Lion of the Blogosphere

Archive for the ‘Wealth’ Category

Did Zuck really do this?

A commenter writes the following:

I have it on the authority of a friend of mine who worked in the valley, that Zuck was once hosting an expensive dinner at a restaurant which provided numerous forks/knives/spoons. He commented on the silverware, and someone sitting near him started explaining what they were all for.

Zuck said: Anyone who knows what each piece of silverware is for raise your hand. Then he said: Everyone with your hand raised, get up and leave. I don’t want or need you.

In other words, Zuck only wants/needs poor people. Maybe because they are more desperate to keep their jobs?

* * *

Commenter Kruck writes:

It seems massively unlikely that he would do that, knowing that the incident would inevitably be talked about, and would cast him in a negative light. Would SAT 1590 or 1600 Zuck make that kind of error? I do not think that he would. And the anecdote has all the signs of an urban legend, “some friend of mine who works at such-and-such said that he heard this-and-that from somebody.”

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 21, 2020 at 12:33 PM

Posted in Wealth

Wexner claims Epstein misappropriated vast sums of money

NY Times says that Les Wexner wrote in a letter that Jeffrey Epstein “misappropriated vast sums of money from me and my family,” that learning about it was “a tremendous shock.”

In the letter, Mr. Wexner explained why he gave Mr. Epstein so much control. He wrote that several friends “vouched for and recommended him as a knowledgeable financial professional.” He added that Mr. Epstein claimed he had many well-known clients.

I find this hard to believe. How did Wexner not notice that Epstein suddenly owned the expensive townhouse mansion on the Upper East Side that used to be Wexner’s? Who are these mysterious “friends” who vouched for Epstein? Everything else we know about the history of Epstein indicates that Wexner was Epstein’s first client. Before Epstein had Wexner as a client, he was telling tall tales about being an international bounty hunter or a Mossad agent or other nonsense.

If Epstein really stole “vast sums of money” from Wexner, why didn’t Wexner complain to the FBI? Or sue him to get his money back?

This story stinks.

* * *

Roger writes in a comment: “Yes, Wexner could not have gotten so rich if he were really that stupid. There must be more to the story.”

Or maybe, being smart has nothing to do with becoming rich, and a lot of rich people are stupid?

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

August 8, 2019 at 9:20 AM

Posted in Crime, Wealth

The rise of discreet wealth

Business Insider reports that 10007, Tribeca, is Manhattan’s wealthiest Zip Code:

the lack of pomp and grandeur among such Tribeca residents is part of the rise of discreet wealth, in which showing off wealth is no longer the preferred way to signify having it. Instead, the wealthy are choosing to invest in intangible things, like education and health.

It’s like the whole world is reading my blog!

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

April 18, 2019 at 1:00 PM

Posted in Wealth

Young adults benefit when their parents give them financial support

In a study published in August in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence, Dr. Manzoni found that young adults who are given financial help instead of living rent-free at home do better professionally.

The study looked at about 7,500 18- to 28-year-olds from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, which tracks job status. It found that college graduates whose parents offered money, whether in the form of paid bills or cash outlays, did especially well professionally, while those who lived at home did especially poorly.

Graduates who got the most cash, $15,000 a year or more, did best of all, ranking six points higher on a scale of occupational status than those who got little or no financial help. Graduates living with their parents, on the other hand, ranked 10 points lower on the occupational status scale than their friends who lived independently.

This study proves that the old-fashioned and out-of-date ideas of certain blog commenters about how making your kids pay their own way gives them valuable “life lessons” in frugality and work ethic TURNS OUT TO BE COMPLETELY WRONG.

That bit of bad news, backed by observations like those of Mary Beth Storjohann, a financial planner who works with millennials and the generation behind them, may help persuade parents to write a check instead of insisting that grown children pay their own way.

“In my experience working with people in their 20s and 30s, the ones who get sums of money are moving forward at much faster paces than the ones who move home,” Ms. Storjohann said.

* * *

Lowe has written the best comment:

Clearly a lower class person can’t act on this advice, because he simply doesn’t have the money to spare. But some middle class people could afford giving their children $10k/year for a few years.

They should at least know the facts of the matter, before deciding out of hand that it’s wasteful. Maybe the most important information to have is that the wealthy give their children small amounts of money, to keep them afloat early on. You want to know what the winning strategy looks like, right?

Yes, you could be fatalistic and say that they only do this because they have excess money because of their superior genes, and their children are successful for the same reason. But that’s just telling people to give up without trying. You won’t know whether you or your children have good genes if you don’t try.

