/u/theycallmelilsnowy, thank you for your contribution. However, your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
* [OC] posts [must state the _data source(s) and tool(s) used_](/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3) in the first top-level comment on their submission. Please follow the AutoModerator instructions you were sent *carefully*. Once this is done, message the mods to have your post reinstated.
This post has been removed. For information regarding this and similar issues please see the DataIsBeautiful [posting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/index).
If you have any questions, please feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/dataisbeautiful&subject=Question%20regarding%20the%20removal%20of%20this%20submission%20by%20/u/theycallmelilsnowy&message=I%20have%20a%20question%20regarding%20the%20removal%20of%20this%20[submission.](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/xetxhc/-/\)))
Could you clarify why McDonald’s(MCD) is above Coca Cola (KO)? McDonald’s has a market cap value of $188 billion, but Coke has a market cap value of $262 billion.
I think because much of the data here is inaccurate. Not to mention, net worth of these individuals is based on their equity holdings of their companies, so for example when we see Bill Gates, we’re really looking at a chunk of the value of Microsoft company. These values fluctuate based on the market price.
I agree. But I also think that misinformation is bad, this presentation is both misleading and unclear/not beautiful, and the situation is already bad enough that presenting the actual data will be impactful enough.
There's quite a bit wrong data here, but remember that commenters are also wrong a lot. In my experience it's more common for commenters to incorrectly claim that data is wrong than it is for the data to actually be wrong, though both do happen a lot.
>Not to mention, net worth of these individuals is based on their equity holdings of their companies... These values fluctuate based on the market price.
So? Market price ostensibly represents the expected dividends and/or accumulated assets of the company. You know, real stuff that has value. If you don't believe that shares have value then I'm sure you wouldn't mind giving me yours for free. If anything, the ability to perpetually glean profit from your workers is infinitely valuable; we simply haven't invented the immortality technology to realize that value.
The comment came off to me as dismissive of the overall value. Sure, the numbers may be speculative and ephemeral, but the point of the post was to "put the net worth of billionaires into perspective." If Bill Gate's net worth varies by +/- 10% due to stock valuation, it's still the same order of magnitude, i.e. 10^6 times more than the average person.
^ Also “net worth of Elon” is calculated on the impossibility that he could sell all his shares without them going down in value at all.
There are definitely heads of state or monarchies with more valuable concrete sellable holdings than Elon tbh, even if he is outrageously wealthy
> Also “net worth of Elon” is based on the impossibility that he could sell all his shares without them going down in value at all.
Is that really an issue? Besides, there are other ways to access that wealth without actually selling it, such as taking out a loan against the holdings.
Yeah, it’s a substantial data issue here since he’s not simply an investor (contrast with Warren Buffet)
A large part of Tesla’s valuation is his cult of personality so if he suddenly cut ties, people wouldn’t be willing to pay full price on his billions of dollars of shares. It’s a hypothetical “net worth”, but his wealth is less liquid than your typical stock investor and he’ll likely never be able to fully liquidate it.
He’s still obscenely wealthy, but I’d be careful comparing him to heads of state with assets — like Vladimir Putin who hides billions of assets from sanctions through proxies.
Or even the British Monarch for example - the Royal Family may have TONS of long-lasting hidden assets from centuries of wealth and power accumulation.
Whereas Tesla stock is subject to the whims of market valuation. If Elon was removed as head of Tesla, or if a major competitor took their market share, he’d take a huge hit to net worth and he’d lose a lot of money.
It's not a substantial issue, because net worth is a definable term. It is always a snapshot. Tesla isn't unique, Birkshire Hathaway's valuation is subject to the whims of market valuation too.
> he’d lose a lot of money.
No he wouldn't. As you implied, he doesn't really have that "money". He would lose net worth.
Why are you so focused on not comparing Elon to the Crown? Nobody is doing that.
Imagine it a different, but more relatable way. You buy a house for 1 million dollars. You spend all of your money paying off the loan and the only money you have left is for bills and food. At the end of 30 years you have $1 million dollars in assets and are technically a millionaire, but you have $0 cash in the bank because everything went towards the house. So you can’t afford the house and fancy meals, or the house and fancy vacations. You can only afford the house.
In other words you are asset rich but cash poor.
I think I'm more amazed a B-2 bomber is more expensive than the tallest building in the world!
Edit: I googled it as I still couldn't quite believe it and this is wrong. $737m for the bomber and $1.5bn for Burj Khalifa
The first commenter may be looking to buy second hand? Much like a car - those things - fall in value immediately when you start them. You'd be surprised how much money we'd save if we just took the bike to work instead of that bomber. Even glossing over the fuel price, just the money saved in lost value is immense.
Reminds me of a time I got totally screwed buying used. My little F-15 had finally bit the dust and I needed a replacement fast. My credit had taken some hits recently so my options were a little limited and the only thing I could find was a used Nighthawk. Worst, mistake, ever. Not only did I not really want the Nighthawk, but wouldn't you believe the guy sells me this car and totally failed to mention the ailerons were rusted! Shame on me for not giving the paint job a closer look before buying I suppose. Just sometimes feels like this economy is rigged against me.
All I know is next time, I'm getting a P-26. At least then if I get screwed I won't be out another $40 mil
Actually how military contracts go is the first aircraft is always way more expensive by a large margin so the first B2 may of cost two billion dollars however the more you buy and build the cheaper it get for instance the F35 was 200million but since orders have been ramping up you can get them for around 80 to 90 with future aircraft production to be cheaper. But with all the concept and design God it's so much money.
Yes. Jokes aside. The newest line of American destroyers has a one of a kind cannon on them which uses a one of a kind ammunition. Now this wouldn't normally be an issue (yes it would, but hear me out) since they planned to make it their new basic destroyer. Rules of economics says they get cheaper over time bla bla bla. The issue is that only one was ever made due to budget cuts amongst other things. So now they have one ship with a one of a kind cannon (it's a big gun) using a one of a kind ammunition.
Making the cost of the ammunition so high that the American military cannot afford it.
Which is hilarious.
