The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Another Test of Piketty's Secret Old Money Billionaires Conspiracy Theory
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Screenshot 2018-07-07 12.25.24

As I’ve mentioned several times, bestselling economist Thomas Piketty believes that his theory proves that magazine lists of rich guys, such as Forbes‘ and Bloomberg’s, are incorrectly, even propagandistically, biased toward new money entrepreneurs and overlook lots and lots of Secret Old Money billionaires.

I’ve always found that a very interesting theory and often look for ways to test it.

One way to test it is to look for who owns things that rich guys like to buy, such as yachts, sports enterprises, movies, waterfront property, and personal golf courses.

For example, self-made Oracle founder Larry Ellison, #10 on Bloomberg’s Billionaires list with $52 billion, owns a 288-foot yacht, lots of expensive sailboats (he sponsored the last America’s Cup), an 18 hole personal golf course in the Palm Springs area, the Indian Wells pro tennis event, much land in Malibu, the Hawaiian island of Lanai, a MiG-29, and his daughter produces auteur movies (Paul Thomas Anderson, Richard Linklater, David O. Russell, etc.) and his son produces commercial movies like Tom Cruise’s Mission Impossible franchise (the Ellison name in the credits is a fairly positive indicator of quality).

Granted, Ellison, who goes in for a Bond Villain look, is more upfront about enjoying his vast wealth than many other billionaires. But my point is that being a billionaire tends to leave behind marks on the landscape, both metaphorical and actual.

For example, it’s impossible to hide a personal golf course in your yard from airplanes flying overhead.

As shown in the aerial shot above, in Southhampton on Long Island, for instance, are a couple of par 3 holes in the yard of an estate overlooking the National Golf Links of America, a landmark golf course designed by Charles Blair Macdonald in 1909. The mansion’s owner possesses for his personal enjoyment nearly perfect copies of NGLA’s famous Redan 4th hole (playing from the tee on the right of the photo to the right to left-sloping green on the left) and Short 6th hole (left to right).

Who owns this 35 acre estate? Well, “Ballyshear” was built shortly after the NGLA itself by Macdonald himself, with his right hand man Seth Raynor, himself a famous golf architect, doing the construction.

Ballyshear was purchased in 2011 for $20 million by crime-fighting billionaire mayor Michael Bloomberg, whose name doesn’t appear on the Bloomberg Billionaires lists, but who is currently ranked #8 on the Forbes 400.

Now it could be that Piketty’s Secret Old Money billionaires stick to underground recreations inside hollowed-out volcanoes or the like that you and I will never know about. But it would seem both reasonable and fun to expect Piketty to come up with some examples in support of his assumption that he seems to believe is integral to the rest of his theory.

 
Hide 212 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Dave Pinsen says: • Website

    There’s also some basic math to consider. The older the money, the more descendants it’s likely split amongst. It’s entirely possible to invest a big fortune so that your descendants are wealthy several generations in the future, but to be as wealthy as the wealthiest men of their time seems unlikely.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Barnard
    Right, wasn't there speculation about 20 years ago that the Kennedy fortune was getting so diminished by the heirs that they needed most of the next generation to produce income outside of what they would inherit.
    , @Wally
    Good take downs of Piketty:

    part 1
    The Piketty Fallacy
    http://www.hoover.org/print/publications/defining-ideas/article/177406

    part 2
    defining ideas, Piketty’s Rickety Economics
    http://www.hoover.org/publications/defining-ideas/article/178046
    , @Anonymous
    What about primogeniture?
    , @Slayer
    Good example the Duponts. Still among wealthiest families, but the fortune split among 3000 or so people living in horse country in New Jersey or coastal Delaware presumably. ( Joke )

    Best contradistinction would be the Cargill MacMillan fortune which is vastly larger though of somewhat similar vintage. Still complete family control with the most billionaires in the US. When one wants to exit the others either buy them out or spin off a part of the company that allows the exiting member to sell the shares and liquidate but keeps control with cargill. Never been a public company unlike dupont so far easier to manage these transactions.
    , @Bernardo Pizzaro Cortez Del Castro
    True, look st the Vanderbilt family as an example..Cornelius was the Wealthiest man in America and left $100 million to his children, 90% went to one son, William Vanderbilt. Yet even among the descendants of William none are Billionaires today , most of his hundreds of ggg grandchildren are not even millionaires today. Gloria Vanderbilt inherited just $4 million and her grandfather had left an estate worth over $200 million.
    , @Anon
    Descendants often make more money of their own and and or marry into money.

    The famous Boston Trusts ensured that. Lots of money for education, money for investments and start ups carefully scrutinized and monitored by the trustees. But nothing for anything else. You want a mansion filled with expensive furniture surrounded by splendid gardens?

    Earn the money yourself.

    Individual inheritances were small. The bulk of the money was already in the Trust and safe from inheritance tax.
    , @Kevin C.
    I recall reading about how the persistance of the Rothschild family's wealth down the centuries was probably largely explained by their tendency to cousin marriage and other endogamy "keeping it in the family," as it were.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Bad joke time.

    TRIGGER WARNING … DEAD BABY JOKE

    Q: What do you call a dead baby decapitated by a Nigerian immigrant in a German subway station in front of a crowd of horrified commuters?

    A: Nothing. Or else your house will be raided by police at 6:45 AM by the “Hate and Incitement” department of Hamburg’s public prosecution office.

    Germany: Migrant Decapitates Baby, Government Tries To Cover It Up

    On second thought, that’s not really funny at all. PC ruins everything.

    Article excerpt after more:

    [MORE]

    Germany: Migrant Decapitates Baby, Government Tries To Cover It Up

    …On April 12, 33-year-old Mourtala Madou stabbed his German ex-girlfriend, identified as Sandra P., and their one-year-old baby daughter, Miriam, at a Hamburg subway station. The woman’s 3-year-old son was also a witness to the carnage.

    A gospel singer named Daniel J. who arrived at the subway moments after the attack and filmed the bloody scene on his phone witnessed that the baby had been almost or completely decapitated.

    “Oh my God. It’s unbelievable. Oh Jesus, oh Jesus, oh Jesus. They cut off the head of the baby. Oh my God. Oh Jesus,” he is heard saying in the clip.

    A blogger named Heinrich Kordewiner who found the video on Daniel J.’s Facebook page uploaded the video to YouTube, which then made him a target for authorities.

    “A few days later, a team of state prosecutors and officers of the cybercrime unit of the Hamburg police arrived at Kordewiner’s apartment with a search warrant, and confiscated his computer, mobile phone and other electronics, allegedly to find “evidence” of the “crime”. He was — and still is — accused of: uploading the video,” reports the Gatestone Institute.

    Kordewiner and his flatmate told Gatestone about the raid, which took place at 6.45 a.m. They recounted that when they first refused to open the door, police forced it open — and even searched the flatmate’s room, although it was apparently not covered by the search warrant.

    “The police officer said that he could also search for SD (secure digital) cards,” the flatmate told Gatestone. “While he fumbled through the books on my shelf, he suggested that he could turn my whole apartment upside down. He told me to relax.”

    Kordewiner was accused of having “invaded the private sphere” of the murder victim, an obscure and barely used law that has been criticized for jeopardizing freedom of the press. Daniel J.’s home was also raided by authorities.

    Ulf Bornemann, head of the “Hate and Incitement” department of Hamburg’s public prosecution office and also part of the team that raided Kordewiner’s apartment, defended the law for having helped tackle, “hate crime in social networks.”

    The video has now been deleted from all German websites and YouTube channels.

    Hamburg’s ministry of justice concluded its investigation by declaring, “the double murder is a crime of passion that must not be of any interest to the public.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @tyrone
    "not of any interest to the public"…….might slow future production of mulattos.
    , @TheBoom
    When noticing becomes illegal
    , @El Dato
    Definitely not old-school Highlander lore.

    Wait, did the "Madou" decapitate his own baby?

    Meanwhile, Nantes is still on fire because "Mamadou" (real name Aboubakar Fofana) got hit in useful places of his body by somewhat nervous blue forces:

    Mr Fofana almost ran over two children and hit an officer as he reversed his car away from a police control point “at very high speed,” prompting another officer to open fire. He was hit in the neck and declared dead on arrival at hospital.

    He was the subject of an arrest warrant issued in June last year for organised robbery, possession of stolen goods and criminal conspiracy.
     
    So far about thirty cars and several buildings, among which a town hall subsidiary and two supermarkets have been torched.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Enochian says:

    A problem with this is that you have to guess what Secret Old Money wants to own. They might consider sports teams and 600 foot yachts to be for the nouveau rich, fit only for trailer trash that has risen above its place.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    So it's hollowed-out volcanoes I guess.
    , @Steve Sailer
    So it's hollowed-out volcanoes I guess.
    , @Mr. Anon
    I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps golf is the pastime of arrivistes.

    However, I would think that yachts, private airplanes, and private islands would be reliable markers for the super-rich, whether new money or old.
    , @Almost Missouri
    Agree. Were I wealthy, yachts and golf courses would be way down my shopping list. What would be near the top?

    · Key politicians and public servants, especially near where I and my descendants live or want to live. Indeed, let the publicity-loving politicians buy and have all the flashy stuff in their own names so long as they do my bidding. They don't even need to do my bidding with the flashy stuff. They can keep that just for playing. What would be my bidding? Oh, nothing much. Just keep things moving along more or less in the direction I like, for whatever reason. Also, a bit of insurance: if an investigation or inquiry starts going in a way that displeases me, my pols will ensure that it is defunded and the snoops reassigned.

    · A foundation or two or a hundred. Nothing with my name on it. Who needs the hassle or notoriety when something goes wrong? Something like the TIDES Foundation: anonymity, opacity and maneuverability. If I see something that can be fixed to be more to my liking by lawyers, academics, journalists or "activists", then boom, the money will appear for them, from The Foundation. Why is The Foundation funding this? Didn't you know The Foundation has a long history of supporting progressive public policy? Why you want to ask awkward questions? Well if you don't really want the money, we don't need to make this grant... Oh, also sign this non-disclosure agreement before we can disburse the funds.

    · A share here and there in key media organizations. Enough to be able to kick in and out subjects of interest to me. I don't have to do this in my own name of course. That's what shell companies and charities are for. Imagine, that Bezos fellow bought the entire Washington Post in his own name. Obviously, he is fresh off the plane from Wall Street, poor fellow.

    · A bit of a security organization. Nothing big or flashy. No minions in silver suits patrolling empty volcanoes. Just some discreet private investigator types, an "ex-"deep stater or two, and someone with a bit of muscle and self discipline. You know, in case there is a kidnapping and we need to know whom to send the kidnapper's son's pinkie finger to. Of course, this "security" might have other uses too...

    · Maybe if I were feeling self indulgent, some obscure but heritable European titles or other. Nothing with a lot of distracting responsibilities, but just something that keeps my family on a good invite list or two. My very limited acquaintance with the upper crust hasn't convinced me they are much more interesting than anyone else, but they do have better real estate. And who knows, maybe my kids will take a shine to that kind of thing.

    Notably, none of these things leaves a large public footprint.

    Also notably, a lot of things in Ron Unz's American Pravda series seem a lot more plausible when looked at this way.

    , @Reg Cæsar

    A problem with this is that you have to guess what Secret Old Money wants to own. They might consider sports teams and 600 foot yachts to be for the nouveau rich, fit only for trailer trash that has risen above its place.

     

    Paul Fussell in Class pointed out that the old money far preferred Buicks to Cadillacs. They were just as good, but a lot less showy. They helped you disappear.
    , @Run GMC
    I would think Piketty has an unconscious European bias towards class distinction that makes him think about “Old Money” as still being pervasive. Probably a common thought among European socialist movements for 2 centuries now. The European Old Money is now remarkably diffuse after generations and centuries. The Rothchilds are spread throughout the world by now and hardly know one another. They havent been innovators like American new-money, but have just attempted to maintain their inherited wealth to some degree and to stay relevant.
    , @Pat Boyle
    I've known a couple billionaires and I think you are right on. Billionaires are visible.

    I used to socialize with some of the Oracle founders. I remember dinner and skinny dipping with my wife in the hot tub on a mountain top in Marin with the fog coming over the peaks. Taht was with the #2 guy at Oracle and his wife drinking champagne all the while. He and the other Oracle guys I met always talked about Ellison. Almost nothing else. Ellison burned a cavern in the mind-space of everyone he met. See - "The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison" a kind of tribute by his former employees. Available at better bookstores everywhere.

    I also knew Gordon Getty socially. He too cut a wide swath in the public's apperception. He was always in the papers even before that kidnapping and ear removal business. He performed publicly with my wife several times. She was pretty good, he was dreadful but he had all those billions and she just had me.

    I'm skeptical of the reality of hidden billionaires.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. “One way to test it is to look for who owns things that rich guys like to buy, such as yachts, sports enterprises, movies, waterfront property, and personal golf courses.”

    Don’t forget private islands.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. @Enochian
    A problem with this is that you have to guess what Secret Old Money wants to own. They might consider sports teams and 600 foot yachts to be for the nouveau rich, fit only for trailer trash that has risen above its place.

    So it’s hollowed-out volcanoes I guess.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    Hollowed-out volcano lairs separate the aristo from the nouveau


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dnaorqo6krg
    , @ThirdWorldSteveReader
    If this hidden old money exists, I guess it would be on things like valuable buildings (like owning a company that owns a company that owns 50 buildings in central London, which are then they rent to Barclay's and Jarrod's and Russian millionaires). Or owning vast latifundia on productive farmland.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. @Enochian
    A problem with this is that you have to guess what Secret Old Money wants to own. They might consider sports teams and 600 foot yachts to be for the nouveau rich, fit only for trailer trash that has risen above its place.

    So it’s hollowed-out volcanoes I guess.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. tyrone says:
    @Hippopotamusdrome
    Bad joke time.

    TRIGGER WARNING ... DEAD BABY JOKE

    Q: What do you call a dead baby decapitated by a Nigerian immigrant in a German subway station in front of a crowd of horrified commuters?

    A: Nothing. Or else your house will be raided by police at 6:45 AM by the "Hate and Incitement" department of Hamburg's public prosecution office.

    Germany: Migrant Decapitates Baby, Government Tries To Cover It Up

    On second thought, that's not really funny at all. PC ruins everything.

    Article excerpt after more:



    Germany: Migrant Decapitates Baby, Government Tries To Cover It Up

    ...On April 12, 33-year-old Mourtala Madou stabbed his German ex-girlfriend, identified as Sandra P., and their one-year-old baby daughter, Miriam, at a Hamburg subway station. The woman's 3-year-old son was also a witness to the carnage.

    A gospel singer named Daniel J. who arrived at the subway moments after the attack and filmed the bloody scene on his phone witnessed that the baby had been almost or completely decapitated.

    "Oh my God. It's unbelievable. Oh Jesus, oh Jesus, oh Jesus. They cut off the head of the baby. Oh my God. Oh Jesus," he is heard saying in the clip.
    ...
    A blogger named Heinrich Kordewiner who found the video on Daniel J.'s Facebook page uploaded the video to YouTube, which then made him a target for authorities.

    "A few days later, a team of state prosecutors and officers of the cybercrime unit of the Hamburg police arrived at Kordewiner's apartment with a search warrant, and confiscated his computer, mobile phone and other electronics, allegedly to find "evidence" of the "crime". He was -- and still is -- accused of: uploading the video," reports the Gatestone Institute.

    Kordewiner and his flatmate told Gatestone about the raid, which took place at 6.45 a.m. They recounted that when they first refused to open the door, police forced it open -- and even searched the flatmate's room, although it was apparently not covered by the search warrant.

    "The police officer said that he could also search for SD (secure digital) cards," the flatmate told Gatestone. "While he fumbled through the books on my shelf, he suggested that he could turn my whole apartment upside down. He told me to relax."

    Kordewiner was accused of having "invaded the private sphere" of the murder victim, an obscure and barely used law that has been criticized for jeopardizing freedom of the press. Daniel J.'s home was also raided by authorities.

    Ulf Bornemann, head of the "Hate and Incitement" department of Hamburg's public prosecution office and also part of the team that raided Kordewiner's apartment, defended the law for having helped tackle, "hate crime in social networks."
    ...
    The video has now been deleted from all German websites and YouTube channels.
    ...
    Hamburg's ministry of justice concluded its investigation by declaring, "the double murder is a crime of passion that must not be of any interest to the public."

     

    “not of any interest to the public”…….might slow future production of mulattos.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. HA says:

    “…being a billionaire tends to leave behind marks on the landscape, both metaphorical and actual.

    This is basic sasquatch debunking 101 — a large (indeed, gigantic) mammal consuming thousands of calories a day and shedding long shaggy hair is not going to survive for centuries without leaving some scat, hair, carcass, or other concrete evidence (that doesn’t eventually turn out to be a hoax or bear remains).

    By that analogy, Piketty is a sasquatch believer who insists that financial behemoths walk the earth without leaving any concrete evidence of their passage.

    And here’s the thing: the bigfoot myth has persisted for centuries, and still lingers to this day. That being the case, don’t expect a little thing like lack of any concrete evidence to quiet the Piketty’s of this world.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rapparee
    Sasquatch sightings probably fall into two basic categories- mistaken animals (usually black bears), and supernatural entities. The former are far more common, but a non-negligible minority of accounts suggest something vaguely related to fairies or demons. (The fairies are also a pretty good explanation of some of the more credible UFO and "alien" encounter reports- see Jacques Vallée's "Passport to Magonia). Lack of a real physical body would explain both the utter dearth of animal remains, and the small but significant number of apparently stable, sane witnesses who insist they saw it clearly and unmistakably.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. George says:

    The GWOT is said to have cost trillions. Where are the Global War on Terror Billionaires? For example one of the Afghanistan Generals is living large in NYC, but if he lived too large it would raise suspicions wouldn’t it? But of course, Occam’s razor would suggest he is not living larger because his pay at The Carlyle Group is not that good. Another possibility is that the GWOT trillions are spread all over in smaller piles hidden in duffle bags and ammo boxes.

    Tony Blair made out rather publicly from the GWOT. Blair’s buddy Jack Staw is more discrete. Former PM Gordon ‘Golden’ Brown who sold 400 tons of gold just before 9 11 is also living discretely. Occam’s Razor would suggest Blair does great speeches while Straw and Brown don’t.

    Another curiosity is all the Real Estate that cannot be linked to actual people, just corporations owned by other corporations.

    How come Warren Buffett does not have a golf course in his backyard, unlike Bloomberg he is not planning on running for office. Plus as a Jew Bloomberg has the lingering pain of his ancestors being rejected at the ticket window of Augusta. Buffett derives business advantage being known as being rich. Bloomberg can’t do anything about publicity, his name is on the company.

    To make the Forbes 400 you need wealth as calculated by them to be $2 Billion. So a clever sort just needs to live less large than $2 Billionaire. Another curiousity is low interest rates means your $1 Billion probably produces $30 million minus the costs associated with keeping it secret. So one way the richies keep their wealth secret is low returns on capital means they just own barren assets.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Simple Psuedonym
    Bloomberg goes down to 1 billion. That is a list of anyone they estimate to be worth 1 billion. 1500 odd people, and the methodology is well described and often impressively modeled for leveraged and illliquid assets or income streams that flow over decades.

    Anyone below 1 or 2 billion is not really what is being discussed here. If you have 2 children that ends things right there in most cases.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Mr. Anon says:
    @Enochian
    A problem with this is that you have to guess what Secret Old Money wants to own. They might consider sports teams and 600 foot yachts to be for the nouveau rich, fit only for trailer trash that has risen above its place.

    I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps golf is the pastime of arrivistes.

    However, I would think that yachts, private airplanes, and private islands would be reliable markers for the super-rich, whether new money or old.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    But 1911's golf-playing arrivistes pass their golf club memberships onto their Old Money descendants.

    For example, the locker room in the National Golf Links of America used to keep the name plates on the lockers of the late members who had previously used each locker. In 1986, I noted Carnegie and Frick among the various names now more commonly found on libraries and museums.

    The only old member granted an honorific was Gen. Eisenhower, perhaps the point being that unlike that arriviste club Augusta National, Eisenhower was a member at The National before he became President.

    A taste for Charles Blair Macdonald designs was very non-arriviste in 1986 and was mostly passed down. My only money friend's 90 year old grandfather had played golf as a boy with Charles Blair Macdonald and had scandalous stories about his college roommate Adlai Stevenson.

    , @Steve Sailer
    But 1911's golf-playing arrivistes pass their golf club memberships onto their Old Money descendants.

    For example, the locker room in the National Golf Links of America used to keep the name plates on the lockers of the late members who had previously used each locker. In 1986, I noted Carnegie and Frick among the various names now more commonly found on libraries and museums.

    The only old member granted an honorific was Gen. Eisenhower, perhaps the point being that unlike that arriviste club Augusta National, Eisenhower was a member at The National before he became President.

    A taste for Charles Blair Macdonald designs was very non-arriviste in 1986 and was mostly passed down. My only money friend's 90 year old grandfather had played golf as a boy with Charles Blair Macdonald and had scandalous stories about his college roommate Adlai Stevenson.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says:

    Getting funnier and funnier

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. Anonym says:

    Does Piketty actually give any evidence for his theory?

    Your method of profiling ultra-wealthy individuals and what they like to buy has merit. Even reclusive billionaires would tend to have some tells one would think. How to identify them? You’d start with those who have decloaked and look at what they did.

    A brute force approach would be to look at the major categories of wealth, and attempt to see who owned most of each. For example, shares and private companies, real estate, precious metals, mineral rights. There is going to be a lot of state ownership I would think. And also, who owns all the debt? National debts are huge, who owns them? Ditto public and corporate debts.

    Kind of on topic and kind of not, after getting into a bit of a JFK kick (not the first time) since reading Ron’s articles, I have also been absorbing what Fletcher Prouty had to say (the real life Man X of the JFK movie). With all of that money they made from wars, one would think they might rank a little higher in the list of largest companies in the world, although they are still pretty big.

    One thing caught my eye. I don’t know how much is true or not, but suspect that a reasonable amount of it is due to references and being positioned to know. In any case, Prouty claims:
    1. That in 1945, all of the US materiel for the invasion of Japan was shipped to Viet Nam (to Ho Chi Minh) and Korea (Syngman Rhee). I mention this because of the timelines. The plans were in motion before the end of WWII already for war and war profiteering, though the wars to consume more war materiel and generate more war profits wouldn’t eventuate for years later.

    http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/prouty_arms.htm

    2. That 1.1M North Vietnamese were shipped south at the behest of the CIA to create the conditions for war. Emphasis mine:

    This formula endeared Ed to Allen Dulles. In 1954 Dulles established the Saigon Military Mission in Vietnam…counter to Eisenhower’s orders. He had the French accept Lansdale as its chief. This mission was not in Saigon. It was not military, and its job was subversion in Vietnam. Its biggest job was that it got more than 1,100,000 northern Vietnamese to move south. 660,000 by U.S.Navy ships and the rest by CIA airline planes. These 1,100,000 north Vietnamese became the “subversive” element in South Vietnam and the principal cause of the warmaking. Lansdale and his cronies (Bohanon, Arundel, Phillips, Hand, Conein and many others) did all that using the same check book. I was with them many times during 1954. All Malthuseanism.

    https://www.prouty.org/letter.html

    In the age of thermonuclear weapons, wars such as WWII between the great powers cannot happen, and Prouty makes this point himself in video. So, wars need to take place at most, between nuclear and non-nuclear countries. Or… within any country, nuclear or otherwise.

    In any case, massive movements of people, encouraged by the Deep State, has in the past been apparently used to generate the conditions for war, and hence, war profits. Does this, uh, kind of resemble anything we see around us today? I just thought this was interesting. I think there is a lot more to it than that obviously, e.g. BLS and the Every Single Time of the NYT and others. But something to consider.

    Read More
    • Replies: @gcochran
    Those "North Vietnamese shipped South" are called Catholics.
    , @Svigor
    Could you quote the specific stuff the US supposedly put by for 15 years, or whatever it was? I saw this:

    If such a huge shipment of war materiel, "amounted to what the Army called a 145,00 'man-pack' of supplies ... enough of everything required during combat to arm and supply that many men of war" (Prouty, 37), did reach both Korea and Vietnam it would seem likely that a conspiracy had chosen those locations for future confrontations. The fact that this "decision" was made before the end of the war in Europe would be further evidence of the far-reaching grasp and extent of the control the conspiracy exerted. After all, the conflict in Korea would not erupt for another five years and American involvement in Vietnam did not "officially" begin until 1965.(1) An investigation into whether or not this stockpile of materiel was shipped will determine whether or not the roots of the wars in both Korea and Vietnam wars were conspiratorial.
     
    Which is pretty vague, to say the least. I read on a bit further but saw nothing further, and my eyes start to bleed when I read conspiracy theories.

    Did we actually start the Vietnam war with all the exact same equipment as we ended WWII with? I know a lot of that stuff was canvas, so it better have been stored an arid part of Japan. Better not have included gasoline, which goes bad in a few years, IIRC, unless properly maintained. I don't wanna know what the MREs tasted like after 15 years. I'm no expert on US military equipment of the time, but I do know we used helicopters a lot in Vietnam, and we didn't in WWII, so I'm pretty sure they weren't stored in Japan in '45. I'm betting it's a similar story with our armor. The M16 made its debut in Vietnam, so again, not in Japan...
    , @Prester John
    As a footnote and continuing in the on and off topic vein, speaking of The Prince of Camelot, am re-reading an interesting (if a bit snarky) evaluation of the Cold War called "The Fifty Year Wound" by one Derek Leebaert of G-town wherein he describes the obsession that the brothers Kennedy had with delivering a personal knock-out punch to that bearded slob in Kooba. The KGB spooks in Langley and (for all we know) the White House no doubt made him aware that he was in their x-hairs, hence the little tidbit offered to the reader by Leebaert that maybe, just maybe, it was Castro who gave the order to take out JFK, in so doing thereby implicitly rejecting "Oswald acted alone" argument (which, as the decades have passed, has become almost impossible to believe). No proof offered of course, nonetheless...interesting.
    , @Art Deco
    The ratio of military expenditure to domestic product declined with scant interruption from 1953 to 1979. It saw an increase (of about 16%) only from 1965 to 1967. It saw a 20% increase from 1979 to 1985, then began to decline again. It passed below the Cold War nadir during the fiscal year concluding in 1993 and hit bottom in 2000. The ratio saw a 45% increase from 2000 to 2010 and has since declined, returning to the level of 1999/2000. It is, as we speak, as low as it has been since 1940. The wars in Korea, VietNam, and the Gulf were quite modest in scale compared to the World Wars (during the 1st of which the ratio of military expenditure to gdp topped 12% and during the second topped 40% for several years in a row). The war in VietNam in particular was fought through redistributing the military's allocations, not by extracting expanded allocations.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. @Mr. Anon
    I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps golf is the pastime of arrivistes.

    However, I would think that yachts, private airplanes, and private islands would be reliable markers for the super-rich, whether new money or old.

    But 1911′s golf-playing arrivistes pass their golf club memberships onto their Old Money descendants.

    For example, the locker room in the National Golf Links of America used to keep the name plates on the lockers of the late members who had previously used each locker. In 1986, I noted Carnegie and Frick among the various names now more commonly found on libraries and museums.

    The only old member granted an honorific was Gen. Eisenhower, perhaps the point being that unlike that arriviste club Augusta National, Eisenhower was a member at The National before he became President.

    A taste for Charles Blair Macdonald designs was very non-arriviste in 1986 and was mostly passed down. My only money friend’s 90 year old grandfather had played golf as a boy with Charles Blair Macdonald and had scandalous stories about his college roommate Adlai Stevenson.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. @Mr. Anon
    I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps golf is the pastime of arrivistes.

    However, I would think that yachts, private airplanes, and private islands would be reliable markers for the super-rich, whether new money or old.

    But 1911′s golf-playing arrivistes pass their golf club memberships onto their Old Money descendants.

    For example, the locker room in the National Golf Links of America used to keep the name plates on the lockers of the late members who had previously used each locker. In 1986, I noted Carnegie and Frick among the various names now more commonly found on libraries and museums.

    The only old member granted an honorific was Gen. Eisenhower, perhaps the point being that unlike that arriviste club Augusta National, Eisenhower was a member at The National before he became President.

    A taste for Charles Blair Macdonald designs was very non-arriviste in 1986 and was mostly passed down. My only money friend’s 90 year old grandfather had played golf as a boy with Charles Blair Macdonald and had scandalous stories about his college roommate Adlai Stevenson.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. One of my favorite Trump stories is how he faked himself onto the Forbes richest list and then IIRC used that ranking to get loans.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/20/trump-used-fake-persona-to-lie-about-his-wealth-former-forbes-writer.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  16. syonredux says:
    @Steve Sailer
    So it's hollowed-out volcanoes I guess.

    Hollowed-out volcano lairs separate the aristo from the nouveau

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. “The only old member granted an honorific was Gen. Eisenhower, perhaps the point being that unlike that arriviste club Augusta National”

    Wait, wait. Augusta? An arriviste club? Ok, at what point does an alleged arriviste become Old Money? Would think that by now, Augusta National, based on its historical as well as legendary reputation, would qualify as Old Money. By deeds as well as by honor, certainly Augusta has earned the title.

    Carried to the conclusion, one could say that in 1910 NY, the Old Money (or traditional/first established) MLB franchise was the Giants, with the Yankees being the interloping arrivistes. Although as the Giants moved to SF, the Yankees have become the de facto Old Money franchise. Not too sure the Mets qualify as anything, least of all an arriviste franchise.

