A few years ago I was chatting with a co-worker. We had the exact same job. I asked him what he would buy with a billion dollars that he couldn’t get with $50 million.
He couldn’t name any specific thing he’d want, but he was enraged at the idea that $50 million was the same as a billion.
No idea what to do with the money, but he was sure it was ‘better.’
He couldn’t name any specific thing he’d want, but he was enraged at the idea that $50 million was the same as a billion.
The question was ‘what specific object or experience would you buy with $1 billion that couldn’t be purchased for $50 million.’
We agreed that a billion is more money, but my point is that it’s meaningless in terms of personal pleasures.
Think of it this way, what’s the difference between a bomb of 100 kilos of TNT and a hydrogen bomb when you’re standing on top of the bomb when it goes off?
Thanks, now I think I understand that you’re saying once you get above 50 million, the amount isn’t meaningful.
For me I can see where even $50 million would put limits on my spending. I would love to have a personal super yacht with well paid crew and be able to cruise wherever, whenever. I wouldn’t feel that $50M would be safe enough for that, whereas $1B would be. Not that I’ll ever have the opportunity to test that.
Some projects would take more than $50M, such as buying enough politicians to make the country a better place. The problem is, most people who lean more altruistic with spending are likely not to accumulate large amounts of money. They are more likely to spend it before it accumulates, or to not accumulate it at all due to their choices.
1B is a bit low for superyachting, you gotta project 10% of purchase price as the annual cost and that’ll be tens of millions a year. Gotta have a few more billion invested to stay in the green
That’s not a super yacht, that’s just a yacht unfortunately. Super yachts are hundreds of millions. Yes, on that kind of yacht, you could get by essentially forever on 1B or even less.
Just like there is no crying in the casino, there is no logic or empathy in the mental illness epidemic of fascism.
A few years ago I was chatting with a co-worker. We had the exact same job. I asked him what he would buy with a billion dollars that he couldn’t get with $50 million.
He couldn’t name any specific thing he’d want, but he was enraged at the idea that $50 million was the same as a billion.
No idea what to do with the money, but he was sure it was ‘better.’
Can you explain this more? Did he think that million and billion are the same quantity?
He couldn’t name any specific thing he’d want, but he was enraged at the idea that $50 million was the same as a billion.
The question was ‘what specific object or experience would you buy with $1 billion that couldn’t be purchased for $50 million.’
We agreed that a billion is more money, but my point is that it’s meaningless in terms of personal pleasures.
Think of it this way, what’s the difference between a bomb of 100 kilos of TNT and a hydrogen bomb when you’re standing on top of the bomb when it goes off?
Thanks, now I think I understand that you’re saying once you get above 50 million, the amount isn’t meaningful.
For me I can see where even $50 million would put limits on my spending. I would love to have a personal super yacht with well paid crew and be able to cruise wherever, whenever. I wouldn’t feel that $50M would be safe enough for that, whereas $1B would be. Not that I’ll ever have the opportunity to test that.
Some projects would take more than $50M, such as buying enough politicians to make the country a better place. The problem is, most people who lean more altruistic with spending are likely not to accumulate large amounts of money. They are more likely to spend it before it accumulates, or to not accumulate it at all due to their choices.
Once they know you care $50 million worth, the price will be $60 million, or $100mil.
1B is a bit low for superyachting, you gotta project 10% of purchase price as the annual cost and that’ll be tens of millions a year. Gotta have a few more billion invested to stay in the green
10 million is only 1% of 1B. That’s enough for 100 years of yachting. Seems in the realm of reasonable to me.
I was thinking of a super yacht that was less than 10M, so 10% upkeep would be less than 1M.
That’s not a super yacht, that’s just a yacht unfortunately. Super yachts are hundreds of millions. Yes, on that kind of yacht, you could get by essentially forever on 1B or even less.