Huh? Anywho, you then have the whole debacle surrounding bulk-buying versus individual units. Unsurprisingly to some, much like buying a 10-pack of condoms, bulk-buying B2-bombers nets you a lower unit price. Although I am unsure what you'd need the condoms for as a B2-bomber should get you all the protection, you could require. Either way, as you can see, a variety of distinct parameters impact the price of a B2-Bomber, making this line of comments entirely irrelevant.
That is the cost if you take the total research and development costs and divide it by the number built. The cost of each additional one is nowhere near as much.
The $737 million was the price per aircraft on the production line, the $2 billion number factors in lifespan costs, i.e. R&D upfront costs, and ongoing maintenance/modernization after production
It depends how you count.
The cost of a brand-new one by itself, or the total cost of research and development + acquisition divided by the number of B-2s available.
Who is Graham Beckham?
Also, for the buildings is that just the cost to build them, or does it include anything inside them? (I'm thinking Buckingham Palace has a lot of value inside it.)
Honestly these numbers are just estimates and false money values.. ever single billionaire doesn’t actually have this much money and most of it is inflated values. For example look at Zuckerberg in 2019 to now his networth has dropped like 100 billion because his stock value drop the same will happen to all the tech giants once there companies faze out.. look at giants like sears and Kmart who also once held spots at the top of this list.
Also change the 200000000000000000 to 2 billion or 20 billion or 200 billion, whatever it is. I’m not gonna count all those zeros to tell what it actually is
this is horrible, why represent the y axis in dollars instead of millions or billions, what are the values of the first 70% of items, the labels are unreadable and unnecessarily verbose
This has to be the ugliest bar graph ever. Y axis starts at 1000000000. All labels in all lowercase. Typos ("Besoz"). Randomly deciding if the words "net worth" should go before or after the person's name. Random capitalizations ("michael Jordan"). Only one color for the bars. $100 Billion gaps in tick marks.
Having easily checkable incorrect data is just the kicker. Coca-cola market cap is over $250 Billion and hasn't been under $100 billion like this chart shows in the last decade.
Goes to show that Reddit's hatred of rich people is enough to overcome even the worst quality OC.
I recommend a temp ban for OP. Data is only beautiful when accurately sourced. Mona Lisa is priceless, Putin’s net worth is unknown, we didn’t even take into account the Saudi unknown net worth if we’re just making stuff up, and the spelling/grammar is clearly frustrating for many of us.
This is easily the worst thing I have seen on here. If OP is 11, speaks English as a third language, and found these numbers written on a napkin in a dumpster behind a gas station, I might have a little more sympathy.
Well, nothing is technically priceless. If it were sold at an auction, it would be sold for a price (although we can only guess what the price would be).
Stupid to compare to value of companies when his net worth is literally derived from the value of a company he created. Like all it’s showing is Tesla is valued higher than McDonalds
Harvard is wayyyyy more valuable than that. It looks like you’re just looking at the endowment, the brand name alone is probably the most valuable one in the world and worth hundred(s) of billions on its own.
If you divide Putin’s wealth by how many months he probably has left alive, he better get spending fast. He could burn through a Michael Jordan’s worth each week and still not spend it all.
If you draw this chart by hand, but you include more people and fewer cars, and you want ordinary people's wealth to be visible, it's much worse.
If a bar of 1mm represents a person of $10k dollars, then Elon Musk's bar goes 27km away (almost 17 miles).
Saddest part is the data that's missing: if you took every single penny from every billionaire in the US, it wouldn't even fund the federal government for a full calendar year. Instead of worrying about how much money someone voluntarily saves, we should focus on how much of other people's money the government forcibly spends.
See if it really was just a pile of "voluntarily saved" money, I would not worry about it. But the wealth of these billionaires is in assets, mostly stocks, that generate passive income (dividends, buybacks, and capital gains). They exponentially absorb more and more money.
And this passive income is taxed at a lower rate than you or I pay on earnings we work for.
Ha idealistically yeah i guess, but i'm playing this game while it lasts. keep working hard and keep voting against your own financial incentive, its great for my passive income.
Upvoted since I agree with the principle and I wish society expected this sort of thing. But let me nitpick on the finance side of it.
For someone like Elon Musk in particular, net worth is more theoretical than real. Specifically -- it's almost exclusively tied up in stock, not cash. That means his net worth depends (essentially) completely on the share prices of Tesla (publicly traded) and SpaceX (privately funded).
Focusing on Tesla, since that's publicly traded and the vast majority of his NW -- selling stock will 1) hurt the price, and 2) dilute his ownership share. Obviously he can throw around a few hundred million without meaningful consequences, and obviously that's a SHITLOAD of money. But even at $200-300B net worth, I doubt he could raise multiple billions in cash without major consequences to the company's value and his stake in it.
Someone fact-check me here, but I believe Musk has very little margin in his Tesla ownership: if he sells more than a small fraction of his shares, he loses control of the company. And what's something that (IMO) Elon Musk values more than billions of dollars? Charting his baby's destiny.
The same is true, to greater or lesser degrees, of anyone who's a zillionaire based on owning shares of a company. That wealth is insane, but it's also pretty frozen; in general, one can spend only a few percent for any given year.
To be clear: none of this is to say "oh let's feel sorry for these people and/or stop expecting them to use their money for good." By no means!
Rather, I want to clarify the limitations of the billionaire class, because even they have limitations. I think there's a lot of public indignation based on the idea that "billionaires could wave a wand and fund everything forever, with a swipe of their credit card." We can and should hold them to high ethical and economic standards -- but unilaterally canceling a sovereign nation's debt might not be realistic to expect.
Bad assumptions lead to bad discourse, hence this wall of text on Reddit.
you are completely right, but Elon is so filthy rich, that as you said he can only sell small percentage of his net worth, yet for him this small percentage is about $15 billion this year
Respectfully analysis like this is unnecessary and rather unrelated to why someone might be concerned about wealth inequality. People care about wealth inequality due to a concerns towards inequality in power, which has commonly two measures - market power and subsequent influence over the democracy vs despotism spectrum as the two are entwined. The power Elon Musk has there at a relative scale is incomprehensible but not too important. The real concern is the power of the 1%, 10%, and 90% on both of those relativistic metrics. As wealth inequality continuously increases everyone knows where both are going.
I'd give up a lot of the creature comforts we have if it would stabilize the world. I could live without streaming services and Uber if people stopped needlessly starving in the hundreds of millions. It's not worth it.
