How is he still the richest person in the universe when he doesn't

>>1851166
he's friends with warren buffett and invests like him

he owns over a billion dollars worth of
caterpillar
ups
walmart
coca cola
waste management
fed ex
berkshire hathaway

he still owns 25 billion worth of microsoft

when indexs are breaking highs, he's making billions

File: rothschild1.jpg (57KB, 564x564px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 564x564px

>richest person in the universe

good one

>>1851166
>>1851185
What he said.
Once you have enough billions to live off the interest you should never ever go broke, the long term stock market always goes up, so do estate values. Just another reason why the rich get richer..

>>1851166
Not being microsoft head honcho doesn't mean he gave the company away to some schmuck.

File: IMG_7213.jpg (43KB, 960x597px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 960x597px

>>1851194
>Only 7 countries
>Lists 6 countries

>>1851305
North and Korea are two different countries nigga

>>1851166
Interest

>>1851194
>Every $ of current on earth
huh?
>except 3 countries
which?

This graphic is pretty retarded

>>1851194
i think you mean the bogdanoffs

rothschild is childsplay

>>1851194
nice meme facebook picture

>>1851333
Kanye really missed an opportunity to name his second kid Korea.

File: 1482048036437.jpg (197KB, 695x1224px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 695x1224px

>>1851305
>>1851358
>>1851684
>>1851724

bla bla, stop deceiving people, the mudslimes are already coming for you

>>1851305
Its Libya.

Also good old Evelyn has no male heirs.

>>1851166
From Thomas Piketty:

>Take a particularly clear example at the very top of the global wealth hierarchy. Between 1990 and 2010, the fortune of Bill Gates— the found er of Microsoft , the world leader in operating systems, and the very incarnation of entrepreneurial wealth and number one in the Forbes rankings for more than ten years— increased from $4 billion to $50 billion.14 At the same time, the fortune of Liliane Bettencourt— the heiress of L’Oréal, the world leader in cosmetics, founded by her father Eugène Schueller, who in 1907 invented a range of hair dyes that were destined to do well in a way reminiscent of César Birotteau’s success with perfume a century earlier— increased from $2 billion to $25 billion, again according to Forbes.15 Both fortunes thus grew at an annual rate of more than 13 percent from 1990 to 2010, equivalent to a real return on capital of 10 or 11 percent aft er correcting for infl ation.

>In other words, Liliane Bettencourt, who never worked a day in her life, saw her fortune grow exactly as fast as that of Bill Gates, the high- tech pioneer, whose wealth has incidentally continued to grow just as rapidly since he stopped working. Once a fortune is established, the capital grows according to a dynamic of its own, and it can continue to grow at a rapid pace for decades simply because of its size.

>>1851845
OK, but the heiress's money was invested... perhaps partly in Microsoft? But it had to be invested in something that gave a return... if it had been invested poorly then it would not have grown.

>>1851860
Once your war chest gets into the tens of billions it's hard to fuck that situation up. Would take generations of mismanagement which is unlikely since decent money managers are going to be highly incentivized to continue growth.

>>1851860
I can almost guarantee you that it was invested in a seemingly usual diversified portfolio with a low percentage of bonds. What differentiates high value portfolios from those of you and me is that the owners spend considerable sums on portfolio management, in the case of the Harvard University around $100 mil per annum. This allows them to hire experts from very niche fields that can increase the return-on-capital from the usual steady 7% anyone can achieve to a steady 10% p.a. through instruments such as unlisted foreign stocks and private equity funds (although the later is debatable).

>>1851845
>Once a fortune is established, the capital grows according to a dynamic of its own, and it can continue to grow at a rapid pace for decades simply because of its size.
this is where I go a bit socialist. I dont see why people like that need anymore past say, a billion. All those billions should be going back to society; not held by a few individuals. Its like great, you created Microsoft, but now make room for the next guy to come along and do something. All wealth over 1 billion should be completely taxed and put into a public fund or some sort

>>1852009
Nigger in order for those people to make billions the government is raking in billions. Those people are taking money and turning it into more money while the government only wants to take money and turn it into dust.

>>1852009
This kind of happens already with a progressive tax on capital. Piketty argues we need more of it. One can make an argument though that those people's investments are facilitating economic growth by not being spent right away, i.e. in an economy saving is equal to investment and encouraging saving is generally seen as a good macroeconomic strategy. By contrast, increasing the tax on capital disincentivises saving. It's a difficult question that the people, including the economists doing normative economics, are united on for multiple reasons. Personally very much undecided on the issue myself.

>>1852009
The government already taxes his wealth. How many taxes can you take out of it? You think theyre going to poor Johny and Laquisha, but in reality those taxes will flow back to Raytheon and Lockheed Martin to build more weapons for the government. Fuck taxes f a m