Richest man on Earth: Jeff Bezos' Fortune Crosses $130 Billion!

[Kathandira]

He will do exactly that when he purchases real estate and avoids taxation on gains through accelerated depreciation schedules. Once the depreciation is over, he takes out all the equity, tax free, and restarts the accelerated depreciation schedule ad infinitum, and when he passes, his children will be able to do the same.

Personally, I think there should be a wealth cap in the U.S.

When you have so much money that you will never be able to spend it all in your lifetime, you should be required to release some of that money (after taxes).

But then again, that's what offshore accounts are for...so I guess there really isn't a way to prevent this.

[Deleted]

He does.

Just like Bill Gates, he is giving away money as fast as he can - but still the earn/loss rotatio leads to this.

Jeff Bezos ranked last of the top 10. While he briefly became the world's richest man this summer, he has given less than 0.1 percent of his net worth to charity. The Chronicle said his total giving since 2000 is $68 million, compared with a fortune of $67 billion as of 2016 and more than $80 billion today.

$68 million between 2000-2016, warren donated $46 billion in the same period of time..

[Daelak]

Personally, I think there should be a wealth cap in the U.S.

When you have so much money that you will never be able to spend it all in your lifetime, you should be required to release some of that money (after taxes).

But then again, that's what offshore accounts are for...so I guess there really isn't a way to prevent this.

There is a way, and it would require a global governing body like the UN or INTERPOL to seize the conservative estimate of tens of trillions of dollars that are held offshore and/or laundered through shell corporations. The accelerated depreciation schedules that can wipe out hundreds of millions of dollars of tax burden would be the hardest to remove, because it is an integral part of any tax avoidance strategy used by persons with net worth of at least $100 million. For the more wealthier persons, that's when offshoring and laundering become more attractive due to it's ability to completely avoid taxable income.

[Deleted]

Personally, I think there should be a wealth cap in the U.S.

When you have so much money that you will never be able to spend it all in your lifetime, you should be required to release some of that money (after taxes).

But then again, that's what offshore accounts are for...so I guess there really isn't a way to prevent this.

There should never be a wealth cap, those that work hard and provide to the economy should not be punished for being too rich, but it should be expected that the more you earn especially in the absurd range of billions, the more you'll give back to charity and local economies so they can thrive too.

In 99% of all the countries in the world, if you make more than a million dollars per year, you'll get a 50-70% taxation on that income.

USA on a billion, you wouldn't even pay 0.1% tax.

-

In the ideal world :

If you make $100 million or more per year, tax it at 60% baseline, and then if they do a certain amount of charity or they invest in the local economy, reduce that tax percentage.

You might say, but oh well, they'll run abroad with their money? Then tax them for the full value of money they are trying to move abroad or already have abroad, they wouldn't even dare to think about doing it. Obviously it's never going to happen because politicians are generally wealthy themselves and the few honorable ones that remain are never going to get enough traction to change anything about it.

[Daelak]

There should never be a wealth cap, those that work hard and provide to the economy should not be punished for being too rich, but it should be expected that the more you earn especially in the absurd range of billions, the more you'll give back to charity and local economies so they can thrive too.

In 99% of all the countries in the world, if you make more than a million dollars per year, you'll get a 50-70% taxation on that income.

USA on a billion, you wouldn't even pay 0.1% tax.

If you wanted to stop subsidizing the tax avoidance/evasion strategies of the super rich, you would definitely support a wealth cap, and supporting the creation of a global anti-tax evasion/laundering regime that would seize assets and liquid cash to pay to their respective governments. Anything else is just pro-bono defense work for the people who are scamming the global economy the most.

[ranzino]

No one is even going to give me a little shout-out to my brilliant plan? I mean, this was a true flash of brilliance.