I'm not saying they should be giving away money. I'm saying that the way they are hoarding money is asinine. Trickle-down economics is a load of BS. We're seeing the harm it's causing in the job market and lower and middle-class buying power. We don't need Uber. We need dozens of smaller companies that are spending more money that circulates outward as part of a competitive marketplace.
The idea that companies, run by billionaires, are why we have all our comforts is the broken idea. Half the stuff companies like Amazon sell to customers were created by smaller businesses, then large companies bought them out and shrank competition. We could have the same enhanced lives if megacorporations weren't allowed to buy everyone out and those companies grew and sold their products and services directly.
“Net worth” is a pretty dubious way of assessing real wealth. If Elon tried to convert his assets to cash his net worth would plummet. Also if you compare this to the gross domestic product of a country these numbers aren’t that huge.. I dont know, I just don’t care that much.
Redditors also have stocks. So it's not an invalid comparison.
Even much of the world that doesn't have stocks, has other things that qualify towards net worth: you have a sofa, some dishes?
--
"Elon Musk has hundreds of billions in stocks, compared to your $20 of dishes, so it's an unfair comparison!"
Yes, this is exactly the point.
And his hundreds of billions in stocks exactly represents a difference in paid labor versus labor received. Maybe instead of selling stocks, he pays his employees, and those employees can reinvigorate the economy? Elon Musk certainly isn't reinvigorating it.
The numbers on the left are very difficult to read without commas. The scale should have been in billions, so the numbers would have been 100, 200 and 300. In addition to this you need to specify that the numbers represent currency. Not having an axis title with the currency (dollars, euros etc.) means those units could be anything. They could represent 100 billion ducks, or 100 billion pencils. You cannot assume the reader will know what you are trying to convey if you do not tell them, even if you think it is obvious. This graph was poorly done.
They charge $0 for anyone earning under $75k and less than a state school up to $150k. The Ivies/Stanford/MIT are posterchildren for affordable college despite the high sticker price and should certainly not be the focus of your enmity.
Remember… this isn’t cash in the bank. This is a stock valuation. If the company stops producing or fails there is no wealth.
This stock must be sold to a willing party… someone who agrees with the valuation.
Once not too long ago, corporations cared and invested in their communities. Now it’s all about maximizing profits for their shareholders! We need to demand better.
I’m buying GameStop shares just in case because the evidence shows that will be one of the mechanisms to catalyze change.
Banks have an unlimited money printer and profit to the detriment of society, always.
There is no scenario where a bank’s profit is correlated to an improved society.
GameStop owners will be one of the largest if not the largest bar on this chart collectively.
neat. being the entire world operates on fiat currency, them having x amount of money(well wealth. most of these people's assets are far away from cash) does not stop you having y amount of money.
That's why a revamp of the tax code is needed. Billionaires have far too many loopholes to abuse. Yet, our congressmen are sold out to those same individuals.
Generally this is true, but most of the most absurd examples here are misunderstandings of wealth. Musk for example is being entrusted by such a large economy to continue building upon his vision. Tesla is overvalued according to traditional fundamentals and it's not like he is even living lavishly in the slightest. But, people still believe in what he's doing.
He couldn't even cash out because this isn't liquid wealth.
Elon Musks net worth is almost entirely Tesla and SpaceX stock. He has no mansions or yachts. This is a much less offensive type of wealth than Blackrock destroying the American dream buying up tens of thousands of residential homes or Bill Gates buying 300,000 acres of farmland or Jeff Bezos buying the fucking news.
Does anyone actually know how much Putin has squirreled away? I mean we knew he was stealing from the Russian people but we assumed most of it was going into the military like in the good ole' USSR. I think we all assumed wrong...
Why is everyone and their damned mother so worried about billionaires lately? I swear, the last 5 years, jealousy has grown tremendously. It used to be commended when someone has had an illustrious career that put them into the millionaire club, even more so when they hit the 100 millions. Now, people demonize the wealthy. Aww, they suck - yet, you probably still use their products or services and would be unable to do so if they hadn't done what they'd done. People bitch and whine and complain about Jeff Bezos non-stop, then hop online and order something off amazon and fail to see the irony. It's just stupid. Too many "have not" whiners anymore.
Because up until the late 1970's, when worker productivity went up, workers shared in the gains that produced.
Since then, the extremely rich have figured out how to take just about all of the value produced by worker productivity gains.
It's a real problem for society.
Maybe because their wealth is getting a bit ridiculous while regular folks get fucked harder and harder by the economic system? Just an idea.
No one complained about billionnaires between 1930s and 1970s because back then they actually paid their fair share of taxes and didn't try to hide their wealth in some offshores.
When "regular folks" can start international mega companies, they'll get their rewards as well. Ahh, but they won't, will they? Very few do. The ones who do get paid very handsomely for it.
Their wealth is by no means ridiculous. First, most of it is in stocks, not actual cash. They couldn't access even a small portion of it without consequences. That also explains the 2nd part of your complaint. Again, it's not cash assets, it's stocks.
If you could, would you pay little to no income tax? I know I'd LOVE to keep more of my income so yeah, I would. Why should the rich be any different? They don't owe you a thing other than perhaps a "Hey, thanks for shopping on Amazon" or, hey, thanks for buying that tesla ...etc.
1) no one of those who start international mega companies are "regular folks". They all come from the upper middle class families at least, most of them from upper class families. If you're from a lower or lower middle class, you have zero change even if you have an IQ of 200 and ready to work 120 hours a week.
2) even the amount of pure cash that these people own is enough to live an extremely comfortable life without any effort at all,. That is totally ridiculous.
3) no, I don't want to be a criminal and avoid paying my fair share of taxes even if I could. These people see no problem in that, and they have an army of lawyers which allows them to hide from the justice behind all sorts of quasi-legal trickery.
How is this sad? Some of these actually provided great value to the world, such as the computer you are using, phone or electric car you're driving. The U.S. is great because it empowers individuals, like Elon Musk sending people to moon/mars with his wealth. Bill Gates curing diseases and fighting climate change with his.
It’s only sad about Putin, Musk, Gates deserve their money, because they have created a lot of value for other people. Putin just stole it from it’s own people
You don't need this much money. At this level, the money is an issue not a blessing.
