7 ms·

third richest person... "officially" there are so many much more richer persons/families not taken into consideration by forbes. russians, chinese, indians, no

third richest person... "officially" there are so many much more richer persons/families not taken into consideration by forbes. russians, chinese, indians, non americans. People that have money spread across borders.. there is no such thing as the officially "Worlds third richest person"... some are "unkown (by forbes)" trillionaires that are not accounted because there are no official records

21 8y ago
When the biggest "official" richest person only has ~150 bil, your claim that there are trillionairs out there is pretty ridiculous.
lucasmullens 8y ago
I would be surprised to hear there exists a trillionaire that Forbes didn't even consider. That would mean having 8x more money than the "officially" richest person.
arcanus 8y ago
> People that have money spread across borders.. trillionaires The only person I could even speculate with that sort of wealth could be Vladimir Putin, if you argued he is a dictator and so controls the entire Russian economy / wealth base.
- withdavidli 8y ago
  By that argument, there’s another person that’s basically president for life that controls a country with about 10x of Russia’s.
  - darawk 8y ago
    While it's true that Xi Jinping (to whom you are presumably referring) is probably dictator of China for life now, he can't quite use the country as his personal piggy bank in the way Putin can.
    - withdavidli 8y ago
      Yep. That’s who I’m referring to. I don’t know each persons’ level of control and utilization of their country’s wealth. But Xi only needs a fraction of his country to match Putin’s. The consolidation of power is what we have to look out for. So the qualifier to your statement is “yet”. Would you have said the same thing of Putin after he returned to being president? How long did it take him to control as much as he has?
      - darawk 8y ago
        Ya, no argument from me. I think Xi is a bad actor on the world stage. A realistic assessment of his 'true wealth' is probably extremely high, comparable to Putin's, you're right.
- mbesto 8y ago
  Putin is controlled by oligarchs that are much more wealthy than he is. So not only does he not control the Russian economy (the oligarchs he reports to do), but he himself does not have the wealth you're assuming.
  - tomashertus 8y ago
    Would you mind to share some sources backing this theory?
  - ModernMech 8y ago
    It's the other way around. Oligarchs are oligarchs until Putin says otherwise: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3011021/Exiled-oligarch-Boris-Berezovsky-murdered-hand-Putin-evidence-coup-plot-claims-former-head-security.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3011021/Exiled-oliga...
- nwah1 8y ago
  The monarchy of saudi arabia may be trillionaires.
- epicureanideal 8y ago
  Except that the wealth of a country is not typically heritable, so I would say in the best case scenario (for him) he simply has temporary access to the resources of the country, which he seems to be using for the betterment of that country. After he's out of office or dies, his children will get some preferential treatment and their connections and influence may be worth millions, but not billions or trillions. His children will not inherit all the oil fields in Russia. And it's not like children of Western leaders don't gain similar influence and connections.
hourislate 8y ago
Yup, compared to King Salman and Putin (1 trillion +), these guys are poor.
ChuckMcM 8y ago
I think it is a bit more nuanced than that. Forbes includes non-US persons. Jack Ma (China), Mukesh Ambani (India), it goes on. What it doesn't include are people where their wealth is hidden because it was either acquired and/or held illegally and those who have control over wealth but only by virtue of their position (so a king is "rich" because they can control what the sovereign fund invests in but they don't make the list because if they weren't king all of that wealth would be inaccessible to them.) If Czar Putin suffers the same fate as the Czar Nicolas where the people decide it is no longer in their best interest to have him plundering the country then Putin will likely die with greatly reduced wealth, much like Emelda Marcos. Crime bosses have the same problem, their wealth is a function of their black market operations and when they are deposed or killed the organization reclaims the wealth for itself. The people on the Forbes list have full control of their assets and nobody is going to rise up in revolution if they decide to spend it poorly. So they are indeed rich 'persons' as opposed to simply stewarding great wealth.

21 8y ago

When the biggest "official" richest person only has ~150 bil, your claim that there are trillionairs out there is pretty ridiculous.

lucasmullens 8y ago

I would be surprised to hear there exists a trillionaire that Forbes didn't even consider. That would mean having 8x more money than the "officially" richest person.

arcanus 8y ago

> People that have money spread across borders.. trillionaires The only person I could even speculate with that sort of wealth could be Vladimir Putin, if you argued he is a dictator and so controls the entire Russian economy / wealth base.

withdavidli 8y ago
By that argument, there’s another person that’s basically president for life that controls a country with about 10x of Russia’s.
- darawk 8y ago
  While it's true that Xi Jinping (to whom you are presumably referring) is probably dictator of China for life now, he can't quite use the country as his personal piggy bank in the way Putin can.
  - withdavidli 8y ago
    Yep. That’s who I’m referring to. I don’t know each persons’ level of control and utilization of their country’s wealth. But Xi only needs a fraction of his country to match Putin’s. The consolidation of power is what we have to look out for. So the qualifier to your statement is “yet”. Would you have said the same thing of Putin after he returned to being president? How long did it take him to control as much as he has?
    - darawk 8y ago
      Ya, no argument from me. I think Xi is a bad actor on the world stage. A realistic assessment of his 'true wealth' is probably extremely high, comparable to Putin's, you're right.
mbesto 8y ago
Putin is controlled by oligarchs that are much more wealthy than he is. So not only does he not control the Russian economy (the oligarchs he reports to do), but he himself does not have the wealth you're assuming.
- tomashertus 8y ago
  Would you mind to share some sources backing this theory?
- ModernMech 8y ago
  It's the other way around. Oligarchs are oligarchs until Putin says otherwise: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3011021/Exiled-oligarch-Boris-Berezovsky-murdered-hand-Putin-evidence-coup-plot-claims-former-head-security.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3011021/Exiled-oliga...
nwah1 8y ago
The monarchy of saudi arabia may be trillionaires.
epicureanideal 8y ago
Except that the wealth of a country is not typically heritable, so I would say in the best case scenario (for him) he simply has temporary access to the resources of the country, which he seems to be using for the betterment of that country. After he's out of office or dies, his children will get some preferential treatment and their connections and influence may be worth millions, but not billions or trillions. His children will not inherit all the oil fields in Russia. And it's not like children of Western leaders don't gain similar influence and connections.

hourislate 8y ago

Yup, compared to King Salman and Putin (1 trillion +), these guys are poor.

ChuckMcM 8y ago

I think it is a bit more nuanced than that. Forbes includes non-US persons. Jack Ma (China), Mukesh Ambani (India), it goes on. What it doesn't include are people where their wealth is hidden because it was either acquired and/or held illegally and those who have control over wealth but only by virtue of their position (so a king is "rich" because they can control what the sovereign fund invests in but they don't make the list because if they weren't king all of that wealth would be inaccessible to them.) If Czar Putin suffers the same fate as the Czar Nicolas where the people decide it is no longer in their best interest to have him plundering the country then Putin will likely die with greatly reduced wealth, much like Emelda Marcos. Crime bosses have the same problem, their wealth is a function of their black market operations and when they are deposed or killed the organization reclaims the wealth for itself. The people on the Forbes list have full control of their assets and nobody is going to rise up in revolution if they decide to spend it poorly. So they are indeed rich 'persons' as opposed to simply stewarding great wealth.