    The point being, over generations the definition of Old Money tends to change. We think now of Rockefeller, Carnegie, Frick, Ford, Vanderbilt, etc as Old Money, but lest we forget that in their heyday they were considered to be arrivistes, replacing the Old Money generations that went before them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hodag
    Augusta is an arrivista club by it's very nature. First, when it opened there was a nationwide campaign to find members - their invitational served as promotion. Second, it is a national club. The membership used to be locals (Coke executives, local builders etc) plus the people throughout the country who were golf nuts. Third, now they just hunt for CEOs. Rodger Godell from the NFL, Gates, Buffet, Condi Rice - all new money. Finally until very recently it was an all mens club, not the sort of place where old money could bring their kids to find spouses.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. Anon[183] • Disclaimer says:

    This appears to be some sort of secret volcano facility:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  19. @Enochian
    A problem with this is that you have to guess what Secret Old Money wants to own. They might consider sports teams and 600 foot yachts to be for the nouveau rich, fit only for trailer trash that has risen above its place.

    Agree. Were I wealthy, yachts and golf courses would be way down my shopping list. What would be near the top?

    · Key politicians and public servants, especially near where I and my descendants live or want to live. Indeed, let the publicity-loving politicians buy and have all the flashy stuff in their own names so long as they do my bidding. They don’t even need to do my bidding with the flashy stuff. They can keep that just for playing. What would be my bidding? Oh, nothing much. Just keep things moving along more or less in the direction I like, for whatever reason. Also, a bit of insurance: if an investigation or inquiry starts going in a way that displeases me, my pols will ensure that it is defunded and the snoops reassigned.

    · A foundation or two or a hundred. Nothing with my name on it. Who needs the hassle or notoriety when something goes wrong? Something like the TIDES Foundation: anonymity, opacity and maneuverability. If I see something that can be fixed to be more to my liking by lawyers, academics, journalists or “activists”, then boom, the money will appear for them, from The Foundation. Why is The Foundation funding this? Didn’t you know The Foundation has a long history of supporting progressive public policy? Why you want to ask awkward questions? Well if you don’t really want the money, we don’t need to make this grant… Oh, also sign this non-disclosure agreement before we can disburse the funds.

    · A share here and there in key media organizations. Enough to be able to kick in and out subjects of interest to me. I don’t have to do this in my own name of course. That’s what shell companies and charities are for. Imagine, that Bezos fellow bought the entire Washington Post in his own name. Obviously, he is fresh off the plane from Wall Street, poor fellow.

    · A bit of a security organization. Nothing big or flashy. No minions in silver suits patrolling empty volcanoes. Just some discreet private investigator types, an “ex-”deep stater or two, and someone with a bit of muscle and self discipline. You know, in case there is a kidnapping and we need to know whom to send the kidnapper’s son’s pinkie finger to. Of course, this “security” might have other uses too…

    · Maybe if I were feeling self indulgent, some obscure but heritable European titles or other. Nothing with a lot of distracting responsibilities, but just something that keeps my family on a good invite list or two. My very limited acquaintance with the upper crust hasn’t convinced me they are much more interesting than anyone else, but they do have better real estate. And who knows, maybe my kids will take a shine to that kind of thing.

    Notably, none of these things leaves a large public footprint.

    Also notably, a lot of things in Ron Unz’s American Pravda series seem a lot more plausible when looked at this way.

    Read More
    • Agree: Abe
    • Replies: @m___

    What would be near the top?
     
    Much so, as the comment on war profiteering in Vietnam,

    If you cannot hide suppreme access to wealth, then you do not deserve it. The system is built on the normative of magic tricks for the elites, and control over the middle classes. Wealth is power, capital precedes cognitive capacity. There are two sets of rules, "we" and the "others". Some individuals fall victim between ship and wall.

    How visible you want to be, is merely a question of testosteron. Invisible means no rewards of ego, and insulation of every day reality. Some, the new on the block ones, tend to crave it, by habit(Soros, Blair, Buffet selling his person out of habit). How "rich" you are defines the point of shutting up, and have other clowns do your bidding. The system simply requires it thus. Horse whispering only.

    The next generations? The question defeats the purpose, power mongering is not inheritable. How we treat the Earth, the planet is proof for that. Dead wood, as to the patriarch.

    , @International Jew
    I like your shopping list, and I'm gonna bookmark it for in case I ever become a billionaire, haha.

    If there's a flaw in your plan, it's that you imagine you can keep your profile low by just avoiding active acts of publicity-seeking. That will help, but you'll never have much control over what other people say about you. And your plan inevitably puts you in contact with a lot of people.

    Anyway, just some things to think about between now and the day you actually become a billionaire. I don't know you so I don't know how tight your timetable for that is. Me, it would be nice if I could become a billionaire before my next major college reunion.
    , @Anon
    You get on the good invite list by contributing to the right causes. For instance there are still hundreds of debutante balls in this country. They are usually fundraisers for hospitals.

    When your girls are about 10, send a presentable female family member to join the Friends of ....... contribute the minimum and your girls are debs and on all the right lists. Have their brothers and if not brothers men cousins be the required escorts and your kids are set for life.

    It’s expensive to keep up with the country club luxury vacation set though.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Rapparee says:
    @HA
    "...being a billionaire tends to leave behind marks on the landscape, both metaphorical and actual.

    This is basic sasquatch debunking 101 -- a large (indeed, gigantic) mammal consuming thousands of calories a day and shedding long shaggy hair is not going to survive for centuries without leaving some scat, hair, carcass, or other concrete evidence (that doesn't eventually turn out to be a hoax or bear remains).

    By that analogy, Piketty is a sasquatch believer who insists that financial behemoths walk the earth without leaving any concrete evidence of their passage.

    And here's the thing: the bigfoot myth has persisted for centuries, and still lingers to this day. That being the case, don't expect a little thing like lack of any concrete evidence to quiet the Piketty's of this world.

    Sasquatch sightings probably fall into two basic categories- mistaken animals (usually black bears), and supernatural entities. The former are far more common, but a non-negligible minority of accounts suggest something vaguely related to fairies or demons. (The fairies are also a pretty good explanation of some of the more credible UFO and “alien” encounter reports- see Jacques Vallée’s “Passport to Magonia). Lack of a real physical body would explain both the utter dearth of animal remains, and the small but significant number of apparently stable, sane witnesses who insist they saw it clearly and unmistakably.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HA
    "non-negligible minority of accounts suggest something vaguely related to fairies or demons. "

    Any forest is a cornucopia of pharmological disturbances -- molds, fungi, etc., -- whose effects on brain chemistry (as seen with psilycbyins, ergot poisoning, Colorado river toads, coca plants, poppies) are only beginning to be understood in isolation, much less so when countless numbers are cross-contaminating each other.

    Whether it's fairies, or UFO's, or sasquatch, people who live in or near forests will eventually have some freaky stories to tell, many involving bright lights or humanoid creatures of one form or another. But that prevalence still doesn't mean any of those stories are true.

    You are free to believe in the existence of woodland fairies or demons on the basis of any such eyewitness accounts, but if that explanation is correct, then given that most everyone these days has a camera phone, we should soon see some photographic evidence come in. Until that happens, I submit that trippy experiences that often afflict those who live in forests -- exacerbated at times by exhaustion, alcohol, or hunger -- are a far more plausible explanation (in those rare cases where weather balloons or momentarily bipedal bears or some other natural phenomenon is not an even more likely explanation).

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Barnard says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    There's also some basic math to consider. The older the money, the more descendants it's likely split amongst. It's entirely possible to invest a big fortune so that your descendants are wealthy several generations in the future, but to be as wealthy as the wealthiest men of their time seems unlikely.

    Right, wasn’t there speculation about 20 years ago that the Kennedy fortune was getting so diminished by the heirs that they needed most of the next generation to produce income outside of what they would inherit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    What Kennedy fortune? They've never been the Vanderbilts or Rockefellers.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. The Leverett House library at Harvard has a prominent brass plaque inscribed with the text “Ten generations of Saltonstalls have matriculated here”. Where are the Saltonstalls today? Not entirely sure, however, looking for deep power in the family trees of recent HYP graduates seems like a good starting point, and something far easier with computers, online ancestry and social media.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saltonstall_family

    Josh Rosen, the UCLA quarterback, is the son of a Philadelphia Lippincott.

    , @Reg Cæsar

    The Leverett House library at Harvard has a prominent brass plaque inscribed with the text “Ten generations of Saltonstalls have matriculated here”. Where are the Saltonstalls today?
     
    To comprehend the extent of the loss of Yankee power in its former hub, consider that Gov Leverett Saltonstall was reduced to campaigning in the Irish bars of Southie.
    , @Brutusale
    Harumph. Blow-ins like the Saltonstalls have nothing on the Welds.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Weld

    Bill Weld had a great line when MA Senate president Billy Bulger (known variously as the Corrupt Midget or Whitey's brother) poked fun at his heritage during a joint session when Weld was governor.

    "Actually, they weren't on the Mayflower. They sent the servants over first to get the cottage ready."

    The old money summer places are pretty impressive, though.

    http://www.newportmansions.org/explore
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. The Z Blog says: • Website

    My guess is Piketty has bumped into some old money and noticed that old WASP money tends to avoid ostentatious displays of wealth. I went to school with some old money guys. Modesty was a highly cultivated attitude with them. They were very careful to not be ostentatious.

    That does not mean Piketty is correct. It’s juts that the newly rich tend to live like NBA players, while old money does not.

    Read More
    • Agree: Svigor
    • Replies: @Slayer
    Except he lives in France and likely is meeting European aristocrats. Either that or hes bought into the Rothschild's mythology.

    Is piketty an......anti SEMITE !!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. HA says:
    @Rapparee
    Sasquatch sightings probably fall into two basic categories- mistaken animals (usually black bears), and supernatural entities. The former are far more common, but a non-negligible minority of accounts suggest something vaguely related to fairies or demons. (The fairies are also a pretty good explanation of some of the more credible UFO and "alien" encounter reports- see Jacques Vallée's "Passport to Magonia). Lack of a real physical body would explain both the utter dearth of animal remains, and the small but significant number of apparently stable, sane witnesses who insist they saw it clearly and unmistakably.

    “non-negligible minority of accounts suggest something vaguely related to fairies or demons. ”

    Any forest is a cornucopia of pharmological disturbances — molds, fungi, etc., — whose effects on brain chemistry (as seen with psilycbyins, ergot poisoning, Colorado river toads, coca plants, poppies) are only beginning to be understood in isolation, much less so when countless numbers are cross-contaminating each other.

    Whether it’s fairies, or UFO’s, or sasquatch, people who live in or near forests will eventually have some freaky stories to tell, many involving bright lights or humanoid creatures of one form or another. But that prevalence still doesn’t mean any of those stories are true.

    You are free to believe in the existence of woodland fairies or demons on the basis of any such eyewitness accounts, but if that explanation is correct, then given that most everyone these days has a camera phone, we should soon see some photographic evidence come in. Until that happens, I submit that trippy experiences that often afflict those who live in forests — exacerbated at times by exhaustion, alcohol, or hunger — are a far more plausible explanation (in those rare cases where weather balloons or momentarily bipedal bears or some other natural phenomenon is not an even more likely explanation).

    Read More
    • Replies: @HA
    Sorry, that was 'pharmacological' and 'psilocybins'... I blame all those 'shrooms that have been sprouting up after the last few weeks of rain. I need to stay indoors.
    , @Rapparee
    If there's clear evidence that someone might not have been in a sound mental state, I assume he wasn't in a sound mental state. If there isn't, I don't presume to diagnose him without a look at his medical records. The standard of proof is legal, rather than scientific- either one believes the witness is trustworthy and credible, or one doesn't, and if not, one tries to impeach his testimony with facts relevant to the specific case. Many felony cases are thus decided without any hard physical evidence. As Chesterton said, "[A woodcutter] saw a man hang on a gallows and afterwards hang round it as a ghost. It is all very well to say we ought not to believe in the ghost on an ignorant man's evidence. But we should hang the man on the gallows on the same man's evidence." Most accounts of the supernatural are people jumping at their own shadows, but as Mr. Sailer quoted in another post recently, "Look at the number of them". There's seems to be no reason incorporeal beings ought to consistently photograph the same as corporeal beings, but as it happens, within just the past few weeks, I have personally seen a woman's photo of the head of a spectral Black Dog behind her, and pictures of the cuts inflicted by demonic assaults (taken by someone who didn't particularly seem the sort to self-mutilate for attention). Encounters with the weird are both more common and less significant than people think- you probably have friends who have seen strange things and largely put them out of mind.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. HA says:
    @HA
    "non-negligible minority of accounts suggest something vaguely related to fairies or demons. "

    Any forest is a cornucopia of pharmological disturbances -- molds, fungi, etc., -- whose effects on brain chemistry (as seen with psilycbyins, ergot poisoning, Colorado river toads, coca plants, poppies) are only beginning to be understood in isolation, much less so when countless numbers are cross-contaminating each other.

    Whether it's fairies, or UFO's, or sasquatch, people who live in or near forests will eventually have some freaky stories to tell, many involving bright lights or humanoid creatures of one form or another. But that prevalence still doesn't mean any of those stories are true.

    You are free to believe in the existence of woodland fairies or demons on the basis of any such eyewitness accounts, but if that explanation is correct, then given that most everyone these days has a camera phone, we should soon see some photographic evidence come in. Until that happens, I submit that trippy experiences that often afflict those who live in forests -- exacerbated at times by exhaustion, alcohol, or hunger -- are a far more plausible explanation (in those rare cases where weather balloons or momentarily bipedal bears or some other natural phenomenon is not an even more likely explanation).

    Sorry, that was ‘pharmacological’ and ‘psilocybins’… I blame all those ‘shrooms that have been sprouting up after the last few weeks of rain. I need to stay indoors.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. TheBoom says:
    @Hippopotamusdrome
    Bad joke time.

    TRIGGER WARNING ... DEAD BABY JOKE

    Q: What do you call a dead baby decapitated by a Nigerian immigrant in a German subway station in front of a crowd of horrified commuters?

    A: Nothing. Or else your house will be raided by police at 6:45 AM by the "Hate and Incitement" department of Hamburg's public prosecution office.

    Germany: Migrant Decapitates Baby, Government Tries To Cover It Up

    On second thought, that's not really funny at all. PC ruins everything.

    Article excerpt after more:



    Germany: Migrant Decapitates Baby, Government Tries To Cover It Up

    ...On April 12, 33-year-old Mourtala Madou stabbed his German ex-girlfriend, identified as Sandra P., and their one-year-old baby daughter, Miriam, at a Hamburg subway station. The woman's 3-year-old son was also a witness to the carnage.

    A gospel singer named Daniel J. who arrived at the subway moments after the attack and filmed the bloody scene on his phone witnessed that the baby had been almost or completely decapitated.

    "Oh my God. It's unbelievable. Oh Jesus, oh Jesus, oh Jesus. They cut off the head of the baby. Oh my God. Oh Jesus," he is heard saying in the clip.
    ...
    A blogger named Heinrich Kordewiner who found the video on Daniel J.'s Facebook page uploaded the video to YouTube, which then made him a target for authorities.

    "A few days later, a team of state prosecutors and officers of the cybercrime unit of the Hamburg police arrived at Kordewiner's apartment with a search warrant, and confiscated his computer, mobile phone and other electronics, allegedly to find "evidence" of the "crime". He was -- and still is -- accused of: uploading the video," reports the Gatestone Institute.

    Kordewiner and his flatmate told Gatestone about the raid, which took place at 6.45 a.m. They recounted that when they first refused to open the door, police forced it open -- and even searched the flatmate's room, although it was apparently not covered by the search warrant.

    "The police officer said that he could also search for SD (secure digital) cards," the flatmate told Gatestone. "While he fumbled through the books on my shelf, he suggested that he could turn my whole apartment upside down. He told me to relax."

    Kordewiner was accused of having "invaded the private sphere" of the murder victim, an obscure and barely used law that has been criticized for jeopardizing freedom of the press. Daniel J.'s home was also raided by authorities.

    Ulf Bornemann, head of the "Hate and Incitement" department of Hamburg's public prosecution office and also part of the team that raided Kordewiner's apartment, defended the law for having helped tackle, "hate crime in social networks."
    ...
    The video has now been deleted from all German websites and YouTube channels.
    ...
    Hamburg's ministry of justice concluded its investigation by declaring, "the double murder is a crime of passion that must not be of any interest to the public."

     

    When noticing becomes illegal

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. gcochran says:
    @Anonym
    Does Piketty actually give any evidence for his theory?

    Your method of profiling ultra-wealthy individuals and what they like to buy has merit. Even reclusive billionaires would tend to have some tells one would think. How to identify them? You'd start with those who have decloaked and look at what they did.

    A brute force approach would be to look at the major categories of wealth, and attempt to see who owned most of each. For example, shares and private companies, real estate, precious metals, mineral rights. There is going to be a lot of state ownership I would think. And also, who owns all the debt? National debts are huge, who owns them? Ditto public and corporate debts.

    Kind of on topic and kind of not, after getting into a bit of a JFK kick (not the first time) since reading Ron's articles, I have also been absorbing what Fletcher Prouty had to say (the real life Man X of the JFK movie). With all of that money they made from wars, one would think they might rank a little higher in the list of largest companies in the world, although they are still pretty big.

    One thing caught my eye. I don't know how much is true or not, but suspect that a reasonable amount of it is due to references and being positioned to know. In any case, Prouty claims:
    1. That in 1945, all of the US materiel for the invasion of Japan was shipped to Viet Nam (to Ho Chi Minh) and Korea (Syngman Rhee). I mention this because of the timelines. The plans were in motion before the end of WWII already for war and war profiteering, though the wars to consume more war materiel and generate more war profits wouldn't eventuate for years later.

    http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/prouty_arms.htm

    2. That 1.1M North Vietnamese were shipped south at the behest of the CIA to create the conditions for war. Emphasis mine:

    This formula endeared Ed to Allen Dulles. In 1954 Dulles established the Saigon Military Mission in Vietnam...counter to Eisenhower's orders. He had the French accept Lansdale as its chief. This mission was not in Saigon. It was not military, and its job was subversion in Vietnam. Its biggest job was that it got more than 1,100,000 northern Vietnamese to move south. 660,000 by U.S.Navy ships and the rest by CIA airline planes. These 1,100,000 north Vietnamese became the "subversive" element in South Vietnam and the principal cause of the warmaking. Lansdale and his cronies (Bohanon, Arundel, Phillips, Hand, Conein and many others) did all that using the same check book. I was with them many times during 1954. All Malthuseanism.
     
    https://www.prouty.org/letter.html

    In the age of thermonuclear weapons, wars such as WWII between the great powers cannot happen, and Prouty makes this point himself in video. So, wars need to take place at most, between nuclear and non-nuclear countries. Or... within any country, nuclear or otherwise.

    In any case, massive movements of people, encouraged by the Deep State, has in the past been apparently used to generate the conditions for war, and hence, war profits. Does this, uh, kind of resemble anything we see around us today? I just thought this was interesting. I think there is a lot more to it than that obviously, e.g. BLS and the Every Single Time of the NYT and others. But something to consider.

    Those “North Vietnamese shipped South” are called Catholics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    Largely true.

    Those facts do make me wonder about the NGOs and assistance with migrants in the Med. Where is the money coming from, and why?

    I wonder which public listed companies make the best arms to be used in ethnic-based civil wars. What sort of weapons would prove the most useful?
    , @Anon
    The story at the time was that the ho chi
    min’s communists took over N Vietnam and persecuted the Catholics who fled to S Vietnam.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Jimi says:

    One way to test it is to look for who owns things that rich guys like to buy, such as yachts, sports enterprises, movies, waterfront property, and personal golf courses.

    That doesn’t sound like old money at all. How about looking for Manhattan coops that don’t allow financing, degrees from expensive, prestige schools like Colgate, Colby and Middlebury, and horse ranches in Northern Virginia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Sounds dull. Do you have to be Forbes 400 rich to send your kid to Colby or Colgate?

    Remember, that's Piketty's assertion: not that there are lots of people with nice trust funds but that there are lots of Secret Old Money Billionaires (Billionaires with a B), enough to make the published magazine lists of billionaires be radically misleading.

    It could be that Piketty is confused and off by one or two orders of magnitude. But he is, after all, a quantitative economist, so he ought to be good with his decimal points.

    Or it could be that Piketty is right.

    Either alternative seems pretty interesting.

    , @Simple Psuedonym
    Add those up you might get a few hundred million if your lucky. No one vaguely interested in that stuff.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. I’m skeptical of this hidden money theory. Piketty seems to want it both ways: he says there are these big fortunes that are simultaneously hidden yet influential. If the Rothschilds have $50 billion worth of gold in a secret vault somewhere, so what? It might as well still be in the ground. If they do something important with it, then it won’t be hidden any more. By its very nature money isn’t worth anything unless someone who matters knows you have it.

    OT, I wonder if Seth Raynor the golf course designer was the father of Harold Raynor the Apollo moon project executive. They were both from Long Island, both engineers, and the timing works. Tried a little Googling but turned up nothing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sabril
    Yes, also sooner or later, a member of this secretly wealthy family is going to spend money ostentatiously or othwerwise advertise his wealth. A certain percentage of people can't keep a secret.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Anonym says:
    @gcochran
    Those "North Vietnamese shipped South" are called Catholics.

    Largely true.

    Those facts do make me wonder about the NGOs and assistance with migrants in the Med. Where is the money coming from, and why?

    I wonder which public listed companies make the best arms to be used in ethnic-based civil wars. What sort of weapons would prove the most useful?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. I wonder if Larry Ellison has EVER given one cent to the now Black South Shore High School in Chicago that he went too?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Why should anyone give money to a public school of any kind, let alone a black one?

    Better he endow some inexpensive maybe $5,00o a year tuition private high schools.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:

    middle aged vet said: Did Cecil Rhodes actually buy a whole country? That would be fun … that is what I would do if I were as rich as him, although one likes to think that the country would be named after one for a lot longer than was the case in Rhodesia ….

    Do billionaires hire anonymous bridge players to propel them to the top of the bridge world? yes and no: but mostly no, the idea of anonymous bridge players making more coin than they otherwise would, by partnering with bridge-crazy billionaires, than the famous ones who simply play in normal tournaments, has been refuted, I think

    Can a billionaire buy a Vermeer, a good one, not a sketchy one that might just be the “school of Vermeer”: no, despite what you may have seen in a recent movie about a billionaire

    how accurate is CDAN when writing about billionaires, as opposed to when writing about millionaires?:
    much less accurate

    the person who has had the most fun playing golf on premium courses over the last 10 years or so is the centimillionaire John Smoltz, he can play on any course he wants, he is not a billionaire:
    but he is far from being the person who has had the most fun spending his or her money in the last ten years or so:

    reread the chapters in the Book of Kings where not only Saul, the richest little fellow of his day, but also David, who was even richer, and Solomon, who was even richer, mess up.

    People like to criticize Saul but David and Solomon messed up because of women who probably did not even love them all that much anyway (as the country song says, “you can have her I don’t want her she don’t love me anyway”a. – and she was right not to, in those cases) , Saul messed up out of martial and kingly pride: the Bible is full of details like this.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  33. AndrewR says:
    @Barnard
    Right, wasn't there speculation about 20 years ago that the Kennedy fortune was getting so diminished by the heirs that they needed most of the next generation to produce income outside of what they would inherit.

    What Kennedy fortune? They’ve never been the Vanderbilts or Rockefellers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Unladen Swallow
    The Vanderbilts had lost most of their money by the mid-20th century ( something like 95 percent from their late 19th century peak ) Gloria built it up significantly again later.
    , @Flip
    Fortune Magazine put Joseph Kennedy in the top 16 richest people in America in 1957.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_richest_Americans_in_history#Fortune's_Wealthiest_Americans_(1957)
    , @Mr. Anon

    What Kennedy fortune? They’ve never been the Vanderbilts or Rockefellers.
     
    When JFK was elected President in 1960, Joe Kennedy was reckoned to be the 11th richest man in America.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. The old “self-made millionaire” lie.

    Know why there are “statistically” so many “self-made millionaires”?

    Because a million is peanuts.

    Ancient, unbelievably clueless superannuated bootstrap nonsense.

    Look up “anomie” IQ geniuses.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  35. The “self-made” lie is propaganda with a purpose.
    People push the “self-made” lie either because
    A. They are stupid and poor, or
    B. They don’t want you to know where and how they got their (or more likely, their employers got their) money.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    I've read a lot of business biographies and autobiographies, and don't remember a single one of them claiming to be "self-made". They were profuse in their thanks to those who helped them on the way up.

    John Fogerty, whose Fortunate Son I'm reading now, is the closest to an exception that I can find. But he's just dismissing his bandmates and others in his old circle, because he wrote the songs, and Saul Zaentz got all the money. He seems to be quite pleasant about everyone else in the business.
    , @Anonym
    There are plenty of self made millionaires and upward around. The Millionaire Next Door is a good book to read on the subject.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. Money disappears fast. I have some distant cousins whose grandfather was chairman of a large corporation that everyone has heard of. They are utterly middle class people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ali Choudhury
    Not that surprising. Executive salaries a couple of generations back, around the Depression era and its aftermath were much more modest than they are today.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. You might want to look at the membership of the Myopia Hunt Club in Massachusetts. Polo, fox hunting, and golf. I’ll bet 5he members are well-to-do but not really rich.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Myopia Hunt used to host US Opens regularly about 110 years ago.

    Best known recent member was John Updike.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @Jimi

    One way to test it is to look for who owns things that rich guys like to buy, such as yachts, sports enterprises, movies, waterfront property, and personal golf courses.
     
    That doesn't sound like old money at all. How about looking for Manhattan coops that don't allow financing, degrees from expensive, prestige schools like Colgate, Colby and Middlebury, and horse ranches in Northern Virginia.

    Sounds dull. Do you have to be Forbes 400 rich to send your kid to Colby or Colgate?

    Remember, that’s Piketty’s assertion: not that there are lots of people with nice trust funds but that there are lots of Secret Old Money Billionaires (Billionaires with a B), enough to make the published magazine lists of billionaires be radically misleading.

    It could be that Piketty is confused and off by one or two orders of magnitude. But he is, after all, a quantitative economist, so he ought to be good with his decimal points.

    Or it could be that Piketty is right.

    Either alternative seems pretty interesting.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2

    It could be that Piketty is confused and off by one or two orders of magnitude.
     
    This.

    There's absolutely no evidence otherwise. It is merely where Piketty's theory ends up; which says a lot about his theory.

    That there is no evidence from divorce courts is particularly damning.
    , @Slayer
    We now moving to the theory that Piketty is a raving anti semite. Sees ghosts of teh Rothschilds everywhere in Paris and London, assumes they must control global commerce.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Rapparee says:
    @HA
    "non-negligible minority of accounts suggest something vaguely related to fairies or demons. "

    Any forest is a cornucopia of pharmological disturbances -- molds, fungi, etc., -- whose effects on brain chemistry (as seen with psilycbyins, ergot poisoning, Colorado river toads, coca plants, poppies) are only beginning to be understood in isolation, much less so when countless numbers are cross-contaminating each other.

    Whether it's fairies, or UFO's, or sasquatch, people who live in or near forests will eventually have some freaky stories to tell, many involving bright lights or humanoid creatures of one form or another. But that prevalence still doesn't mean any of those stories are true.

    You are free to believe in the existence of woodland fairies or demons on the basis of any such eyewitness accounts, but if that explanation is correct, then given that most everyone these days has a camera phone, we should soon see some photographic evidence come in. Until that happens, I submit that trippy experiences that often afflict those who live in forests -- exacerbated at times by exhaustion, alcohol, or hunger -- are a far more plausible explanation (in those rare cases where weather balloons or momentarily bipedal bears or some other natural phenomenon is not an even more likely explanation).

    If there’s clear evidence that someone might not have been in a sound mental state, I assume he wasn’t in a sound mental state. If there isn’t, I don’t presume to diagnose him without a look at his medical records. The standard of proof is legal, rather than scientific- either one believes the witness is trustworthy and credible, or one doesn’t, and if not, one tries to impeach his testimony with facts relevant to the specific case. Many felony cases are thus decided without any hard physical evidence. As Chesterton said, “[A woodcutter] saw a man hang on a gallows and afterwards hang round it as a ghost. It is all very well to say we ought not to believe in the ghost on an ignorant man’s evidence. But we should hang the man on the gallows on the same man’s evidence.” Most accounts of the supernatural are people jumping at their own shadows, but as Mr. Sailer quoted in another post recently, “Look at the number of them“. There’s seems to be no reason incorporeal beings ought to consistently photograph the same as corporeal beings, but as it happens, within just the past few weeks, I have personally seen a woman’s photo of the head of a spectral Black Dog behind her, and pictures of the cuts inflicted by demonic assaults (taken by someone who didn’t particularly seem the sort to self-mutilate for attention). Encounters with the weird are both more common and less significant than people think- you probably have friends who have seen strange things and largely put them out of mind.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sabril
    My response to Chesterton is that extraordinary claims require extaordinary evidence.

    If Mr. Smith is found dead from stab wounds and a couple disinterested and reliable witnesses say they saw Mr. Jones stab him and then run away, I tend to believe it.

    If those same witnesses say they saw a faerie do it and then ascend to the sky on a glowing horse, I am skeptical.
    , @HA
    >I have personally seen a woman’s photo of the head of a spectral Black Dog behind her, and pictures of the cuts inflicted by demonic assaults

    I'll grant that you might have seen some cuts, and also a woman's photo. As to any claims about who or what inflicted those cuts, and what exactly was in that photo, I'm guessing these claims say more about you than they say about those cuts and that photo.

