3 ms·
Those billionaires still have the means to impact the world in ways that you or I do not, should they chose to do so.
by moksly 5y ago
Those billionaires still have the means to impact the world in ways that you or I do not, should they chose to do so.
- listenallyall 5y agoMake a coherent argument. You were comparing to the Kardashians, who are massively influential, not to "you or I". And so what "if they choose to"? They've chosen not to.
- filmgirlcw 5y agoBut to use your example, the Kardashian’s are billionaires, meaning they could impact the world should they choose to. And Murdoch, to use your other example, didn’t start to build his global influence until the 1980s, some 30 years into his career. And although the global influence of his media groups isn’t debatable, it is important to note that the vast majority of his newspaper properties are tabloids.
- paulpauper 5y agoeven if they wanted to, I think they would find that their success to be quite limited. Without using google, what is the name of Ray Dalio's 2017 book. It got some media attention at the time, but surely being how rich he is you should have heard about it. Or Bill Gates' latest book.
- nebula8804 5y agoI am reminded of how Bloomberg spent $500 million dollars on his ill-fated presidential campaign that lasted 100 days....about 4 months. It was clear proof that money does not always result in impact.