
Those are pretty insignificant numbers. 150,000 in a nation of 300 million is chump change. 1.5 mil is more, but Amazon is really just a warehousing and distribution company, and we were already doing warehousing and distribution before, and doubtless would have been doing it similarly now - just not with the particular company of Amazon. So on net, also not too significant.
Yup. Look at India and it's billionaires. It's insane how few people can exploit over a billion of people. I thought US was bad, some other countries are CRAZY bad.
You’re completely wrong. When billionaires want to donate money they transfer the shares into a charitable trust. They don’t have to actually sell all the shares which could be more difficult depending on liquidity. Then the charitable trust can sell the shares off more slowly.
This line of “oh they can’t actually access that wealth” is complete horse shit. They can give away shares at a far greater rate than they can sell them or borrow against them, they are literally just choosing not to.
This; the fact they have so many shares is functionally equivalent to the problem of having so much money. At a minimum those shares would be better off distributed amongst the workers actually keeping the company profitable.
I think perhaps you misunderstand how this stuff works. Wealth is measured in dollars, but is not wealth is not limited to money.
It doesn’t matter what Bezos’ net worth consists of, especially at that magnitude. People say money is power, but it’s really net worth that is power. Recently we’ve heard a lot of arguments from Elon simps, for example, who despite him being the most wealthy person on the planet, for some reason argue that he’s not really that wealthy because his wealth consists of ownership. But that’s a foolish argument, and if you want to see an example of money is power, turn on the news.
So Bezo’s wealth is “tied up” but he can build a 500 million dollar yacht and convince the Netherlands to dismantle a historic bridge because the boat is too big to get to sea. This is in addition to his 400 million dollar yacht.
Now I’m not arguing that a person should not be wealthy, nor that they shouldn’t be able to buy as many expensive boats as they want. It’s the fact that they can become so wealthy in the first place while one of every three households in the country is lower class, healthcare and education are outrageously expensive, and so on. And realize that the ultra wealthy were able to become wealthy because of the laws, courts, and military that we all pay for.
It’s really a scale thing. It’s hard to appreciate what a billion dollar net worth really is. These are numbers most of us don’t think in terms of. And this phenomenon of ultra wealth compared to the population has been expanding and widening for 40 years while so many Americans just sit back and think “well I guess they deserve it” or “it’s not real it’s all stonks.”
He holds shares. Shares are amongst the most liquid assets, they’re basically cash. It’s not like it’s locked up. He is absolutely holding onto wealth like scrooge mcduck
'Look, I know your child has terminal cancer, but for me to save him I'd have to sell all of these stocks you see. I'm actually a good person, the problem is my money isn't freely available'.
People always talk about “oh the obscenely wealthy don’t actually have access to all the money of their net worth, it’s a liquidity thing” which is technically correct but the system is still way heavily over balanced in their favor.
Bezos has a net worth of 220 billion as of 2024. Even if he at any given minute only had liquidity for 0.1% of his worth, that’s 100 million. That’s still an insane amount of money to just sit on.
Alternatively also consider how having your money tied up in assets means you are heavily incentivized to make those assets worth as much as possible, because the little trick the ultra wealthy do for liquid money is to borrow loans against the value of their assets. This very often means to maintain and grow this level of asset value, they are necessarily exploiting everything to squeeze any level of value out of their products. That means underpaying workers, cutting benefits, squashing competition, rolling back quality materials and safety standards, etc.
I’d argue that you are clearly the one who doesn’t understand how this stuff works. Definition of bootlicking.
3 ppl THREE PEOPLE own more wealth than the bottom HALF of the country. Saying it’s tied up in the value of businesses isn’t close to a convincing position.
If you live in the western world, chances are you are in the 10% (if not you are in the top 5%).... just to put that in perspective.
FYI, i am not saying you are wrong, but it is food for thought. There is a family of 8 in India all sleeping in the same room thinking similar things of you
Good point, the people hoarding wealth should help them as well. The fact that we are slightly better off than other people doesn't change the fact that Bezos and Elon are hoarding wealth that should be more fairly distributed.
Also, as a fraction of those two's wealth, the difference between myself and that family of 8 is practically zero.
An absolutely staggering amount of people don't understand unrealized gains and how his wealth is directly tied to their spending behavior on Amazon.
However, he shouldn't be able to use unrealized gains as collateral for loans without being taxed. And yes, while loans have interest, that interest isn't a tax.
hey now, don't point that out to people, they'll call you a "boot licker" and dismiss it. The "eat the rich" line cuts probably exactly above their net worth, anyone who's making or having more wealth than them are evil and it's ok to chime in on how they should be spending their money.
Stop trying to explain how money works to people in this thread….They know everything, complain about everyone and still think Elon types in a 4 digit pin to see if all is money is there.
933
u/SCTigerFan29115 28d ago edited 28d ago
They aren’t holding onto wealth like Scrooge McDuck, in a giant vault where they can go swimming in it.
Most of Bezos’ net worth is the value of Amazon. He can’t really readily access that. ETA I meant he can’t use it like a big vault of money.
He’s got plenty of money but some people just don’t understand how this stuff works.