Submitted by LeverageShares t3_108bg5r in dataisbeautiful
PM_ME_A_PLANE_TICKET t1_j3r8k0q wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in [OC] Mr. Buffett - The Older The Wealthier by LeverageShares
Conversely, that's how ridiculously rich he is now that the difference between 26k and a million is invisible.
Dombo1896 t1_j3r9ecp wrote
Even 376M is not visible.
ELVEVERX t1_j3v1zt1 wrote
This is strange because 1.4B looks 6 times larger than 620m. Seems very inaccurate.
ThisGuyCrohns t1_j3w0u5k wrote
Because 1bn vs 110bn is so large it almost shrinks the 1bn
[deleted] t1_j3ryq05 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j3rbxtv wrote
[deleted]
1945BestYear t1_j3vzllh wrote
This is part of the reason why it's a bad argument when someone accuses, say, a hollywood director, with a famous name and a big house in LA, of being hypocritical if they say something negative, either directly or in their work, about billionaires. Quintin Tarantino, who's on an extreme end in terms of success and wealth for Hollywood directors, has something like $120 million to his net worth, which means he's worth just below 1000x the median American of his age bracket (about $200,000) At the same time, Elon Musk at $144 billion is worth more than 1000 Tarantinos. If somebody thinks a person as wealthy or even a hundredth as wealthy as Tarantino is 'rich', that's fine, but they gotta see how one is just in a different magnitude to the other.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments