3 ms·
makes perfect sense. ellison would probably try to blast him from lānaʻi if shtf. no wait, it’s because the locals hate him, this is his safe vacation house, l
by catchnear4321 3y ago
makes perfect sense. ellison would probably try to blast him from lānaʻi if shtf. no wait, it’s because the locals hate him, this is his safe vacation house, like a safe room but billions.
more realistically, a hurricane hitting at the wrong spot could be enough to take out one of the richest humans alive. not even from a direct hit, fires are also a concern. lots of concerns, really. should his security detail even allow that risk? insurers, investors, etc?
unless you put in something that looks a lot like a doomsday bunker.
plus, that way when shtf you have a doomsday bunker in paradise.
- jforo9 3y ago[flagged]
- ChatGTP 3y agoI think the point is that if he is allowed to have a Doomsday bunker, everyone should. Mark Zuckerberg is not special.
- voisin 3y agoPresumably anyone can build a doomsday bunker if they have the money.
- catchnear4321 3y ago> I think the point is that if he is allowed to have a Doomsday bunker, everyone should. that seems more like common sense than a point. > Mark Zuckerberg is not special. why is this personal though?
- ChatGTP 3y agoIt's probably the least personal statement I could make. He isn't any more important than anyone else. Everyone is equally important.
- credit_guy 3y ago> if he is allowed to have a Doomsday bunker Who exactly needs to allow him? This is a free country. If he has the money (and he does) and wants to set it on fire, he can do that. If he wants to build a Doomsday bunker, it's his choice. It's not all that different from setting his money on fire, but why would I, or you, care?