Gates: Don’t Try to Be a Billionaire, It’s Overrated

eh, this purpose stuff is just mental games that our ego likes to play. ultimately the only purpose of life is to be lived and enjoyed. Everything else will turn to shit and eventually be destroyed. There are good times and bad times, but taking away the bad times is like taking the hills and drops out of a rollercoaster. Our main problem is that we don't know how to live and enjoy life as a daily practice but instead need to continually seek highs to counter the lows.... ugh. :)
 
HardwareSearcher said:
It is only pointless when you are not trying (such as the case with Bill Gates) to accomplish something meaningful with all that money and power to advance humanity. When you don't truly believe in anything and just throw token efforts to random charity (Bill Gates) instead of at least trying to solve the core problems facing humanity, of course that money is pointless.
Click to expand...

Uh...what the hell are you talking about? Bill Gates completely transformed philanthropy. He doesn't throw money at charity, he runs it like a business. Rather than just donate $100 million to trendy AIDS/cancer research, he found that malaria and diarhea kill many more people worldwide annually and yet it was very cheap and effective to treat - so he does that. He fully vets his charities, with the rigor of a VC firm. You have not the slightest clue what you're talking about.
 
Zarathustra[H];1037945388 said:
As it stands now, I am working 60 hour work weeks at a job I absolutely loathe. Sure, it pays well, and I have some financial stability, and can buy a decent car, and own a pretty nice gaming rig, but I rarely get to use these things, as I am too busy between life and work.
Click to expand...

FZ1JI.jpg
 
Dekoth-E- said:
This is a completely retarded statement you will only hear from people with money. I work a job I love that pays miserably and I can assure you being broke isn't happiness or anything even close. That is nothing more than a BS lie perpetuated by those intent on keeping the majority under their feet.

Money can't buy happiness, but not having any money sure as hell can't either. I had a job that I loathed and made a ton of money and gave it up. That was the single stupidest decision I have made in my life. Given the opportunity again, I will gladly take a high paying job that I hate every day over one I love. At least then the time that really matters (the time with my family) can be actually enjoyed instead of telling my kids we can't do something because there wasn't enough on this weeks paycheck. :mad:
Click to expand...

I disagree completely, I make less than 30k a year doing a job I enjoy(I don't love it but I don't think I could ever "love" work) and have turned down office jobs that would pay considerably more. I can pay my bills, eat, drink, and enjoy life, I spend much of my free time outdoors or playing board games and pc games with friends.

I also have free time to tinker with things and learn to do things for myself which in the long run save quite a bit of money and give me a sense of accomplishment rather than just paying for it to be fixed. Making drinking money by changing brakes for friends, while saving them hundreds of dollars in the process is a double win.

It's all perspective.
 
PsychoAMD said:
only a retarded rich person would say something as stupid as that. Hey kids money don't buy happiness I only have 15 Lamborghini and Ferrari's and really there's nothing else for me to buy now so this money is over rated, mean while everyone else is struggling to pay utility bills and put food on the table. Some people just don't know... Bill gates was never raised in a poor family. He has always been in an upper class family so how can you actually expect him to know the feeling of needing? Sure he may donate to charity but when you never experienced something for your self you just can't know what it's like.

If he thinks his billions are so overrated, he should make a reality show where he gets a part time job at Walmart and has to live off the income for an entire year so he can understand poverty, and only then I would challenge him to make such a stupid statement that having billions is overrated. :mad:
Click to expand...

Why does need need to "experience" low class life? He's giving his money away to help benefit people, and make them have a better life. He's not selfish, and he's taking his time researching who needs the money that will in the end output something positive that impacts thousands.. millions of people.

I don't think you understand where he's coming from, when he said having all that money makes no difference. He has so much of it, that an addition x amount of income won't matter. He would rather share his riches. Not too many people do the things he does for society. If you had a couple billion, and you're satisfied with your current living situation, that money is not useful if you just keep it.
 
