Search Results
6/21/2025, 10:53:14 AM
I have a hypothesis regarding outsize billionaire wealth.
Perhaps the most highly paid people in our society are top-level executives who can achieve an income of $10 million/year. That is an insane level of value, we are asserting that this man is more productive than 100 professionals. I think it's too much, but it's still somewhat in the realm of feasibility.
The craziness comes in with actual *billionaires*. Are we asserting a single human being can be millions, or 10's of millions of times more productive than an average working person? It's not possible.
If you examine this problem, it's always the case that the billionaire exploited the stock market to his advantage. He gets in on the ground floor of a company before it goes public, then makes billions on accrued stock options, that's how it works.
So why are they able to do that? It's because of the rules around "going public", which are very strict. Fledgling companies need startup capital before they even reach that point. They can't put themselves up on the public exchange, so they hold shadowy behind-closed-doors meetings with rich investors, who get access to the ground-floor of the company and can make mega-returns.
If there was some mechanism by which anyone could invest in pre-public companies, this "first finder advantage" would be greatly moderated.
The analogy is this. You shipwreck on an island, and are the first to find the water source. You claim it as your own. When everyone else finds it, they have to pay you.
Your money doesn't come from any innovation, it comes from "getting there first". If everyone had an equal chance to get there first, then your ground-floor advantage would be neutralized.
For this reason, I think there should be a pre-public exchange for startups, and it should be mandatory for a startup seeking money to post themselves there. To this effect, patent rights must be greatly strengthened so they can divulge secrets and business strategies.
Am I talking sense?
Perhaps the most highly paid people in our society are top-level executives who can achieve an income of $10 million/year. That is an insane level of value, we are asserting that this man is more productive than 100 professionals. I think it's too much, but it's still somewhat in the realm of feasibility.
The craziness comes in with actual *billionaires*. Are we asserting a single human being can be millions, or 10's of millions of times more productive than an average working person? It's not possible.
If you examine this problem, it's always the case that the billionaire exploited the stock market to his advantage. He gets in on the ground floor of a company before it goes public, then makes billions on accrued stock options, that's how it works.
So why are they able to do that? It's because of the rules around "going public", which are very strict. Fledgling companies need startup capital before they even reach that point. They can't put themselves up on the public exchange, so they hold shadowy behind-closed-doors meetings with rich investors, who get access to the ground-floor of the company and can make mega-returns.
If there was some mechanism by which anyone could invest in pre-public companies, this "first finder advantage" would be greatly moderated.
The analogy is this. You shipwreck on an island, and are the first to find the water source. You claim it as your own. When everyone else finds it, they have to pay you.
Your money doesn't come from any innovation, it comes from "getting there first". If everyone had an equal chance to get there first, then your ground-floor advantage would be neutralized.
For this reason, I think there should be a pre-public exchange for startups, and it should be mandatory for a startup seeking money to post themselves there. To this effect, patent rights must be greatly strengthened so they can divulge secrets and business strategies.
Am I talking sense?
Page 1