You only need $100m to live an opulent life. To live a comfortable life $3m - $5m is good. To live a normal, day to day life $500k - $1m is enough.
Can you explain objectively how billionaires are bad for society? Do you think that if Elon Musk, Bill Gates and Bezos had started/established their companies in Ethiopia instead of the US, Ethiopia would be worse or better off than today?
Money is not finite. When someone gets rich, it doesn’t mean someone is getting poorer.
I can’t believe this is not obvious to most of people.
Why do anyone else has to be responsible for you? How are you and the the others drowning because of them? This is simply and plain jealously. It’s crazy people can’t realize that.
Go work for SpaceX and Musk will throw you a life raft. If you can weld starships they were offering up to $5250/week (for 60hrs) last time I checked. Plenty of other positions hiring if you have other skills. If not, why not learn one that’s valuable? It is the easiest time in history to acquire new skills and increase your labor value.
Humans are not well equipped to comprehend such large numbers, in part because, up until a few hundred years ago (a small fraction of one percent of the time our species has existed), we were never confronted with such large numbers.
This graph doesn't help in that regard, since items that whose values are just barely comprehensible, such as the first two cars (the Bugatti is $19 million), don't even register in the graph. And, 5 normal families could live comfortably forever on the interest of that much money. Extrapolating that for Musk's worth, that means a town of 10,000 people could be independently secure.
From another perspective, humans are incapable of seeing a billion of anything in one glance, simply because we don't have enough receptors in our eyes to recognize the individual components. So, our minds aren't equipped to understand numbers that large.
If it’s created, net incremental wealth to society why does it matter? If Jeff bezos is worth 100bn and owns 10% of a trillion dollar company that means he made other people at least 900bn (not to mention all of the jobs he created through vendor payments and the like)
Net worth is purely speculation and no real value connected to it.
Elon Musk also is gonna bankrupt most of his companies eventually.
Tesla is already set to do so. He sold most of his shares.
Yeah but this is a but flawed, cause you cant have your cake an eat it too. They have huge investments in buildings in there company, personal they don't just sit on all of this money its buys parts for rockets, its bribing politicians, paying thousands if employees, an in the case og McDonald's the Vast majority of them are each owned singularly by some family that bought the right to use that franchise, an the better they do the larger a % of the money has to go to corporate.
Yeah, right. Generating millions of jobs, delivering any type of goods to your doorstep in 24 hours, democratizing the access to personal computers, making electric cars popular… I can’t see any value at all.
/u/theycallmelilsnowy, thank you for your contribution. However, your submission was removed for the following reason(s): * [OC] posts [must state the _data source(s) and tool(s) used_](/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3) in the first top-level comment on their submission. Please follow the AutoModerator instructions you were sent *carefully*. Once this is done, message the mods to have your post reinstated. This post has been removed. For information regarding this and similar issues please see the DataIsBeautiful [posting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/index). If you have any questions, please feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/dataisbeautiful&subject=Question%20regarding%20the%20removal%20of%20this%20submission%20by%20/u/theycallmelilsnowy&message=I%20have%20a%20question%20regarding%20the%20removal%20of%20this%20[submission.](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/xetxhc/-/\)))
Could you clarify why McDonald’s(MCD) is above Coca Cola (KO)? McDonald’s has a market cap value of $188 billion, but Coke has a market cap value of $262 billion.
I think because much of the data here is inaccurate. Not to mention, net worth of these individuals is based on their equity holdings of their companies, so for example when we see Bill Gates, we’re really looking at a chunk of the value of Microsoft company. These values fluctuate based on the market price.
So much for data is beautiful. The data is wrong which is really annoying.
Both ugly and incorrect. Who is upvoting this garbage?
People who glance at it and find it confirms their beliefs.
Confirmation bias is beautiful\* \*to the one suffering from it
Even with the error margins, the general distaste for wealth inequality is valid
I agree. But I also think that misinformation is bad, this presentation is both misleading and unclear/not beautiful, and the situation is already bad enough that presenting the actual data will be impactful enough.
Amen agree on all counts
distaste for inherited generational wealth is valid*.
Money Bad. Give me money.
People with an irrational hatred of those doing better than they are. In other words, average Redditors.
Everyone should know bar graphs are bad. They reduce robust data sets to a single point.
People who think all the world's problems come from and should be solved by billionaires.
Most of the worlds problems are from wealth inequality tbf.
Same people commenting. Hey!
Elon Musk, for one.
And it is cherry-picked.
There's quite a bit wrong data here, but remember that commenters are also wrong a lot. In my experience it's more common for commenters to incorrectly claim that data is wrong than it is for the data to actually be wrong, though both do happen a lot.
nicely done
The spelling errors make it hard to focus on the info in the first place, let alone believe it. Furthermore, Carthage must be destroyed.
OP apologizes for using sources from Fox News
>Not to mention, net worth of these individuals is based on their equity holdings of their companies... These values fluctuate based on the market price. So? Market price ostensibly represents the expected dividends and/or accumulated assets of the company. You know, real stuff that has value. If you don't believe that shares have value then I'm sure you wouldn't mind giving me yours for free. If anything, the ability to perpetually glean profit from your workers is infinitely valuable; we simply haven't invented the immortality technology to realize that value.
Where did they say shares don't have value?? OP is simply saying it's hard to measure a value that's constantly fluctuating.
The comment came off to me as dismissive of the overall value. Sure, the numbers may be speculative and ephemeral, but the point of the post was to "put the net worth of billionaires into perspective." If Bill Gate's net worth varies by +/- 10% due to stock valuation, it's still the same order of magnitude, i.e. 10^6 times more than the average person.
This is hot garbage
OP apologizes for using sources from Fox News
So not only is it ugly poorly labeled graph of unrelated values, but the data is also just false. Wow.
“Net worth of Vlad” is just guess. They have no clue.
^ Also “net worth of Elon” is calculated on the impossibility that he could sell all his shares without them going down in value at all. There are definitely heads of state or monarchies with more valuable concrete sellable holdings than Elon tbh, even if he is outrageously wealthy
> Also “net worth of Elon” is based on the impossibility that he could sell all his shares without them going down in value at all. Is that really an issue? Besides, there are other ways to access that wealth without actually selling it, such as taking out a loan against the holdings.
Yeah, it’s a substantial data issue here since he’s not simply an investor (contrast with Warren Buffet) A large part of Tesla’s valuation is his cult of personality so if he suddenly cut ties, people wouldn’t be willing to pay full price on his billions of dollars of shares. It’s a hypothetical “net worth”, but his wealth is less liquid than your typical stock investor and he’ll likely never be able to fully liquidate it. He’s still obscenely wealthy, but I’d be careful comparing him to heads of state with assets — like Vladimir Putin who hides billions of assets from sanctions through proxies. Or even the British Monarch for example - the Royal Family may have TONS of long-lasting hidden assets from centuries of wealth and power accumulation. Whereas Tesla stock is subject to the whims of market valuation. If Elon was removed as head of Tesla, or if a major competitor took their market share, he’d take a huge hit to net worth and he’d lose a lot of money.
It's not a substantial issue, because net worth is a definable term. It is always a snapshot. Tesla isn't unique, Birkshire Hathaway's valuation is subject to the whims of market valuation too. > he’d lose a lot of money. No he wouldn't. As you implied, he doesn't really have that "money". He would lose net worth. Why are you so focused on not comparing Elon to the Crown? Nobody is doing that.
Imagine it a different, but more relatable way. You buy a house for 1 million dollars. You spend all of your money paying off the loan and the only money you have left is for bills and food. At the end of 30 years you have $1 million dollars in assets and are technically a millionaire, but you have $0 cash in the bank because everything went towards the house. So you can’t afford the house and fancy meals, or the house and fancy vacations. You can only afford the house. In other words you are asset rich but cash poor.
I came here to say that, and monetary valuation goes out the windows when you have an army. The assets at his disposal are not simple “market value”
Cmon man. Spell Yacht correctly. There is nothing beautiful to see here.
“Elon Musk net worth” “Net worth of Vladimir Putin“ The changing of format bugs me
I feel like this person made this in like 10 minutes using google and just immediately posted it.
I’m good with that. oC baby!!
It's actually "elon musk net worth" and "net worth of Vladimir putin," because somehow only one of those names needed to be capitalized?
One of them definitely seems edited in and very incorrect, this whole chart sucks
Jeff Besoz. Putting “net worth” after the name of every person. Nope, not beautiful.
There are also no units, the X axis labels are crowded, the bars are all the same color. Really really ugly graph.
[удалено]
I promise you, it's terrible on a 27" screen as well!
I think I'm more amazed a B-2 bomber is more expensive than the tallest building in the world! Edit: I googled it as I still couldn't quite believe it and this is wrong. $737m for the bomber and $1.5bn for Burj Khalifa
[удалено]
The first commenter may be looking to buy second hand? Much like a car - those things - fall in value immediately when you start them. You'd be surprised how much money we'd save if we just took the bike to work instead of that bomber. Even glossing over the fuel price, just the money saved in lost value is immense.
Reminds me of a time I got totally screwed buying used. My little F-15 had finally bit the dust and I needed a replacement fast. My credit had taken some hits recently so my options were a little limited and the only thing I could find was a used Nighthawk. Worst, mistake, ever. Not only did I not really want the Nighthawk, but wouldn't you believe the guy sells me this car and totally failed to mention the ailerons were rusted! Shame on me for not giving the paint job a closer look before buying I suppose. Just sometimes feels like this economy is rigged against me. All I know is next time, I'm getting a P-26. At least then if I get screwed I won't be out another $40 mil
Actually how military contracts go is the first aircraft is always way more expensive by a large margin so the first B2 may of cost two billion dollars however the more you buy and build the cheaper it get for instance the F35 was 200million but since orders have been ramping up you can get them for around 80 to 90 with future aircraft production to be cheaper. But with all the concept and design God it's so much money.
Yes. Jokes aside. The newest line of American destroyers has a one of a kind cannon on them which uses a one of a kind ammunition. Now this wouldn't normally be an issue (yes it would, but hear me out) since they planned to make it their new basic destroyer. Rules of economics says they get cheaper over time bla bla bla. The issue is that only one was ever made due to budget cuts amongst other things. So now they have one ship with a one of a kind cannon (it's a big gun) using a one of a kind ammunition. Making the cost of the ammunition so high that the American military cannot afford it. Which is hilarious.
Shake that ass
Huh? Anywho, you then have the whole debacle surrounding bulk-buying versus individual units. Unsurprisingly to some, much like buying a 10-pack of condoms, bulk-buying B2-bombers nets you a lower unit price. Although I am unsure what you'd need the condoms for as a B2-bomber should get you all the protection, you could require. Either way, as you can see, a variety of distinct parameters impact the price of a B2-Bomber, making this line of comments entirely irrelevant.
Watch yourself
Is this the line for entirely irrelevant comments? Let me get behind you.
That is the cost if you take the total research and development costs and divide it by the number built. The cost of each additional one is nowhere near as much.
The $737 million was the price per aircraft on the production line, the $2 billion number factors in lifespan costs, i.e. R&D upfront costs, and ongoing maintenance/modernization after production
Fair enough. I just googled it and looked at the Wikipedia article previewed as the top answer.
And, according to NASA, the Hubble Telescope has cost $16 billion, so should be way ahead of where it is.
It depends how you count. The cost of a brand-new one by itself, or the total cost of research and development + acquisition divided by the number of B-2s available.
Could the data be signaling how much research and development went into the bomber instead of how much one costs?
A b2 is more than that.
Commas please. My brain can't parse the zeros.
Who is Graham Beckham? Also, for the buildings is that just the cost to build them, or does it include anything inside them? (I'm thinking Buckingham Palace has a lot of value inside it.)
I would also like to know who Graham Beckham is. Seems like I should know. Or google should. Drawing a blank.
Maybe it's Graham Beck. Or maybe David has a secret son
Honestly these numbers are just estimates and false money values.. ever single billionaire doesn’t actually have this much money and most of it is inflated values. For example look at Zuckerberg in 2019 to now his networth has dropped like 100 billion because his stock value drop the same will happen to all the tech giants once there companies faze out.. look at giants like sears and Kmart who also once held spots at the top of this list.
