
The Homeless Billionaire - jlhamilton
http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2008/05/19/the-homeless-billionaire/
======
noonespecial
From the article:

 _And of course it’s easy for a billionaire to say “money and things aren’t
important.”_

The important thing that they always miss is _why_ its easy. It goes beyond
just being able to afford to hotel hop. In a very real sense _everything_
belongs to him. At least everything that is mass producible. This guy doesn't
need a car because wherever in the world he is, he can simply say "get me a
car" and one will appear. Substitute boat, plane, ham sandwich, whatever and
its still true. When you have that much money, "ownership" becomes entirely a
matter of semantics.

~~~
jorgeortiz85
I think in some sense we're all moving towards this model of "ownership", in
one way or another.

For example, when it comes to the most easily mass producible thing in the
world--information--we're all "billionaires" now. I can ask Google to get me
all kinds of information, and it just appears. Even 15 years ago some fairly
trivial Google searches would have required privileged access to sources of
knowledge (libraries, universities, etc... stuff not always available
everywhere in the world) and lots of free time.

There are very few limits (or if there are, we haven't reached them yet) on
the reproducibility of information. The marginal cost of reproducing
information for another ten or twenty billion human beings is fairly
negligible. Will it ever be the case that we can overcome the limits on the
reproducibility of material goods? Or are there fundamental constraints on
material goods that don't exist for information? If we can overcome them, then
one day we will all be "billionaires", in this sense.

EDIT: Amazon Web Services is a good example of this kind of transformation;
it's made all of us "millionaires" when it comes to computing. A few years
ago, "get me a thousand servers" would have required millions of dollars, a
fair amount of time, and a lot of technical expertise. With EC2, it requires
$100/hr.

~~~
ph0rque
> Will it ever be the case that we can overcome the limits on the
> reproducibility of material goods? Or are there fundamental constraints on
> material goods that don't exist for information?

Yes, in a sense: see reprap.org, and further along in the future, molecular
nanotechnology. However, there will always be a (small) cost for the raw
materials that go into the finished product.

~~~
jorgeortiz85
I think I'm fundamentally a pessimist on this front.

I think, for example, that the rising price of oil is a symptom of the
absolute physical limits that material resources face.

Some raw materials have a small cost, others have a high cost.

------
tlrobinson
By "homeless" they mean "living in 5 star hotels year round".

~~~
lancashire
True, although I suppose if they put "houseless" you probably wouldn't have
read it...

------
rokhayakebe
Anyone really serious about being humble would pay his laywers big money to
make sure he never appears on the WSJ. I mean seriously this is what they call
"substract to add". You give the impression that you dont care for material
goods, although ou have spent a lifetime acquiring them. aS a result you
become even more famous and richer.

~~~
natrius
Quite the contrary. Only someone who was serious about _appearing_ humble
would try to prevent publicity. While the article might not make him appear
humble, true humility does not require the appearance of humility.

~~~
rokhayakebe
I consider W. Buffett humble. Leaving in the same house you purchased when you
were not even a millionaire, let alone the second richest person on earth.
Seriously there is not one person on earth who needs more than 5 million to
survive. I say pledge the remaining 2.995 billies. And finally is it truly
humble to say that you stay in 5 star hotels across the planet.

~~~
nazgulnarsil
yeah, those people with 4 million have it pretty tough.

you can live very comfortably the rest of your life off of 500,000 even in
some of the richest counties in the US if you know how not to squander money.

------
gruseom
_But his perspective seems to be increasingly common among today’s
superwealthy — and even wealthy — who are looking for more lasting meaning in
their lives beyond their possessions._

I suspect that this is not increasingly common, but rather as common as it
ever was. People with money who learn that it doesn't convey lasting meaning
will inevitably look for it elsewhere.

------
rw
Here we see the demand side of the equation decreasing. If this spreads, is it
actually bad?

~~~
hugh
Depends. Are you in the real estate business or the luxury hotel business?