No love at all @ranzino?

naaaah, i was waiting for a real plan.


and tax evasion is legal. as long as simple math works ( 40 % of something is more than 70% of nothing, it was mentioned above), tax evasion is a thing.

germany was angry at our formula 1 champions for example, because nobody of them live in germany and therefore not pay anything "at home". but it was also germany's fault; nobody with more brain activity than a dead amoeba would pay ~ 50% taxes if you could live elsewhere and pay less.

[Flarelaine]

5% of his wealth would end world hunter lol.

What is your beef with hunters?

[Deleted]

If you wanted to stop subsidizing the tax avoidance/evasion strategies of the super rich, you would definitely support a wealth cap, and supporting the creation of a global anti-tax evasion/laundering regime that would seize assets and liquid cash to pay to their respective governments. Anything else is just pro-bono defense work for the people who are scamming the global economy the most.

You don't have to cap anything, you just need governments that do anything about it, there's thousands of fixes to try before capping wealth, and all of them will have a much more positive effect than capping wealth, as capping wealth will only increase the intent to hide assets even more.

[Rasulis]

There should never be a wealth cap, those that work hard and provide to the economy should not be punished for being too rich, but it should be expected that the more you earn especially in the absurd range of billions, the more you'll give back to charity and local economies so they can thrive too.

In 99% of all the countries in the world, if you make more than a million dollars per year, you'll get a 50-70% taxation on that income.

USA on a billion, you wouldn't even pay 0.1% tax.

I don't think any country in the world tax non-realized capital gain. As for Bill Gates, he needs to give away a lot more if he wants to get rid of his net worth within this lifetime. All you have to do is look at the value of some common stocks that make up most investment portfolio.

Apple, Inc. tripled in 5 years.

Microsoft increased 5 fold.

Disney doubled.

Facebook almost 10 fold.

Cisco doubled.

AMD six fold.

Home Depot tripled.

Johnson & Johnson doubled.

Oracle doubled.

You actually need to make an effort to pick a losing stock in the last 10 years.

[Kathandira]

There should never be a wealth cap, those that work hard and provide to the economy should not be punished for being too rich, but it should be expected that the more you earn especially in the absurd range of billions, the more you'll give back to charity and local economies so they can thrive too.

In 99% of all the countries in the world, if you make more than a million dollars per year, you'll get a 50-70% taxation on that income.

USA on a billion, you wouldn't even pay 0.1% tax.

-

In the ideal world :

If you make $100 million or more per year, tax it at 60% baseline, and then if they do a certain amount of charity or they invest in the local economy, reduce that tax percentage.

You might say, but oh well, they'll run abroad with their money? Then tax them for the full value of money they are trying to move abroad or already have abroad, they wouldn't even dare to think about doing it. Obviously it's never going to happen because politicians are generally wealthy themselves and the few honorable ones that remain are never going to get enough traction to change anything about it.

This is sort of what I am thinking. When you reach the cap, all earnings past that amount would need to be distributed or taxed. If you go below the cap, you earn again till you reach the cap again. This way you can be rich forever, but you will also be contributing a ton to the rest of society.

But really, since those with money and power make the decisions, this would never happen.

[Flarelaine]

Imagine how many people he could help grt out of poverty, lol. Litterally buy half the us a house with that kind of money

Half the US is still around 160.000.000 people (maybe more). His wealth, apportioned to 160.000.000 US citizens, would give less than $1000 to each.

What kind of house does that get you in the US?

I can't help but note that people take the same cavalier attitude towards math as they take towards someone else's money.

[cubby]

naaaah, i was waiting for a real plan.

I wasn't joking around.

I had never thought of that idea before, but you have to admit, it's brilliant. Take $1.4 Trillion and buy the United States government for 20 years. Legislate everything that's needed to get the U.S. back to being a world leader.

$400 billion for Presidential races (that's $80 Billion for each election until 2040)
$2.8 billion per Congressional race (535 - 468 elections every two years - senate on 1/3 each cycle - or $213 Million for EACH seat, every two years).

Universal healthcare
Big Defense - done intelligently
Jobs programs
Renewable energy
Education reform
Social programs that work and are efficient
Veterans benefits that help vets before they die
Intelligent immigration

Most importantly - getting the nation to start talking to one another.