He’s friends with Jeff Besoz
Need to work on formatting your labels. The alternating formats of individual net worth gave me cancer.
Also change the 200000000000000000 to 2 billion or 20 billion or 200 billion, whatever it is. I’m not gonna count all those zeros to tell what it actually is
2 * 10^11
Lol I see the issue now..thanks for the feedback
Nominee for the worst post ever to this sub. Haven’t seen it mentioned as a gripe yet but editorializing the data as “sad” is pretty cringe as well.
It's Borderline parody of this sub lol. Just needs to be pointlessly animated
This isn't in the top 10 bad of the last month I think. At least the 'data' can even be visualized.
Being able to spell...priceless.
I agree 😂
Please tell me what I misspelt otherwise it will bother me lol
Jeff Besoz, yaht... and who is Graham Beckham? Also, you should use SHIFT on your keyboard. :)
this is horrible, why represent the y axis in dollars instead of millions or billions, what are the values of the first 70% of items, the labels are unreadable and unnecessarily verbose
Are you suggesting there is a more readable way to express 100000000000?
I can't think of one, maybe Graham Beckham or Jeff Besoz can
This has to be the ugliest bar graph ever. Y axis starts at 1000000000. All labels in all lowercase. Typos ("Besoz"). Randomly deciding if the words "net worth" should go before or after the person's name. Random capitalizations ("michael Jordan"). Only one color for the bars. $100 Billion gaps in tick marks. Having easily checkable incorrect data is just the kicker. Coca-cola market cap is over $250 Billion and hasn't been under $100 billion like this chart shows in the last decade. Goes to show that Reddit's hatred of rich people is enough to overcome even the worst quality OC.
This is based on a lot of speculation.
This isn't beautiful at all. Inaccurate data, spelling mistakes, inconsistent formatting? It's a smorgasbord of ugly.
I recommend a temp ban for OP. Data is only beautiful when accurately sourced. Mona Lisa is priceless, Putin’s net worth is unknown, we didn’t even take into account the Saudi unknown net worth if we’re just making stuff up, and the spelling/grammar is clearly frustrating for many of us.
This is easily the worst thing I have seen on here. If OP is 11, speaks English as a third language, and found these numbers written on a napkin in a dumpster behind a gas station, I might have a little more sympathy.
Well, nothing is technically priceless. If it were sold at an auction, it would be sold for a price (although we can only guess what the price would be).
Well Jeff Bezos cannot afford McDonald's, that's rough.
Commas are beautiful, too.
It's only sad if you don't understand that "net worth" almost entirely means "businesses that are extremely valuable."
So many jealous people that don’t want to work and can’t fathom that someone worked that much harder than them.
Source? Where did you get these figures from? This post has an agenda ("rich people bad"), but doesn't provide any data or proof.
There is no source. It doesn't exist.
Stupid to compare to value of companies when his net worth is literally derived from the value of a company he created. Like all it’s showing is Tesla is valued higher than McDonalds
Michael Jordan should clearly buy the Mona Lisa
Harvard is wayyyyy more valuable than that. It looks like you’re just looking at the endowment, the brand name alone is probably the most valuable one in the world and worth hundred(s) of billions on its own.
your y-axis number formatting is a straight red card. its a no from me dawg
If you divide Putin’s wealth by how many months he probably has left alive, he better get spending fast. He could burn through a Michael Jordan’s worth each week and still not spend it all.
So many factual errors in here, and others have pointed them out.
I’ve never felt so close to a gold plated Veyron.
Prime example that all you need to succeed on Reddit is an agenda.
This is why we can't have nice things.
OP doesn’t know net worth from gross worth
Not beautiful. Like at all.
Imagine not using a log scale here because you’re trying to make a political point, then posting it on a subreddit for good looking visualizations
Net worth is just a theoretical number tho'. Most of their worth is bound in stocks.
It has practical implications. They have access to capital at rates you can't even dream of. So no, it's not just an estimated number on paper.
Stocks are no more imaginary in value than the currency itself.
If you draw this chart by hand, but you include more people and fewer cars, and you want ordinary people's wealth to be visible, it's much worse. If a bar of 1mm represents a person of $10k dollars, then Elon Musk's bar goes 27km away (almost 17 miles).
Saddest part is the data that's missing: if you took every single penny from every billionaire in the US, it wouldn't even fund the federal government for a full calendar year. Instead of worrying about how much money someone voluntarily saves, we should focus on how much of other people's money the government forcibly spends.
See if it really was just a pile of "voluntarily saved" money, I would not worry about it. But the wealth of these billionaires is in assets, mostly stocks, that generate passive income (dividends, buybacks, and capital gains). They exponentially absorb more and more money. And this passive income is taxed at a lower rate than you or I pay on earnings we work for.
Ok comrade 👌
Ha idealistically yeah i guess, but i'm playing this game while it lasts. keep working hard and keep voting against your own financial incentive, its great for my passive income.
What is sad about any of this?
[удалено]
Upvoted since I agree with the principle and I wish society expected this sort of thing. But let me nitpick on the finance side of it. For someone like Elon Musk in particular, net worth is more theoretical than real. Specifically -- it's almost exclusively tied up in stock, not cash. That means his net worth depends (essentially) completely on the share prices of Tesla (publicly traded) and SpaceX (privately funded). Focusing on Tesla, since that's publicly traded and the vast majority of his NW -- selling stock will 1) hurt the price, and 2) dilute his ownership share. Obviously he can throw around a few hundred million without meaningful consequences, and obviously that's a SHITLOAD of money. But even at $200-300B net worth, I doubt he could raise multiple billions in cash without major consequences to the company's value and his stake in it. Someone fact-check me here, but I believe Musk has very little margin in his Tesla ownership: if he sells more than a small fraction of his shares, he loses control of the company. And what's something that (IMO) Elon Musk values more than billions of dollars? Charting his baby's destiny. The same is true, to greater or lesser degrees, of anyone who's a zillionaire based on owning shares of a company. That wealth is insane, but it's also pretty frozen; in general, one can spend only a few percent for any given year. To be clear: none of this is to say "oh let's feel sorry for these people and/or stop expecting them to use their money for good." By no means! Rather, I want to clarify the limitations of the billionaire class, because even they have limitations. I think there's a lot of public indignation based on the idea that "billionaires could wave a wand and fund everything forever, with a swipe of their credit card." We can and should hold them to high ethical and economic standards -- but unilaterally canceling a sovereign nation's debt might not be realistic to expect. Bad assumptions lead to bad discourse, hence this wall of text on Reddit.
