 |
| |
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:27
|
|
I was just thinking about this, but couldn't come up with a really good answer.
By private citizen, I mean someone who doesn't head up a political or other government office, no law enforcement/intelligence agency, no royalty, no military and no religious group (ie: the Pope, or any official of any church).
I figure it's got to be the head of some large corporation, but it would also need to be someone with considerable influence on politicians and/or someone who has a good deal of actual control over their corporation (eg: owns a significant percentage of the shares, is rarely questioned by the board on corporate decisions, etc.).
People that come to mind for me would be Jack Welsh (ok, not any more), perhaps Warren Buffet (considerable influence on investors, owns significant chunks of large companies), Ted Turner (again, not so much anymore, but had a significant influence through media control), Rupert Murdoch (~shudder~ but for the same reasons as Turner).
Any thoughts?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Andrew1999
|
|
Sam Walton (the Wal-Mart guy) has been dead for years--his fortune was split up among his family.
Rupert Murdoch sounds good to me--he has a lot of influence from his media empire.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon Miller
|
|
your limitations are somewhat arbitrary
if you don't see any difference between the Pope and George Bush, than I don't see why you see Bill Gates as not exactly the same as them (a position of leadership in a large social group, just becuase Bill Gates has Microsoft and the Pope has the catholics does not mean that it is not the same thing)
Jon Miller
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:27
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jon Miller
your limitations are somewhat arbitrary
if you don't see any difference between the Pope and George Bush, than I don't see why you see Bill Gates as not exactly the same as them (a position of leadership in a large social group, just becuase Bill Gates has Microsoft and the Pope has the catholics does not mean that it is not the same thing)
Jon Miller |
I don't think they're arbitrary at all. Both the Pope and Bush, to use your examples, have been elected via some means by lesser people and have limitations on what they can do based on their office (and not just national laws). Bill Gates co-founded Microsoft, no one elected him leader, he didn't seize power within the company and his power is entirely self made.
Put another way, Bush and the Pope are powerful because of their office, not because of individual actions (which, granted, helped them get their). If Bush wasn't elected President, he'd only be as powerful as the office of the governor of Texas is, which he also had to be elected to. Remember also that Bush very nearly wasn't elected president - where would he be then?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:27
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sten Sture
I don't think it is Bill Gates at all. He doesn't move stocks much - if ever, and most of his $ is tied up in MS shares, so he doesn't swing cash around to that level.
A guy that can move markets though is George Soros - aka Saras - but he keeps a lower profile than he used to. |
I agree with this. Gates also sold off a sizeable chunk of his shares (he still owns alot, though) and doesn't exercise the kind of control over the company he once did. Also, despite Microsoft's success and market cap, it's far from being one of the largest companies in world in terms of assets or employees.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon Miller
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kontiki
I don't think they're arbitrary at all. Both the Pope and Bush, to use your examples, have been elected via some means by lesser people and have limitations on what they can do based on their office (and not just national laws). Bill Gates co-founded Microsoft, no one elected him leader, he didn't seize power within the company and his power is entirely self made.
Put another way, Bush and the Pope are powerful because of their office, not because of individual actions (which, granted, helped them get their). If Bush wasn't elected President, he'd only be as powerful as the office of the governor of Texas is, which he also had to be elected to. Remember also that Bush very nearly wasn't elected president - where would he be then? |
ok, disregarding Microsoft and other recent made companies
most companies are older and have been arround for a while
and most rich men, are rich becuase of votes going their way in the companies, and because of other things like that
it is a very similiar thing
Jon Miller
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
michael jackson, the children are our future. and michael affects the children!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002
time: 00:27
|
|
My fiance is the most powerful person in the world. No one else on earth can affect me like she does, for better or worse. Bill Gates? Why do I care what he does? Walton family? Who cares about them (though they do own my favorite pro teams and basically my university)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MRT144
|
|
Seattle Washington
Oct 2002
time: 21:27
|
|
Hitler
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27.
Apolyton Time is 00:27. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-04-2003 01:12
- the richest at the moment me thinks
.
|