Check my logic. >1. Money, up to a certain point, allows

>>1463167
Depends if you like hedonism

I do, so personally money is my gold medal

>>1463167
>2. Past that point, money has only two uses: degenerate hedonism and influencing power.
Or providing the capital to create new businesses. Or financing unprofitable projects (charity, art, churches, football clubs...). Or creating your own country or your own cult. Whatever.
By the way, luxury has no limits. Give me one billion dollars and I'll blow that in one month just with luxury goods. Jets, yachts, jewelry and mansions are expensive, without even partaking in "hedonism".

>5. Most political dynasties last longer than financial dynasties, with exceptions on both sides existing.
No. A study of Bank of Italy shows that the top-earning families in Florence in 1427 were exactly the same as today (those who pay the more taxes today have the same surnames). Now where are the politicians of 1427?

>Degenerate

Stopped reading right there. What the fuck does degenerate even mean??? Go back to >>>/pol/

>>1463167
It's not just a bronze medal, it's bronze, silver, gold and whatever you want, because with money you can buy them all.

>>1463167
Also, for your final assumption: politicians are the yes-men of the rich (not the other way round), and they are envious of what the billionaires can afford. After some time, the politician is expelled from his position and ceases to live in palaces, while the billionaire keeps his billions and will sometimes give a bone to bite to his old politician friend, under the form of "speaking fees".

>>1463198

>Or providing the capital to create new businesses. Or financing unprofitable projects (charity, art, churches, football clubs...). Or creating your own country or your own cult. Whatever.
>By the way, luxury has no limits. Give me one billion dollars and I'll blow that in one month just with luxury goods. Jets, yachts, jewelry and mansions are expensive, without even partaking in "hedonism".

Right, so hedonism and influence.

>No. A study of Bank of Italy shows that the top-earning families in Florence in 1427 were exactly the same as today (those who pay the more taxes today have the same surnames). Now where are the politicians of 1427?

Actually the rich at that time were the patriarchal families who controlled the major financial enterprises, not the low-level merchants who "ran businesses" as we understand it today. Most "corporations" were actually created by the wealthy in order to curtail the rising power of the merchant class.

>>1463199

Paris Hilton, Dan Bilzerian etc etc.

>>1463201

Not really.

>>1463202

You've got an upside down notion of things m8.

>>1463167

Money is step one. Changing the world is step two. And ruling the world is step three.

>>1463207
Paying for art or church renovations, giving out money to important causes... can have nothing to do with "influence". You can create a business to change the world, not to serve yourself.

And having a very expensive yacht or jet is more about privacy and practical reasons than "hedonism" (you don't do it for pleasure, but for avoiding displeasure). Having a castle isn't very amusing either. Try to live in one. It's a constant burden, it's not even comfortable. It's also magnificent but you don't do this for pure pleasure.

It seems you have a pre-conceived notion of what the rich are, and you'll discard any fact that won't fit in your theory.

>You've got an upside down notion of things m8.
Excellent argument haha lol ^^

>>1463272

>You can create a business to change the world

Right. Power. In a more limited sphere, yes. Possibly backed by the influence from spreading around your profits.

Or you could just be a legislator/executive/judge and make that shit happen.

>>1463341
Google has changed the world in ways a million politicians together couldn't even dream of thinking, let alone achieving.

Meng, the only real use for money and investing is so that you don't need to work and can retire to pursue whatever you want.

I'm not sure where you're getting all this claptrap about political power from.