4 ms·

Once you start to play that game, doesn't the conversation begin and end with John D. Rockefeller?

by lbrandy 14y ago

ok_craig 14y ago
According to Wikipedia, Rockefeller is widely considered to be the richest person ever, but I guess this is interesting to me because the Walton heirs themselves are still making billionaire lists. But that's a good point. I wonder what the total Rockefeller net worth is among all heirs today.
- larrys 14y ago
  "Rockefeller is widely considered to be the richest person ever" But back in a time when life was not as good, for even rich people, as it is today. Not to mention medical care or even pain medication or air conditioning or any creature comforts (I'm remembering when cars didn't have even electric windows when I was really young). Would you rather have 10 times the money you have and be back in the 1930's? Similar also to computers. As anyone who has worked with a teletype, floppy drives, punch tape, or green ascii terminal can attest to vs. being able to ssh into your server from an ipad mini.
  - dllthomas 14y ago
    > Would you rather have 10 times the money you have and be back in the 1930's? If I could keep my current knowledge, yes I think so. "Hey, guys, here's some capital; look into these 'semiconductor' things..." I recognize that this is deliberately missing your point, however.
    - dennisgorelik 14y ago
      You are extremely too optimistic about your personal ability to move technical progress forward. The amount of technological knowledge our civilization carries is enormous, and even if you are extremely knowledgeable, you are unlikely to know even 1% of it. So yes, you would be able to move civilization forward in the magnitude of a few months. But that's about it.
      - dllthomas 14y ago
        Obviously, it's not something we can really test... However, I do think you are severely underestimating the benefits, for technological progress, of: 1) Knowing that things are possible, 2) knowing approximately where to look, and 3) having a large (and growing) pile of resources to put behind these things.
  - protomyth 14y ago
    Well, since I grew up on a reservation, I'll take now, but I don't think the health care has improved much (given the stats).
- adventured 14y ago
  The Rockefeller claim is always dubious to me. I've read a lot of books on the man, and by every account I've seen his wealth peaked at between $1 and $2 billion before the great depression. Even a generous multiplier based on dollar devaluation, of say 30 fold, only gets you into Gates territory. The only way you get to the notion that he was the richest ever, would be to speculate on what his empire would be worth today rather than just the dollar figure inflation adjusted. Most likely, Bill Gates had the greatest private fortune in history at the peak of the Nasdaq bubble. Inflation adjusted it would be worth upwards of $150 +/- billion today.
  - argonaut 14y ago
    The New York Times pegs Rockefeller at $192 billion, in real 2007 terms. Adjusting for inflation is an imperfect measure, and how the NY Times adjusts wealth is by adjusting it according to Rockefeller's relative share of GDP. http://www.nytimes.com/ref/business/20070715_GILDED_GRAPHIC.html http://www.nytimes.com/ref/business/20070715_GILDED_GRAPHIC....
    - Retric 14y ago
      That's almost silly as there where fewer people back then and a much smaller government as a share of GDP. I mean what %GDP did rich people have back in 1790 when there where 3,893,635 people 694,280 of them slaves and almost zero government spending.

Once you start to play that game, doesn't the conversation begin and end with John D. Rockefeller?

by lbrandy 14y ago

Once you start to play that game, doesn't the conversation begin and end with John D. Rockefeller?

According to Wikipedia, Rockefeller is widely considered to be the richest person ever, but I guess this is interesting to me because the Walton heirs themselves are still making billionaire lists. But that's a good point. I wonder what the total Rockefeller net worth is among all heirs today.

larrys 14y ago
"Rockefeller is widely considered to be the richest person ever" But back in a time when life was not as good, for even rich people, as it is today. Not to mention medical care or even pain medication or air conditioning or any creature comforts (I'm remembering when cars didn't have even electric windows when I was really young). Would you rather have 10 times the money you have and be back in the 1930's? Similar also to computers. As anyone who has worked with a teletype, floppy drives, punch tape, or green ascii terminal can attest to vs. being able to ssh into your server from an ipad mini.
- dllthomas 14y ago
  > Would you rather have 10 times the money you have and be back in the 1930's? If I could keep my current knowledge, yes I think so. "Hey, guys, here's some capital; look into these 'semiconductor' things..." I recognize that this is deliberately missing your point, however.
  - dennisgorelik 14y ago
    You are extremely too optimistic about your personal ability to move technical progress forward. The amount of technological knowledge our civilization carries is enormous, and even if you are extremely knowledgeable, you are unlikely to know even 1% of it. So yes, you would be able to move civilization forward in the magnitude of a few months. But that's about it.
    - dllthomas 14y ago
      Obviously, it's not something we can really test... However, I do think you are severely underestimating the benefits, for technological progress, of: 1) Knowing that things are possible, 2) knowing approximately where to look, and 3) having a large (and growing) pile of resources to put behind these things.
- protomyth 14y ago
  Well, since I grew up on a reservation, I'll take now, but I don't think the health care has improved much (given the stats).
adventured 14y ago
The Rockefeller claim is always dubious to me. I've read a lot of books on the man, and by every account I've seen his wealth peaked at between $1 and $2 billion before the great depression. Even a generous multiplier based on dollar devaluation, of say 30 fold, only gets you into Gates territory. The only way you get to the notion that he was the richest ever, would be to speculate on what his empire would be worth today rather than just the dollar figure inflation adjusted. Most likely, Bill Gates had the greatest private fortune in history at the peak of the Nasdaq bubble. Inflation adjusted it would be worth upwards of $150 +/- billion today.
- argonaut 14y ago
  The New York Times pegs Rockefeller at $192 billion, in real 2007 terms. Adjusting for inflation is an imperfect measure, and how the NY Times adjusts wealth is by adjusting it according to Rockefeller's relative share of GDP. http://www.nytimes.com/ref/business/20070715_GILDED_GRAPHIC.html http://www.nytimes.com/ref/business/20070715_GILDED_GRAPHIC....
  - Retric 14y ago
    That's almost silly as there where fewer people back then and a much smaller government as a share of GDP. I mean what %GDP did rich people have back in 1790 when there where 3,893,635 people 694,280 of them slaves and almost zero government spending.