Skip Navigation

Anti-Corporate Movement @lemmy.giftedmc.com

haui @lemmy.giftedmc.com

4w ago

earned it all

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/25830369

Microblog Memes @lemmy.world

earned it all

1402 69

19 comments

But I would be immortal, and still rich.
- Is immortality worth it if you're required to work 7 days a week for 600 years?
  
  Yea, you could probably retire soon

972,725,000 is my rough estimate, so only about 15 years to go.

I get the point. I've even posted about how absurd a billion dollars is. But, here's the problem with the post's absurdism: $5,000 a day since 1492 would be well over a billion dollars today, assuming things like investing, real-estate, and inflation still exist. Given that, for reference, $5K / year was uber rich around the victorian era, you'd definitely be a multi-billionaire if you've had access to that kind of money since 1492.
- Okay, how about this? If someone were to work every day for 50 years and if they invested everything they earned at an 8% interest rate, they would need to earn approximately $1.4M/day to reach Elon's current level of wealth.
  At $5,000/day income and 8% interest investments, it would take 120 years to accumulate $340B.
  
  Yes. Your math is correct. My point was never "billionaires good", but rather the meme is disingenuous. But I guess any time anyone says anything other than "billionaires bad" they get downvoted.
- But you can also use this to make it work. If you instead use the amount that is equal to todays 5000$ then it works. You just have to see your own point through instead of selective ocd.
  
  So, if we add information it makes sense, but only then? Which is my point, it's disingenuous. The people making $5K a year back in 1492 are the ones who passed their wealth on to the 0.001% today. Making $5K per day is just more money, and my point still stands.

How much does Bezos "make in a week"? This sounds wrong
- Feel free to check it out. Your favorite search engine should do the trick.
  
  If you searched it you'd see that you'll get a variety of answers, ranging substantially.
  Also this doesn't accomodate for the idea that his weekly "income" is likely negative during temporary stock market downturns.
  This seeems to be making "what he makes" equivalent to his net worth, which would fluctuate a lot.

19 comments