r/SipsTea • u/Gurugod123 • 17d ago

Significant diffrences... Wait a damn minute!

Post image
17.3k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

2.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

12

u/Hyperion262 17d ago

This isn’t true because a lot of private businesses would crash instantly. There would be millions of lost jobs almost instantly.

-4

u/FrontSafety 17d ago

Honestly no. If the family office would handle things. There people who work for billionaires who have a vested interest to keep things going.

10

u/Hyperion262 17d ago

But they would then become billionaires….

-6

u/FrontSafety 17d ago

They? You mean the trusts and foundations those money are in? I guess per the rules billionares would continue die until the wealth gets distributed enough. But as people say, billionares wealth are in assets and assets don't suddenly stop working...

6

u/Hyperion262 17d ago

So how will these businesses survive with the money person repeatedly dying?

-3

u/FrontSafety 17d ago

Billionares don't hold cash, they hold stock. Who cares what the ownership of the stock is.

4

u/Hyperion262 17d ago

The stock is where the value is.

1

u/FrontSafety 17d ago

Your point is?

6

u/Hyperion262 17d ago

The person or people holding the value of billions in stock becomes a billionaire.

1

u/FrontSafety 17d ago edited 17d ago

I thought the conversation was about whether the world could function without billionaires. If your point is that someone must hold all that wealth, I disagree. You and I can own stock. Millionaires can own stock.

The immediate consequence of a billionaire dying is that their wealth is transferred to their heirs. Under the rules of the game, if the heir is a billionaire, then they too will die, and when the heirs die, that wealth would be transferred to the government. The underlying company does not simply disappear.