this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
1184 points (96.8% liked)
Technology
58143 readers
5171 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
When no-one was looking, Elon Musk lost forty billion. He lost 40 billion. That's as many as four tens billions. And that's terrible.
He could have ended world hunger multiple times. But instead he bought a social media site so he could be popular with the Nazi crowd.
On the bright side, whenever anyone fucks things up now, they can think "well at least at least I didn't fuck things up as badly as Elon Musk."
Terrible for him. Great for everyone else that that 40 billion is now in the hands of other people. 
It’s also ironic, that he is single-handedly the greatest redistributor of his own wealth. 
That's not really how that works. He just reduced the value of the site. He nuked value out of existence.
I mean he did spend 44 billion prior to said nuking. Site isn't worth as much now sure, but the volume of currency still traveled into the hands of others.
Good point actually.
Is the previous owner also a fuckhead though?
But he hasn't realized his losses yet - HODL!
Twitter having overwhelming dominance may have had value to shareholders, but IMO that is at the expense of everyone else. Not having to use Twitter is valuable.
Depends what they do with it, I guess.
40,000 millions. Most people could live without working ever again with one million dollars (provided they managed them wisely.)
While one million is a pretty good amount of cash, you're delusional if you thinks it's a "never working again" amount of money. I had this talk pretty recently with a friend of mine, if he used it to finish paying his house (150k) at 24k a year it would not even last 40 years.
You're assuming that everyone living today will live for more than 40 years. Ageist much? (I'm kidding.)
No, I'm not delusional. I'm not saying "never work again and live in luxury." I'll gladly live in a studio apartment for a few years while I put some of that money work for me (instead of me working.) It's doable.
Edit: you can also move to a relatively safe country where 20K a year gives you the same standard of living as a middle-class westerner - minus the 9 to 5 grind.
At a 4% return, a million nets you around 4000k/month without affecting the principle. After taxes, youre likely walking away with 40k/yr.
Plently of places in the US you can live for around 40k/yr. Not luxury, but if youre fine with rural to semi rural, you can do well on interest alone.
Last time I looked into it, it was closer to 4 million to "never work again" if you were in your mid-30s. Nowadays, even that figure is probably not enough. Your point still stands, however.
Let's run an experiment. Someone give me 1 million dollars, post-taxes, and I'll try my best to never work again. Any takers?