Well he is right to some extent. After you have a certain amount of money, more money doesnt really do help you much since you can't really buy anything else. I guess there are always grand construction projects you could fund but..eh.
 
He's right, money becomes meaningless after a certain point. All the people that would blow their millions in a week if they had it are just dreamers. Bill Gates is living in reality.
 
PsychoAMD said:
only a retarded rich person would say something as stupid as that. Hey kids money don't buy happiness I only have 15 Lamborghini and Ferrari's and really there's nothing else for me to buy now so this money is over rated, mean while everyone else is struggling to pay utility bills and put food on the table. Some people just don't know... Bill gates was never raised in a poor family. He has always been in an upper class family so how can you actually expect him to know the feeling of needing? Sure he may donate to charity but when you never experienced something for your self you just can't know what it's like.
Click to expand...

If you knew anything about Bill Gates you would know he was a Porsche guy. :p Besides I believe he still daily drives a ford focus.

If you read what he said, he doesn't say money isn't needed. He just says that much beyond a million dollars it is all the same for him at least. I mean a million dollars for savings is a goal of mine and it isn't that hard to achieve these days, nor is it always enough for retirement.

Given he is giving most of his money away and not making his children trust fund rejects. I see no problem with how he does things.
 
Azhar said:
You're absolutely right, Bill. Since you don't like having billions, I'll offer my help and take some of that money off your hands. It's the least I can do.
Click to expand...

He's already giving it all away... just not to you. :D
 
PsychoAMD said:
only a retarded rich person would say something as stupid as that. Hey kids money don't buy happiness I only have 15 Lamborghini and Ferrari's and really there's nothing else for me to buy now so this money is over rated, mean while everyone else is struggling to pay utility bills and put food on the table.
Click to expand...

Dude, I get not reading the article, but I'd think you could at least read the blurb here. He's saying don't waste your time trying to become super rich. Focus on trying to become just normal rich, because normal rich is sweet, but beyond the first few million, the next million doesn't make much difference.

Oh, but sorry. Someone successful opened his mouth, so feel free to jump down his throat to say what a greedy uncaring bastard he is. Clearly he should never say anything without following every sentence with "but what do I know, I've never been poor".
 
Valshistixol said:
He's already giving it all away... just not to you. :D
Click to expand...

I would love to work for that organization though. I can imagine what the salary would be. I know it's a non profit but when the 2 richest men in America is donating all of their money to it, it can't pay too bad..lol
 
Zarathustra...I agree with most of what you said, except for the second sentence, which was dead wrong. I fixed it with post editing for accuracy.


Zarathustra[H];1037945388 said:
I'm no billionaire, but I agree with him.

Teenagers often see getting laid and partying as the number one thing to strive for.
.
Click to expand...

No well intentioned post goes unpunished.
 
Tak Ne said:
He gives a lot of money to charitable causes that are fronts for corporate business interests.
Click to expand...

Please do expound on that statement. Especially the parts where they provide medical treatment and teach risk prevention for third world kids with diseases for some kind of business gain.
 
matteos said:
Wow, worldwide I am in the 1%.

Take that OWS
Click to expand...

That means you are the target of the liberal world that wants to increase your taxes in order to give money to politicians and lawyers under the guise of 'redistributing' it to those who have less.
 
He's not saying money isn't important. He's saying that once you hit the magic number where you can accomplish everything you wish, further money does you no good.

Money is only worth something to you if it accomplishes something - it's a tool. Personally, I'd be happy with around 25-30 million (I want a Hinckley sailboat and the budget to maintain it for 50+ years). Past that, I would focus on using it to change the world. So for me, there would be no difference between 30 million and 1 billion in terms of personal satisfaction.

That doesn't mean I'd stop earning money after 30 million though - I'd keep going as hard as I could since I have plans to use money to change things like education, disease, etc.
 
computerpro3 said:
He's not saying money isn't important. He's saying that once you hit the magic number where you can accomplish everything you wish, further money does you no good.