[Deleted]

I don't think any country in the world tax non-realized capital gain. As for Bill Gates, he needs to give away a lot more if he wants to get rid of his net worth within this lifetime. All you have to do is look at the value of some common stocks that make up most investment portfolio.

Apple, Inc. tripled in 5 years.

Microsoft increased 5 fold.

Disney doubled.

Facebook almost 10 fold.

Cisco doubled.

AMD six fold.

Home Depot tripled.

Johnson & Johnson doubled.

Oracle doubled.

You actually need to make an effort to pick a losing stock in the last 10 years.

Most Eu countries actually adapted laws this or last year to tax non direct incomes (dividends, shares and all that).

[cubby]

Space race is still on. Wonder how much he'll invest. Going from 80b to 130b in a year is astonishing though.

Is he going for something similar to SpaceX or something else? I know he's far behind Musk, but so is everyone else, in the world.

[Rasulis]

Space race is still on. Wonder how much he'll invest. Going from 80b to 130b in a year is astonishing though.

Amazon stock value about doubled in 1 year, so his net worth increases following that trend.

[Flarelaine]

He could buy everyone in the world a house and still be a super rich. He owns this site too lmao.

He could buy everyone a house as long as that house costs less than $19.

Seriously. Do the math. But first, learn it.

[Deleted]

This is sort of what I am thinking. When you reach the cap, all earnings past that amount would need to be distributed or taxed. If you go below the cap, you earn again till you reach the cap again. This way you can be rich forever, but you will also be contributing a ton to the rest of society.

But really, since those with money and power make the decisions, this would never happen.

Pretty much, you could vote new people into power to break the chain, but money and politics are very corrupting, it's only a matter of time until they get sucked into it corruption as well, so I don't expect anything to change within the next century, unless humanity suddenly has an epiphany.

Then again the few that stay true and want improvement, they never really have anything to say as they never gain enough support from within.

[Kathandira]

He could buy everyone a house as long as that house costs less than $19.

Seriously. Do the math. But first, learn it.

Indeed. If he donated every dollar of that 130b to each person in the U.S. it would be a very small amount.

But I don't see a problem with throwing a few million at a particular state of his choosing to improve things such as infrastructure and such. It would be 0 cost to the state, so they wouldn't need to increase the cost for the citizens to remain there. I know it doesn't sound like a huge thing to those who don't live in a state sponsored by him, but i'm sure those who live there would see him as a saint.

- - - Updated - - -

Pretty much, you could vote new people into power to break the chain, but money and politics are very corrupting, it's only a matter of time until they get sucked into it corruption as well, so I don't expect anything to change within the next century, unless humanity suddenly has an epiphany.

Then again the few that stay true and want improvement, they never really have anything to say as they never gain enough support from within.

All of that is depressingly true.

[Flarelaine]

Stop buying from Amazon!!!

EDIT: Well I did need a pop over pan, and the store nearby didn't have any ;-(

And I needed a specific book for a Christmas gift and all the gaming stores in the country (which means like 3 of them) were fresh out. Amazon had the book and got it to me in time. In the rush before Christmas.

[ranzino]

I wasn't joking around.

I had never thought of that idea before, but you have to admit, it's brilliant. Take $1.4 Trillion and buy the United States government for 20 years. Legislate everything that's needed to get the U.S. back to being a world leader.

$400 billion for Presidential races (that's $80 Billion for each election until 2040)
$2.8 billion per Congressional race (535 - 468 elections every two years - senate on 1/3 each cycle - or $213 Million for EACH seat, every two years).

Universal healthcare
Big Defense - done intelligently
Jobs programs
Renewable energy
Education reform
Social programs that work and are efficient
Veterans benefits that help vets before they die
Intelligent immigration

Most importantly - getting the nation to start talking to one another.

and who pays for all that stuff ? 1.4 trillion will not make it IMHO.