    If you don't regard my position as being more plausible than yours, we'll probably have to leave it there.

    Then again, if at some point in the future you can show me the video of the cuts being made, and sensibly consider what else other than a "spectral Black Dog" might have produced the photo that you found so memorable, we can talk further. What I've found so far coming from people making claims like you makes me think that won't happen soon.

    >Encounters with the weird are both more common...

    The same goes for human gullibility, credulity, mendacity, error, and downright stupidity. The sheer amount of that is more than enough to cover the sheer number you speak of, at least at first glance. At least that's how I see it. You're free to see spectral Black Dogs, instead, if you choose, but I suggest you exhaust the natural explanations before moving beyond them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. @Foreign Expert
    You might want to look at the membership of the Myopia Hunt Club in Massachusetts. Polo, fox hunting, and golf. I’ll bet 5he members are well-to-do but not really rich.

    Myopia Hunt used to host US Opens regularly about 110 years ago.

    Best known recent member was John Updike.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. @Enochian
    A problem with this is that you have to guess what Secret Old Money wants to own. They might consider sports teams and 600 foot yachts to be for the nouveau rich, fit only for trailer trash that has risen above its place.

    A problem with this is that you have to guess what Secret Old Money wants to own. They might consider sports teams and 600 foot yachts to be for the nouveau rich, fit only for trailer trash that has risen above its place.

    Paul Fussell in Class pointed out that the old money far preferred Buicks to Cadillacs. They were just as good, but a lot less showy. They helped you disappear.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
    My old money (well, fairly - back to around 1850) grandfather had, in his time, both Buicks and Cadillacs - and at least one Lincoln.
    His much richer sister, who lived round the corner in the "North of Montana" part of Santa Monica where they both lived from around 1920 into the mid-Sixties, stuck to great boat-like Cadillacs (I once, aged about ten, watched her and her lady friends sail by grandly on their way, no doubt, to play bridge at the LA Country).

    My English (and titled) great-uncle, who lived on the Upper East Side for decades, was driven to and from Wall Street in a Rolls Royce by a liveried chauffeur with, sitting beside him, an equally liveried footman whose sole task was to hop out, once arrived at the destination, and open the door for his lordship. The title, by the way, dates to 1660, so the showing off (if it was that) was anything but nouveau.

    So Fussell (in what I do not deny to be an entertaining and perceptive book of lasting value) doesn't always get it right.

    , @Hibernian
    Neither Buick nor Cadillac is much to write home about anymore.
    , @Art Deco
    Paul Fussell in Class pointed out


    Based on what? Someone he knew in graduate school?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @obwandiyag
    The "self-made" lie is propaganda with a purpose.
    People push the "self-made" lie either because
    A. They are stupid and poor, or
    B. They don't want you to know where and how they got their (or more likely, their employers got their) money.

    I’ve read a lot of business biographies and autobiographies, and don’t remember a single one of them claiming to be “self-made”. They were profuse in their thanks to those who helped them on the way up.

    John Fogerty, whose Fortunate Son I’m reading now, is the closest to an exception that I can find. But he’s just dismissing his bandmates and others in his old circle, because he wrote the songs, and Saul Zaentz got all the money. He seems to be quite pleasant about everyone else in the business.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    As good a summation as exists:

    After a hiatus of several years from the music industry, Fogerty's solo career re-emerged with 1985's Centerfield, his first album for Warner Bros. Records, which had taken co-ownership of Asylum's contract with Fogerty. Centerfield went to the top of the charts and included a top-10 hit in "The Old Man Down the Road." The title track is frequently played on classic rock radio and at baseball games to this day. But the album led to legal problems for Fogerty.

    Two songs on the album, "Zanz Kant Danz" and "Mr. Greed," were believed to be attacks on Fogerty's former boss at Fantasy Records, Saul Zaentz. "Zanz Kant Danz" was about a pig that cannot dance, but would "steal your money." When Zaentz responded with a lawsuit, Fogerty issued a revised version: "Vanz Kant Danz" (changing the lead character's name to Vanz). Another lawsuit (Fantasy, Inc. v. Fogerty) claimed that "The Old Man Down The Road" shared the same chorus as "Run Through the Jungle", a song from Fogerty's days with CCR to which Fantasy Records still owned the publishing rights. Fogerty ultimately won his case when he proved that the two songs were distinct compositions. Fogerty then countersued for attorney fees (Fogerty v. Fantasy). After losing in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Fogerty won his case in the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled that a trial court has discretion in awarding fees to defendants or plaintiffs.

    On May 31, 1985, Fogerty filmed a one-hour music and interview special for Showtime called John Fogerty's All-Stars. The set list consisted of rhythm and blues tunes from the 1960s, as well as material from the Centerfield LP and the song "No Love in You" written by Michael Anderson, which Fogerty found on the Textones' debut album Midnight Mission and he later recorded with Textones band leader Carla Olson. John Fogerty's All-Stars was recorded in front of an audience of Warners Bros. Music employees and other invited guests at A&M Record on La Brea in Hollywood. The band included Albert Lee, Booker T. Jones, Duck Dunn, Steve Douglas, and Prairie Prince.

    The follow-up album to Centerfield was Eye of the Zombie in 1986, but it was significantly less successful than its predecessor. Fogerty toured behind the album, but he refused to play any CCR material. Eye of the Zombie took on a darker mood, talking about a troubled society, terrorism, and pop stars selling out. For over 20 years after the Eye of the Zombie tour ended in late 1986, Fogerty refused to play material from the album in concert. However, "Change in the Weather" was included in the set list for his 2009 tour, and it was even re-recorded for that year's solo release, The Blue Ridge Rangers Rides Again.

    Fogerty played CCR material again at a concert in Washington, DC, for Vietnam veterans that took place on July 4, 1987. The show was aired on HBO. Aside from a guest appearance at the Palomino and performance at the 1986 Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony, this was the first time Fogerty had performed any Creedence Clearwater Revival songs for a large audience since 1972. On May 27, 1989, he played a set of CCR material at Oakland Coliseum for the Concert Against AIDS. His backing band that night consisted of Jerry Garcia and Bob Weir on guitars, Randy Jackson on bass, and Steve Jordan on drums.

    In 1990, Tom Fogerty died of complications from AIDS at the age of 48, specifically from a tuberculosis infection, having contracted HIV from blood transfusions during surgery for a back ailment. John Fogerty has mentioned that the darkest moments in his life were when his brother took the record company's side in their royalties dispute, and the fact that when his brother died, the two of them were not speaking to each other.[15] In the eulogy he delivered at Tom's funeral, he said: "We wanted to grow up and be musicians. I guess we achieved half of that, becoming rock 'n roll stars. We didn't necessarily grow up."
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Fogerty

    A few months before his recent death, I got to attend a presentation by local (state of Kansas) entrepreneur 'Bud' Ross, who owned the Kustom Electronics Co. of Chanute, KS. Fogerty and CCR were far and away the most famous users of the famous tuck-and-roll metalflake upholstered Kustom amplifiers. On being asked about Fogerty, Ross just shook his head and mumbled some noncommittal stuff.

    Ross's approach to designing the Kustom circuits was simple: he got it all out of the RCA transistor manuals of the late sixties. They worked, were low cost to produce, and worked great for jazz, lounge and country players as well as bass and steel guitar. But Fogerty was the only bigtime rock and roll act that used them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Sabril says:
    @Faraday's Bobcat
    I'm skeptical of this hidden money theory. Piketty seems to want it both ways: he says there are these big fortunes that are simultaneously hidden yet influential. If the Rothschilds have $50 billion worth of gold in a secret vault somewhere, so what? It might as well still be in the ground. If they do something important with it, then it won't be hidden any more. By its very nature money isn't worth anything unless someone who matters knows you have it.

    OT, I wonder if Seth Raynor the golf course designer was the father of Harold Raynor the Apollo moon project executive. They were both from Long Island, both engineers, and the timing works. Tried a little Googling but turned up nothing.

    Yes, also sooner or later, a member of this secretly wealthy family is going to spend money ostentatiously or othwerwise advertise his wealth. A certain percentage of people can’t keep a secret.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Second generation heirs who couldn't stay out of the newspapers include William Randolph Hearst and Howard Hughes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. SnakeEyes says:

    Piketty’s theory is interesting but likely wrong. I always think of the Duke of Westminster as the classic old money billionaire. The Grosvenor family (or trusts of which the family members are beneficiaries) own most of the City of Westminster. But Forbes estimates their net worth at $9 billion so they do not qualify for Picketty’s theory. Personally, I think that estimate is low. I would rather own what the Grosvenors own that whatever it is that makes Larry Ellison worth $52 billion.

    Real estate, art and jewelry would be the types of assets that Picketty’s secret billionaires could own under the radar. But real estate is pretty noticeable and the other two don’t get you into the billions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    In May, the late 101 year old David Rockefeller's art collection went at auction for $833 million, which was supposedly a record.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/11/arts/design/it-didnt-hit-1-billion-but-rockefeller-sale-still-set-a-record.html

    , @Tyrion 2

    I would rather own what the Grosvenors own that whatever it is that makes Larry Ellison worth $52 billion
     
    Land is fixed. You cannot escape the predations of the administrative state. This has almost drowned the Grosvenors before, multiple times. I'd certainly prefer what Ellison's got.
    , @Simple Psuedonym
    You are making a logical mistake there. Ellison can liquidate 9 billion in Oracle stock by clicking a button. ( unwise for his remaining holdings ) He could then approach the grosvenors and offer them 20 billion for their land holdings. Large leveraged illiquid assets like real estate are worth far far less than amazon or google shares which are traded all day everyday in the billions. We know what they are worth. Grosvenor estate ? Just estimates until they sell some elements which they do periodically.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Sabril says:
    @Rapparee
    If there's clear evidence that someone might not have been in a sound mental state, I assume he wasn't in a sound mental state. If there isn't, I don't presume to diagnose him without a look at his medical records. The standard of proof is legal, rather than scientific- either one believes the witness is trustworthy and credible, or one doesn't, and if not, one tries to impeach his testimony with facts relevant to the specific case. Many felony cases are thus decided without any hard physical evidence. As Chesterton said, "[A woodcutter] saw a man hang on a gallows and afterwards hang round it as a ghost. It is all very well to say we ought not to believe in the ghost on an ignorant man's evidence. But we should hang the man on the gallows on the same man's evidence." Most accounts of the supernatural are people jumping at their own shadows, but as Mr. Sailer quoted in another post recently, "Look at the number of them". There's seems to be no reason incorporeal beings ought to consistently photograph the same as corporeal beings, but as it happens, within just the past few weeks, I have personally seen a woman's photo of the head of a spectral Black Dog behind her, and pictures of the cuts inflicted by demonic assaults (taken by someone who didn't particularly seem the sort to self-mutilate for attention). Encounters with the weird are both more common and less significant than people think- you probably have friends who have seen strange things and largely put them out of mind.

    My response to Chesterton is that extraordinary claims require extaordinary evidence.

    If Mr. Smith is found dead from stab wounds and a couple disinterested and reliable witnesses say they saw Mr. Jones stab him and then run away, I tend to believe it.

    If those same witnesses say they saw a faerie do it and then ascend to the sky on a glowing horse, I am skeptical.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Why do extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Anonym says:
    @obwandiyag
    The "self-made" lie is propaganda with a purpose.
    People push the "self-made" lie either because
    A. They are stupid and poor, or
    B. They don't want you to know where and how they got their (or more likely, their employers got their) money.

    There are plenty of self made millionaires and upward around. The Millionaire Next Door is a good book to read on the subject.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Enochian says:

    What do all men want, but only a few can have? Really nice real estate and sending their kids to elite schools have been mentioned. Are there are public lists anywhere of the surnames of students who attend ivy league schools? Maybe there are ways of getting that information, or a useful proxy for it, by searching the news sections of the colleges’ websites.
    The other thing I can think of is beautiful women. You could try combing through gossip columns, finding out who models and movie starlets are dating. Are they men with family names that haven’t been in the news for generations?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Models and starlets tend not to be averse to publicity.
    , @Anonym
    The other thing I can think of is beautiful women. You could try combing through gossip columns, finding out who models and movie starlets are dating. Are they men with family names that haven’t been in the news for generations?

    And someone else:
    Paul Fussell in Class pointed out that the old money far preferred Buicks to Cadillacs. They were just as good, but a lot less showy. They helped you disappear.

    Generally speaking a Buick will not attract a beautiful woman.
    , @Dave Pinsen
    My guess is that actresses and models are more likely to date actors or directors or photographers (in the case of models) than billionaires. The exception that immediately comes to mind, Miranda Kerr, who married Snap billionaire Evan Spiegel, might not prove that as a rule but it would seem to support that observation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. @Enochian
    What do all men want, but only a few can have? Really nice real estate and sending their kids to elite schools have been mentioned. Are there are public lists anywhere of the surnames of students who attend ivy league schools? Maybe there are ways of getting that information, or a useful proxy for it, by searching the news sections of the colleges' websites.
    The other thing I can think of is beautiful women. You could try combing through gossip columns, finding out who models and movie starlets are dating. Are they men with family names that haven't been in the news for generations?

    Models and starlets tend not to be averse to publicity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. @SnakeEyes
    Piketty's theory is interesting but likely wrong. I always think of the Duke of Westminster as the classic old money billionaire. The Grosvenor family (or trusts of which the family members are beneficiaries) own most of the City of Westminster. But Forbes estimates their net worth at $9 billion so they do not qualify for Picketty's theory. Personally, I think that estimate is low. I would rather own what the Grosvenors own that whatever it is that makes Larry Ellison worth $52 billion.

    Real estate, art and jewelry would be the types of assets that Picketty's secret billionaires could own under the radar. But real estate is pretty noticeable and the other two don't get you into the billions.

    In May, the late 101 year old David Rockefeller’s art collection went at auction for $833 million, which was supposedly a record.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/11/arts/design/it-didnt-hit-1-billion-but-rockefeller-sale-still-set-a-record.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. @Sabril
    Yes, also sooner or later, a member of this secretly wealthy family is going to spend money ostentatiously or othwerwise advertise his wealth. A certain percentage of people can't keep a secret.

    Second generation heirs who couldn’t stay out of the newspapers include William Randolph Hearst and Howard Hughes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @boomstick
    The Hearsts seem to have a much smaller than the original mansion in San Simeon. On the beach, but exclusively theirs? Their own isolated mansion area seems seems to be Wyntoon, in Siskiyou County.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyntoon

    I suspect the Hearsts have gone a bit downhill. Newspapers are a mess. But didn't they get ESPN?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. HA says:
    @Rapparee
    If there's clear evidence that someone might not have been in a sound mental state, I assume he wasn't in a sound mental state. If there isn't, I don't presume to diagnose him without a look at his medical records. The standard of proof is legal, rather than scientific- either one believes the witness is trustworthy and credible, or one doesn't, and if not, one tries to impeach his testimony with facts relevant to the specific case. Many felony cases are thus decided without any hard physical evidence. As Chesterton said, "[A woodcutter] saw a man hang on a gallows and afterwards hang round it as a ghost. It is all very well to say we ought not to believe in the ghost on an ignorant man's evidence. But we should hang the man on the gallows on the same man's evidence." Most accounts of the supernatural are people jumping at their own shadows, but as Mr. Sailer quoted in another post recently, "Look at the number of them". There's seems to be no reason incorporeal beings ought to consistently photograph the same as corporeal beings, but as it happens, within just the past few weeks, I have personally seen a woman's photo of the head of a spectral Black Dog behind her, and pictures of the cuts inflicted by demonic assaults (taken by someone who didn't particularly seem the sort to self-mutilate for attention). Encounters with the weird are both more common and less significant than people think- you probably have friends who have seen strange things and largely put them out of mind.

    >I have personally seen a woman’s photo of the head of a spectral Black Dog behind her, and pictures of the cuts inflicted by demonic assaults

    I’ll grant that you might have seen some cuts, and also a woman’s photo. As to any claims about who or what inflicted those cuts, and what exactly was in that photo, I’m guessing these claims say more about you than they say about those cuts and that photo.

    If you don’t regard my position as being more plausible than yours, we’ll probably have to leave it there.

    Then again, if at some point in the future you can show me the video of the cuts being made, and sensibly consider what else other than a “spectral Black Dog” might have produced the photo that you found so memorable, we can talk further. What I’ve found so far coming from people making claims like you makes me think that won’t happen soon.

    >Encounters with the weird are both more common…

    The same goes for human gullibility, credulity, mendacity, error, and downright stupidity. The sheer amount of that is more than enough to cover the sheer number you speak of, at least at first glance. At least that’s how I see it. You’re free to see spectral Black Dogs, instead, if you choose, but I suggest you exhaust the natural explanations before moving beyond them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rapparee

    If you don’t regard my position as being more plausible than yours, we’ll probably have to leave it there.
     
    Precisely my point. Belief in the impossibility or improbability of the supernatural is a philosophical, not a scientific position, debatable solely on that grounds. It is always possible to explain anything by multiplying entities- I can believe African-Americans do poorly in school because of a low average IQ and lax discipline, or I can posit the existence of invisible knapsacks and "implicit bias". Both theories explain the data equally well, but not with equal simplicity. Plutarch records that an evil spirit appeared to Brutus before the battle of Philippi. He also records that Brutus assassinated Caesar. Virgil records that the assassination was followed by remarkable portents and natural wonders. If I affirm the murder but doubt the signs and ghosts, it is because I have a pre-existing philosophical objection to the latter. Perhaps one ought to have such an objection, but for myself, I see no particular reason to doubt, in the main, the universal judgment of mankind: "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." A thousand other things might account for any uncanny oddities, and I can devise plausible naturalistic explanations as quickly and readily as anyone else. But most techniques that can be used to explain away eyewitness reports of the supernatural can be just as easily employed to explain away the very existence of the witness himself.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Wally says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    There's also some basic math to consider. The older the money, the more descendants it's likely split amongst. It's entirely possible to invest a big fortune so that your descendants are wealthy several generations in the future, but to be as wealthy as the wealthiest men of their time seems unlikely.

    Good take downs of Piketty:

    part 1
    The Piketty Fallacy

    http://www.hoover.org/print/publications/defining-ideas/article/177406

    part 2
    defining ideas, Piketty’s Rickety Economics

    http://www.hoover.org/publications/defining-ideas/article/178046

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew
    Neither of those links works.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Goatweed says:

    Has someone constructed a 1790 Forbes’ list for America, Britain….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    George Washington’s wife Martha was the 6th richest person and richest woman in America at the time of their marriage

    She inherited it all when parents and first husband died. There was a Philadelphia banker Girard 1800 1810 who was the richest man in America
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Anonym says:
    @Enochian
    What do all men want, but only a few can have? Really nice real estate and sending their kids to elite schools have been mentioned. Are there are public lists anywhere of the surnames of students who attend ivy league schools? Maybe there are ways of getting that information, or a useful proxy for it, by searching the news sections of the colleges' websites.
    The other thing I can think of is beautiful women. You could try combing through gossip columns, finding out who models and movie starlets are dating. Are they men with family names that haven't been in the news for generations?

    The other thing I can think of is beautiful women. You could try combing through gossip columns, finding out who models and movie starlets are dating. Are they men with family names that haven’t been in the news for generations?

    And someone else:
    Paul Fussell in Class pointed out that the old money far preferred Buicks to Cadillacs. They were just as good, but a lot less showy. They helped you disappear.

    Generally speaking a Buick will not attract a beautiful woman.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    This thread reminds me of a recent letter to the FT, where the letter writer essentially argues that focusing on old money lets new money off the hook.

    https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/1010790915189899264?s=21
    , @Anonymous
    No Cadillac is going to attract a respectable white woman. Cadillac hasn't been the Cadillac of cars since the 1960s, if then.

    The "Deuce and A Quarter" was the preferred car for the retired mill hunkies in my family. Usually they would keep a fairly vintage one up at their Michigan, Minnesota, or Wisconsin summer place, unless they were Mopar guys. You were either GM or Mopar, that was it. No Fords, no Ramblers, and damn sure nothing foreign. They bought a new Buick or Olds or a Chevy wagon, van or truck, for driving at home and they rusted to hell in three or four years in South Chicago when the mills were running.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. @Foreign Expert
    Money disappears fast. I have some distant cousins whose grandfather was chairman of a large corporation that everyone has heard of. They are utterly middle class people.

    Not that surprising. Executive salaries a couple of generations back, around the Depression era and its aftermath were much more modest than they are today.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Reg Cæsar
    I've read a lot of business biographies and autobiographies, and don't remember a single one of them claiming to be "self-made". They were profuse in their thanks to those who helped them on the way up.

    John Fogerty, whose Fortunate Son I'm reading now, is the closest to an exception that I can find. But he's just dismissing his bandmates and others in his old circle, because he wrote the songs, and Saul Zaentz got all the money. He seems to be quite pleasant about everyone else in the business.

    As good a summation as exists:

    After a hiatus of several years from the music industry, Fogerty’s solo career re-emerged with 1985′s Centerfield, his first album for Warner Bros. Records, which had taken co-ownership of Asylum’s contract with Fogerty. Centerfield went to the top of the charts and included a top-10 hit in “The Old Man Down the Road.” The title track is frequently played on classic rock radio and at baseball games to this day. But the album led to legal problems for Fogerty.

    Two songs on the album, “Zanz Kant Danz” and “Mr. Greed,” were believed to be attacks on Fogerty’s former boss at Fantasy Records, Saul Zaentz. “Zanz Kant Danz” was about a pig that cannot dance, but would “steal your money.” When Zaentz responded with a lawsuit, Fogerty issued a revised version: “Vanz Kant Danz” (changing the lead character’s name to Vanz). Another lawsuit (Fantasy, Inc. v. Fogerty) claimed that “The Old Man Down The Road” shared the same chorus as “Run Through the Jungle”, a song from Fogerty’s days with CCR to which Fantasy Records still owned the publishing rights. Fogerty ultimately won his case when he proved that the two songs were distinct compositions. Fogerty then countersued for attorney fees (Fogerty v. Fantasy). After losing in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Fogerty won his case in the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled that a trial court has discretion in awarding fees to defendants or plaintiffs.

    On May 31, 1985, Fogerty filmed a one-hour music and interview special for Showtime called John Fogerty’s All-Stars. The set list consisted of rhythm and blues tunes from the 1960s, as well as material from the Centerfield LP and the song “No Love in You” written by Michael Anderson, which Fogerty found on the Textones’ debut album Midnight Mission and he later recorded with Textones band leader Carla Olson. John Fogerty’s All-Stars was recorded in front of an audience of Warners Bros. Music employees and other invited guests at A&M Record on La Brea in Hollywood. The band included Albert Lee, Booker T. Jones, Duck Dunn, Steve Douglas, and Prairie Prince.

    The follow-up album to Centerfield was Eye of the Zombie in 1986, but it was significantly less successful than its predecessor. Fogerty toured behind the album, but he refused to play any CCR material. Eye of the Zombie took on a darker mood, talking about a troubled society, terrorism, and pop stars selling out. For over 20 years after the Eye of the Zombie tour ended in late 1986, Fogerty refused to play material from the album in concert. However, “Change in the Weather” was included in the set list for his 2009 tour, and it was even re-recorded for that year’s solo release, The Blue Ridge Rangers Rides Again.

    Fogerty played CCR material again at a concert in Washington, DC, for Vietnam veterans that took place on July 4, 1987. The show was aired on HBO. Aside from a guest appearance at the Palomino and performance at the 1986 Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony, this was the first time Fogerty had performed any Creedence Clearwater Revival songs for a large audience since 1972. On May 27, 1989, he played a set of CCR material at Oakland Coliseum for the Concert Against AIDS. His backing band that night consisted of Jerry Garcia and Bob Weir on guitars, Randy Jackson on bass, and Steve Jordan on drums.

    In 1990, Tom Fogerty died of complications from AIDS at the age of 48, specifically from a tuberculosis infection, having contracted HIV from blood transfusions during surgery for a back ailment. John Fogerty has mentioned that the darkest moments in his life were when his brother took the record company’s side in their royalties dispute, and the fact that when his brother died, the two of them were not speaking to each other.[15] In the eulogy he delivered at Tom’s funeral, he said: “We wanted to grow up and be musicians. I guess we achieved half of that, becoming rock ‘n roll stars. We didn’t necessarily grow up.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Fogerty

    A few months before his recent death, I got to attend a presentation by local (state of Kansas) entrepreneur ‘Bud’ Ross, who owned the Kustom Electronics Co. of Chanute, KS. Fogerty and CCR were far and away the most famous users of the famous tuck-and-roll metalflake upholstered Kustom amplifiers. On being asked about Fogerty, Ross just shook his head and mumbled some noncommittal stuff.

    Ross’s approach to designing the Kustom circuits was simple: he got it all out of the RCA transistor manuals of the late sixties. They worked, were low cost to produce, and worked great for jazz, lounge and country players as well as bass and steel guitar. But Fogerty was the only bigtime rock and roll act that used them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Rapparee says:
    @HA
    >I have personally seen a woman’s photo of the head of a spectral Black Dog behind her, and pictures of the cuts inflicted by demonic assaults

    I'll grant that you might have seen some cuts, and also a woman's photo. As to any claims about who or what inflicted those cuts, and what exactly was in that photo, I'm guessing these claims say more about you than they say about those cuts and that photo.

    If you don't regard my position as being more plausible than yours, we'll probably have to leave it there.

    Then again, if at some point in the future you can show me the video of the cuts being made, and sensibly consider what else other than a "spectral Black Dog" might have produced the photo that you found so memorable, we can talk further. What I've found so far coming from people making claims like you makes me think that won't happen soon.

    >Encounters with the weird are both more common...

    The same goes for human gullibility, credulity, mendacity, error, and downright stupidity. The sheer amount of that is more than enough to cover the sheer number you speak of, at least at first glance. At least that's how I see it. You're free to see spectral Black Dogs, instead, if you choose, but I suggest you exhaust the natural explanations before moving beyond them.

    If you don’t regard my position as being more plausible than yours, we’ll probably have to leave it there.

    Precisely my point. Belief in the impossibility or improbability of the supernatural is a philosophical, not a scientific position, debatable solely on that grounds. It is always possible to explain anything by multiplying entities- I can believe African-Americans do poorly in school because of a low average IQ and lax discipline, or I can posit the existence of invisible knapsacks and “implicit bias”. Both theories explain the data equally well, but not with equal simplicity. Plutarch records that an evil spirit appeared to Brutus before the battle of Philippi. He also records that Brutus assassinated Caesar. Virgil records that the assassination was followed by remarkable portents and natural wonders. If I affirm the murder but doubt the signs and ghosts, it is because I have a pre-existing philosophical objection to the latter. Perhaps one ought to have such an objection, but for myself, I see no particular reason to doubt, in the main, the universal judgment of mankind: “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” A thousand other things might account for any uncanny oddities, and I can devise plausible naturalistic explanations as quickly and readily as anyone else. But most techniques that can be used to explain away eyewitness reports of the supernatural can be just as easily employed to explain away the very existence of the witness himself.

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato
    "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”

    But garden-variety errors in the cognitive system of 3.1 lb of nastily assembled wetware trying to make sense of the world (and being entrained by people around) are more likely.

    I like Jacques Vallée but he's going overboard on the "Close encounters of the 4th kind" stuff.
    , @HA
    >But most techniques that can be used to explain away eyewitness reports of the supernatural can be just as easily employed to explain away the very existence of the witness himself.

    No, according to you, there is, at least in one instance, photographic evidence worth mentioning. Showing a spectral Black Dog, no less. The fact that you chose to simply TELL me you saw this photo instead of providing a link and thereby SHOWING me, speaks more than you apparently realize, at least in this day and age, and this discrepancy will only become more aggravating as phones and other recording devices become even more prevalent.

    While I don't know for sure, I'm guessing the woman in question never bothered to scan her photo, perhaps realized that the Rorschach blob she was sure was a Black Dog could just as easily be a Black Chipmunk or Black Barney-the-Dinosaur, which wouldn't have had quite the same effect. You and the other people she showed it to didn't choose to snap a photo of it either with your phone. At least that's how it appears to me, given what you've stated, and I'm certainly allowed to factor all that in. Likewis,e fairy/demon researchers like Conan Doyle didn't know about LSD or MK Ultra or ergot poisoning, and they had no access to phone-camera technology. If it were otherwise, their conclusions and standards of proof might have been different. Maybe some other set of tools or discoveries will swing the pendelum back in the other direction some day, but that's how it's supposed to work.

    To the extent that fairies and demons exist in some metaphysical realm, I don't have much to say about that. But when they purportedly pierce that realm to activate optic or auditory nerves, and leave photographic evidence, or barf up pea soup for that matter, then I take more of an interest, but I'm still going to notice what doesn't get said or recorded.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Ellison also owns 97 percent of the 6th largest Hawaiian island, about 140 square miles in area. I think he also owned a MiG-29 at one time, Bond villain indeed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Thanks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. In Europe old money tends to stick to land and real-estate. It‘s all about preserving capital. My impression is that certain small countries – Austria and Sweden for example- are run by old money, and the rules are skewed against new money. That‘s why socialism works in those countries, it’s a way of buying off the masses.

    Sometimes the old money hides in very plain sight – the Liechtenstein family is not hard to find.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  60. @Unladen Swallow
    Ellison also owns 97 percent of the 6th largest Hawaiian island, about 140 square miles in area. I think he also owned a MiG-29 at one time, Bond villain indeed.

    Thanks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Anonym
    The other thing I can think of is beautiful women. You could try combing through gossip columns, finding out who models and movie starlets are dating. Are they men with family names that haven’t been in the news for generations?

    And someone else:
    Paul Fussell in Class pointed out that the old money far preferred Buicks to Cadillacs. They were just as good, but a lot less showy. They helped you disappear.

    Generally speaking a Buick will not attract a beautiful woman.

    This thread reminds me of a recent letter to the FT, where the letter writer essentially argues that focusing on old money lets new money off the hook.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. @AndrewR
    What Kennedy fortune? They've never been the Vanderbilts or Rockefellers.

    The Vanderbilts had lost most of their money by the mid-20th century ( something like 95 percent from their late 19th century peak ) Gloria built it up significantly again later.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Barnard
    Yet Anderson Cooper claims he isn't getting some huge inheritance from her. I wonder if that is true.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonym
    The other thing I can think of is beautiful women. You could try combing through gossip columns, finding out who models and movie starlets are dating. Are they men with family names that haven’t been in the news for generations?

    And someone else:
    Paul Fussell in Class pointed out that the old money far preferred Buicks to Cadillacs. They were just as good, but a lot less showy. They helped you disappear.

    Generally speaking a Buick will not attract a beautiful woman.

    No Cadillac is going to attract a respectable white woman. Cadillac hasn’t been the Cadillac of cars since the 1960s, if then.

    The “Deuce and A Quarter” was the preferred car for the retired mill hunkies in my family. Usually they would keep a fairly vintage one up at their Michigan, Minnesota, or Wisconsin summer place, unless they were Mopar guys. You were either GM or Mopar, that was it. No Fords, no Ramblers, and damn sure nothing foreign. They bought a new Buick or Olds or a Chevy wagon, van or truck, for driving at home and they rusted to hell in three or four years in South Chicago when the mills were running.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    I was referring to the Buick not the Cadillac.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Not Raul says:

    This Rolling Hills mansion looks modest from above; but is massive underground:

    http://www.latimes.com/business/realestate/la-fi-peninsula-mega-mansion-20130624-story.html

    In money laundering nexus London, the rich are expanding their homes underground:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/may/07/pool-basement-wealth-super-rich-digging-down-london

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "an underground tennis court"

    He needs an underground zeppelin hangar.

    , @Cowboy Shaw
    The battle between Jimmy Page and Robbie Williams is a story of the ages:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5439559/Jimmy-Page-reignites-feud-neighbour-Robbie-WIlliams.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @Not Raul
    This Rolling Hills mansion looks modest from above; but is massive underground:

    http://www.latimes.com/business/realestate/la-fi-peninsula-mega-mansion-20130624-story.html

    In money laundering nexus London, the rich are expanding their homes underground:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/may/07/pool-basement-wealth-super-rich-digging-down-london

    “an underground tennis court”

    He needs an underground zeppelin hangar.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Benjamin I. Espen
    If you find an underground zeppelin hangar you will have confirmed that we live in an alternate timeline, which is the only place airships exist.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Enochian
    What do all men want, but only a few can have? Really nice real estate and sending their kids to elite schools have been mentioned. Are there are public lists anywhere of the surnames of students who attend ivy league schools? Maybe there are ways of getting that information, or a useful proxy for it, by searching the news sections of the colleges' websites.
    The other thing I can think of is beautiful women. You could try combing through gossip columns, finding out who models and movie starlets are dating. Are they men with family names that haven't been in the news for generations?

    My guess is that actresses and models are more likely to date actors or directors or photographers (in the case of models) than billionaires. The exception that immediately comes to mind, Miranda Kerr, who married Snap billionaire Evan Spiegel, might not prove that as a rule but it would seem to support that observation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cowboy Shaw
    Speigel was unusual for three reasons: a) he is unusually presentable for a techie b) his fortune is easily understood by models and is fashionable c) he is based in LA not Silicon Valley.
    , @FPD72
    Before Spiegel she was with a rock musician and was then eventually married to an actor, Orlando Bloom.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Anonymous[219] • Disclaimer says:

    The USA – like most of the developed world – has a government sector which accounts for at least 50% of GDP.
    Who do you think pays for army, airforce, navy, police, politicians, teachers etc etc etc salaries?

    Now, this of course means that the state – politicians remember are paid through the state – has an absolutely enormous vested interest in gathering as much tax money as possible.
    Doubtless the state pays for and maintains highly competent personnel to gather tax – and target individuals with money – supported by the most sophisticated and exhaustive record keeping, surveillance and monitoring. Basically, there’s no where to hide.
    Also tax authorities have rather draconian powers of investigation and seizure.

    The upshot is that tax authorities know, absolutely, who’s got the money and where it is stashed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew

    The USA – like most of the developed world – has a government sector which accounts for at least 50% of GDP.
     
    Not that much. More like 36%.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending
    , @Anonymous
    Any small businessman who you speak to, be it butcher, barber, baker or candlestick maker will sooner or later regale you with tales of his biggest bugbear - namely his dealings with the tax authorities, the stringent powers of the tax authorities, and the sheer burden of taxes.

    If the state puts so much effort and resources in garnering money from small time operators, do you really think that they will give the real money people an easy ride?
    , @Art Deco
    The USA – like most of the developed world – has a government sector which accounts for at least 50% of GDP.

    Public expenditure may (in France and other countries at the limit). That's largely socialized consumption and transfer payments. In the U.S., the ratio of public expenditure to domestic product is 0.32, but only 14% of value-added is attributable to the public sector.
    , @Anon
    There’s plenty of places to hide. For instance, you don’t have to pay tax on real estate you sell.

    The IRS doesn’t track real estate sales so it doesn’t know you’ve sold real estate unles you tell it by paying tax on the sale

    You get to keep it all instead of giving it to the Anti White Minions of Satan.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. El Dato says:
    @Hippopotamusdrome
    Bad joke time.

    TRIGGER WARNING ... DEAD BABY JOKE

    Q: What do you call a dead baby decapitated by a Nigerian immigrant in a German subway station in front of a crowd of horrified commuters?

    A: Nothing. Or else your house will be raided by police at 6:45 AM by the "Hate and Incitement" department of Hamburg's public prosecution office.

    Germany: Migrant Decapitates Baby, Government Tries To Cover It Up

    On second thought, that's not really funny at all. PC ruins everything.

    Article excerpt after more:



    Germany: Migrant Decapitates Baby, Government Tries To Cover It Up

    ...On April 12, 33-year-old Mourtala Madou stabbed his German ex-girlfriend, identified as Sandra P., and their one-year-old baby daughter, Miriam, at a Hamburg subway station. The woman's 3-year-old son was also a witness to the carnage.

    A gospel singer named Daniel J. who arrived at the subway moments after the attack and filmed the bloody scene on his phone witnessed that the baby had been almost or completely decapitated.

    "Oh my God. It's unbelievable. Oh Jesus, oh Jesus, oh Jesus. They cut off the head of the baby. Oh my God. Oh Jesus," he is heard saying in the clip.
    ...
    A blogger named Heinrich Kordewiner who found the video on Daniel J.'s Facebook page uploaded the video to YouTube, which then made him a target for authorities.

    "A few days later, a team of state prosecutors and officers of the cybercrime unit of the Hamburg police arrived at Kordewiner's apartment with a search warrant, and confiscated his computer, mobile phone and other electronics, allegedly to find "evidence" of the "crime". He was -- and still is -- accused of: uploading the video," reports the Gatestone Institute.

    Kordewiner and his flatmate told Gatestone about the raid, which took place at 6.45 a.m. They recounted that when they first refused to open the door, police forced it open -- and even searched the flatmate's room, although it was apparently not covered by the search warrant.

    "The police officer said that he could also search for SD (secure digital) cards," the flatmate told Gatestone. "While he fumbled through the books on my shelf, he suggested that he could turn my whole apartment upside down. He told me to relax."

    Kordewiner was accused of having "invaded the private sphere" of the murder victim, an obscure and barely used law that has been criticized for jeopardizing freedom of the press. Daniel J.'s home was also raided by authorities.

    Ulf Bornemann, head of the "Hate and Incitement" department of Hamburg's public prosecution office and also part of the team that raided Kordewiner's apartment, defended the law for having helped tackle, "hate crime in social networks."
    ...
    The video has now been deleted from all German websites and YouTube channels.
    ...
    Hamburg's ministry of justice concluded its investigation by declaring, "the double murder is a crime of passion that must not be of any interest to the public."

     

    Definitely not old-school Highlander lore.

    Wait, did the “Madou” decapitate his own baby?

    Meanwhile, Nantes is still on fire because “Mamadou” (real name Aboubakar Fofana) got hit in useful places of his body by somewhat nervous blue forces:

    Mr Fofana almost ran over two children and hit an officer as he reversed his car away from a police control point “at very high speed,” prompting another officer to open fire. He was hit in the neck and declared dead on arrival at hospital.

    He was the subject of an arrest warrant issued in June last year for organised robbery, possession of stolen goods and criminal conspiracy.

    So far about thirty cars and several buildings, among which a town hall subsidiary and two supermarkets have been torched.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Note the almost total news blackout with which the MSM is treating these events.

    This is most definitely *NOT* unintentional.
    , @Anon
    Yes he did decapitate his own baby after he lost a custody battle for her.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. LondonBob says:

    A friend of my brother works in his family firm that provides fiduciary services for the global super rich, mostly old money types, yes there are plenty of very rich people with their money hidden in trusts etc. If you wish to keep a low profile it is not very difficult. I wouldn’t exaggerate though.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    Do you mean a "family office", which is an office that a wealthy family will keep to manage their money and probably do some concierge type stuff?
    , @David
    Here in little Vermont, my neighbor owns 2600 acres with a very fine house and maybe 25 acres of nicely fenced horse pasture -- an impressive feature in this land like Ithaca.

    He's supposedly a mergers and acquisitions lawyer in Manhattan. I've met him, know his name, but if I google it, I hit absolutely nothing. No matter how many pages I tab through.

    I'm nobody, but my name appears here and there on the net due to communications with our select board, charitable gifts, etc. I wonder how he does it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Anonymous[400] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    There's also some basic math to consider. The older the money, the more descendants it's likely split amongst. It's entirely possible to invest a big fortune so that your descendants are wealthy several generations in the future, but to be as wealthy as the wealthiest men of their time seems unlikely.

    What about primogeniture?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    That might explain Grosvenor.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Anonymous[400] • Disclaimer says:
    @Sabril
    My response to Chesterton is that extraordinary claims require extaordinary evidence.

    If Mr. Smith is found dead from stab wounds and a couple disinterested and reliable witnesses say they saw Mr. Jones stab him and then run away, I tend to believe it.

    If those same witnesses say they saw a faerie do it and then ascend to the sky on a glowing horse, I am skeptical.

    Why do extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    Why do extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?
     
    Bayesian reasoning. If a claim has low prior probability (i.e. is extraordinary) it requires exceptionally strong (i.e. extraordinary) evidence to make it likely.

    More at https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Extraordinary_claims_require_extraordinary_evidence

    This is a good summary:

    Either way, the phrase is central to the scientific method, and a key issue for critical thinking, rational thought and skepticism everywhere.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. El Dato says:
    @Rapparee

    If you don’t regard my position as being more plausible than yours, we’ll probably have to leave it there.
     
    Precisely my point. Belief in the impossibility or improbability of the supernatural is a philosophical, not a scientific position, debatable solely on that grounds. It is always possible to explain anything by multiplying entities- I can believe African-Americans do poorly in school because of a low average IQ and lax discipline, or I can posit the existence of invisible knapsacks and "implicit bias". Both theories explain the data equally well, but not with equal simplicity. Plutarch records that an evil spirit appeared to Brutus before the battle of Philippi. He also records that Brutus assassinated Caesar. Virgil records that the assassination was followed by remarkable portents and natural wonders. If I affirm the murder but doubt the signs and ghosts, it is because I have a pre-existing philosophical objection to the latter. Perhaps one ought to have such an objection, but for myself, I see no particular reason to doubt, in the main, the universal judgment of mankind: "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." A thousand other things might account for any uncanny oddities, and I can devise plausible naturalistic explanations as quickly and readily as anyone else. But most techniques that can be used to explain away eyewitness reports of the supernatural can be just as easily employed to explain away the very existence of the witness himself.

    “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”

    But garden-variety errors in the cognitive system of 3.1 lb of nastily assembled wetware trying to make sense of the world (and being entrained by people around) are more likely.

    I like Jacques Vallée but he’s going overboard on the “Close encounters of the 4th kind” stuff.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    What about primogeniture?

    That might explain Grosvenor.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. m___ says:
    @Almost Missouri
    Agree. Were I wealthy, yachts and golf courses would be way down my shopping list. What would be near the top?

    · Key politicians and public servants, especially near where I and my descendants live or want to live. Indeed, let the publicity-loving politicians buy and have all the flashy stuff in their own names so long as they do my bidding. They don't even need to do my bidding with the flashy stuff. They can keep that just for playing. What would be my bidding? Oh, nothing much. Just keep things moving along more or less in the direction I like, for whatever reason. Also, a bit of insurance: if an investigation or inquiry starts going in a way that displeases me, my pols will ensure that it is defunded and the snoops reassigned.

    · A foundation or two or a hundred. Nothing with my name on it. Who needs the hassle or notoriety when something goes wrong? Something like the TIDES Foundation: anonymity, opacity and maneuverability. If I see something that can be fixed to be more to my liking by lawyers, academics, journalists or "activists", then boom, the money will appear for them, from The Foundation. Why is The Foundation funding this? Didn't you know The Foundation has a long history of supporting progressive public policy? Why you want to ask awkward questions? Well if you don't really want the money, we don't need to make this grant... Oh, also sign this non-disclosure agreement before we can disburse the funds.

    · A share here and there in key media organizations. Enough to be able to kick in and out subjects of interest to me. I don't have to do this in my own name of course. That's what shell companies and charities are for. Imagine, that Bezos fellow bought the entire Washington Post in his own name. Obviously, he is fresh off the plane from Wall Street, poor fellow.

    · A bit of a security organization. Nothing big or flashy. No minions in silver suits patrolling empty volcanoes. Just some discreet private investigator types, an "ex-"deep stater or two, and someone with a bit of muscle and self discipline. You know, in case there is a kidnapping and we need to know whom to send the kidnapper's son's pinkie finger to. Of course, this "security" might have other uses too...

    · Maybe if I were feeling self indulgent, some obscure but heritable European titles or other. Nothing with a lot of distracting responsibilities, but just something that keeps my family on a good invite list or two. My very limited acquaintance with the upper crust hasn't convinced me they are much more interesting than anyone else, but they do have better real estate. And who knows, maybe my kids will take a shine to that kind of thing.

    Notably, none of these things leaves a large public footprint.

    Also notably, a lot of things in Ron Unz's American Pravda series seem a lot more plausible when looked at this way.

    What would be near the top?

    Much so, as the comment on war profiteering in Vietnam,

    If you cannot hide suppreme access to wealth, then you do not deserve it. The system is built on the normative of magic tricks for the elites, and control over the middle classes. Wealth is power, capital precedes cognitive capacity. There are two sets of rules, “we” and the “others”. Some individuals fall victim between ship and wall.

    How visible you want to be, is merely a question of testosteron. Invisible means no rewards of ego, and insulation of every day reality. Some, the new on the block ones, tend to crave it, by habit(Soros, Blair, Buffet selling his person out of habit). How “rich” you are defines the point of shutting up, and have other clowns do your bidding. The system simply requires it thus. Horse whispering only.

    The next generations? The question defeats the purpose, power mongering is not inheritable. How we treat the Earth, the planet is proof for that. Dead wood, as to the patriarch.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. I think another interesting aspect of this is that it demonstrates just how unworldly the left are who swallowed this. Their general understanding of how the world is put together is extremely poor, and they specialise in narrower and narrower academic fields, which makes them susceptible to grand narratives that are enticing but very very wrong.

    Most of them will have no idea how the top 100 or so entrepreneurs made their wealth, and why it is that Bezos and Zuckerberg have such vast fortunes based on multiplier valuations of single stocks. My personal experience is that academic lefties – and I’ve known many – are profoundly ignorant and uncurious people.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  76. @Dave Pinsen
    My guess is that actresses and models are more likely to date actors or directors or photographers (in the case of models) than billionaires. The exception that immediately comes to mind, Miranda Kerr, who married Snap billionaire Evan Spiegel, might not prove that as a rule but it would seem to support that observation.

    Speigel was unusual for three reasons: a) he is unusually presentable for a techie b) his fortune is easily understood by models and is fashionable c) he is based in LA not Silicon Valley.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Is Evan Spiegel any relation to the mail order catalog Spiegels? The movie director Spike Jonze (Her) is some kind of Spiegel.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. @Not Raul
    This Rolling Hills mansion looks modest from above; but is massive underground:

    http://www.latimes.com/business/realestate/la-fi-peninsula-mega-mansion-20130624-story.html

    In money laundering nexus London, the rich are expanding their homes underground:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/may/07/pool-basement-wealth-super-rich-digging-down-london

    The battle between Jimmy Page and Robbie Williams is a story of the ages:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5439559/Jimmy-Page-reignites-feud-neighbour-Robbie-WIlliams.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @Reg Cæsar

    A problem with this is that you have to guess what Secret Old Money wants to own. They might consider sports teams and 600 foot yachts to be for the nouveau rich, fit only for trailer trash that has risen above its place.

     

    Paul Fussell in Class pointed out that the old money far preferred Buicks to Cadillacs. They were just as good, but a lot less showy. They helped you disappear.

    My old money (well, fairly – back to around 1850) grandfather had, in his time, both Buicks and Cadillacs – and at least one Lincoln.
    His much richer sister, who lived round the corner in the “North of Montana” part of Santa Monica where they both lived from around 1920 into the mid-Sixties, stuck to great boat-like Cadillacs (I once, aged about ten, watched her and her lady friends sail by grandly on their way, no doubt, to play bridge at the LA Country).

    My English (and titled) great-uncle, who lived on the Upper East Side for decades, was driven to and from Wall Street in a Rolls Royce by a liveried chauffeur with, sitting beside him, an equally liveried footman whose sole task was to hop out, once arrived at the destination, and open the door for his lordship. The title, by the way, dates to 1660, so the showing off (if it was that) was anything but nouveau.

    So Fussell (in what I do not deny to be an entertaining and perceptive book of lasting value) doesn’t always get it right.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Candidates for old money are Rockefellers, Rothschilds, DuPonts, various royals, … Anybody interested could get to know what individuals or members of these families own: real estate, banks, art galleries, islands somewhere at the end of the world, companies, ..

    Basically, old money has gotten too diverse, inheritors too numerous & too lazy (or hedonistic): First generation makes it. 2nd generation maintains it, 3rd generation blows it.

    The most powerful & influential men actually did not own much, especially in past 200 years: Napoleon, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, .. in democratic societies Thatcher, de Gaulle,.. perhaps Putin, Orban & Jiang now. Power is associated with wealth in some twisted ways; just, these are two very different things. Plutocracy is not for real (nor has ever been).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hibernian
    The Communist dictators own a lot, they own the country and the people. Except in North Korea and Cuba, they're not allowed to pass it on to their kids.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @Steve Sailer
    Sounds dull. Do you have to be Forbes 400 rich to send your kid to Colby or Colgate?

    Remember, that's Piketty's assertion: not that there are lots of people with nice trust funds but that there are lots of Secret Old Money Billionaires (Billionaires with a B), enough to make the published magazine lists of billionaires be radically misleading.

    It could be that Piketty is confused and off by one or two orders of magnitude. But he is, after all, a quantitative economist, so he ought to be good with his decimal points.

    Or it could be that Piketty is right.

    Either alternative seems pretty interesting.

    It could be that Piketty is confused and off by one or two orders of magnitude.

    This.

    There’s absolutely no evidence otherwise. It is merely where Piketty’s theory ends up; which says a lot about his theory.

    That there is no evidence from divorce courts is particularly damning.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/toddganos/2014/02/05/how-the-wealthiest-families-make-and-lose-their-money/#51271d9b77d6

    http://mygame.typepad.com/my-blog/2016/12/-the-first-generation-makes-it-the-second-generation-spends-it-and-the-third-generation-blows-it.html

    http://time.com/money/3925308/rich-families-lose-wealth/

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/globe-wealth/eroding-family-fortunes-how-the-cycle-can-be-broken/article33757468/

    https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1508683.Blood_Relations

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_family

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_family
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @SnakeEyes
    Piketty's theory is interesting but likely wrong. I always think of the Duke of Westminster as the classic old money billionaire. The Grosvenor family (or trusts of which the family members are beneficiaries) own most of the City of Westminster. But Forbes estimates their net worth at $9 billion so they do not qualify for Picketty's theory. Personally, I think that estimate is low. I would rather own what the Grosvenors own that whatever it is that makes Larry Ellison worth $52 billion.

    Real estate, art and jewelry would be the types of assets that Picketty's secret billionaires could own under the radar. But real estate is pretty noticeable and the other two don't get you into the billions.

    I would rather own what the Grosvenors own that whatever it is that makes Larry Ellison worth $52 billion

    Land is fixed. You cannot escape the predations of the administrative state. This has almost drowned the Grosvenors before, multiple times. I’d certainly prefer what Ellison’s got.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Flip
    Right. The Junker class in Prussia found that out after the Soviets confiscated their estates after WWII.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @LondonBob
    A friend of my brother works in his family firm that provides fiduciary services for the global super rich, mostly old money types, yes there are plenty of very rich people with their money hidden in trusts etc. If you wish to keep a low profile it is not very difficult. I wouldn't exaggerate though.

    Do you mean a “family office”, which is an office that a wealthy family will keep to manage their money and probably do some concierge type stuff?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. @Cowboy Shaw
    Speigel was unusual for three reasons: a) he is unusually presentable for a techie b) his fortune is easily understood by models and is fashionable c) he is based in LA not Silicon Valley.

    Is Evan Spiegel any relation to the mail order catalog Spiegels? The movie director Spike Jonze (Her) is some kind of Spiegel.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Slayer
    No. Father a securities lawyer at a firm with ties to Buffet Munger. Probably a 2-3 mill a year salary guy. JD cant make the uber cash because they are not allowed to operate as a public company which conflicts with their clients interests.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. Flip says:
    @AndrewR
    What Kennedy fortune? They've never been the Vanderbilts or Rockefellers.

    Fortune Magazine put Joseph Kennedy in the top 16 richest people in America in 1957.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_richest_Americans_in_history#Fortune’s_Wealthiest_Americans_(1957)

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Did not know that. Wish there were a "Thank You" button...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. Flip says:
    @Tyrion 2

    I would rather own what the Grosvenors own that whatever it is that makes Larry Ellison worth $52 billion
     
    Land is fixed. You cannot escape the predations of the administrative state. This has almost drowned the Grosvenors before, multiple times. I'd certainly prefer what Ellison's got.

    Right. The Junker class in Prussia found that out after the Soviets confiscated their estates after WWII.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Hodag says:
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    "The only old member granted an honorific was Gen. Eisenhower, perhaps the point being that unlike that arriviste club Augusta National"

    Wait, wait. Augusta? An arriviste club? Ok, at what point does an alleged arriviste become Old Money? Would think that by now, Augusta National, based on its historical as well as legendary reputation, would qualify as Old Money. By deeds as well as by honor, certainly Augusta has earned the title.

    Carried to the conclusion, one could say that in 1910 NY, the Old Money (or traditional/first established) MLB franchise was the Giants, with the Yankees being the interloping arrivistes. Although as the Giants moved to SF, the Yankees have become the de facto Old Money franchise. Not too sure the Mets qualify as anything, least of all an arriviste franchise.

    The point being, over generations the definition of Old Money tends to change. We think now of Rockefeller, Carnegie, Frick, Ford, Vanderbilt, etc as Old Money, but lest we forget that in their heyday they were considered to be arrivistes, replacing the Old Money generations that went before them.

    Augusta is an arrivista club by it’s very nature. First, when it opened there was a nationwide campaign to find members – their invitational served as promotion. Second, it is a national club. The membership used to be locals (Coke executives, local builders etc) plus the people throughout the country who were golf nuts. Third, now they just hunt for CEOs. Rodger Godell from the NFL, Gates, Buffet, Condi Rice – all new money. Finally until very recently it was an all mens club, not the sort of place where old money could bring their kids to find spouses.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. AndrewR says:
    @Flip
    Fortune Magazine put Joseph Kennedy in the top 16 richest people in America in 1957.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_richest_Americans_in_history#Fortune's_Wealthiest_Americans_(1957)

    Did not know that. Wish there were a “Thank You” button…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. Anonym says:
    @Anonymous
    No Cadillac is going to attract a respectable white woman. Cadillac hasn't been the Cadillac of cars since the 1960s, if then.

    The "Deuce and A Quarter" was the preferred car for the retired mill hunkies in my family. Usually they would keep a fairly vintage one up at their Michigan, Minnesota, or Wisconsin summer place, unless they were Mopar guys. You were either GM or Mopar, that was it. No Fords, no Ramblers, and damn sure nothing foreign. They bought a new Buick or Olds or a Chevy wagon, van or truck, for driving at home and they rusted to hell in three or four years in South Chicago when the mills were running.

    I was referring to the Buick not the Cadillac.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. FPD72 says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    My guess is that actresses and models are more likely to date actors or directors or photographers (in the case of models) than billionaires. The exception that immediately comes to mind, Miranda Kerr, who married Snap billionaire Evan Spiegel, might not prove that as a rule but it would seem to support that observation.

    Before Spiegel she was with a rock musician and was then eventually married to an actor, Orlando Bloom.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. Perhaps what the truly, truly rich like to buy is countries.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  91. Hibernian says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    A problem with this is that you have to guess what Secret Old Money wants to own. They might consider sports teams and 600 foot yachts to be for the nouveau rich, fit only for trailer trash that has risen above its place.

     

    Paul Fussell in Class pointed out that the old money far preferred Buicks to Cadillacs. They were just as good, but a lot less showy. They helped you disappear.

    Neither Buick nor Cadillac is much to write home about anymore.

    Read More
    • Replies: @IBC
    I think the Lexus brand now occupies a pretty comparable market position to what Buick used to enjoy many decades ago. And the Germany luxury brands and large luxury SUVs in general have mostly taken over Cadillac's old position; which remember, before the '70s; was a lot more socially prestigious than in subsequent decades (except for the Escalade which is still very successful within its market).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. Hibernian says:
    @Bardon Kaldian
    Candidates for old money are Rockefellers, Rothschilds, DuPonts, various royals, ... Anybody interested could get to know what individuals or members of these families own: real estate, banks, art galleries, islands somewhere at the end of the world, companies, ..

    Basically, old money has gotten too diverse, inheritors too numerous & too lazy (or hedonistic): First generation makes it. 2nd generation maintains it, 3rd generation blows it.

    The most powerful & influential men actually did not own much, especially in past 200 years: Napoleon, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, .. in democratic societies Thatcher, de Gaulle,.. perhaps Putin, Orban & Jiang now. Power is associated with wealth in some twisted ways; just, these are two very different things. Plutocracy is not for real (nor has ever been).

    The Communist dictators own a lot, they own the country and the people. Except in North Korea and Cuba, they’re not allowed to pass it on to their kids.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    They had power, but not property.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. David says:
    @LondonBob
    A friend of my brother works in his family firm that provides fiduciary services for the global super rich, mostly old money types, yes there are plenty of very rich people with their money hidden in trusts etc. If you wish to keep a low profile it is not very difficult. I wouldn't exaggerate though.

    Here in little Vermont, my neighbor owns 2600 acres with a very fine house and maybe 25 acres of nicely fenced horse pasture — an impressive feature in this land like Ithaca.

    He’s supposedly a mergers and acquisitions lawyer in Manhattan. I’ve met him, know his name, but if I google it, I hit absolutely nothing. No matter how many pages I tab through.

    I’m nobody, but my name appears here and there on the net due to communications with our select board, charitable gifts, etc. I wonder how he does it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    There's a small industry involved in getting you to disappear from the internet. It involves creating fake stories and activities about a person with the same name, but different profile and interests. We looked into it for a relative, but it was too cumbersome for our computer guru and we didn't feel like paying for a professional.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @George
    The GWOT is said to have cost trillions. Where are the Global War on Terror Billionaires? For example one of the Afghanistan Generals is living large in NYC, but if he lived too large it would raise suspicions wouldn't it? But of course, Occam's razor would suggest he is not living larger because his pay at The Carlyle Group is not that good. Another possibility is that the GWOT trillions are spread all over in smaller piles hidden in duffle bags and ammo boxes.

    Tony Blair made out rather publicly from the GWOT. Blair's buddy Jack Staw is more discrete. Former PM Gordon 'Golden' Brown who sold 400 tons of gold just before 9 11 is also living discretely. Occam's Razor would suggest Blair does great speeches while Straw and Brown don't.

    Another curiosity is all the Real Estate that cannot be linked to actual people, just corporations owned by other corporations.

    How come Warren Buffett does not have a golf course in his backyard, unlike Bloomberg he is not planning on running for office. Plus as a Jew Bloomberg has the lingering pain of his ancestors being rejected at the ticket window of Augusta. Buffett derives business advantage being known as being rich. Bloomberg can't do anything about publicity, his name is on the company.

    To make the Forbes 400 you need wealth as calculated by them to be $2 Billion. So a clever sort just needs to live less large than $2 Billionaire. Another curiousity is low interest rates means your $1 Billion probably produces $30 million minus the costs associated with keeping it secret. So one way the richies keep their wealth secret is low returns on capital means they just own barren assets.

    Bloomberg goes down to 1 billion. That is a list of anyone they estimate to be worth 1 billion. 1500 odd people, and the methodology is well described and often impressively modeled for leveraged and illliquid assets or income streams that flow over decades.

    Anyone below 1 or 2 billion is not really what is being discussed here. If you have 2 children that ends things right there in most cases.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. Slayer says:
    @The Z Blog
    My guess is Piketty has bumped into some old money and noticed that old WASP money tends to avoid ostentatious displays of wealth. I went to school with some old money guys. Modesty was a highly cultivated attitude with them. They were very careful to not be ostentatious.

    That does not mean Piketty is correct. It's juts that the newly rich tend to live like NBA players, while old money does not.

    Except he lives in France and likely is meeting European aristocrats. Either that or hes bought into the Rothschild’s mythology.

    Is piketty an……anti SEMITE !!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. @Jimi

    One way to test it is to look for who owns things that rich guys like to buy, such as yachts, sports enterprises, movies, waterfront property, and personal golf courses.
     
    That doesn't sound like old money at all. How about looking for Manhattan coops that don't allow financing, degrees from expensive, prestige schools like Colgate, Colby and Middlebury, and horse ranches in Northern Virginia.

    Add those up you might get a few hundred million if your lucky. No one vaguely interested in that stuff.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Slayer says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Sounds dull. Do you have to be Forbes 400 rich to send your kid to Colby or Colgate?

    Remember, that's Piketty's assertion: not that there are lots of people with nice trust funds but that there are lots of Secret Old Money Billionaires (Billionaires with a B), enough to make the published magazine lists of billionaires be radically misleading.

    It could be that Piketty is confused and off by one or two orders of magnitude. But he is, after all, a quantitative economist, so he ought to be good with his decimal points.

    Or it could be that Piketty is right.

    Either alternative seems pretty interesting.

    We now moving to the theory that Piketty is a raving anti semite. Sees ghosts of teh Rothschilds everywhere in Paris and London, assumes they must control global commerce.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. HA says:
    @Rapparee

    If you don’t regard my position as being more plausible than yours, we’ll probably have to leave it there.
     
    Precisely my point. Belief in the impossibility or improbability of the supernatural is a philosophical, not a scientific position, debatable solely on that grounds. It is always possible to explain anything by multiplying entities- I can believe African-Americans do poorly in school because of a low average IQ and lax discipline, or I can posit the existence of invisible knapsacks and "implicit bias". Both theories explain the data equally well, but not with equal simplicity. Plutarch records that an evil spirit appeared to Brutus before the battle of Philippi. He also records that Brutus assassinated Caesar. Virgil records that the assassination was followed by remarkable portents and natural wonders. If I affirm the murder but doubt the signs and ghosts, it is because I have a pre-existing philosophical objection to the latter. Perhaps one ought to have such an objection, but for myself, I see no particular reason to doubt, in the main, the universal judgment of mankind: "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." A thousand other things might account for any uncanny oddities, and I can devise plausible naturalistic explanations as quickly and readily as anyone else. But most techniques that can be used to explain away eyewitness reports of the supernatural can be just as easily employed to explain away the very existence of the witness himself.

    >But most techniques that can be used to explain away eyewitness reports of the supernatural can be just as easily employed to explain away the very existence of the witness himself.

    No, according to you, there is, at least in one instance, photographic evidence worth mentioning. Showing a spectral Black Dog, no less. The fact that you chose to simply TELL me you saw this photo instead of providing a link and thereby SHOWING me, speaks more than you apparently realize, at least in this day and age, and this discrepancy will only become more aggravating as phones and other recording devices become even more prevalent.

    While I don’t know for sure, I’m guessing the woman in question never bothered to scan her photo, perhaps realized that the Rorschach blob she was sure was a Black Dog could just as easily be a Black Chipmunk or Black Barney-the-Dinosaur, which wouldn’t have had quite the same effect. You and the other people she showed it to didn’t choose to snap a photo of it either with your phone. At least that’s how it appears to me, given what you’ve stated, and I’m certainly allowed to factor all that in. Likewis,e fairy/demon researchers like Conan Doyle didn’t know about LSD or MK Ultra or ergot poisoning, and they had no access to phone-camera technology. If it were otherwise, their conclusions and standards of proof might have been different. Maybe some other set of tools or discoveries will swing the pendelum back in the other direction some day, but that’s how it’s supposed to work.

    To the extent that fairies and demons exist in some metaphysical realm, I don’t have much to say about that. But when they purportedly pierce that realm to activate optic or auditory nerves, and leave photographic evidence, or barf up pea soup for that matter, then I take more of an interest, but I’m still going to notice what doesn’t get said or recorded.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. @SnakeEyes
    Piketty's theory is interesting but likely wrong. I always think of the Duke of Westminster as the classic old money billionaire. The Grosvenor family (or trusts of which the family members are beneficiaries) own most of the City of Westminster. But Forbes estimates their net worth at $9 billion so they do not qualify for Picketty's theory. Personally, I think that estimate is low. I would rather own what the Grosvenors own that whatever it is that makes Larry Ellison worth $52 billion.

    Real estate, art and jewelry would be the types of assets that Picketty's secret billionaires could own under the radar. But real estate is pretty noticeable and the other two don't get you into the billions.

    You are making a logical mistake there. Ellison can liquidate 9 billion in Oracle stock by clicking a button. ( unwise for his remaining holdings ) He could then approach the grosvenors and offer them 20 billion for their land holdings. Large leveraged illiquid assets like real estate are worth far far less than amazon or google shares which are traded all day everyday in the billions. We know what they are worth. Grosvenor estate ? Just estimates until they sell some elements which they do periodically.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. Slayer says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Is Evan Spiegel any relation to the mail order catalog Spiegels? The movie director Spike Jonze (Her) is some kind of Spiegel.

    No. Father a securities lawyer at a firm with ties to Buffet Munger. Probably a 2-3 mill a year salary guy. JD cant make the uber cash because they are not allowed to operate as a public company which conflicts with their clients interests.

    Read More
    • Replies: @1661er
    http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2011/04/flomwill.html

    Flom, the last living name partner of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, died in February at age 87. His estate, estimated to be in the low nine figures,
     
    Joseph Flom made it to "low nine figures" with just his income from Skadden as a name partner at the largest security/corporate/M&A firm. So it can be done. And that's not counting the plaintiff side lawyers.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. TG says:

    Indeed. But I would think that most super rich do NOT buy mega-yachts or private golf courses etc. They live very well, indeed, but at expensive clubs and restaurants etc. Why bother to manage your own golf course when you can just pay to use a really nice one and hob-nob with your rich friends?

    One thing that the super rich WILL use, is private airplanes. We all know what a hassle traveling commercial air is, even in first class. A billionaire WILL want to avoid that. Using a private airplane lets you skip the TSA checkpoints etc., you just drive to a ‘private’ airport (subsidized by the general public, of course) and walk right onto the plane. I hear that often you don’t even need passports etc. to go to many foreign countries. Last I checked wikipedia in 2017 there were worldwide over 22,000 private jets. Just saying.

    Something that is exploding is the use of “non-profit” foundations. These pay little to no taxes, but are still directly controlled by the founding families. Ostensibly for non-profit, the reality is that these can be used to influence politics etc. in many ways. Sure, a new rich billionaire may buy a mega yacht, but the cool ones know that past a certain point there is only so much physical luxury a single human being can experience. But power and influence? Ah, that has no ceiling.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JMcG
    I agree with you about airports. I’ve been mystified about the number of airports that have been bought by small local governments from very well to do families over the past couple of decades. It makes no sense to me at all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Slayer says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    There's also some basic math to consider. The older the money, the more descendants it's likely split amongst. It's entirely possible to invest a big fortune so that your descendants are wealthy several generations in the future, but to be as wealthy as the wealthiest men of their time seems unlikely.

    Good example the Duponts. Still among wealthiest families, but the fortune split among 3000 or so people living in horse country in New Jersey or coastal Delaware presumably. ( Joke )

    Best contradistinction would be the Cargill MacMillan fortune which is vastly larger though of somewhat similar vintage. Still complete family control with the most billionaires in the US. When one wants to exit the others either buy them out or spin off a part of the company that allows the exiting member to sell the shares and liquidate but keeps control with cargill. Never been a public company unlike dupont so far easier to manage these transactions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Is Cargill the meat company?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. From the Vox article you linked to:

    In the book he waxes enthusiastic about the extensive wealth assessments done for tax purposes by the governments put in power by the French Revolution and the excellent historical data series this collects.

    I don’t think I like this guy at all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  104. @Wally
    Good take downs of Piketty:

    part 1
    The Piketty Fallacy
    http://www.hoover.org/print/publications/defining-ideas/article/177406

    part 2
    defining ideas, Piketty’s Rickety Economics
    http://www.hoover.org/publications/defining-ideas/article/178046

    Neither of those links works.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    You can see them at

    https://www.hoover.org/research/piketty-fallacy original link seen at
    https://web.archive.org/web/20140511040420/http://www.hoover.org/print/publications/defining-ideas/article/177406

    https://www.hoover.org/research/pikettys-rickety-economics

    When links break it is helpful to either check the Internet Archive or do a search for the title with a site qualifier (e.g. site:hoover.org here).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. res says:
    @Anonymous
    Why do extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?

    Why do extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?

    Bayesian reasoning. If a claim has low prior probability (i.e. is extraordinary) it requires exceptionally strong (i.e. extraordinary) evidence to make it likely.

    More at https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Extraordinary_claims_require_extraordinary_evidence

    This is a good summary:

    Either way, the phrase is central to the scientific method, and a key issue for critical thinking, rational thought and skepticism everywhere.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    So whether or not something is "extraordinary" is subjective and arbitrary, or it's completely circular: "extraordinary claims" are those which can only be supported by "extraordinary evidence", which is something that can support "extraordinary claims".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @Anonymous
    The USA - like most of the developed world - has a government sector which accounts for at least 50% of GDP.
    Who do you think pays for army, airforce, navy, police, politicians, teachers etc etc etc salaries?

    Now, this of course means that the state - politicians remember are paid through the state - has an absolutely enormous vested interest in gathering as much tax money as possible.
    Doubtless the state pays for and maintains highly competent personnel to gather tax - and target individuals with money - supported by the most sophisticated and exhaustive record keeping, surveillance and monitoring. Basically, there's no where to hide.
    Also tax authorities have rather draconian powers of investigation and seizure.

    The upshot is that tax authorities know, absolutely, who's got the money and where it is stashed.

    The USA – like most of the developed world – has a government sector which accounts for at least 50% of GDP.

    Not that much. More like 36%.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. Run GMC says:
    @Enochian
    A problem with this is that you have to guess what Secret Old Money wants to own. They might consider sports teams and 600 foot yachts to be for the nouveau rich, fit only for trailer trash that has risen above its place.

    I would think Piketty has an unconscious European bias towards class distinction that makes him think about “Old Money” as still being pervasive. Probably a common thought among European socialist movements for 2 centuries now. The European Old Money is now remarkably diffuse after generations and centuries. The Rothchilds are spread throughout the world by now and hardly know one another. They havent been innovators like American new-money, but have just attempted to maintain their inherited wealth to some degree and to stay relevant.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    The Fuggers, Von Thurn und Taxis, Freacobaldis, Casaraghis, Lichtensteins and Hohenzollerns have kept their 500 or more year old wealth.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. Mike1 says:

    This has reached the point of stupidity. Do you really not know that you can own assets that are not in your personal name?! Is it really beyond your comprehension that not everyone wants property they own to be known by journalists? Do you seriously not get that there are assets like government debt?

    I’m not a fan of Piketty but this is a topic you know nothing about.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  109. res says:
    @International Jew
    Neither of those links works.

    You can see them at

    https://www.hoover.org/research/piketty-fallacy original link seen at

    https://web.archive.org/web/20140511040420/http://www.hoover.org/print/publications/defining-ideas/article/177406

    https://www.hoover.org/research/pikettys-rickety-economics

    When links break it is helpful to either check the Internet Archive or do a search for the title with a site qualifier (e.g. site:hoover.org here).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    Thanks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. @Hibernian
    The Communist dictators own a lot, they own the country and the people. Except in North Korea and Cuba, they're not allowed to pass it on to their kids.

    They had power, but not property.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. Svigor says:
    @Anonym
    Does Piketty actually give any evidence for his theory?

    Your method of profiling ultra-wealthy individuals and what they like to buy has merit. Even reclusive billionaires would tend to have some tells one would think. How to identify them? You'd start with those who have decloaked and look at what they did.

    A brute force approach would be to look at the major categories of wealth, and attempt to see who owned most of each. For example, shares and private companies, real estate, precious metals, mineral rights. There is going to be a lot of state ownership I would think. And also, who owns all the debt? National debts are huge, who owns them? Ditto public and corporate debts.

    Kind of on topic and kind of not, after getting into a bit of a JFK kick (not the first time) since reading Ron's articles, I have also been absorbing what Fletcher Prouty had to say (the real life Man X of the JFK movie). With all of that money they made from wars, one would think they might rank a little higher in the list of largest companies in the world, although they are still pretty big.

    One thing caught my eye. I don't know how much is true or not, but suspect that a reasonable amount of it is due to references and being positioned to know. In any case, Prouty claims:
    1. That in 1945, all of the US materiel for the invasion of Japan was shipped to Viet Nam (to Ho Chi Minh) and Korea (Syngman Rhee). I mention this because of the timelines. The plans were in motion before the end of WWII already for war and war profiteering, though the wars to consume more war materiel and generate more war profits wouldn't eventuate for years later.

    http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/prouty_arms.htm

    2. That 1.1M North Vietnamese were shipped south at the behest of the CIA to create the conditions for war. Emphasis mine:

    This formula endeared Ed to Allen Dulles. In 1954 Dulles established the Saigon Military Mission in Vietnam...counter to Eisenhower's orders. He had the French accept Lansdale as its chief. This mission was not in Saigon. It was not military, and its job was subversion in Vietnam. Its biggest job was that it got more than 1,100,000 northern Vietnamese to move south. 660,000 by U.S.Navy ships and the rest by CIA airline planes. These 1,100,000 north Vietnamese became the "subversive" element in South Vietnam and the principal cause of the warmaking. Lansdale and his cronies (Bohanon, Arundel, Phillips, Hand, Conein and many others) did all that using the same check book. I was with them many times during 1954. All Malthuseanism.
     
    https://www.prouty.org/letter.html

    In the age of thermonuclear weapons, wars such as WWII between the great powers cannot happen, and Prouty makes this point himself in video. So, wars need to take place at most, between nuclear and non-nuclear countries. Or... within any country, nuclear or otherwise.

    In any case, massive movements of people, encouraged by the Deep State, has in the past been apparently used to generate the conditions for war, and hence, war profits. Does this, uh, kind of resemble anything we see around us today? I just thought this was interesting. I think there is a lot more to it than that obviously, e.g. BLS and the Every Single Time of the NYT and others. But something to consider.

    Could you quote the specific stuff the US supposedly put by for 15 years, or whatever it was? I saw this:

    If such a huge shipment of war materiel, “amounted to what the Army called a 145,00 ‘man-pack’ of supplies … enough of everything required during combat to arm and supply that many men of war” (Prouty, 37), did reach both Korea and Vietnam it would seem likely that a conspiracy had chosen those locations for future confrontations. The fact that this “decision” was made before the end of the war in Europe would be further evidence of the far-reaching grasp and extent of the control the conspiracy exerted. After all, the conflict in Korea would not erupt for another five years and American involvement in Vietnam did not “officially” begin until 1965.(1) An investigation into whether or not this stockpile of materiel was shipped will determine whether or not the roots of the wars in both Korea and Vietnam wars were conspiratorial.

    Which is pretty vague, to say the least. I read on a bit further but saw nothing further, and my eyes start to bleed when I read conspiracy theories.

    Did we actually start the Vietnam war with all the exact same equipment as we ended WWII with? I know a lot of that stuff was canvas, so it better have been stored an arid part of Japan. Better not have included gasoline, which goes bad in a few years, IIRC, unless properly maintained. I don’t wanna know what the MREs tasted like after 15 years. I’m no expert on US military equipment of the time, but I do know we used helicopters a lot in Vietnam, and we didn’t in WWII, so I’m pretty sure they weren’t stored in Japan in ’45. I’m betting it’s a similar story with our armor. The M16 made its debut in Vietnam, so again, not in Japan…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. Pat Boyle says:
    @Enochian
    A problem with this is that you have to guess what Secret Old Money wants to own. They might consider sports teams and 600 foot yachts to be for the nouveau rich, fit only for trailer trash that has risen above its place.

    I’ve known a couple billionaires and I think you are right on. Billionaires are visible.

    I used to socialize with some of the Oracle founders. I remember dinner and skinny dipping with my wife in the hot tub on a mountain top in Marin with the fog coming over the peaks. Taht was with the #2 guy at Oracle and his wife drinking champagne all the while. He and the other Oracle guys I met always talked about Ellison. Almost nothing else. Ellison burned a cavern in the mind-space of everyone he met. See – “The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison” a kind of tribute by his former employees. Available at better bookstores everywhere.

    I also knew Gordon Getty socially. He too cut a wide swath in the public’s apperception. He was always in the papers even before that kidnapping and ear removal business. He performed publicly with my wife several times. She was pretty good, he was dreadful but he had all those billions and she just had me.

    I’m skeptical of the reality of hidden billionaires.

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew

    I remember dinner and skinny dipping with my wife in the hot tub on a mountain top in Marin with the fog coming over the peaks. Taht was with the #2 guy at Oracle and his wife drinking champagne all the while.
     
    Were you and your wife some sort of paid entertainers at that party?
    , @Art Deco
    I also knew Gordon Getty socially. He too cut a wide swath in the public’s apperception. He was always in the papers even before that kidnapping and ear removal business.

    The kidnapped youth was his nephew. He has about six kids of his own.

    I would guess when you say 'in the papers' you mean in California. The one time I can recall reading of him in the pre-internet era it concerned the Getty-Pennzoil-Texaco imbroglio back around 1983. Not before and not after.
    , @Anon
    The kidnapped boy was John Paul third. He lived in Italy with his parents. Gordon and Anne always lived quietly in San Francisco.

    The Getty family became well known when the founder, John Paul 1 built and endowed 2 museums of Western Art, one in Malibu and the second in Los Angeles

    Gordon and Anne have contributed lavishly to the San Francisco Democrat Jerry Brown Willie Brown Feinstein Boxer Harris Pelosi Gay Power faction.

    Many go to Getty fundraisers to social climb
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. Anonymous[153] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    The USA - like most of the developed world - has a government sector which accounts for at least 50% of GDP.
    Who do you think pays for army, airforce, navy, police, politicians, teachers etc etc etc salaries?

    Now, this of course means that the state - politicians remember are paid through the state - has an absolutely enormous vested interest in gathering as much tax money as possible.
    Doubtless the state pays for and maintains highly competent personnel to gather tax - and target individuals with money - supported by the most sophisticated and exhaustive record keeping, surveillance and monitoring. Basically, there's no where to hide.
    Also tax authorities have rather draconian powers of investigation and seizure.

    The upshot is that tax authorities know, absolutely, who's got the money and where it is stashed.

    Any small businessman who you speak to, be it butcher, barber, baker or candlestick maker will sooner or later regale you with tales of his biggest bugbear – namely his dealings with the tax authorities, the stringent powers of the tax authorities, and the sheer burden of taxes.

    If the state puts so much effort and resources in garnering money from small time operators, do you really think that they will give the real money people an easy ride?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Not Raul
    I believe that tax authorities go easier on billionaires than small operators. Small operators can’t afford politicians.
    , @JMcG
    To ask the question is to answer it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. Anon7 says:

    You could also look for real estate held the longest by one family. For example, Gardiner’s Island, off the shore of Long Island, is the only real estate in North America that is still held by Royal Patent (1639) in perpetuity (by Lion Gardiner and his descendants).

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gardiners_Island

    See also Hohenzollern castle, held by the same family for over 1,000 years.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hohenzollern_Castle

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  115. Anonymous[153] • Disclaimer says:
    @El Dato
    Definitely not old-school Highlander lore.

    Wait, did the "Madou" decapitate his own baby?

    Meanwhile, Nantes is still on fire because "Mamadou" (real name Aboubakar Fofana) got hit in useful places of his body by somewhat nervous blue forces:

    Mr Fofana almost ran over two children and hit an officer as he reversed his car away from a police control point “at very high speed,” prompting another officer to open fire. He was hit in the neck and declared dead on arrival at hospital.

    He was the subject of an arrest warrant issued in June last year for organised robbery, possession of stolen goods and criminal conspiracy.
     
    So far about thirty cars and several buildings, among which a town hall subsidiary and two supermarkets have been torched.

    Note the almost total news blackout with which the MSM is treating these events.

    This is most definitely *NOT* unintentional.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Mr. Anon says:
    @AndrewR
    What Kennedy fortune? They've never been the Vanderbilts or Rockefellers.

    What Kennedy fortune? They’ve never been the Vanderbilts or Rockefellers.

    When JFK was elected President in 1960, Joe Kennedy was reckoned to be the 11th richest man in America.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. @Anonym
    Does Piketty actually give any evidence for his theory?

    Your method of profiling ultra-wealthy individuals and what they like to buy has merit. Even reclusive billionaires would tend to have some tells one would think. How to identify them? You'd start with those who have decloaked and look at what they did.

    A brute force approach would be to look at the major categories of wealth, and attempt to see who owned most of each. For example, shares and private companies, real estate, precious metals, mineral rights. There is going to be a lot of state ownership I would think. And also, who owns all the debt? National debts are huge, who owns them? Ditto public and corporate debts.

    Kind of on topic and kind of not, after getting into a bit of a JFK kick (not the first time) since reading Ron's articles, I have also been absorbing what Fletcher Prouty had to say (the real life Man X of the JFK movie). With all of that money they made from wars, one would think they might rank a little higher in the list of largest companies in the world, although they are still pretty big.

    One thing caught my eye. I don't know how much is true or not, but suspect that a reasonable amount of it is due to references and being positioned to know. In any case, Prouty claims:
    1. That in 1945, all of the US materiel for the invasion of Japan was shipped to Viet Nam (to Ho Chi Minh) and Korea (Syngman Rhee). I mention this because of the timelines. The plans were in motion before the end of WWII already for war and war profiteering, though the wars to consume more war materiel and generate more war profits wouldn't eventuate for years later.

    http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/prouty_arms.htm

    2. That 1.1M North Vietnamese were shipped south at the behest of the CIA to create the conditions for war. Emphasis mine:

    This formula endeared Ed to Allen Dulles. In 1954 Dulles established the Saigon Military Mission in Vietnam...counter to Eisenhower's orders. He had the French accept Lansdale as its chief. This mission was not in Saigon. It was not military, and its job was subversion in Vietnam. Its biggest job was that it got more than 1,100,000 northern Vietnamese to move south. 660,000 by U.S.Navy ships and the rest by CIA airline planes. These 1,100,000 north Vietnamese became the "subversive" element in South Vietnam and the principal cause of the warmaking. Lansdale and his cronies (Bohanon, Arundel, Phillips, Hand, Conein and many others) did all that using the same check book. I was with them many times during 1954. All Malthuseanism.
     
    https://www.prouty.org/letter.html

    In the age of thermonuclear weapons, wars such as WWII between the great powers cannot happen, and Prouty makes this point himself in video. So, wars need to take place at most, between nuclear and non-nuclear countries. Or... within any country, nuclear or otherwise.

    In any case, massive movements of people, encouraged by the Deep State, has in the past been apparently used to generate the conditions for war, and hence, war profits. Does this, uh, kind of resemble anything we see around us today? I just thought this was interesting. I think there is a lot more to it than that obviously, e.g. BLS and the Every Single Time of the NYT and others. But something to consider.

    As a footnote and continuing in the on and off topic vein, speaking of The Prince of Camelot, am re-reading an interesting (if a bit snarky) evaluation of the Cold War called “The Fifty Year Wound” by one Derek Leebaert of G-town wherein he describes the obsession that the brothers Kennedy had with delivering a personal knock-out punch to that bearded slob in Kooba. The KGB spooks in Langley and (for all we know) the White House no doubt made him aware that he was in their x-hairs, hence the little tidbit offered to the reader by Leebaert that maybe, just maybe, it was Castro who gave the order to take out JFK, in so doing thereby implicitly rejecting “Oswald acted alone” argument (which, as the decades have passed, has become almost impossible to believe). No proof offered of course, nonetheless…interesting.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    A lot of people thought the Great Bearded One killed the Prince of Camelot because of the Prince’s numerous attempts to kill the Great Bearded One.

    It’s a decent theory based on who benefits and the fact that Oswald was pro Cuba and Ruby smuggled guns to Cuba at one time.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. Travis says:

    few of those on the Forbes 400 list from 1987 remained on the list…345 fell off the list. Only 55 people were among the 400 wealthiest in 1987 and 2017.

    Ross Perot was the Third wealthiest American in 1987, worth 3 Billion yet he had fallen out of the top 150 by 2016…Piketty claims that the rich enjoy a higher rate of return than the rest of society, pointing to the Forbes billionaire rankings. In fact, the Forbes rankings indicate that the rich have an unspectacular rate of return of 2% per year on average. This explains why there is so much turnover on the Forbes 400. Most people on today’s Forbes 400 list were not there a generation ago, nor were their forebears.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Since 1900, the average rate of return on Treasuries, the baseline "risk free" rate of return that requires absolutely no business acumen, mental effort, physical work, etc. to earn has been about 5%. A 5% rate of return means that an investment would double in about 15 years, or half a generation.

    Inflation adjusted return on real estate over the past 150 years has been about 7%, which means an investment would double in about 10 years, or a third of a generation:
    , @Anonymous
    Except Trump Daddy.... : )

    He peaked at 4.5 billion til he threatened the gravy train. Forbes banged him down 1 bil within a month after his elevator speech. Its owned by some VC goons in the valley though they sold half to a Chinese group after losing most of the investment. Print media. ... Nice call
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. Marty says:

    This morning on the freeway above Sausalito I passed not one but two Pace-Arrows, black over burgundy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  120. Anonymous[153] • Disclaimer says:

    Money is as money does.

    Perhaps it’s best to conceive of money as a ‘working fluid’ – rather like water flowing in a mill race – in that it’s utility is only expressed when it passes through the mill, does its work, and passes on again to work for someone else.
    In short money is dyanmic, the erroneous assumption of many being that a ‘fixed stock’ of capital sequestered somewhere necessarily equates income – the only form of wealth being tangible and therefore useful. Money, cash etc represents the means of doing things – purchasing another one’s labor or the fruit of someone else’s production – in that categorary must come a proportion of the fixed capital embodied in the production process.
    Basically, ‘money’ and ‘production’ in an economy are one and the same.

    From this it follows that the metric which *really* matters are the sheer cash flows – the aggregated net cash flows – within the global economy. The magnitude and direction, (vector, if you will), of the nett global cash flow is *the* key statistic.

    In the 1970s the vector favored the Arab petrostates.

    This century it favors China and the far east. Big time.
    That’s where all eyes should be.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    This century it favors China and the far east. Big time.
    That’s where all eyes should be.
     
    As the great pundit said, all the best cowboys have Chinese eyes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Anon[225] • Disclaimer says:

    https://pjmedia.com/spengler/the-safest-country-for-european-jews-try-hungary/

    As it stands, it’s safety vs supremacism.

    European nationalism means more safety for Jews in the street.
    European globalism means more supremacist power for Jews in the castle.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  122. Barnard says:
    @Unladen Swallow
    The Vanderbilts had lost most of their money by the mid-20th century ( something like 95 percent from their late 19th century peak ) Gloria built it up significantly again later.

    Yet Anderson Cooper claims he isn’t getting some huge inheritance from her. I wonder if that is true.

    Read More
    • LOL: Hibernian
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Anon[225] • Disclaimer says:

    http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/the-philistine-destruction-of-Johnny-Depp/21530#.W0JW9NQrK4Q

    In the interview, Depp is refreshingly candid about his ambivalent relationship with his mother, the effect of his marriage breakdown and the loss of his father-figure mentors, such as Hunter S Thompson, Marlon Brando and, more recently, Tom Petty.

    Father-Figure mentors? Them guys?

    http://www.spiked-online.com/spiked-review/article/1968-the-birth-of-the-new-conformism/21452#.W0JW1tQrK4Q

    Dimmocracy

    http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/The-dimming-of-democracy/21566#.W0JW1tQrK4Q

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Good stuff. That Rodrick punk who wrote the original hit piece was in my brother's high school class.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. @Dave Pinsen
    There's also some basic math to consider. The older the money, the more descendants it's likely split amongst. It's entirely possible to invest a big fortune so that your descendants are wealthy several generations in the future, but to be as wealthy as the wealthiest men of their time seems unlikely.

    True, look st the Vanderbilt family as an example..Cornelius was the Wealthiest man in America and left $100 million to his children, 90% went to one son, William Vanderbilt. Yet even among the descendants of William none are Billionaires today , most of his hundreds of ggg grandchildren are not even millionaires today. Gloria Vanderbilt inherited just $4 million and her grandfather had left an estate worth over $200 million.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. Piketty’s argument is plausible enough: self-made billionaires’s wealth is easier to measure because it’s usually concentrated in the stock of a single, public, company, whereas their heirs diversify that wealth.

    Now, while I can see how that diversification could make it harder for the compiler’s of the Forbes and Fortune lists, the IRS knows a lot more, and didn’t Piketty get access to the IRS’s data, to do his study? So is Piketty saying he knows there are lots more billionaires out there, but he can’t name them because he signed a confidentiality agreement with the IRS? Or maybe the data the IRS gave him was limited in some way that prevented him from even counting billionaires?

    I’m not interested enough in this neo-Marxist guy to read his book and find out, but maybe Steve would be kind enough to read it for me?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Slayer
    IRS deals with income, not wealth. 400 highest incomes are published for each year. Without the names obviously. Surely they are not selling our data.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. @Pat Boyle
    I've known a couple billionaires and I think you are right on. Billionaires are visible.

    I used to socialize with some of the Oracle founders. I remember dinner and skinny dipping with my wife in the hot tub on a mountain top in Marin with the fog coming over the peaks. Taht was with the #2 guy at Oracle and his wife drinking champagne all the while. He and the other Oracle guys I met always talked about Ellison. Almost nothing else. Ellison burned a cavern in the mind-space of everyone he met. See - "The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison" a kind of tribute by his former employees. Available at better bookstores everywhere.

    I also knew Gordon Getty socially. He too cut a wide swath in the public's apperception. He was always in the papers even before that kidnapping and ear removal business. He performed publicly with my wife several times. She was pretty good, he was dreadful but he had all those billions and she just had me.

    I'm skeptical of the reality of hidden billionaires.

    I remember dinner and skinny dipping with my wife in the hot tub on a mountain top in Marin with the fog coming over the peaks. Taht was with the #2 guy at Oracle and his wife drinking champagne all the while.

    Were you and your wife some sort of paid entertainers at that party?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. @Almost Missouri
    Agree. Were I wealthy, yachts and golf courses would be way down my shopping list. What would be near the top?

    · Key politicians and public servants, especially near where I and my descendants live or want to live. Indeed, let the publicity-loving politicians buy and have all the flashy stuff in their own names so long as they do my bidding. They don't even need to do my bidding with the flashy stuff. They can keep that just for playing. What would be my bidding? Oh, nothing much. Just keep things moving along more or less in the direction I like, for whatever reason. Also, a bit of insurance: if an investigation or inquiry starts going in a way that displeases me, my pols will ensure that it is defunded and the snoops reassigned.

    · A foundation or two or a hundred. Nothing with my name on it. Who needs the hassle or notoriety when something goes wrong? Something like the TIDES Foundation: anonymity, opacity and maneuverability. If I see something that can be fixed to be more to my liking by lawyers, academics, journalists or "activists", then boom, the money will appear for them, from The Foundation. Why is The Foundation funding this? Didn't you know The Foundation has a long history of supporting progressive public policy? Why you want to ask awkward questions? Well if you don't really want the money, we don't need to make this grant... Oh, also sign this non-disclosure agreement before we can disburse the funds.

    · A share here and there in key media organizations. Enough to be able to kick in and out subjects of interest to me. I don't have to do this in my own name of course. That's what shell companies and charities are for. Imagine, that Bezos fellow bought the entire Washington Post in his own name. Obviously, he is fresh off the plane from Wall Street, poor fellow.

    · A bit of a security organization. Nothing big or flashy. No minions in silver suits patrolling empty volcanoes. Just some discreet private investigator types, an "ex-"deep stater or two, and someone with a bit of muscle and self discipline. You know, in case there is a kidnapping and we need to know whom to send the kidnapper's son's pinkie finger to. Of course, this "security" might have other uses too...

    · Maybe if I were feeling self indulgent, some obscure but heritable European titles or other. Nothing with a lot of distracting responsibilities, but just something that keeps my family on a good invite list or two. My very limited acquaintance with the upper crust hasn't convinced me they are much more interesting than anyone else, but they do have better real estate. And who knows, maybe my kids will take a shine to that kind of thing.

    Notably, none of these things leaves a large public footprint.

    Also notably, a lot of things in Ron Unz's American Pravda series seem a lot more plausible when looked at this way.

    I like your shopping list, and I’m gonna bookmark it for in case I ever become a billionaire, haha.

    If there’s a flaw in your plan, it’s that you imagine you can keep your profile low by just avoiding active acts of publicity-seeking. That will help, but you’ll never have much control over what other people say about you. And your plan inevitably puts you in contact with a lot of people.

    Anyway, just some things to think about between now and the day you actually become a billionaire. I don’t know you so I don’t know how tight your timetable for that is. Me, it would be nice if I could become a billionaire before my next major college reunion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Thanks. But I don't think you need to become a billionaire to influence world events. A centi-millionaire or even a deci-millionaire should be able to do it, if they are not distracted with publicity, sports teams and chasing actresses.

    The discussion in this post kind of conflates two different things:

    1) Are there secret (stealth) billionaires out there? Piketty thinks so. Steve is skeptical.

    2) Is there an old money (or any age money) conspiracy to influence world events? Again, Piketty thinks so, while Steve is skeptical.

    It might be that Piketty is right about both questions (but if so, I suspect he would be wrong about who they are), but even then, the people who would be the affirmative answer to question 1 need not be the same people who would be an affirmative answer to question 2.

    To take some examples from the 20th century:

    It is generally accepted that Lenin's Bolshevik revolution was financed by outside parties. There is a little less agreement about exactly who and how much, but that need not bother us as we just want to quantify approximately what it cost "own", or at least influence, a major world power in 1917 and the answer appears to be the equivalent of a few hundred million of today's dollars.

    A better documented (and cheaper) example is Winston Churchill, who was bailed out of his excessive personal debts before he assumed Britain's Prime Ministership by Henry Strakosch (and possibly a few others) for about $50 million in today's money. So the most powerful man in the biggest empire of the day could be had for $0.05 billion in today's money. What a deal!

    As you probably know, the Clinton Foundation tended to attract multi-million dollar donations immediately before one Clinton or the other made or influenced major decisions of interest to the donor. So as recently as until the last election cycle, the vast power of the American deep state was at your disposal for $5 to $50 million a pop.

    What I'm saying is that if you're not busy with private islands, yachting or movie producing, you can buy an awful lot of world power without ever appearing on anyone's list of billionaires.

    And this doesn't even get into examples like Stalin and Hitler, who ascended to dictatorial rulership of major powers without apparently any significant outside financing: just through their own ruthlessness, terror and intimidation, or--as they probably thought of it--political entrepreneurship. So if you are without morals or conscience, you don't even need any money at all to ascend to world leadership.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. Not Raul says:
    @Anonymous
    Any small businessman who you speak to, be it butcher, barber, baker or candlestick maker will sooner or later regale you with tales of his biggest bugbear - namely his dealings with the tax authorities, the stringent powers of the tax authorities, and the sheer burden of taxes.

    If the state puts so much effort and resources in garnering money from small time operators, do you really think that they will give the real money people an easy ride?

    I believe that tax authorities go easier on billionaires than small operators. Small operators can’t afford politicians.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. Anonymous[400] • Disclaimer says:
    @res

    Why do extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?
     
    Bayesian reasoning. If a claim has low prior probability (i.e. is extraordinary) it requires exceptionally strong (i.e. extraordinary) evidence to make it likely.

    More at https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Extraordinary_claims_require_extraordinary_evidence

    This is a good summary:

    Either way, the phrase is central to the scientific method, and a key issue for critical thinking, rational thought and skepticism everywhere.
     

    So whether or not something is “extraordinary” is subjective and arbitrary, or it’s completely circular: “extraordinary claims” are those which can only be supported by “extraordinary evidence”, which is something that can support “extraordinary claims”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    subjective
     
    Perhaps.

    arbitrary
     
    Not really. I think low prior probability and strong evidence are non-arbitrary ideas even if there is much room for disagreement (see subjective above).

    Do you actually have a point, or was your original comment just a troll which I was foolish enough to bite on?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. Art Deco says:
    @Anonym
    Does Piketty actually give any evidence for his theory?

    Your method of profiling ultra-wealthy individuals and what they like to buy has merit. Even reclusive billionaires would tend to have some tells one would think. How to identify them? You'd start with those who have decloaked and look at what they did.

    A brute force approach would be to look at the major categories of wealth, and attempt to see who owned most of each. For example, shares and private companies, real estate, precious metals, mineral rights. There is going to be a lot of state ownership I would think. And also, who owns all the debt? National debts are huge, who owns them? Ditto public and corporate debts.

    Kind of on topic and kind of not, after getting into a bit of a JFK kick (not the first time) since reading Ron's articles, I have also been absorbing what Fletcher Prouty had to say (the real life Man X of the JFK movie). With all of that money they made from wars, one would think they might rank a little higher in the list of largest companies in the world, although they are still pretty big.

    One thing caught my eye. I don't know how much is true or not, but suspect that a reasonable amount of it is due to references and being positioned to know. In any case, Prouty claims:
    1. That in 1945, all of the US materiel for the invasion of Japan was shipped to Viet Nam (to Ho Chi Minh) and Korea (Syngman Rhee). I mention this because of the timelines. The plans were in motion before the end of WWII already for war and war profiteering, though the wars to consume more war materiel and generate more war profits wouldn't eventuate for years later.

    http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/prouty_arms.htm

    2. That 1.1M North Vietnamese were shipped south at the behest of the CIA to create the conditions for war. Emphasis mine:

    This formula endeared Ed to Allen Dulles. In 1954 Dulles established the Saigon Military Mission in Vietnam...counter to Eisenhower's orders. He had the French accept Lansdale as its chief. This mission was not in Saigon. It was not military, and its job was subversion in Vietnam. Its biggest job was that it got more than 1,100,000 northern Vietnamese to move south. 660,000 by U.S.Navy ships and the rest by CIA airline planes. These 1,100,000 north Vietnamese became the "subversive" element in South Vietnam and the principal cause of the warmaking. Lansdale and his cronies (Bohanon, Arundel, Phillips, Hand, Conein and many others) did all that using the same check book. I was with them many times during 1954. All Malthuseanism.
     
    https://www.prouty.org/letter.html

    In the age of thermonuclear weapons, wars such as WWII between the great powers cannot happen, and Prouty makes this point himself in video. So, wars need to take place at most, between nuclear and non-nuclear countries. Or... within any country, nuclear or otherwise.

    In any case, massive movements of people, encouraged by the Deep State, has in the past been apparently used to generate the conditions for war, and hence, war profits. Does this, uh, kind of resemble anything we see around us today? I just thought this was interesting. I think there is a lot more to it than that obviously, e.g. BLS and the Every Single Time of the NYT and others. But something to consider.

    The ratio of military expenditure to domestic product declined with scant interruption from 1953 to 1979. It saw an increase (of about 16%) only from 1965 to 1967. It saw a 20% increase from 1979 to 1985, then began to decline again. It passed below the Cold War nadir during the fiscal year concluding in 1993 and hit bottom in 2000. The ratio saw a 45% increase from 2000 to 2010 and has since declined, returning to the level of 1999/2000. It is, as we speak, as low as it has been since 1940. The wars in Korea, VietNam, and the Gulf were quite modest in scale compared to the World Wars (during the 1st of which the ratio of military expenditure to gdp topped 12% and during the second topped 40% for several years in a row). The war in VietNam in particular was fought through redistributing the military’s allocations, not by extracting expanded allocations.

    Read More
    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. Anonymous[400] • Disclaimer says:
    @Travis
    few of those on the Forbes 400 list from 1987 remained on the list...345 fell off the list. Only 55 people were among the 400 wealthiest in 1987 and 2017.

    Ross Perot was the Third wealthiest American in 1987, worth 3 Billion yet he had fallen out of the top 150 by 2016...Piketty claims that the rich enjoy a higher rate of return than the rest of society, pointing to the Forbes billionaire rankings. In fact, the Forbes rankings indicate that the rich have an unspectacular rate of return of 2% per year on average. This explains why there is so much turnover on the Forbes 400. Most people on today’s Forbes 400 list were not there a generation ago, nor were their forebears.

    Since 1900, the average rate of return on Treasuries, the baseline “risk free” rate of return that requires absolutely no business acumen, mental effort, physical work, etc. to earn has been about 5%. A 5% rate of return means that an investment would double in about 15 years, or half a generation.

    Inflation adjusted return on real estate over the past 150 years has been about 7%, which means an investment would double in about 10 years, or a third of a generation:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    I’ve always been told that inflation wiped out the interest earned on treasuries.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. Art Deco says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    A problem with this is that you have to guess what Secret Old Money wants to own. They might consider sports teams and 600 foot yachts to be for the nouveau rich, fit only for trailer trash that has risen above its place.

     

    Paul Fussell in Class pointed out that the old money far preferred Buicks to Cadillacs. They were just as good, but a lot less showy. They helped you disappear.

    Paul Fussell in Class pointed out

    Based on what? Someone he knew in graduate school?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Based on what? Someone he knew in graduate school?
     
    Perhaps he measured their glucose intake:

    Fussell draws thick dividing lines before drawing thin ones. He suggests, for example, that “you could probably draw a trustworthy class line based wholly on the amount of sugar consumed by a family, making allowances for the number of children in the household.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/27/books/paul-fussell-class-in-america.html

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. Art Deco says:
    @Anonymous
    The USA - like most of the developed world - has a government sector which accounts for at least 50% of GDP.
    Who do you think pays for army, airforce, navy, police, politicians, teachers etc etc etc salaries?

    Now, this of course means that the state - politicians remember are paid through the state - has an absolutely enormous vested interest in gathering as much tax money as possible.
    Doubtless the state pays for and maintains highly competent personnel to gather tax - and target individuals with money - supported by the most sophisticated and exhaustive record keeping, surveillance and monitoring. Basically, there's no where to hide.
    Also tax authorities have rather draconian powers of investigation and seizure.

    The upshot is that tax authorities know, absolutely, who's got the money and where it is stashed.

    The USA – like most of the developed world – has a government sector which accounts for at least 50% of GDP.

    Public expenditure may (in France and other countries at the limit). That’s largely socialized consumption and transfer payments. In the U.S., the ratio of public expenditure to domestic product is 0.32, but only 14% of value-added is attributable to the public sector.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. res says:
    @Anonymous
    So whether or not something is "extraordinary" is subjective and arbitrary, or it's completely circular: "extraordinary claims" are those which can only be supported by "extraordinary evidence", which is something that can support "extraordinary claims".

    subjective

    Perhaps.

    arbitrary

    Not really. I think low prior probability and strong evidence are non-arbitrary ideas even if there is much room for disagreement (see subjective above).

    Do you actually have a point, or was your original comment just a troll which I was foolish enough to bite on?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    It is arbitrary.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. @Steve Sailer
    So it's hollowed-out volcanoes I guess.

    If this hidden old money exists, I guess it would be on things like valuable buildings (like owning a company that owns a company that owns 50 buildings in central London, which are then they rent to Barclay’s and Jarrod’s and Russian millionaires). Or owning vast latifundia on productive farmland.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. Art Deco says:
    @Pat Boyle
    I've known a couple billionaires and I think you are right on. Billionaires are visible.

    I used to socialize with some of the Oracle founders. I remember dinner and skinny dipping with my wife in the hot tub on a mountain top in Marin with the fog coming over the peaks. Taht was with the #2 guy at Oracle and his wife drinking champagne all the while. He and the other Oracle guys I met always talked about Ellison. Almost nothing else. Ellison burned a cavern in the mind-space of everyone he met. See - "The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison" a kind of tribute by his former employees. Available at better bookstores everywhere.

    I also knew Gordon Getty socially. He too cut a wide swath in the public's apperception. He was always in the papers even before that kidnapping and ear removal business. He performed publicly with my wife several times. She was pretty good, he was dreadful but he had all those billions and she just had me.

    I'm skeptical of the reality of hidden billionaires.

    I also knew Gordon Getty socially. He too cut a wide swath in the public’s apperception. He was always in the papers even before that kidnapping and ear removal business.

    The kidnapped youth was his nephew. He has about six kids of his own.

    I would guess when you say ‘in the papers’ you mean in California. The one time I can recall reading of him in the pre-internet era it concerned the Getty-Pennzoil-Texaco imbroglio back around 1983. Not before and not after.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    There's also some basic math to consider. The older the money, the more descendants it's likely split amongst. It's entirely possible to invest a big fortune so that your descendants are wealthy several generations in the future, but to be as wealthy as the wealthiest men of their time seems unlikely.

    Descendants often make more money of their own and and or marry into money.

    The famous Boston Trusts ensured that. Lots of money for education, money for investments and start ups carefully scrutinized and monitored by the trustees. But nothing for anything else. You want a mansion filled with expensive furniture surrounded by splendid gardens?

    Earn the money yourself.

    Individual inheritances were small. The bulk of the money was already in the Trust and safe from inheritance tax.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. Anon[139] • Disclaimer says:

    The reason a lot of old money isn’t on the billionaire list today has a lot of do with inflation and the dividing up of inheritances.

    100 million earned 100 years ago has to keep up with inflation to be 100 million today, which means everything it’s been invested in has to be a good idea. 100 years of good investing ideas is as rare as a Dodo. Part of the problem is the amount of money a rich person can put in some wiseguy’s investing scheme. If you put too much money in, you can get wiped out with one bad judgment call.

    As for inflation, according to this website:

    https://inflationdata.com/Inflation/Inflation_Rate/Long_Term_Inflation.asp

    The years 1913-1919 averaged 9.30% inflation every year. That’s godawful. The next worst tier was 7.06% in the decade of the 1970s. 1913 was also the year income tax was legalized in the Constitution. According to Wiki, the top rates periodically spiked to:

    77% for the top tier in 1918
    58% for the top tier in 1922
    63% for the top tier in 1932
    94% for the top tier in 1944-1945

    The top tier tax rate was around 90% from about 1950-1963. Most people cannot even imagine this today. It was in the 70% tier from about 1963 to about 1980. One reason why Kennedy and Reagan were so loved is because they cut the tax rates. You always hear this about Reagan, but not about Kennedy. People who benefited keep their mouths shut about Kennedy the tax-cutter. It was Kennedy who cut the rate from 90% to 70%. There were lot of rich (((liberals))) living in the 1960s who loved Kennedy because he implemented their liberal policies AND he cut their taxes at the same time. (((They))) absolutely kissed his butt in gratitude for that.

    Do NOT underestimate rates like this in destroying old money. Some of these rates are crazy-high. When you combine high taxes on the rich plus inflation, plus the division of inheritances, it’s not surprising that new money hogs the top of the lists. Do some math and you’ll see a constant chipping away at wealth throughout the 20th century.

    Most people think it’s easy to preserve your money if you’re rich. However, stocks in the first half of the 20th century were not massive yielders, and the stock market did not show the crazy run-ups that have periodically popped up since 1980. Besides, anyone who invested in stocks in the 1930s saw a decade of losses, and the market was stagnant in the 1970s.

    It’s easier to preserve wealth today than it used to be because of favorable tax laws and more ways to hide your wealth. Nonetheless, the actual reality is that preserving wealth is harder than it looks. The tech billionaires of today are highly unlikely to have grandchildren who are billionaries. Why? Making money is hard, but squandering wealth is easy and most people do it, even the descendants of billionaires.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JMcG
    Income tax is not wealth tax.
    , @Bernardo Pizzaro Cortez Del Castro
    Good points. Also the Great Depression wiped out significant wealth. Families lost millions when the banks failed and $140 Billion in deposits were destroyed...FDR then confiscated all Gold and outlawed the ownership of Gold. The Federal Government then devalued the dollar , an ounce of gold went from $20 to $35 in 1933 This policy destroyed billions of wealth, as billions of dollars worth of gold were traded for currency which was then debased.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Pat Boyle
    I've known a couple billionaires and I think you are right on. Billionaires are visible.

    I used to socialize with some of the Oracle founders. I remember dinner and skinny dipping with my wife in the hot tub on a mountain top in Marin with the fog coming over the peaks. Taht was with the #2 guy at Oracle and his wife drinking champagne all the while. He and the other Oracle guys I met always talked about Ellison. Almost nothing else. Ellison burned a cavern in the mind-space of everyone he met. See - "The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison" a kind of tribute by his former employees. Available at better bookstores everywhere.

    I also knew Gordon Getty socially. He too cut a wide swath in the public's apperception. He was always in the papers even before that kidnapping and ear removal business. He performed publicly with my wife several times. She was pretty good, he was dreadful but he had all those billions and she just had me.

    I'm skeptical of the reality of hidden billionaires.

    The kidnapped boy was John Paul third. He lived in Italy with his parents. Gordon and Anne always lived quietly in San Francisco.

    The Getty family became well known when the founder, John Paul 1 built and endowed 2 museums of Western Art, one in Malibu and the second in Los Angeles

    Gordon and Anne have contributed lavishly to the San Francisco Democrat Jerry Brown Willie Brown Feinstein Boxer Harris Pelosi Gay Power faction.

    Many go to Getty fundraisers to social climb

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Boyle
    Yes, yes perhaps this is true. Your point?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    Since 1900, the average rate of return on Treasuries, the baseline "risk free" rate of return that requires absolutely no business acumen, mental effort, physical work, etc. to earn has been about 5%. A 5% rate of return means that an investment would double in about 15 years, or half a generation.

    Inflation adjusted return on real estate over the past 150 years has been about 7%, which means an investment would double in about 10 years, or a third of a generation:

    I’ve always been told that inflation wiped out the interest earned on treasuries.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Almost Missouri
    Agree. Were I wealthy, yachts and golf courses would be way down my shopping list. What would be near the top?

    · Key politicians and public servants, especially near where I and my descendants live or want to live. Indeed, let the publicity-loving politicians buy and have all the flashy stuff in their own names so long as they do my bidding. They don't even need to do my bidding with the flashy stuff. They can keep that just for playing. What would be my bidding? Oh, nothing much. Just keep things moving along more or less in the direction I like, for whatever reason. Also, a bit of insurance: if an investigation or inquiry starts going in a way that displeases me, my pols will ensure that it is defunded and the snoops reassigned.

    · A foundation or two or a hundred. Nothing with my name on it. Who needs the hassle or notoriety when something goes wrong? Something like the TIDES Foundation: anonymity, opacity and maneuverability. If I see something that can be fixed to be more to my liking by lawyers, academics, journalists or "activists", then boom, the money will appear for them, from The Foundation. Why is The Foundation funding this? Didn't you know The Foundation has a long history of supporting progressive public policy? Why you want to ask awkward questions? Well if you don't really want the money, we don't need to make this grant... Oh, also sign this non-disclosure agreement before we can disburse the funds.

    · A share here and there in key media organizations. Enough to be able to kick in and out subjects of interest to me. I don't have to do this in my own name of course. That's what shell companies and charities are for. Imagine, that Bezos fellow bought the entire Washington Post in his own name. Obviously, he is fresh off the plane from Wall Street, poor fellow.

    · A bit of a security organization. Nothing big or flashy. No minions in silver suits patrolling empty volcanoes. Just some discreet private investigator types, an "ex-"deep stater or two, and someone with a bit of muscle and self discipline. You know, in case there is a kidnapping and we need to know whom to send the kidnapper's son's pinkie finger to. Of course, this "security" might have other uses too...

    · Maybe if I were feeling self indulgent, some obscure but heritable European titles or other. Nothing with a lot of distracting responsibilities, but just something that keeps my family on a good invite list or two. My very limited acquaintance with the upper crust hasn't convinced me they are much more interesting than anyone else, but they do have better real estate. And who knows, maybe my kids will take a shine to that kind of thing.

    Notably, none of these things leaves a large public footprint.

    Also notably, a lot of things in Ron Unz's American Pravda series seem a lot more plausible when looked at this way.

    You get on the good invite list by contributing to the right causes. For instance there are still hundreds of debutante balls in this country. They are usually fundraisers for hospitals.

    When your girls are about 10, send a presentable female family member to join the Friends of ……. contribute the minimum and your girls are debs and on all the right lists. Have their brothers and if not brothers men cousins be the required escorts and your kids are set for life.

    It’s expensive to keep up with the country club luxury vacation set though.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Thanks for the tip, but my offspring are past that stage. I'm not too worried about them though.

    If I ever remarry and start over again, I'll keep your advice in mind!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. Anon[183] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/the-philistine-destruction-of-Johnny-Depp/21530#.W0JW9NQrK4Q

    In the interview, Depp is refreshingly candid about his ambivalent relationship with his mother, the effect of his marriage breakdown and the loss of his father-figure mentors, such as Hunter S Thompson, Marlon Brando and, more recently, Tom Petty.

    Father-Figure mentors? Them guys?

    http://www.spiked-online.com/spiked-review/article/1968-the-birth-of-the-new-conformism/21452#.W0JW1tQrK4Q

    Dimmocracy

    http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/The-dimming-of-democracy/21566#.W0JW1tQrK4Q

    Good stuff. That Rodrick punk who wrote the original hit piece was in my brother’s high school class.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. boomstick says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Second generation heirs who couldn't stay out of the newspapers include William Randolph Hearst and Howard Hughes.

    The Hearsts seem to have a much smaller than the original mansion in San Simeon. On the beach, but exclusively theirs? Their own isolated mansion area seems seems to be Wyntoon, in Siskiyou County.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyntoon

    I suspect the Hearsts have gone a bit downhill. Newspapers are a mess. But didn’t they get ESPN?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Have you seen their homes in Hillsboro and San Francisco Ca??? Just a few Bay Area mansions can add up to 100 million.
    , @Steve Sailer
    Forbes asserts the Hearst clan has $28 billion today, making them the 9th richest clan in the US.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. Anonymous[400] • Disclaimer says:
    @res

    subjective
     
    Perhaps.

    arbitrary
     
    Not really. I think low prior probability and strong evidence are non-arbitrary ideas even if there is much room for disagreement (see subjective above).

    Do you actually have a point, or was your original comment just a troll which I was foolish enough to bite on?

    It is arbitrary.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    So a troll it is. Carry on.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:

    There’s a lot of quiet agricultural wealth in this country. The Stevensons of Illinois are best known as politicians. One was a 19th century Vice President, Adlai 2 was governor of Illinois twice and ran for President against Eisenhower twice. He was a Rockefeller protege in the 1930s working in the Rockefeller think tanks planning the establishment of the United Nations. He was the darling of the intellectual leftist faction of the Democrat party.

    His son, Adlai 3 was a Senator planning a great career hopefully President when he disobeyed AIPAC orders, was defeated in the re election and retired from politics

    The Stevensons arrived in Illinois in the 1830s and started buying up miles and miles of black gold. The superb topsoil was 20 feet deep in those days. Long hot summers, plentiful rain the McCormick Reapers and the farmers thrived They developed and built Bloomington Ill. One married into the Borden Milk company.

    They never gave up the farms. They still have them. There’s a saying about those Black Gold farms. They’re so rich even the tenants houses have swimming pools and are remodeled every few years.

    In California there are the Newhalls, Kern County Land Company and the Onizuciys around Watsonville.

    One of the biggest cotton operations in the world is around Bakersfield Ca. It’s owned by the same family that fled Alabama 140 years ago because of the boll weevil.

    Monsanto is mostly agricultural products.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art Deco
    His son, Adlai 3 was a Senator planning a great career hopefully President when he disobeyed AIPAC orders, was defeated in the re election and retired from politics

    He voluntarily retired from the U.S. Senate. The elections he lost were for Governor of Illinois after he left Congress, and AIPAC didn't have a blessed thing to do with it. The politician Israel's advocates worked to get rid of was Paul Findlay, who had for some unaccountable reason volunteered to be Yasir Arafat's prat boy on Capitol Hill. Mearsheimer and Walt had the idea that Charles Percy's defeat in 1984 was attributable to AIPAC, cue Mandy Rice-Davies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @boomstick
    The Hearsts seem to have a much smaller than the original mansion in San Simeon. On the beach, but exclusively theirs? Their own isolated mansion area seems seems to be Wyntoon, in Siskiyou County.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyntoon

    I suspect the Hearsts have gone a bit downhill. Newspapers are a mess. But didn't they get ESPN?

    Have you seen their homes in Hillsboro and San Francisco Ca??? Just a few Bay Area mansions can add up to 100 million.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. Wally says:
    @res
    You can see them at

    https://www.hoover.org/research/piketty-fallacy original link seen at
    https://web.archive.org/web/20140511040420/http://www.hoover.org/print/publications/defining-ideas/article/177406

    https://www.hoover.org/research/pikettys-rickety-economics

    When links break it is helpful to either check the Internet Archive or do a search for the title with a site qualifier (e.g. site:hoover.org here).

    Thanks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. Slayer says:
    @International Jew
    Piketty's argument is plausible enough: self-made billionaires's wealth is easier to measure because it's usually concentrated in the stock of a single, public, company, whereas their heirs diversify that wealth.

    Now, while I can see how that diversification could make it harder for the compiler's of the Forbes and Fortune lists, the IRS knows a lot more, and didn't Piketty get access to the IRS's data, to do his study? So is Piketty saying he knows there are lots more billionaires out there, but he can't name them because he signed a confidentiality agreement with the IRS? Or maybe the data the IRS gave him was limited in some way that prevented him from even counting billionaires?

    I'm not interested enough in this neo-Marxist guy to read his book and find out, but maybe Steve would be kind enough to read it for me?

    IRS deals with income, not wealth. 400 highest incomes are published for each year. Without the names obviously. Surely they are not selling our data.

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew
    Well, you can get a fair idea about someone's wealth, by looking at his income. Especially if, like the IRS, you have his 1040 Schedules B and D, which show what he's invested in. Or, quick and dirty, just multiply investment income by about 25.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. Anonymous[216] • Disclaimer says:
    @Travis
    few of those on the Forbes 400 list from 1987 remained on the list...345 fell off the list. Only 55 people were among the 400 wealthiest in 1987 and 2017.