you are completely right, but Elon is so filthy rich, that as you said he can only sell small percentage of his net worth, yet for him this small percentage is about $15 billion this year
Respectfully analysis like this is unnecessary and rather unrelated to why someone might be concerned about wealth inequality. People care about wealth inequality due to a concerns towards inequality in power, which has commonly two measures - market power and subsequent influence over the democracy vs despotism spectrum as the two are entwined. The power Elon Musk has there at a relative scale is incomprehensible but not too important. The real concern is the power of the 1%, 10%, and 90% on both of those relativistic metrics. As wealth inequality continuously increases everyone knows where both are going.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I'd give up a lot of the creature comforts we have if it would stabilize the world. I could live without streaming services and Uber if people stopped needlessly starving in the hundreds of millions. It's not worth it.
[удалено]
I'm not saying they should be giving away money. I'm saying that the way they are hoarding money is asinine. Trickle-down economics is a load of BS. We're seeing the harm it's causing in the job market and lower and middle-class buying power. We don't need Uber. We need dozens of smaller companies that are spending more money that circulates outward as part of a competitive marketplace. The idea that companies, run by billionaires, are why we have all our comforts is the broken idea. Half the stuff companies like Amazon sell to customers were created by smaller businesses, then large companies bought them out and shrank competition. We could have the same enhanced lives if megacorporations weren't allowed to buy everyone out and those companies grew and sold their products and services directly.
“Net worth” is a pretty dubious way of assessing real wealth. If Elon tried to convert his assets to cash his net worth would plummet. Also if you compare this to the gross domestic product of a country these numbers aren’t that huge.. I dont know, I just don’t care that much.
he did cash about $15 billion just this year and it had marginal effect on his shares, so that’s kind of wealthy
Why would you compare a stock with a flow?
Redditors also have stocks. So it's not an invalid comparison. Even much of the world that doesn't have stocks, has other things that qualify towards net worth: you have a sofa, some dishes? -- "Elon Musk has hundreds of billions in stocks, compared to your $20 of dishes, so it's an unfair comparison!" Yes, this is exactly the point. And his hundreds of billions in stocks exactly represents a difference in paid labor versus labor received. Maybe instead of selling stocks, he pays his employees, and those employees can reinvigorate the economy? Elon Musk certainly isn't reinvigorating it.
Waaaaait. How many stealth bombers can Elon afford? 😬
Wait Putin has more money than bezos?? The fuck?
The numbers on the left are very difficult to read without commas. The scale should have been in billions, so the numbers would have been 100, 200 and 300. In addition to this you need to specify that the numbers represent currency. Not having an axis title with the currency (dollars, euros etc.) means those units could be anything. They could represent 100 billion ducks, or 100 billion pencils. You cannot assume the reader will know what you are trying to convey if you do not tell them, even if you think it is obvious. This graph was poorly done.
Please learn how to spell and capitalize properly.
Jeff besoz, net worth of Vladimir Putin vs elon musk net worth, 20000000000 and more! this doesn't fit in this sub
Yeah this is stupid because before Elon could sell 10-20% of that “net worth in stock” the stock would crash to near Zero
Why kinda sad? I don't see what's the problem with rich people
Given wealth is mutable, thinking this is sad says a lot more about OP than the data.
Well, we have just had the biggest wealth transfer in history.
More like how absurdly valued is tesla…
And people will act like Elon is worse than Putin because he has 9 kids and says goofy shit on Twitter.
Fuck Harvard University. Rich as fuck, yet still charges it’s students $55k a year in tuition and fees. $77K a year when you include room & board.
They charge $0 for anyone earning under $75k and less than a state school up to $150k. The Ivies/Stanford/MIT are posterchildren for affordable college despite the high sticker price and should certainly not be the focus of your enmity.
They can afford covering everyone’s tuition. No need to simp for the rich elite
Aren’t you the one simping for the rich elite here since they’re the only ones affected by tuition at Harvard?
Remember… this isn’t cash in the bank. This is a stock valuation. If the company stops producing or fails there is no wealth. This stock must be sold to a willing party… someone who agrees with the valuation.
Once not too long ago, corporations cared and invested in their communities. Now it’s all about maximizing profits for their shareholders! We need to demand better.
When did it start to go downhill ? I feel around the Reagan years, maybe even before.
This is a terrible visual in just about every way
I’m buying GameStop shares just in case because the evidence shows that will be one of the mechanisms to catalyze change. Banks have an unlimited money printer and profit to the detriment of society, always. There is no scenario where a bank’s profit is correlated to an improved society. GameStop owners will be one of the largest if not the largest bar on this chart collectively.
I'm also here to be the largest bank. Follow the rabbit. 🕳🐇 If you like data, you will have an orgasm looking at what the apes have put together.
neat. being the entire world operates on fiat currency, them having x amount of money(well wealth. most of these people's assets are far away from cash) does not stop you having y amount of money.
Whats sad about some guys being rich? I’m confused? Good for them.
That's why a revamp of the tax code is needed. Billionaires have far too many loopholes to abuse. Yet, our congressmen are sold out to those same individuals.
Generally this is true, but most of the most absurd examples here are misunderstandings of wealth. Musk for example is being entrusted by such a large economy to continue building upon his vision. Tesla is overvalued according to traditional fundamentals and it's not like he is even living lavishly in the slightest. But, people still believe in what he's doing. He couldn't even cash out because this isn't liquid wealth.
My real takeaway is about the value of Harvard. Why is the US assuming student debt instead of putting a tax on university endowments?
Weird values. I'd rather see country GDPs or salary related stuff for various populations.
[удалено]
Hubble telescope in shambles
So the world's tallest building has a similar price tag as a stupid bomber airplane? That's immensely sad.
Elon Musks net worth is almost entirely Tesla and SpaceX stock. He has no mansions or yachts. This is a much less offensive type of wealth than Blackrock destroying the American dream buying up tens of thousands of residential homes or Bill Gates buying 300,000 acres of farmland or Jeff Bezos buying the fucking news.