Money is only worth something to you if it accomplishes something - it's a tool. Personally, I'd be happy with around 25-30 million (I want a Hinckley sailboat and the budget to maintain it for 50+ years). Past that, I would focus on using it to change the world. So for me, there would be no difference between 30 million and 1 billion in terms of personal satisfaction.

That doesn't mean I'd stop earning money after 30 million though - I'd keep going as hard as I could since I have plans to use money to change things like education, disease, etc.
Click to expand...

that is what I gathered from his statement as well.
 
ssjwes1980 said:
Its called the financial collapse...
Click to expand...

It's called you're still wrong.

I spent ages 16-18 with my family in the 250-300k income bracket. They had a 600k house which was not even close to paid off, an Audi A8L bought used for $60k, and a Volvo station wagon. No boat, no 1.5 million dollar house.

To get the stuff that other poster talked about you'd have to be earning 800k for several years with no prior debt. People here just have some ridiculous fantasy about what six figure incomes are like. Sure, it's nice. But you're not rich.
 
I would like to run across Bill Gates on the street. I'd ask if he could spare some change so I can buy myself a pop.

Then I'd just buy out a couple soft drink companies, because I can. :p

Though, I think I see what he's saying. After you hit a certain amount of money, it's just the same after. You can only really spend so much in a life time. Unlike Jobs, he actually did create stuff and I will give him credit where credit is due. He is also one of few rich people who is actually big on giving to charities.
 
computerpro3 said:
It's called you're still wrong.

I spent ages 16-18 with my family in the 250-300k income bracket. They had a 600k house which was not even close to paid off, an Audi A8L bought used for $60k, and a Volvo station wagon. No boat, no 1.5 million dollar house.

To get the stuff that other poster talked about you'd have to be earning 800k for several years with no prior debt. People here just have some ridiculous fantasy about what six figure incomes are like. Sure, it's nice. But you're not rich.
Click to expand...

300k a year when you were a kid (maybe you still are?) will get you a great many things, unless you've built this on debt, or have a big family.
 
computerpro3 said:
It's called you're still wrong.

I spent ages 16-18 with my family in the 250-300k income bracket. They had a 600k house which was not even close to paid off, an Audi A8L bought used for $60k, and a Volvo station wagon. No boat, no 1.5 million dollar house.

To get the stuff that other poster talked about you'd have to be earning 800k for several years with no prior debt. People here just have some ridiculous fantasy about what six figure incomes are like. Sure, it's nice. But you're not rich.
Click to expand...

I saw a story on yahoo 6, 8 months ago about a stewardess out of California(in her 20's) waiting to get into a 500k+ house she wanted. Im sure shes not making over 200k...

Beside me saying financial collapse was meant more in a facetious way then seriously... :rolleyes:
 
LeninGHOLA said:
300k a year when you were a kid (maybe you still are?) will get you a great many things, unless you've built this on debt, or have a big family.
Click to expand...

Nobody wakes up and makes 300k out of thin air. Everyone builds it on debt, or if not on debt on modest salaries leading up to that point. You have to work up to that point from the bottom, facing all of the same challenges everyone else does. You can't just arbitrarily start from point zero - you have to remember that when someone finally reaches the point of making a high salary, they have pre-existing home mortage, car loans, student debt, etc.

In a vacuum, 250k a year is rich. In the real world, it's not even close. It's "comfortable." My comments go for an average family - 2 adults, 2 kids (we had three, so we were even worse). If you are single and making 300k then you can obviously afford much more, by the previous poster mentioned 300k combined family income so that is what my comments were directed towards.

Nobody making 300k as a family owns a Ferrari, boat, and 1.5 million dollar house until many, many, many years of raking in that salary. And here's the kicker - people that have those toys didn't pay for them with salary; they made their wealth through other investments.
 
computerpro3 said:
Nobody wakes up and makes 300k out of thin air. Everyone builds it on debt, or if not on debt on modest salaries leading up to that point. You have to work up to that point from the bottom, facing all of the same challenges everyone else does. You can't just arbitrarily start from point zero - you have to remember that when someone finally reaches the point of making a high salary, they have pre-existing home mortage, car loans, student debt, etc.