There are a lot of valuable lessons that middle class people could learn by watching what high class people do. You can’t just assume they don’t have success because they are naturally inferior. That will be true only sometimes.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

November 17, 2018 at 7:05 PM

Posted in Wealth

The top out-of-sight were #withher

The most top-out-of-sight place in the United States is Nantucket, and we see from the new New York Times voting map that Nantucket went 64% for Clinton and only 29% for Trump.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 26, 2018 at 6:35 PM

Posted in Wealth

Kylie Jenner to become first social-media billionaire

I don’t mean becoming a billionaire by creating a social media site, like Mark Zuckerberg, I mean becoming a billionaire by being famous on social media.

According to news reports, Kylie Jenner, 20 years old, is worth $900 million. She become so rich from hawking cosmetics and other stuff on social media.

How does this fit into Ayn Rand’s theories? Is Kylie Jenner a value creator just like Hank Rearden?

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 16, 2018 at 1:31 PM

Posted in Economics, Wealth

Billionaire heiresses support Cynthia Nixon

She’s the extreme-left candidate, with no actual experience holding an elected office or managing a large organization, who will help De Blasio destroy Stuyvesant High School. Of course, if Toby ever gets married and has kids (or does the single mother thing like Georgina Bloomberg), the kids will go to the best private schools that money can buy, so that’s not a problem for her.

Nixon also wants to raise taxes on the rich. As you see, rich people WANT their taxes to be raised! Which is why Republicans are so stupid to lower taxes for the class of people who vote against them.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

June 24, 2018 at 11:11 PM

Posted in Wealth

Chickens in Silicon Valley

No, we’re not talking about fearful computer programmers, we’re talking about birds that lay eggs. And not regular chickens, but “heritage breeds.” Only the wealthiest can afford to raise heritage chickens in Silicon Valley where real estate is so expensive.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

March 3, 2018 at 8:33 AM

Posted in Wealth

Are rich kids more likely to be screw-ups?

I believe that poor people like to believe that rich kids are more likely to be screw-ups so they can feel better about their own poverty.

But what do we mean by rich? Do we mean extreme wealth like the kids interviewed in the documentary “Born Rich” (who don’t necessarily represent an accurate cross-section of the extreme-wealth social class), or just regular everyday wealth, meaning upper-middle class parents who pay for their childrens’ education so that they have no student loans to pay off, and then provide them with the living expenses they need to live in an apartment in Manhattan, or have car if they live in a location where a car is pretty much a necessity (which are most places outside of Manhattan).

I’ve previously written about the working rich: “Today, it’s considered low class to not have some kind of job.” The importance of having a career or something “to do” is indoctrinated into rich young people in private school and then in college.

In the world as I see it, the best career tracks (either because they pay the most money, or because they are perceived as being desirable on account of providing self-actualization, even though in the real world the term “self-actualization” is rarely used) tend to be dominated by people who didn’t have to pay back any student loans and received financial support from their parents so that they could live in Manhattan (or San Francisco or some other city known for having the best careers).

I think this attitude even extends to children of extreme wealth. Take Trump’s kids, all of them are college graduates, the three oldest have jobs (working for Trump’s business), the youngest daughter is in law school at Georgetown. Compare Trump’s kids to the screw-ups that are Sarah Palin’s kids. Sarah Palin’s kids picked up crappy prole values in the crappy prole public schools in Wasilla, Alaska, while Trump’s kids picked up upper-class values in elite private schools in Manhattan.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

December 27, 2017 at 12:47 PM

Posted in Wealth

Parents who help adult children with rent

Have I blogged about this article before? The article gives us some numbers: “According to surveys that track young people through their first decade of adulthood, about 40 percent of 22-, 23- and 24-year-olds receive some financial assistance from their parents for living expenses. Among those who get help, the average amount is about $3,000 a year.”

If you follow the link to the article, you will see that adult children in blue collar work receive less money from their parents than children in white-collar work like “Art and Design” and “STEM.”

$3,000/year isn’t enough to afford to live in Manhattan, but remember this survey is for all of America and that amount is an average for all Americans and not just the children of the top 1% who live in Manhattan.

Here’s a summary, somewhat exaggerated, explaining parental support by class:

Low prole, mid prole: Kick kids out of the house with no money when they turn 18.
High prole, middle class: Kids live at home after they graduate college.
Upper-middle class: Pay the kids’ rent so they can live in a prestigious city like Manhattan.
Upper class: Buy their kid a condo/co-op in Manhattan.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

December 26, 2017 at 5:08 PM

Posted in Wealth

%d bloggers like this: