Saturday, July 19, 2008 - 01:16 pm, by: Ben Daniel(Lexustt)
From what I believe this seize was a result of cops busting a drug ring where the mexicans had a fake and very clevery designed interstate immigration transportation vehicle which they were using to cart copious amounts of pot from mexico to the states. Pictures of it were on this forum somewhere.
Also, there is definately more than 204 million in that pile
Monday, July 21, 2008 - 05:07 pm, by: Ben Kelly(Ace)
holy cow, when you have that much cash the logistics, accounting, money laundering would have to get pretty complex. You would think at some stage prior to the bust they would have divided up the funds and thought f@#$ it, thats enough crime for one lifetime, im off for an early retirement.
Rod Iseppi DieHard wa uzz31 v8 limited, 86 chev silverado
Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 03:18 am, by: Joshua Rao(Soaren1)
Ben Kelly wrote on Monday, July 21, 2008 - 05:07 pm:
You would think at some stage prior to the bust they would have divided up the funds and thought f@#$ it, thats enough crime for one lifetime, im off for an early retirement.
Some research suggests that very few are happy with their income and most people want 15% additional to what they earn. Do you think this applies to them?
Imagine the economic implications of injecting that back into the economy. Man would they be far reaching
Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 05:55 pm, by: Ben Kelly(Ace)
Josh, it might also be the relative difficulty of escaping the criminal empire unscathed. You would think that with a lot of people working for you or with you, cops to pay off et cetera it could be quite hard to disappear into obscurity.
Economically speaking i would say that there would definately be a diminishing return of happiness per dollar earned above a certain amount. Then again if you have seen the movie scarface it portrays the unbridled greed that drug dealers (and probably most top wealth earners in general have).
Don't mean to bore everyone stupid but i was also thinking about bill gates the other day. There would be a certain amount of money where the fact of 'owning' the money would not be of importance. with 1 billion for example you could practically afford to lease every type of commodity available in life, for life. Since we all die without really owning anything in the end whats the point of accumulating huge wealth unless it is used for altruistic or benevolent purposes? just a thought.
Stuart Smith Tinkerer NEW SOUTH WALES SC400 V8 GT LIMITED
Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 07:42 pm, by: Stuart Smith(Leader428)
Ben Kelly wrote on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 05:55 pm:
altruistic or benevolent purposes
Yes, it looks like Bill Gates and his wife are giving Billions away to selected causes, and convincing other high flyers, like Warren Buffet the Silver magnate to kick in a few Million to make them all feel a little better about themselves.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 10:28 pm, by: Joshua Rao(Soaren1)
Yeah, Ben you have raised good points. I never thought of the diminishing returns of money! I wonder what the marginal amount would be for most?
Stuart Smith wrote on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 07:42 pm:
altruistic or benevolent purposes
That is so true, that is why he has become so benevolent and so he should I say.
I find it interesting that Millionaires like to boy the Ferrari's, Lambo's, Bentleys type cars while many billionaires ie Buffet, Gates, Branson have quite modest cars. Forbes.com had an atricle on it. I think Gates was the most flamboyant with like an 02 911, Branson had a POS and Buffet had a 91 Lincoln (until he recently changed to new one).
I believe the reason for this is as Ben says millionaires like to flaunt their wealth while billionaires find little importance in showcasing their wealth as it is just so large. Or Ben as you have said,
Ben Kelly wrote on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 05:55 pm:
There would be a certain amount of money where the fact of 'owning' the money would not be of importance.
Very interesting topic, could write an essay on it.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008 - 11:34 pm, by: Ben Kelly(Ace)
Ha Joshua, write the essay! and post it here! there's too little discussion on the marginal utility of money per unit happiness on this forum for my liking
Just on gates etc tho...(and i hope you don't think im trying to get all religious or anything, cos quite frankly Im not the religious type), do you think he is trying to fit the proverbial camel through the eye of a needle by giving away a few million here or there? Isn't there a greater responsibility that might be morally felt by the worlds richest man?
Thursday, July 24, 2008 - 01:46 am, by: Joshua Rao(Soaren1)
Haha Ben I agree we need more economics in life. Its actually funny because I have a real passion in 'Money VS Happiness' or marginal utility of money per unit happiness put correctly.
I am in my final year of an Economics degree and I have always thought if I do postgraduate work it will be on the above topic. In fact I have been collecting info on it over the years. Here is a recent source. http://ninemsn.seek.com.au/career-resources/plan-develop/happy.ascx
From a particular life experience I have had I believe that wealth does not equal happiness and one day I endeavor to quantify it. Hard topic to prove though.
Ben Kelly wrote on Wednesday, July 23, 2008 - 11:34 pm:
do you think he is trying to fit the proverbial camel through the eye of a needle by giving away a few million here or there?
Love the reference! Beautiful. It is largely debatable. I feel as though he may be trying to but although he is that wealthy and giving may not be as hard as it is for us I still feel admiration for him. In regards to the monopolistic tension Microsoft has got into over the years, yes it can be seen as anticompetitive but I believe in laisser-faire economics or free markets so I see it as just being really efficient and operating at close to optimal, something that nearly all companies aspire to but cannot reach. Perhaps he is, but I see as better than being a scrooge for the world economy and the welfare of the world. I read awhile back that his will only leaves his kids with like a tiny amount of his wealth (ie 10 million) with the rest to be invested into his and other charities. I think that’s pretty noble to some extent. What do you think?
Ben Kelly wrote on Wednesday, July 23, 2008 - 11:34 pm:
Isn't there a greater responsibility that might be morally felt by the worlds richest man?
What do you think? Giving it all away?
On a lighter note as I believe we have bored every SC member by now I wish I was Gates wealthy so I can (1) cruise around in my soarer as people ask why? And (2) To buy a Lexus SC430 and put Toyota Soarer badges on it to mess with people! Ben do you have Work VS-XX rims?
Thursday, July 24, 2008 - 07:34 pm, by: Ben Kelly(Ace)
Well Joshua you're right we seem to have taken the thread a little off topic. I believe that its apparent that Gates et al do at least have some principles. I don't actually subscribe to your views on the efficiency of the free market system. I would actually say that it is inefficient by design as well as in practice...but thats a debate for another time. Its an interesting though about how the capitalist system requires charity to exist as, well as charity, rather than as legitimate wealth sharing. You could argue that many companies are charitable to some extent but as they have fiduciary duties to the shareholders it is my understanding that any charity work must produce revenue as a result of charitable endeavours (such as through marketing for instance).
If i were a rich man, la de da de dum, i'd fix up my soarer to get it factory. Then i'd employ Swedish virgins that knew how to sing and feed me grapes. Anyone else have rich person fantasies?