In a vacuum, 250k a year is rich. In the real world, it's not even close. It's "comfortable." My comments go for an average family - 2 adults, 2 kids (we had three, so we were even worse). If you are single and making 300k then you can obviously afford much more, by the previous poster mentioned 300k combined family income so that is what my comments were directed towards.

Nobody making 300k as a family owns a Ferrari, boat, and 1.5 million dollar house until many, many, many years of raking in that salary. And here's the kicker - people that have those toys didn't pay for them with salary; they made their wealth through other investments.
Click to expand...


That's true. Most do build this on debt. I guess, for me, I was taught not to use debt in the same way. I wasn't implying it doesn't take a lot of work to get there. Though, a 300k family is doing well. More than comfortable. No Ferrari's, TBH.
 
Sure, we were comfortable. We ate out a lot and never had to worry about making the mortgage payment. But we had no extravagant toys until my father sold his company (I was long moved out by that point), and even then they didn't go nuts.

250-300k is a very strange salary spot. You're not making so much that you don't feel the effect of getting boned with income tax (which drops you to 65-75% of original salary after state and federal), but you're making enough where most people consider you "wealthy" despite not really having any trappings of wealth.

People should only judge wealth by net assets, not income. Steve Jobs made $1 a year, but he was obviously wealthy. I know many people that make $250k a year (think about it - two really good electrical engineers married pull that down) that aren't wealthy at all and live completely normal lifestyles. The next step up from normal toys is so exorbitantly priced that you really have to have a few million in the bank before you get to play. Most people that make 250k a year drive regular luxury cars like Audi's or BMW's, not Aston's and Ferrari's.
 
This man is more profound than most of you will ever think or give him credit for. He knows the one thing that keeps the greed at bay in this country is competition. He is trying to change that to help the world as a whole. He has done more as a single person than any country in the world for helping end poverty.
 
butterfliesrpretty said:
This man is more profound than most of you will ever think or give him credit for. He knows the one thing that keeps the greed at bay in this country is competition. He is trying to change that to help the world as a whole. He has done more as a single person than any country in the world for helping end poverty.
Click to expand...

Explain.

Does he know about that greed thing, because he has done the opposite? I mean, Microsoft used to be quite infamous for buying out people right?
 
Keiichi said:
You're forgetting about his fully wired home that is BUILT INTO THE SIDE OF A MOUNTAIN.
Click to expand...

Nope. It's built into the side of lake Washington. My aunt and uncle used to live down the road from him. IIRC it was on Evergreen? Anyway, none of the neighbors liked him during the building process.
 
eh, while you are lauding microsoft, just remember, some of his former employees talk about how they were paid poorly so they could make him rich. Now its true that a lot of the originators got fantastic stock options. Others later on in the process, not so much.
 
jiminator said:
eh, while you are lauding microsoft, just remember, some of his former employees talk about how they were paid poorly so they could make him rich. Now its true that a lot of the originators got fantastic stock options. Others later on in the process, not so much.
Click to expand...

source? Also the programmers that deserve $1 million plus aren't going to be working for others.
 
computerpro3 said:
It's called you're still wrong.

I spent ages 16-18 with my family in the 250-300k income bracket. They had a 600k house which was not even close to paid off, an Audi A8L bought used for $60k, and a Volvo station wagon. No boat, no 1.5 million dollar house.

To get the stuff that other poster talked about you'd have to be earning 800k for several years with no prior debt. People here just have some ridiculous fantasy about what six figure incomes are like. Sure, it's nice. But you're not rich.
Click to expand...

Most people will spend whatever that earn, and in the end have little to show for it. Just like many of the people who with the lottery and end up filling for bankrupsy a few years later.

It's not how much you earn, but how much you keep.

I've never broken the $100K salary, even during the .com bubble, yet I have a house (almost paid off) worth over $600k, even after the 30% drop in prices the last few years. Wife stays home with the kids, and we have 2 paid off cars, although mine is currently over 9 years old. Most the people we know that live near us make 2x or more than I do, with both parents working, yet they never seem to have any money.