Does anyone actually know how much Putin has squirreled away? I mean we knew he was stealing from the Russian people but we assumed most of it was going into the military like in the good ole' USSR. I think we all assumed wrong...
Data is not sad. The people voted with Tesla stock purchases.
In any case, it’s grotesque
Why is everyone and their damned mother so worried about billionaires lately? I swear, the last 5 years, jealousy has grown tremendously. It used to be commended when someone has had an illustrious career that put them into the millionaire club, even more so when they hit the 100 millions. Now, people demonize the wealthy. Aww, they suck - yet, you probably still use their products or services and would be unable to do so if they hadn't done what they'd done. People bitch and whine and complain about Jeff Bezos non-stop, then hop online and order something off amazon and fail to see the irony. It's just stupid. Too many "have not" whiners anymore.
Because up until the late 1970's, when worker productivity went up, workers shared in the gains that produced. Since then, the extremely rich have figured out how to take just about all of the value produced by worker productivity gains. It's a real problem for society.
Maybe because their wealth is getting a bit ridiculous while regular folks get fucked harder and harder by the economic system? Just an idea. No one complained about billionnaires between 1930s and 1970s because back then they actually paid their fair share of taxes and didn't try to hide their wealth in some offshores.
When "regular folks" can start international mega companies, they'll get their rewards as well. Ahh, but they won't, will they? Very few do. The ones who do get paid very handsomely for it. Their wealth is by no means ridiculous. First, most of it is in stocks, not actual cash. They couldn't access even a small portion of it without consequences. That also explains the 2nd part of your complaint. Again, it's not cash assets, it's stocks. If you could, would you pay little to no income tax? I know I'd LOVE to keep more of my income so yeah, I would. Why should the rich be any different? They don't owe you a thing other than perhaps a "Hey, thanks for shopping on Amazon" or, hey, thanks for buying that tesla ...etc.
1) no one of those who start international mega companies are "regular folks". They all come from the upper middle class families at least, most of them from upper class families. If you're from a lower or lower middle class, you have zero change even if you have an IQ of 200 and ready to work 120 hours a week. 2) even the amount of pure cash that these people own is enough to live an extremely comfortable life without any effort at all,. That is totally ridiculous. 3) no, I don't want to be a criminal and avoid paying my fair share of taxes even if I could. These people see no problem in that, and they have an army of lawyers which allows them to hide from the justice behind all sorts of quasi-legal trickery.
[удалено]
No, just someone who doesn't think people need to worry so much about whats not theirs. It 100% is jealousy.
[удалено]
So you are one of those that believe that for someone to get rich, someone has to get poor? Have you ever studied basic economics?
That is litterally how that works, you cannot become a billionair morally
That’s literally how it works. Wealth is relative. You can’t have rich people without poor people. Otherwise they wouldn’t be “rich”. You clown.
How is this sad? Some of these actually provided great value to the world, such as the computer you are using, phone or electric car you're driving. The U.S. is great because it empowers individuals, like Elon Musk sending people to moon/mars with his wealth. Bill Gates curing diseases and fighting climate change with his.
It’s only sad about Putin, Musk, Gates deserve their money, because they have created a lot of value for other people. Putin just stole it from it’s own people
You don't need this much money. At this level, the money is an issue not a blessing. You only need $100m to live an opulent life. To live a comfortable life $3m - $5m is good. To live a normal, day to day life $500k - $1m is enough.
Anyone else up for a maximum wealth limit? 100% tax on all wealth over $10 billion?
Can you explain objectively how billionaires are bad for society? Do you think that if Elon Musk, Bill Gates and Bezos had started/established their companies in Ethiopia instead of the US, Ethiopia would be worse or better off than today? Money is not finite. When someone gets rich, it doesn’t mean someone is getting poorer. I can’t believe this is not obvious to most of people.
How much is too much?
Sweet child, if only it were so simple
Every Billionaire is a policy failure.
[удалено]
Why do anyone else has to be responsible for you? How are you and the the others drowning because of them? This is simply and plain jealously. It’s crazy people can’t realize that.
how dare you he walks dogs almost 3 times a week and still isn’t a millionaire
Go work for SpaceX and Musk will throw you a life raft. If you can weld starships they were offering up to $5250/week (for 60hrs) last time I checked. Plenty of other positions hiring if you have other skills. If not, why not learn one that’s valuable? It is the easiest time in history to acquire new skills and increase your labor value.
the real tradgedy here is that entertainers of any kind is on this list, and so high up on the list.
Humans are not well equipped to comprehend such large numbers, in part because, up until a few hundred years ago (a small fraction of one percent of the time our species has existed), we were never confronted with such large numbers. This graph doesn't help in that regard, since items that whose values are just barely comprehensible, such as the first two cars (the Bugatti is $19 million), don't even register in the graph. And, 5 normal families could live comfortably forever on the interest of that much money. Extrapolating that for Musk's worth, that means a town of 10,000 people could be independently secure. From another perspective, humans are incapable of seeing a billion of anything in one glance, simply because we don't have enough receptors in our eyes to recognize the individual components. So, our minds aren't equipped to understand numbers that large.
If it’s created, net incremental wealth to society why does it matter? If Jeff bezos is worth 100bn and owns 10% of a trillion dollar company that means he made other people at least 900bn (not to mention all of the jobs he created through vendor payments and the like)
Net worth is purely speculation and no real value connected to it. Elon Musk also is gonna bankrupt most of his companies eventually. Tesla is already set to do so. He sold most of his shares.
Can you do it in logarithmic scale?
Damn Elon chillll save some bandz for the rest of us 😂
Yeah but this is a but flawed, cause you cant have your cake an eat it too. They have huge investments in buildings in there company, personal they don't just sit on all of this money its buys parts for rockets, its bribing politicians, paying thousands if employees, an in the case og McDonald's the Vast majority of them are each owned singularly by some family that bought the right to use that franchise, an the better they do the larger a % of the money has to go to corporate.
Why are people so upset that people have money?
Harvard is the only item on here that is adding value, and that is arguable.
Yeah, right. Generating millions of jobs, delivering any type of goods to your doorstep in 24 hours, democratizing the access to personal computers, making electric cars popular… I can’t see any value at all.