2 ms·
Nothing? Then anyone could do it. No, he first made billions, and is investing it (enabling the company's operations to do something) with risk of losing a bill
by karmakaze 3y ago
Nothing? Then anyone could do it. No, he first made billions, and is investing it (enabling the company's operations to do something) with risk of losing a billion to make it. It's not physical labour, but it's certainly something. I don't think this is the most effective way of distributing capital, but wouldn't call it nothing.
- xtracto 3y agoA very important and often neglected decision is that he decided NOT to sell when the price was lower (although still high). For main street retail investors , that's the most difficult thing to do.
- c54 3y agoIt’s more that he did something and now doesn’t have to. It’s false that there’s a morality to wealth and that those who have gained it have inherently added value in line with the wealth they’ve gained. There’s usually a correlation but even then not always.
- 303uru 3y ago>I don't think this is the most effective way of distributing capital, but wouldn't call it nothing. I think this is the scary part. Ballmer has billions, ok. This extreme gilded age we're living in doesn't end when Ballmer, Musk, Bezos, etc... die though. Their great grand children are guaranteed to wield far more power than anyone you are related to or know and that doesn't sit right with me.