After the .com bubble burst, I was unemployed for over a year, and there was no unemployment after 26 months. Yet I kept my house payment current and even paid for my own health insurance. Personal responsibility seems so lacking now days.

As for rich, $2 million would be enough for me, as it would be enough to semi retire.
$3 Million would be enough for a nice retirement, any thing more and I'd probably just end up wasting it on junk or luxuries I really don't need.
 
computerpro3 said:
250-300k is a very strange salary spot. You're not making so much that you don't feel the effect of getting boned with income tax (which drops you to 65-75% of original salary after state and federal), but you're making enough where most people consider you "wealthy" despite not really having any trappings of wealth.
Click to expand...

According to the current administration, anyone earning over $250K is "rich" and not paying thier fair share.
 
computerpro3 said:
Sure, we were comfortable. We ate out a lot and never had to worry about making the mortgage payment. But we had no extravagant toys until my father sold his company (I was long moved out by that point), and even then they didn't go nuts.

250-300k is a very strange salary spot. You're not making so much that you don't feel the effect of getting boned with income tax (which drops you to 65-75% of original salary after state and federal), but you're making enough where most people consider you "wealthy" despite not really having any trappings of wealth.
Click to expand...

FWIW, a household making $300k a year about 6 years ago puts you in the top 1.5% of income earners in the United States.

So...you may not THINK you were wealthy, but you were making more in a year than 98.5% of Americans.

(I'm sure your parents worked harder than virtually every other American you've ever seen or met, though, so I'm sure that's fair and just - but it is worth pointing out.)
 
jiminator said:
eh, while you are lauding microsoft, just remember, some of his former employees talk about how they were paid poorly so they could make him rich. Now its true that a lot of the originators got fantastic stock options. Others later on in the process, not so much.
Click to expand...

Eh, those are just sourgrapers, bitter that they could no longer make as much as the Microsoft millionaires. By the mid-90's senior level managers and lower level executives numbered in the high hundreds that MS would go broke if they offered the same compensation that they gave the earlier employees (who by the way risked much more by working for a startup MS that many wrote off to fail. Back then if you were a Seattle technology/engineering company not named or affiliated with Boeing professionals ignored you.) Currently MS has 55K employees in the U.S. alone, I don't think there's enough money in the world to make them all millionaires.
 
If I had more money than I could spend in a lifetime, I'd call it quits too and enjoy the rest of my life with no worries.

There's no reason to keep making money for the sake of it when you can even spend it.
 
Hornet said:
If I had more money than I could spend in a lifetime, I'd call it quits too and enjoy the rest of my life with no worries.
Click to expand...

Edit. Typo. It should be:
There's no reason to keep making money for the sake of it when you can't even spend it.
 
I understand Bill's logic, however, for the one's who never struggled financially, making that comment is dubious. The problem with most Americans is that they are financially irresponsible. I for one have made the same mistake in the past. Granted it wasn't so much consumer debt, but if I knew that signing for those students loans at a young age would accrue so much interest, I definitely would have weighed alternative options for attaining my degree.
 
dderidex said:
FWIW, a household making $300k a year about 6 years ago puts you in the top 1.5% of income earners in the United States.

So...you may not THINK you were wealthy, but you were making more in a year than 98.5% of Americans.

(I'm sure your parents worked harder than virtually every other American you've ever seen or met, though, so I'm sure that's fair and just - but it is worth pointing out.)
Click to expand...

I'm well aware of that and by that metric we were wealthy, but I'm just trying to point out that that number is not the popular version of what people think "wealthy" looks like. Especially if you have kids you want to put through school (my parents paid for college for three of us until I got a full ride in my second year).
 
Also though, to show how skewed things are in the income distribution, even earning 100k puts you in the top couple percent. You'd be hard pressed to argue that someone earning 100k is wealthy though, especially considering they'd only bring home ~75k after taxes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top