>You're imputing the economic value of every externality you can trace to Microsoft back to Gates' own bank account.
Not really, I'm much more focused on the externalities of Gates' anti-competitive, monopolistic business practices. His billionaire status is just a small part of the problem in comparison. Speaking of which, I am also looking at the specific assets that makes up his total net worth.
For example, as of now, Bill Gates has a net worth of nearly $82 billion, of which just $14 billion is in Microsoft stock. The bulk of the remainder is $64 billion which is invested in a variety of assets through Cascade Investment LLC, his private investment firm.
Cash, some small technology investments and assets such as his 66,000 square-foot mansion in Medina make up the last $4 billion chunk which is very small in comparison.
I've been researching how his assets both positively and negatively affect society but it pales in comparison to the bigger picture I mentioned in regards to the overall effects of his shady, past business practices that affected society globally (literally).
>You can make that argument, but using "his plunder" as a shorthand for it is at the very least imprecise.
I see your point. He certainly didn’t steal all of it and I should use a better choice of word to describe his booty. ;)
However, I was considering that he's taken far more from society than he's provided for society, so that's why I've called it "plunder", so to speak.
The final report won't have any of that kind of terminology, but as you said, it's probably better if I refrain from using it even it's simply in forum posts, etc.
Not really, I'm much more focused on the externalities of Gates' anti-competitive, monopolistic business practices. His billionaire status is just a small part of the problem in comparison. Speaking of which, I am also looking at the specific assets that makes up his total net worth.
For example, as of now, Bill Gates has a net worth of nearly $82 billion, of which just $14 billion is in Microsoft stock. The bulk of the remainder is $64 billion which is invested in a variety of assets through Cascade Investment LLC, his private investment firm.
Cash, some small technology investments and assets such as his 66,000 square-foot mansion in Medina make up the last $4 billion chunk which is very small in comparison.
I've been researching how his assets both positively and negatively affect society but it pales in comparison to the bigger picture I mentioned in regards to the overall effects of his shady, past business practices that affected society globally (literally).
>You can make that argument, but using "his plunder" as a shorthand for it is at the very least imprecise.
I see your point. He certainly didn’t steal all of it and I should use a better choice of word to describe his booty. ;)
However, I was considering that he's taken far more from society than he's provided for society, so that's why I've called it "plunder", so to speak.
The final report won't have any of that kind of terminology, but as you said, it's probably better if I refrain from using it even it's simply in forum posts, etc.
Thank you for your constructive criticism.
edit: spelling/grammar