    Ross Perot was the Third wealthiest American in 1987, worth 3 Billion yet he had fallen out of the top 150 by 2016...Piketty claims that the rich enjoy a higher rate of return than the rest of society, pointing to the Forbes billionaire rankings. In fact, the Forbes rankings indicate that the rich have an unspectacular rate of return of 2% per year on average. This explains why there is so much turnover on the Forbes 400. Most people on today’s Forbes 400 list were not there a generation ago, nor were their forebears.

    Except Trump Daddy…. : )

    He peaked at 4.5 billion til he threatened the gravy train. Forbes banged him down 1 bil within a month after his elevator speech. Its owned by some VC goons in the valley though they sold half to a Chinese group after losing most of the investment. Print media. … Nice call

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Except Trump Daddy…. : )

    He peaked at 4.5 billion til he threatened the gravy train. Forbes banged him down 1 bil within a month after his elevator speech.
     
    Trump mentions in one of his books that Malcolm Forbes, in his dotage, would show up at his casinos with under-21 boy toys. Trump put a stop to it because, whilc Forbes's private pecadilloes were no concern of his, he wasn't going to risk his license to serve liquor in New Jersey.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. IBC says:
    @Hibernian
    Neither Buick nor Cadillac is much to write home about anymore.

    I think the Lexus brand now occupies a pretty comparable market position to what Buick used to enjoy many decades ago. And the Germany luxury brands and large luxury SUVs in general have mostly taken over Cadillac’s old position; which remember, before the ’70s; was a lot more socially prestigious than in subsequent decades (except for the Escalade which is still very successful within its market).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    (except for the Escalade which is still very successful within its market).
     
    Janet Jackson fans, primarily.

    Around here Escalades are for negroes and Mary Kay distributors. But it is considered cool to put the front clip of an Escalade on a GM truck. I don't get it myself but that's what they do.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. @Slayer
    IRS deals with income, not wealth. 400 highest incomes are published for each year. Without the names obviously. Surely they are not selling our data.

    Well, you can get a fair idea about someone’s wealth, by looking at his income. Especially if, like the IRS, you have his 1040 Schedules B and D, which show what he’s invested in. Or, quick and dirty, just multiply investment income by about 25.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. Art Deco says:
    @Anon
    There’s a lot of quiet agricultural wealth in this country. The Stevensons of Illinois are best known as politicians. One was a 19th century Vice President, Adlai 2 was governor of Illinois twice and ran for President against Eisenhower twice. He was a Rockefeller protege in the 1930s working in the Rockefeller think tanks planning the establishment of the United Nations. He was the darling of the intellectual leftist faction of the Democrat party.

    His son, Adlai 3 was a Senator planning a great career hopefully President when he disobeyed AIPAC orders, was defeated in the re election and retired from politics

    The Stevensons arrived in Illinois in the 1830s and started buying up miles and miles of black gold. The superb topsoil was 20 feet deep in those days. Long hot summers, plentiful rain the McCormick Reapers and the farmers thrived They developed and built Bloomington Ill. One married into the Borden Milk company.

    They never gave up the farms. They still have them. There’s a saying about those Black Gold farms. They’re so rich even the tenants houses have swimming pools and are remodeled every few years.

    In California there are the Newhalls, Kern County Land Company and the Onizuciys around Watsonville.

    One of the biggest cotton operations in the world is around Bakersfield Ca. It’s owned by the same family that fled Alabama 140 years ago because of the boll weevil.

    Monsanto is mostly agricultural products.

    His son, Adlai 3 was a Senator planning a great career hopefully President when he disobeyed AIPAC orders, was defeated in the re election and retired from politics

    He voluntarily retired from the U.S. Senate. The elections he lost were for Governor of Illinois after he left Congress, and AIPAC didn’t have a blessed thing to do with it. The politician Israel’s advocates worked to get rid of was Paul Findlay, who had for some unaccountable reason volunteered to be Yasir Arafat’s prat boy on Capitol Hill. Mearsheimer and Walt had the idea that Charles Percy’s defeat in 1984 was attributable to AIPAC, cue Mandy Rice-Davies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Senator Stevenson, fellow Ill. Senator Charles Percy and Findlay were all wiped out by AIPAC after they voted to sell AWAC planes to Saudi Arabia.

    And Stevenson went back to being a gentleman farmer.
    , @Anon
    Findlay had nothing to do with Arafat.

    Some of his Peoria I’ll. constituents had business dealings with the Kuwait government. He soon realized that everything he knew about the Israel Palestine problem was biased, bigoted lies broadcasted by the zionists.

    So he became neutral, not insanely pro Israel as the rest of the Congress critters are.

    That was his sin and that’s why AIPAC got rid of him.

    60, 70, 80 years ago the Zionist lobby waited till congress critters got elected to lobby them, or if they aren’t compliant get rid of them.

    Nowadays AIPAC and other Zionist’s roam the colleges and law schools looking for young people they can groom to be AIPAC robots.

    Un ambassador former governor Nikki Haley is one example.

    Everybody in I’ll. was aware how AIPAC destroyed Percy and Stevenson because they defied AIPAC on the sale of military planes to Saudi Arabia.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. Voltara says:

    Part of the scam is to persuade you that the ultra wealthy got there by the same means they expect you to live by. So they promote Gates and Buffet as the world’s richest because this suggests anyone who plays the sharemarket or writes some code can also make it.

    I have Chinese friends who tell me there are 100 people in Hong Kong who have more money than Bill Gates.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    I’m sure there are.
    , @Anonymous
    Protip: They are full of shit. Show me one store of wealth in Hong Kong which remotely approaches Microsoft, Amazon, Google. To get to billions you have to be able to show something worth a billion that is not illiquid, gaurded by a foreign military power etc. Which bank would you suppose holds this wealth ? The ones that were bankrupt in 2009 ?


    Walmart paid the Waltons 25 billion in dividends alone the last 10 years.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Run GMC
    I would think Piketty has an unconscious European bias towards class distinction that makes him think about “Old Money” as still being pervasive. Probably a common thought among European socialist movements for 2 centuries now. The European Old Money is now remarkably diffuse after generations and centuries. The Rothchilds are spread throughout the world by now and hardly know one another. They havent been innovators like American new-money, but have just attempted to maintain their inherited wealth to some degree and to stay relevant.

    The Fuggers, Von Thurn und Taxis, Freacobaldis, Casaraghis, Lichtensteins and Hohenzollerns have kept their 500 or more year old wealth.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    And survived world wars, coup d'états, currency collapses and ethnic cleansing. They know what they are doing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Voltara
    Part of the scam is to persuade you that the ultra wealthy got there by the same means they expect you to live by. So they promote Gates and Buffet as the world's richest because this suggests anyone who plays the sharemarket or writes some code can also make it.

    I have Chinese friends who tell me there are 100 people in Hong Kong who have more money than Bill Gates.

    I’m sure there are.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Art Deco
    His son, Adlai 3 was a Senator planning a great career hopefully President when he disobeyed AIPAC orders, was defeated in the re election and retired from politics

    He voluntarily retired from the U.S. Senate. The elections he lost were for Governor of Illinois after he left Congress, and AIPAC didn't have a blessed thing to do with it. The politician Israel's advocates worked to get rid of was Paul Findlay, who had for some unaccountable reason volunteered to be Yasir Arafat's prat boy on Capitol Hill. Mearsheimer and Walt had the idea that Charles Percy's defeat in 1984 was attributable to AIPAC, cue Mandy Rice-Davies.

    Senator Stevenson, fellow Ill. Senator Charles Percy and Findlay were all wiped out by AIPAC after they voted to sell AWAC planes to Saudi Arabia.

    And Stevenson went back to being a gentleman farmer.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @Art Deco Senator Stevenson, fellow Ill. Senator Charles Percy and Findlay were all wiped out by AIPAC after they voted to sell AWAC planes to Saudi Arabia. And Stevenson went back to being a gentleman farmer.

    Stevenson voluntarily retired from Congress at the end of 1980 and was not a member of that body during the AWACs controversy. Amazing how otiose the Israel Lobby is that the only people they can manage to get rid of out of the hundreds of members of Congress who voted to approve the AWACs sale were two people whose hold on their respective constituencies had been noticeably deteriorating in 1978 and 1980. Adlai Stevenson III, was, of course, a lawyer.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. @Art Deco
    Paul Fussell in Class pointed out


    Based on what? Someone he knew in graduate school?

    Based on what? Someone he knew in graduate school?

    Perhaps he measured their glucose intake:

    Fussell draws thick dividing lines before drawing thin ones. He suggests, for example, that “you could probably draw a trustworthy class line based wholly on the amount of sugar consumed by a family, making allowances for the number of children in the household.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/27/books/paul-fussell-class-in-america.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Prester John
    As a footnote and continuing in the on and off topic vein, speaking of The Prince of Camelot, am re-reading an interesting (if a bit snarky) evaluation of the Cold War called "The Fifty Year Wound" by one Derek Leebaert of G-town wherein he describes the obsession that the brothers Kennedy had with delivering a personal knock-out punch to that bearded slob in Kooba. The KGB spooks in Langley and (for all we know) the White House no doubt made him aware that he was in their x-hairs, hence the little tidbit offered to the reader by Leebaert that maybe, just maybe, it was Castro who gave the order to take out JFK, in so doing thereby implicitly rejecting "Oswald acted alone" argument (which, as the decades have passed, has become almost impossible to believe). No proof offered of course, nonetheless...interesting.

    A lot of people thought the Great Bearded One killed the Prince of Camelot because of the Prince’s numerous attempts to kill the Great Bearded One.

    It’s a decent theory based on who benefits and the fact that Oswald was pro Cuba and Ruby smuggled guns to Cuba at one time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art Deco
    It’s a decent theory based on who benefits and the fact that Oswald was pro Cuba and Ruby smuggled guns to Cuba at one time.

    Mr. Ruby ran seedy nightclubs that he wished were something better than that. He never married, had no children, and his living quarters at age 51 were described thus by a reporter present when they were searched by police: 'just a dumpy apartment'. He and his brothers had a certain amount of ingenuity in coming up with small business ideas which didn't require much technical knowledge, e.g. manufacturing and selling board-game type amusements. He was self-employed for decades. He was an impecunious, impetuous, and sentimental man who ran his mouth liberally, not some international man of mystery.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. @Anonymous
    Except Trump Daddy.... : )

    He peaked at 4.5 billion til he threatened the gravy train. Forbes banged him down 1 bil within a month after his elevator speech. Its owned by some VC goons in the valley though they sold half to a Chinese group after losing most of the investment. Print media. ... Nice call

    Except Trump Daddy…. : )

    He peaked at 4.5 billion til he threatened the gravy train. Forbes banged him down 1 bil within a month after his elevator speech.

    Trump mentions in one of his books that Malcolm Forbes, in his dotage, would show up at his casinos with under-21 boy toys. Trump put a stop to it because, whilc Forbes’s private pecadilloes were no concern of his, he wasn’t going to risk his license to serve liquor in New Jersey.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Art Deco
    His son, Adlai 3 was a Senator planning a great career hopefully President when he disobeyed AIPAC orders, was defeated in the re election and retired from politics

    He voluntarily retired from the U.S. Senate. The elections he lost were for Governor of Illinois after he left Congress, and AIPAC didn't have a blessed thing to do with it. The politician Israel's advocates worked to get rid of was Paul Findlay, who had for some unaccountable reason volunteered to be Yasir Arafat's prat boy on Capitol Hill. Mearsheimer and Walt had the idea that Charles Percy's defeat in 1984 was attributable to AIPAC, cue Mandy Rice-Davies.

    Findlay had nothing to do with Arafat.

    Some of his Peoria I’ll. constituents had business dealings with the Kuwait government. He soon realized that everything he knew about the Israel Palestine problem was biased, bigoted lies broadcasted by the zionists.

    So he became neutral, not insanely pro Israel as the rest of the Congress critters are.

    That was his sin and that’s why AIPAC got rid of him.

    60, 70, 80 years ago the Zionist lobby waited till congress critters got elected to lobby them, or if they aren’t compliant get rid of them.

    Nowadays AIPAC and other Zionist’s roam the colleges and law schools looking for young people they can groom to be AIPAC robots.

    Un ambassador former governor Nikki Haley is one example.

    Everybody in I’ll. was aware how AIPAC destroyed Percy and Stevenson because they defied AIPAC on the sale of military planes to Saudi Arabia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Findlay had nothing to do with Arafat.

    Take a look at the Almanac of American Politics and other reference books on Congress from the period. Not only did he have private meetings with Arafat in 1978, promoting the PLO was (by the admission of his office) his largest time sink over the succeeding four years. It was perfectly bizarre, but that's what he thought important. He was in a snit about losing his seat in 1982 for years afterward, blamed Israel for 9/11, and sits on the board of the rancid little agitprop agency run by Philip Giraldi and Alison Weir. That's what passes for 'neutral' on this board.

    Of course, AIPAC didn't get rid of him, the voters in his district got rid of him. It was a bad year for Republicans anyway and the Illinois legislature had redistricted in a way that injured him. Findlay was at odds with other constituencies, such as the pro-life movement, and his personality irritated other politicians and also constituents who had met him in meatspace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. Art Deco says:
    @Anon
    A lot of people thought the Great Bearded One killed the Prince of Camelot because of the Prince’s numerous attempts to kill the Great Bearded One.

    It’s a decent theory based on who benefits and the fact that Oswald was pro Cuba and Ruby smuggled guns to Cuba at one time.

    It’s a decent theory based on who benefits and the fact that Oswald was pro Cuba and Ruby smuggled guns to Cuba at one time.

    Mr. Ruby ran seedy nightclubs that he wished were something better than that. He never married, had no children, and his living quarters at age 51 were described thus by a reporter present when they were searched by police: ‘just a dumpy apartment’. He and his brothers had a certain amount of ingenuity in coming up with small business ideas which didn’t require much technical knowledge, e.g. manufacturing and selling board-game type amusements. He was self-employed for decades. He was an impecunious, impetuous, and sentimental man who ran his mouth liberally, not some international man of mystery.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Yes, I know he was a pimp strip club owner low level probably gay gangster. But he did smuggle guns to Cuba and did kill Oswald.

    Oswald’s being pro Castro and Ruby’s smuggling guns to Cuba, and at least one authenticated trip to pre Castro Cuba makes the Great Bearded One killed the Prince of Camelot theory a reasonable theory among many reasonable theories.

    It’s a good thing Ruby killed Oswald in front of a TV audience of millions on a Sunday morning when everyone was home from work watching the TV coverage.

    Otherwise there’d be a thousand books claiming Ruby didn’t kill Oswald.
    , @Anon
    I see you’re going to kvetch and try to start a fight about every word I post.

    Do you have undiagnosed diabetes? You’ve got the symptoms.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    The USA - like most of the developed world - has a government sector which accounts for at least 50% of GDP.
    Who do you think pays for army, airforce, navy, police, politicians, teachers etc etc etc salaries?

    Now, this of course means that the state - politicians remember are paid through the state - has an absolutely enormous vested interest in gathering as much tax money as possible.
    Doubtless the state pays for and maintains highly competent personnel to gather tax - and target individuals with money - supported by the most sophisticated and exhaustive record keeping, surveillance and monitoring. Basically, there's no where to hide.
    Also tax authorities have rather draconian powers of investigation and seizure.

    The upshot is that tax authorities know, absolutely, who's got the money and where it is stashed.

    There’s plenty of places to hide. For instance, you don’t have to pay tax on real estate you sell.

    The IRS doesn’t track real estate sales so it doesn’t know you’ve sold real estate unles you tell it by paying tax on the sale

    You get to keep it all instead of giving it to the Anti White Minions of Satan.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Slayer
    Well yes, if you want to be imprisoned for tax fraud ? I would advise against this strategy to create wealth.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Art Deco
    It’s a decent theory based on who benefits and the fact that Oswald was pro Cuba and Ruby smuggled guns to Cuba at one time.

    Mr. Ruby ran seedy nightclubs that he wished were something better than that. He never married, had no children, and his living quarters at age 51 were described thus by a reporter present when they were searched by police: 'just a dumpy apartment'. He and his brothers had a certain amount of ingenuity in coming up with small business ideas which didn't require much technical knowledge, e.g. manufacturing and selling board-game type amusements. He was self-employed for decades. He was an impecunious, impetuous, and sentimental man who ran his mouth liberally, not some international man of mystery.

    Yes, I know he was a pimp strip club owner low level probably gay gangster. But he did smuggle guns to Cuba and did kill Oswald.

    Oswald’s being pro Castro and Ruby’s smuggling guns to Cuba, and at least one authenticated trip to pre Castro Cuba makes the Great Bearded One killed the Prince of Camelot theory a reasonable theory among many reasonable theories.

    It’s a good thing Ruby killed Oswald in front of a TV audience of millions on a Sunday morning when everyone was home from work watching the TV coverage.

    Otherwise there’d be a thousand books claiming Ruby didn’t kill Oswald.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art Deco
    But he did smuggle guns to Cuba

    No, that's a fantasy.



    And did kill Oswald

    On the spur of the moment, like everything else he did. His dog was waiting for him in his car. He'd gone on an errand to buy money orders.



    Yes, I know he was a pimp strip club owner low level probably gay gangster.

    Protection rackets weren't unknown at that time and some union locals are run by shady characters. He had to do business with such people. He wasn't such a person himself.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Art Deco
    It’s a decent theory based on who benefits and the fact that Oswald was pro Cuba and Ruby smuggled guns to Cuba at one time.

    Mr. Ruby ran seedy nightclubs that he wished were something better than that. He never married, had no children, and his living quarters at age 51 were described thus by a reporter present when they were searched by police: 'just a dumpy apartment'. He and his brothers had a certain amount of ingenuity in coming up with small business ideas which didn't require much technical knowledge, e.g. manufacturing and selling board-game type amusements. He was self-employed for decades. He was an impecunious, impetuous, and sentimental man who ran his mouth liberally, not some international man of mystery.

    I see you’re going to kvetch and try to start a fight about every word I post.

    Do you have undiagnosed diabetes? You’ve got the symptoms.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art Deco
    I see you’re going to kvetch and try to start a fight about every word I post.

    Don't post crazy stuff, and I'll leave you alone.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. 1661er says:
    @Slayer
    No. Father a securities lawyer at a firm with ties to Buffet Munger. Probably a 2-3 mill a year salary guy. JD cant make the uber cash because they are not allowed to operate as a public company which conflicts with their clients interests.

    http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2011/04/flomwill.html

    Flom, the last living name partner of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, died in February at age 87. His estate, estimated to be in the low nine figures,

    Joseph Flom made it to “low nine figures” with just his income from Skadden as a name partner at the largest security/corporate/M&A firm. So it can be done. And that’s not counting the plaintiff side lawyers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Slayer
    Likely 200 mm territory. Some of those shysters worked contingency stuff on tobacco lawsuits or such.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. res says:
    @Anonymous
    It is arbitrary.

    So a troll it is. Carry on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. @boomstick
    The Hearsts seem to have a much smaller than the original mansion in San Simeon. On the beach, but exclusively theirs? Their own isolated mansion area seems seems to be Wyntoon, in Siskiyou County.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyntoon

    I suspect the Hearsts have gone a bit downhill. Newspapers are a mess. But didn't they get ESPN?

    Forbes asserts the Hearst clan has $28 billion today, making them the 9th richest clan in the US.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. @Chief Seattle
    The Leverett House library at Harvard has a prominent brass plaque inscribed with the text "Ten generations of Saltonstalls have matriculated here". Where are the Saltonstalls today? Not entirely sure, however, looking for deep power in the family trees of recent HYP graduates seems like a good starting point, and something far easier with computers, online ancestry and social media.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saltonstall_family

    Josh Rosen, the UCLA quarterback, is the son of a Philadelphia Lippincott.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. Art Deco says:
    @Anon
    Findlay had nothing to do with Arafat.

    Some of his Peoria I’ll. constituents had business dealings with the Kuwait government. He soon realized that everything he knew about the Israel Palestine problem was biased, bigoted lies broadcasted by the zionists.

    So he became neutral, not insanely pro Israel as the rest of the Congress critters are.

    That was his sin and that’s why AIPAC got rid of him.

    60, 70, 80 years ago the Zionist lobby waited till congress critters got elected to lobby them, or if they aren’t compliant get rid of them.

    Nowadays AIPAC and other Zionist’s roam the colleges and law schools looking for young people they can groom to be AIPAC robots.

    Un ambassador former governor Nikki Haley is one example.

    Everybody in I’ll. was aware how AIPAC destroyed Percy and Stevenson because they defied AIPAC on the sale of military planes to Saudi Arabia.

    Findlay had nothing to do with Arafat.

    Take a look at the Almanac of American Politics and other reference books on Congress from the period. Not only did he have private meetings with Arafat in 1978, promoting the PLO was (by the admission of his office) his largest time sink over the succeeding four years. It was perfectly bizarre, but that’s what he thought important. He was in a snit about losing his seat in 1982 for years afterward, blamed Israel for 9/11, and sits on the board of the rancid little agitprop agency run by Philip Giraldi and Alison Weir. That’s what passes for ‘neutral’ on this board.

    Of course, AIPAC didn’t get rid of him, the voters in his district got rid of him. It was a bad year for Republicans anyway and the Illinois legislature had redistricted in a way that injured him. Findlay was at odds with other constituencies, such as the pro-life movement, and his personality irritated other politicians and also constituents who had met him in meatspace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Knowing that Findlay is associated with Alison Weir makes me admire him.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. Art Deco says:
    @Anon
    Yes, I know he was a pimp strip club owner low level probably gay gangster. But he did smuggle guns to Cuba and did kill Oswald.

    Oswald’s being pro Castro and Ruby’s smuggling guns to Cuba, and at least one authenticated trip to pre Castro Cuba makes the Great Bearded One killed the Prince of Camelot theory a reasonable theory among many reasonable theories.

    It’s a good thing Ruby killed Oswald in front of a TV audience of millions on a Sunday morning when everyone was home from work watching the TV coverage.

    Otherwise there’d be a thousand books claiming Ruby didn’t kill Oswald.

    But he did smuggle guns to Cuba

    No, that’s a fantasy.

    And did kill Oswald

    On the spur of the moment, like everything else he did. His dog was waiting for him in his car. He’d gone on an errand to buy money orders.

    Yes, I know he was a pimp strip club owner low level probably gay gangster.

    Protection rackets weren’t unknown at that time and some union locals are run by shady characters. He had to do business with such people. He wasn’t such a person himself.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    He was a union racketeer in the 1930s in Chicago 25 years before he shot Kennedy.
    He was a pimp, strip club owner and low level gangster who shot Oswald in front of a world wide TV audience.

    I know the whole Jewish shtick. We are so oppressed and poor victims and there’s so much discrimination against us that we are were forced into the rackets.

    Ruby spent 30 or more years in the Mafia.

    And he shot Oswald because he wanted to show Jews were loyal Americans or because he loved the King and Queen of Camelot so much he wanted to spare the Queen the ordeal of testifying in a murder trial.

    Or he was just so emotional and devastated by the murder he succumbed to an irresistible impulse to shot the only suspect.

    I suppose he was arrested and charged with the murder because of anti Semitism
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. Art Deco says:
    @Anon
    I see you’re going to kvetch and try to start a fight about every word I post.

    Do you have undiagnosed diabetes? You’ve got the symptoms.

    I see you’re going to kvetch and try to start a fight about every word I post.

    Don’t post crazy stuff, and I’ll leave you alone.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. @Chief Seattle
    The Leverett House library at Harvard has a prominent brass plaque inscribed with the text "Ten generations of Saltonstalls have matriculated here". Where are the Saltonstalls today? Not entirely sure, however, looking for deep power in the family trees of recent HYP graduates seems like a good starting point, and something far easier with computers, online ancestry and social media.

    The Leverett House library at Harvard has a prominent brass plaque inscribed with the text “Ten generations of Saltonstalls have matriculated here”. Where are the Saltonstalls today?

    To comprehend the extent of the loss of Yankee power in its former hub, consider that Gov Leverett Saltonstall was reduced to campaigning in the Irish bars of Southie.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Here's a video from the 80s or 90s featuring two elderly Boston Brahmins who look to be in their 70s or 80s. They say that the Boston Brahmins are a "dwindling group" and that there are about a thousand of them around at the time of video. Presumably it's even fewer now.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwvONJXJUO4
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. @Anonymous
    Money is as money does.

    Perhaps it's best to conceive of money as a 'working fluid' - rather like water flowing in a mill race - in that it's utility is only expressed when it passes through the mill, does its work, and passes on again to work for someone else.
    In short money is dyanmic, the erroneous assumption of many being that a 'fixed stock' of capital sequestered somewhere necessarily equates income - the only form of wealth being tangible and therefore useful. Money, cash etc represents the means of doing things - purchasing another one's labor or the fruit of someone else's production - in that categorary must come a proportion of the fixed capital embodied in the production process.
    Basically, 'money' and 'production' in an economy are one and the same.

    From this it follows that the metric which *really* matters are the sheer cash flows - the aggregated net cash flows - within the global economy. The magnitude and direction, (vector, if you will), of the nett global cash flow is *the* key statistic.

    In the 1970s the vector favored the Arab petrostates.

    This century it favors China and the far east. Big time.
    That's where all eyes should be.

    This century it favors China and the far east. Big time.
    That’s where all eyes should be.

    As the great pundit said, all the best cowboys have Chinese eyes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. Art Deco says:
    @Anon
    Senator Stevenson, fellow Ill. Senator Charles Percy and Findlay were all wiped out by AIPAC after they voted to sell AWAC planes to Saudi Arabia.

    And Stevenson went back to being a gentleman farmer.

    Senator Stevenson, fellow Ill. Senator Charles Percy and Findlay were all wiped out by AIPAC after they voted to sell AWAC planes to Saudi Arabia. And Stevenson went back to being a gentleman farmer.

    Stevenson voluntarily retired from Congress at the end of 1980 and was not a member of that body during the AWACs controversy. Amazing how otiose the Israel Lobby is that the only people they can manage to get rid of out of the hundreds of members of Congress who voted to approve the AWACs sale were two people whose hold on their respective constituencies had been noticeably deteriorating in 1978 and 1980. Adlai Stevenson III, was, of course, a lawyer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. JMcG says:
    @TG
    Indeed. But I would think that most super rich do NOT buy mega-yachts or private golf courses etc. They live very well, indeed, but at expensive clubs and restaurants etc. Why bother to manage your own golf course when you can just pay to use a really nice one and hob-nob with your rich friends?

    One thing that the super rich WILL use, is private airplanes. We all know what a hassle traveling commercial air is, even in first class. A billionaire WILL want to avoid that. Using a private airplane lets you skip the TSA checkpoints etc., you just drive to a 'private' airport (subsidized by the general public, of course) and walk right onto the plane. I hear that often you don't even need passports etc. to go to many foreign countries. Last I checked wikipedia in 2017 there were worldwide over 22,000 private jets. Just saying.

    Something that is exploding is the use of "non-profit" foundations. These pay little to no taxes, but are still directly controlled by the founding families. Ostensibly for non-profit, the reality is that these can be used to influence politics etc. in many ways. Sure, a new rich billionaire may buy a mega yacht, but the cool ones know that past a certain point there is only so much physical luxury a single human being can experience. But power and influence? Ah, that has no ceiling.

    I agree with you about airports. I’ve been mystified about the number of airports that have been bought by small local governments from very well to do families over the past couple of decades. It makes no sense to me at all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. JMcG says:
    @Anonymous
    Any small businessman who you speak to, be it butcher, barber, baker or candlestick maker will sooner or later regale you with tales of his biggest bugbear - namely his dealings with the tax authorities, the stringent powers of the tax authorities, and the sheer burden of taxes.

    If the state puts so much effort and resources in garnering money from small time operators, do you really think that they will give the real money people an easy ride?

    To ask the question is to answer it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. @International Jew
    I like your shopping list, and I'm gonna bookmark it for in case I ever become a billionaire, haha.

    If there's a flaw in your plan, it's that you imagine you can keep your profile low by just avoiding active acts of publicity-seeking. That will help, but you'll never have much control over what other people say about you. And your plan inevitably puts you in contact with a lot of people.

    Anyway, just some things to think about between now and the day you actually become a billionaire. I don't know you so I don't know how tight your timetable for that is. Me, it would be nice if I could become a billionaire before my next major college reunion.

    Thanks. But I don’t think you need to become a billionaire to influence world events. A centi-millionaire or even a deci-millionaire should be able to do it, if they are not distracted with publicity, sports teams and chasing actresses.

    The discussion in this post kind of conflates two different things:

    1) Are there secret (stealth) billionaires out there? Piketty thinks so. Steve is skeptical.

    2) Is there an old money (or any age money) conspiracy to influence world events? Again, Piketty thinks so, while Steve is skeptical.

    It might be that Piketty is right about both questions (but if so, I suspect he would be wrong about who they are), but even then, the people who would be the affirmative answer to question 1 need not be the same people who would be an affirmative answer to question 2.

    To take some examples from the 20th century:

    It is generally accepted that Lenin’s Bolshevik revolution was financed by outside parties. There is a little less agreement about exactly who and how much, but that need not bother us as we just want to quantify approximately what it cost “own”, or at least influence, a major world power in 1917 and the answer appears to be the equivalent of a few hundred million of today’s dollars.

    A better documented (and cheaper) example is Winston Churchill, who was bailed out of his excessive personal debts before he assumed Britain’s Prime Ministership by Henry Strakosch (and possibly a few others) for about $50 million in today’s money. So the most powerful man in the biggest empire of the day could be had for $0.05 billion in today’s money. What a deal!

    As you probably know, the Clinton Foundation tended to attract multi-million dollar donations immediately before one Clinton or the other made or influenced major decisions of interest to the donor. So as recently as until the last election cycle, the vast power of the American deep state was at your disposal for $5 to $50 million a pop.

    What I’m saying is that if you’re not busy with private islands, yachting or movie producing, you can buy an awful lot of world power without ever appearing on anyone’s list of billionaires.

    And this doesn’t even get into examples like Stalin and Hitler, who ascended to dictatorial rulership of major powers without apparently any significant outside financing: just through their own ruthlessness, terror and intimidation, or–as they probably thought of it–political entrepreneurship. So if you are without morals or conscience, you don’t even need any money at all to ascend to world leadership.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Another angle is that a moderate amount of personal wealth combined with personal talent can take you far. William F. Buckley, for example, was wealthy enough to have a chauffeur and he got a lot of work done in the back seat of his limo. He wasn't famous because he was rich, but being rich helped him in his struggle to be famous and influential.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. JMcG says:
    @Anon
    The reason a lot of old money isn't on the billionaire list today has a lot of do with inflation and the dividing up of inheritances.

    100 million earned 100 years ago has to keep up with inflation to be 100 million today, which means everything it's been invested in has to be a good idea. 100 years of good investing ideas is as rare as a Dodo. Part of the problem is the amount of money a rich person can put in some wiseguy's investing scheme. If you put too much money in, you can get wiped out with one bad judgment call.

    As for inflation, according to this website:

    https://inflationdata.com/Inflation/Inflation_Rate/Long_Term_Inflation.asp

    The years 1913-1919 averaged 9.30% inflation every year. That's godawful. The next worst tier was 7.06% in the decade of the 1970s. 1913 was also the year income tax was legalized in the Constitution. According to Wiki, the top rates periodically spiked to:

    77% for the top tier in 1918
    58% for the top tier in 1922
    63% for the top tier in 1932
    94% for the top tier in 1944-1945

    The top tier tax rate was around 90% from about 1950-1963. Most people cannot even imagine this today. It was in the 70% tier from about 1963 to about 1980. One reason why Kennedy and Reagan were so loved is because they cut the tax rates. You always hear this about Reagan, but not about Kennedy. People who benefited keep their mouths shut about Kennedy the tax-cutter. It was Kennedy who cut the rate from 90% to 70%. There were lot of rich (((liberals))) living in the 1960s who loved Kennedy because he implemented their liberal policies AND he cut their taxes at the same time. (((They))) absolutely kissed his butt in gratitude for that.

    Do NOT underestimate rates like this in destroying old money. Some of these rates are crazy-high. When you combine high taxes on the rich plus inflation, plus the division of inheritances, it's not surprising that new money hogs the top of the lists. Do some math and you'll see a constant chipping away at wealth throughout the 20th century.

    Most people think it's easy to preserve your money if you're rich. However, stocks in the first half of the 20th century were not massive yielders, and the stock market did not show the crazy run-ups that have periodically popped up since 1980. Besides, anyone who invested in stocks in the 1930s saw a decade of losses, and the market was stagnant in the 1970s.

    It's easier to preserve wealth today than it used to be because of favorable tax laws and more ways to hide your wealth. Nonetheless, the actual reality is that preserving wealth is harder than it looks. The tech billionaires of today are highly unlikely to have grandchildren who are billionaries. Why? Making money is hard, but squandering wealth is easy and most people do it, even the descendants of billionaires.

    Income tax is not wealth tax.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. @Almost Missouri
    Thanks. But I don't think you need to become a billionaire to influence world events. A centi-millionaire or even a deci-millionaire should be able to do it, if they are not distracted with publicity, sports teams and chasing actresses.

    The discussion in this post kind of conflates two different things:

    1) Are there secret (stealth) billionaires out there? Piketty thinks so. Steve is skeptical.

    2) Is there an old money (or any age money) conspiracy to influence world events? Again, Piketty thinks so, while Steve is skeptical.

    It might be that Piketty is right about both questions (but if so, I suspect he would be wrong about who they are), but even then, the people who would be the affirmative answer to question 1 need not be the same people who would be an affirmative answer to question 2.

    To take some examples from the 20th century:

    It is generally accepted that Lenin's Bolshevik revolution was financed by outside parties. There is a little less agreement about exactly who and how much, but that need not bother us as we just want to quantify approximately what it cost "own", or at least influence, a major world power in 1917 and the answer appears to be the equivalent of a few hundred million of today's dollars.

    A better documented (and cheaper) example is Winston Churchill, who was bailed out of his excessive personal debts before he assumed Britain's Prime Ministership by Henry Strakosch (and possibly a few others) for about $50 million in today's money. So the most powerful man in the biggest empire of the day could be had for $0.05 billion in today's money. What a deal!

    As you probably know, the Clinton Foundation tended to attract multi-million dollar donations immediately before one Clinton or the other made or influenced major decisions of interest to the donor. So as recently as until the last election cycle, the vast power of the American deep state was at your disposal for $5 to $50 million a pop.

    What I'm saying is that if you're not busy with private islands, yachting or movie producing, you can buy an awful lot of world power without ever appearing on anyone's list of billionaires.

    And this doesn't even get into examples like Stalin and Hitler, who ascended to dictatorial rulership of major powers without apparently any significant outside financing: just through their own ruthlessness, terror and intimidation, or--as they probably thought of it--political entrepreneurship. So if you are without morals or conscience, you don't even need any money at all to ascend to world leadership.

    Another angle is that a moderate amount of personal wealth combined with personal talent can take you far. William F. Buckley, for example, was wealthy enough to have a chauffeur and he got a lot of work done in the back seat of his limo. He wasn’t famous because he was rich, but being rich helped him in his struggle to be famous and influential.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Yes, there are synergies.

    There might even be a golden mean.

    Labor + capital, baby!

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. @Anon
    You get on the good invite list by contributing to the right causes. For instance there are still hundreds of debutante balls in this country. They are usually fundraisers for hospitals.

    When your girls are about 10, send a presentable female family member to join the Friends of ....... contribute the minimum and your girls are debs and on all the right lists. Have their brothers and if not brothers men cousins be the required escorts and your kids are set for life.

    It’s expensive to keep up with the country club luxury vacation set though.

    Thanks for the tip, but my offspring are past that stage. I’m not too worried about them though.

    If I ever remarry and start over again, I’ll keep your advice in mind!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. Pat Boyle says:
    @Anon
    The kidnapped boy was John Paul third. He lived in Italy with his parents. Gordon and Anne always lived quietly in San Francisco.

    The Getty family became well known when the founder, John Paul 1 built and endowed 2 museums of Western Art, one in Malibu and the second in Los Angeles

    Gordon and Anne have contributed lavishly to the San Francisco Democrat Jerry Brown Willie Brown Feinstein Boxer Harris Pelosi Gay Power faction.

    Many go to Getty fundraisers to social climb

    Yes, yes perhaps this is true. Your point?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. Anonymous[400] • Disclaimer says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    The Leverett House library at Harvard has a prominent brass plaque inscribed with the text “Ten generations of Saltonstalls have matriculated here”. Where are the Saltonstalls today?
     
    To comprehend the extent of the loss of Yankee power in its former hub, consider that Gov Leverett Saltonstall was reduced to campaigning in the Irish bars of Southie.

    Here’s a video from the 80s or 90s featuring two elderly Boston Brahmins who look to be in their 70s or 80s. They say that the Boston Brahmins are a “dwindling group” and that there are about a thousand of them around at the time of video. Presumably it’s even fewer now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. @Anon
    The Fuggers, Von Thurn und Taxis, Freacobaldis, Casaraghis, Lichtensteins and Hohenzollerns have kept their 500 or more year old wealth.

    And survived world wars, coup d’états, currency collapses and ethnic cleansing. They know what they are doing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    It’s either the Hohenzollerns or Hohenloes who developed miles and miles of the Mediterranean coast of Spain into expensive beach resorts after WW2.

    The Prince bought the Spanish land ultra cheap developed the resorts and used his and his friends aristocratic prestige to bring in wealthy vacationers.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. @Steve Sailer
    Another angle is that a moderate amount of personal wealth combined with personal talent can take you far. William F. Buckley, for example, was wealthy enough to have a chauffeur and he got a lot of work done in the back seat of his limo. He wasn't famous because he was rich, but being rich helped him in his struggle to be famous and influential.

    Yes, there are synergies.

    There might even be a golden mean.

    Labor + capital, baby!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @IBC
    I think the Lexus brand now occupies a pretty comparable market position to what Buick used to enjoy many decades ago. And the Germany luxury brands and large luxury SUVs in general have mostly taken over Cadillac's old position; which remember, before the '70s; was a lot more socially prestigious than in subsequent decades (except for the Escalade which is still very successful within its market).

    (except for the Escalade which is still very successful within its market).

    Janet Jackson fans, primarily.

    Around here Escalades are for negroes and Mary Kay distributors. But it is considered cool to put the front clip of an Escalade on a GM truck. I don’t get it myself but that’s what they do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @IBC
    The Escalade is just a Suburban or Tahoe with some styling changes and extra luxury bling. But I think it was a hit with professional athletes and hip hop artists from the moment it was introduced. Prices start at close to $90,000 and GM sells quite a few of them, so that's a nice profit they must be making. For comparison, you can buy an entry-level Lexus for about $35,000. Cadillac makes entry-level luxury cars too, but they don't sell that well. Buick generally gets good reviews and its average customer age is actually very close to that of Lexus, but its sales numbers and overall prestige are still just a shadow of what they used to be, at least in the US.

    If you remember, back in 2009 when Tiger Woods was in that embarassing car crash and it became public knowledge that he was cheating on his wife and potentially had some substance abuse issues --he was driving an Escalade. Ironically, at around that time or maybe ending a little bit before, he was publicly endorsing Buick. So maybe that was a clue to the difference between his public and private personas at the time...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. Slayer says:
    @1661er
    http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2011/04/flomwill.html

    Flom, the last living name partner of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, died in February at age 87. His estate, estimated to be in the low nine figures,
     
    Joseph Flom made it to "low nine figures" with just his income from Skadden as a name partner at the largest security/corporate/M&A firm. So it can be done. And that's not counting the plaintiff side lawyers.

    Likely 200 mm territory. Some of those shysters worked contingency stuff on tobacco lawsuits or such.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. Slayer says:
    @Anon
    There’s plenty of places to hide. For instance, you don’t have to pay tax on real estate you sell.

    The IRS doesn’t track real estate sales so it doesn’t know you’ve sold real estate unles you tell it by paying tax on the sale

    You get to keep it all instead of giving it to the Anti White Minions of Satan.

    Well yes, if you want to be imprisoned for tax fraud ? I would advise against this strategy to create wealth.

    Read More
    • Agree: PV van der Byl
    • Replies: @Anon
    It’s not fraud if you don’t file a tax return the year you sold the property

    There are people who’ve been doing it for 40 years.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. Anonymous[216] • Disclaimer says:
    @Voltara
    Part of the scam is to persuade you that the ultra wealthy got there by the same means they expect you to live by. So they promote Gates and Buffet as the world's richest because this suggests anyone who plays the sharemarket or writes some code can also make it.

    I have Chinese friends who tell me there are 100 people in Hong Kong who have more money than Bill Gates.

    Protip: They are full of shit. Show me one store of wealth in Hong Kong which remotely approaches Microsoft, Amazon, Google. To get to billions you have to be able to show something worth a billion that is not illiquid, gaurded by a foreign military power etc. Which bank would you suppose holds this wealth ? The ones that were bankrupt in 2009 ?

    Walmart paid the Waltons 25 billion in dividends alone the last 10 years.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. Brutusale says:
    @Chief Seattle
    The Leverett House library at Harvard has a prominent brass plaque inscribed with the text "Ten generations of Saltonstalls have matriculated here". Where are the Saltonstalls today? Not entirely sure, however, looking for deep power in the family trees of recent HYP graduates seems like a good starting point, and something far easier with computers, online ancestry and social media.

    Harumph. Blow-ins like the Saltonstalls have nothing on the Welds.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Weld

    Bill Weld had a great line when MA Senate president Billy Bulger (known variously as the Corrupt Midget or Whitey’s brother) poked fun at his heritage during a joint session when Weld was governor.

    “Actually, they weren’t on the Mayflower. They sent the servants over first to get the cottage ready.”

    The old money summer places are pretty impressive, though.

    http://www.newportmansions.org/explore

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. @Anon
    The reason a lot of old money isn't on the billionaire list today has a lot of do with inflation and the dividing up of inheritances.

    100 million earned 100 years ago has to keep up with inflation to be 100 million today, which means everything it's been invested in has to be a good idea. 100 years of good investing ideas is as rare as a Dodo. Part of the problem is the amount of money a rich person can put in some wiseguy's investing scheme. If you put too much money in, you can get wiped out with one bad judgment call.

    As for inflation, according to this website:

    https://inflationdata.com/Inflation/Inflation_Rate/Long_Term_Inflation.asp

    The years 1913-1919 averaged 9.30% inflation every year. That's godawful. The next worst tier was 7.06% in the decade of the 1970s. 1913 was also the year income tax was legalized in the Constitution. According to Wiki, the top rates periodically spiked to:

    77% for the top tier in 1918
    58% for the top tier in 1922
    63% for the top tier in 1932
    94% for the top tier in 1944-1945

    The top tier tax rate was around 90% from about 1950-1963. Most people cannot even imagine this today. It was in the 70% tier from about 1963 to about 1980. One reason why Kennedy and Reagan were so loved is because they cut the tax rates. You always hear this about Reagan, but not about Kennedy. People who benefited keep their mouths shut about Kennedy the tax-cutter. It was Kennedy who cut the rate from 90% to 70%. There were lot of rich (((liberals))) living in the 1960s who loved Kennedy because he implemented their liberal policies AND he cut their taxes at the same time. (((They))) absolutely kissed his butt in gratitude for that.

    Do NOT underestimate rates like this in destroying old money. Some of these rates are crazy-high. When you combine high taxes on the rich plus inflation, plus the division of inheritances, it's not surprising that new money hogs the top of the lists. Do some math and you'll see a constant chipping away at wealth throughout the 20th century.

    Most people think it's easy to preserve your money if you're rich. However, stocks in the first half of the 20th century were not massive yielders, and the stock market did not show the crazy run-ups that have periodically popped up since 1980. Besides, anyone who invested in stocks in the 1930s saw a decade of losses, and the market was stagnant in the 1970s.

    It's easier to preserve wealth today than it used to be because of favorable tax laws and more ways to hide your wealth. Nonetheless, the actual reality is that preserving wealth is harder than it looks. The tech billionaires of today are highly unlikely to have grandchildren who are billionaries. Why? Making money is hard, but squandering wealth is easy and most people do it, even the descendants of billionaires.

    Good points. Also the Great Depression wiped out significant wealth. Families lost millions when the banks failed and $140 Billion in deposits were destroyed…FDR then confiscated all Gold and outlawed the ownership of Gold. The Federal Government then devalued the dollar , an ounce of gold went from $20 to $35 in 1933 This policy destroyed billions of wealth, as billions of dollars worth of gold were traded for currency which was then debased.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. MBlanc46 says:

    Mme B informs me that the Duke of Westminster is no longer the richest man in the UK.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    James Ratcliffe. Working class, from Yorkshire. Chemical engineer. 14 Billion US$
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. Anonymous[216] • Disclaimer says:
    @MBlanc46
    Mme B informs me that the Duke of Westminster is no longer the richest man in the UK.

    James Ratcliffe. Working class, from Yorkshire. Chemical engineer. 14 Billion US$

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. @Steve Sailer
    "an underground tennis court"

    He needs an underground zeppelin hangar.

    If you find an underground zeppelin hangar you will have confirmed that we live in an alternate timeline, which is the only place airships exist.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @gcochran
    Those "North Vietnamese shipped South" are called Catholics.

    The story at the time was that the ho chi
    min’s communists took over N Vietnam and persecuted the Catholics who fled to S Vietnam.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. @David
    Here in little Vermont, my neighbor owns 2600 acres with a very fine house and maybe 25 acres of nicely fenced horse pasture -- an impressive feature in this land like Ithaca.

    He's supposedly a mergers and acquisitions lawyer in Manhattan. I've met him, know his name, but if I google it, I hit absolutely nothing. No matter how many pages I tab through.

    I'm nobody, but my name appears here and there on the net due to communications with our select board, charitable gifts, etc. I wonder how he does it.

    There’s a small industry involved in getting you to disappear from the internet. It involves creating fake stories and activities about a person with the same name, but different profile and interests. We looked into it for a relative, but it was too cumbersome for our computer guru and we didn’t feel like paying for a professional.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Joe Stalin
    I wonder if Larry Ellison has EVER given one cent to the now Black South Shore High School in Chicago that he went too?

    Why should anyone give money to a public school of any kind, let alone a black one?

    Better he endow some inexpensive maybe $5,00o a year tuition private high schools.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Goatweed
    Has someone constructed a 1790 Forbes' list for America, Britain....

    George Washington’s wife Martha was the 6th richest person and richest woman in America at the time of their marriage

    She inherited it all when parents and first husband died. There was a Philadelphia banker Girard 1800 1810 who was the richest man in America

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Slayer
    Well yes, if you want to be imprisoned for tax fraud ? I would advise against this strategy to create wealth.

    It’s not fraud if you don’t file a tax return the year you sold the property

    There are people who’ve been doing it for 40 years.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @El Dato
    Definitely not old-school Highlander lore.

    Wait, did the "Madou" decapitate his own baby?

    Meanwhile, Nantes is still on fire because "Mamadou" (real name Aboubakar Fofana) got hit in useful places of his body by somewhat nervous blue forces:

    Mr Fofana almost ran over two children and hit an officer as he reversed his car away from a police control point “at very high speed,” prompting another officer to open fire. He was hit in the neck and declared dead on arrival at hospital.

    He was the subject of an arrest warrant issued in June last year for organised robbery, possession of stolen goods and criminal conspiracy.
     
    So far about thirty cars and several buildings, among which a town hall subsidiary and two supermarkets have been torched.

    Yes he did decapitate his own baby after he lost a custody battle for her.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Slayer
    Good example the Duponts. Still among wealthiest families, but the fortune split among 3000 or so people living in horse country in New Jersey or coastal Delaware presumably. ( Joke )

    Best contradistinction would be the Cargill MacMillan fortune which is vastly larger though of somewhat similar vintage. Still complete family control with the most billionaires in the US. When one wants to exit the others either buy them out or spin off a part of the company that allows the exiting member to sell the shares and liquidate but keeps control with cargill. Never been a public company unlike dupont so far easier to manage these transactions.

    Is Cargill the meat company?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Slayer
    Grains and other ag yes. Commodity trading broadly.
    , @PV van der Byl
    Grain.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  201. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Almost Missouri
    And survived world wars, coup d'états, currency collapses and ethnic cleansing. They know what they are doing.

    It’s either the Hohenzollerns or Hohenloes who developed miles and miles of the Mediterranean coast of Spain into expensive beach resorts after WW2.

    The Prince bought the Spanish land ultra cheap developed the resorts and used his and his friends aristocratic prestige to bring in wealthy vacationers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. IBC says:
    @Anonymous

    (except for the Escalade which is still very successful within its market).
     
    Janet Jackson fans, primarily.

    Around here Escalades are for negroes and Mary Kay distributors. But it is considered cool to put the front clip of an Escalade on a GM truck. I don't get it myself but that's what they do.

    The Escalade is just a Suburban or Tahoe with some styling changes and extra luxury bling. But I think it was a hit with professional athletes and hip hop artists from the moment it was introduced. Prices start at close to $90,000 and GM sells quite a few of them, so that’s a nice profit they must be making. For comparison, you can buy an entry-level Lexus for about $35,000. Cadillac makes entry-level luxury cars too, but they don’t sell that well. Buick generally gets good reviews and its average customer age is actually very close to that of Lexus, but its sales numbers and overall prestige are still just a shadow of what they used to be, at least in the US.

    If you remember, back in 2009 when Tiger Woods was in that embarassing car crash and it became public knowledge that he was cheating on his wife and potentially had some substance abuse issues –he was driving an Escalade. Ironically, at around that time or maybe ending a little bit before, he was publicly endorsing Buick. So maybe that was a clue to the difference between his public and private personas at the time…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. Family/Private Foundations.

    Examples: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation but there are many old ones, like the Ford Foundation.

    - Reduce your income tax for each year in which you make a contribution
    - Avoid capital gains taxes depending on the characteristics of property contributed
    - Reduce or eliminate potential estate taxes
    - Grow your charitable funds in a tax-advantaged environment, and pass control of them to future generations to continue your philanthropy.

    If your very rich, north of $20 million your estate will be subjected to estate taxes which are very high. But the rich being rich, created tax advantaged loopholes getting themselves out of those estate taxes and also provide the family name great PR as a secondary benefit for decades to come! Plus they will employ subsequent generations of family & friends for many years as well. How many Ford’s descendants received salaries for showing up to the Foundations annual meeting and voting aye?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    So you give away billions but some random grandchild will get a token salary.

    Thats not how to get rich. Once your dead, philanthropy looks less interesting.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Art Deco
    Findlay had nothing to do with Arafat.

    Take a look at the Almanac of American Politics and other reference books on Congress from the period. Not only did he have private meetings with Arafat in 1978, promoting the PLO was (by the admission of his office) his largest time sink over the succeeding four years. It was perfectly bizarre, but that's what he thought important. He was in a snit about losing his seat in 1982 for years afterward, blamed Israel for 9/11, and sits on the board of the rancid little agitprop agency run by Philip Giraldi and Alison Weir. That's what passes for 'neutral' on this board.

    Of course, AIPAC didn't get rid of him, the voters in his district got rid of him. It was a bad year for Republicans anyway and the Illinois legislature had redistricted in a way that injured him. Findlay was at odds with other constituencies, such as the pro-life movement, and his personality irritated other politicians and also constituents who had met him in meatspace.

    Knowing that Findlay is associated with Alison Weir makes me admire him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Art Deco
    But he did smuggle guns to Cuba

    No, that's a fantasy.



    And did kill Oswald

    On the spur of the moment, like everything else he did. His dog was waiting for him in his car. He'd gone on an errand to buy money orders.



    Yes, I know he was a pimp strip club owner low level probably gay gangster.

    Protection rackets weren't unknown at that time and some union locals are run by shady characters. He had to do business with such people. He wasn't such a person himself.

    He was a union racketeer in the 1930s in Chicago 25 years before he shot Kennedy.
    He was a pimp, strip club owner and low level gangster who shot Oswald in front of a world wide TV audience.

    I know the whole Jewish shtick. We are so oppressed and poor victims and there’s so much discrimination against us that we are were forced into the rackets.

    Ruby spent 30 or more years in the Mafia.

    And he shot Oswald because he wanted to show Jews were loyal Americans or because he loved the King and Queen of Camelot so much he wanted to spare the Queen the ordeal of testifying in a murder trial.

    Or he was just so emotional and devastated by the murder he succumbed to an irresistible impulse to shot the only suspect.

    I suppose he was arrested and charged with the murder because of anti Semitism

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art Deco
    He was a union racketeer in the 1930s in Chicago 25 years before he shot Kennedy.
    He was a pimp, strip club owner and low level gangster who shot Oswald in front of a world wide TV audience.


    He didn't shoot Kennedy, he shot Oswald. He was all of 27 years old in 1938, so a mighty precocious underworld boss. Had no criminal record, either.


    I know the whole Jewish shtick. We are so oppressed and poor victims and there’s so much discrimination against us that we are were forced into the rackets.

    I didn't allude to anything to which you're referring, but you brought it up anyway. I can see why you fancy Alison Weir.



    Ruby spent 30 or more years in the Mafia.

    Yeah, the figured he'd been wetnursed by a Sicilian.



    And he shot Oswald because he wanted to show Jews were loyal Americans or because he loved the King and Queen of Camelot so much he wanted to spare the Queen the ordeal of testifying in a murder trial.

    He shot Oswald for about the same reason he had confrontations with people at his nightclub: he was a highly emotional man.



    I suppose he was arrested and charged with the murder because of anti Semitism

    You probably should deal with this obsession 'ere it costs you or somebody else.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  206. Art Deco says:
    @Anon
    He was a union racketeer in the 1930s in Chicago 25 years before he shot Kennedy.
    He was a pimp, strip club owner and low level gangster who shot Oswald in front of a world wide TV audience.

    I know the whole Jewish shtick. We are so oppressed and poor victims and there’s so much discrimination against us that we are were forced into the rackets.

    Ruby spent 30 or more years in the Mafia.

    And he shot Oswald because he wanted to show Jews were loyal Americans or because he loved the King and Queen of Camelot so much he wanted to spare the Queen the ordeal of testifying in a murder trial.

    Or he was just so emotional and devastated by the murder he succumbed to an irresistible impulse to shot the only suspect.

    I suppose he was arrested and charged with the murder because of anti Semitism

    He was a union racketeer in the 1930s in Chicago 25 years before he shot Kennedy.
    He was a pimp, strip club owner and low level gangster who shot Oswald in front of a world wide TV audience.

    He didn’t shoot Kennedy, he shot Oswald. He was all of 27 years old in 1938, so a mighty precocious underworld boss. Had no criminal record, either.

    I know the whole Jewish shtick. We are so oppressed and poor victims and there’s so much discrimination against us that we are were forced into the rackets.

    I didn’t allude to anything to which you’re referring, but you brought it up anyway. I can see why you fancy Alison Weir.

    Ruby spent 30 or more years in the Mafia.

    Yeah, the figured he’d been wetnursed by a Sicilian.

    And he shot Oswald because he wanted to show Jews were loyal Americans or because he loved the King and Queen of Camelot so much he wanted to spare the Queen the ordeal of testifying in a murder trial.

    He shot Oswald for about the same reason he had confrontations with people at his nightclub: he was a highly emotional man.

    I suppose he was arrested and charged with the murder because of anti Semitism

    You probably should deal with this obsession ‘ere it costs you or somebody else.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    (different anon)

    Yeah, the figured he’d been wetnursed by a Sicilian.
     
    You know a fair deal about a lot of things, but the mob is not one of them.

    I didn’t allude to anything to which you’re referring, but you brought it up anyway.
     
    I get the appreciation of "topic", but this is not a cross-examination.

    mighty precocious underworld boss. vs.

    union racketeer ... low level gangster
     

     
    The OED has a bone to pick with you, sir.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. Slayer says:
    @Anon
    Is Cargill the meat company?

    Grains and other ag yes. Commodity trading broadly.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. Anonymous[216] • Disclaimer says:
    @George Taylor
    Family/Private Foundations.

    Examples: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation but there are many old ones, like the Ford Foundation.

    - Reduce your income tax for each year in which you make a contribution
    - Avoid capital gains taxes depending on the characteristics of property contributed
    - Reduce or eliminate potential estate taxes
    - Grow your charitable funds in a tax-advantaged environment, and pass control of them to future generations to continue your philanthropy.

    If your very rich, north of $20 million your estate will be subjected to estate taxes which are very high. But the rich being rich, created tax advantaged loopholes getting themselves out of those estate taxes and also provide the family name great PR as a secondary benefit for decades to come! Plus they will employ subsequent generations of family & friends for many years as well. How many Ford's descendants received salaries for showing up to the Foundations annual meeting and voting aye?

    So you give away billions but some random grandchild will get a token salary.

    Thats not how to get rich. Once your dead, philanthropy looks less interesting.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. @Anon
    Is Cargill the meat company?

    Grain.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  210. Anon[298] • Disclaimer says:
    @Art Deco
    He was a union racketeer in the 1930s in Chicago 25 years before he shot Kennedy.
    He was a pimp, strip club owner and low level gangster who shot Oswald in front of a world wide TV audience.


    He didn't shoot Kennedy, he shot Oswald. He was all of 27 years old in 1938, so a mighty precocious underworld boss. Had no criminal record, either.


    I know the whole Jewish shtick. We are so oppressed and poor victims and there’s so much discrimination against us that we are were forced into the rackets.

    I didn't allude to anything to which you're referring, but you brought it up anyway. I can see why you fancy Alison Weir.



    Ruby spent 30 or more years in the Mafia.

    Yeah, the figured he'd been wetnursed by a Sicilian.



    And he shot Oswald because he wanted to show Jews were loyal Americans or because he loved the King and Queen of Camelot so much he wanted to spare the Queen the ordeal of testifying in a murder trial.

    He shot Oswald for about the same reason he had confrontations with people at his nightclub: he was a highly emotional man.



    I suppose he was arrested and charged with the murder because of anti Semitism

    You probably should deal with this obsession 'ere it costs you or somebody else.

    (different anon)

    Yeah, the figured he’d been wetnursed by a Sicilian.

    You know a fair deal about a lot of things, but the mob is not one of them.

    I didn’t allude to anything to which you’re referring, but you brought it up anyway.

    I get the appreciation of “topic”, but this is not a cross-examination.

    mighty precocious underworld boss. vs.

    union racketeer … low level gangster

    The OED has a bone to pick with you, sir.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. Kevin C. says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    There's also some basic math to consider. The older the money, the more descendants it's likely split amongst. It's entirely possible to invest a big fortune so that your descendants are wealthy several generations in the future, but to be as wealthy as the wealthiest men of their time seems unlikely.

    I recall reading about how the persistance of the Rothschild family’s wealth down the centuries was probably largely explained by their tendency to cousin marriage and other endogamy “keeping it in the family,” as it were.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Hundreds of POWs may have been left to die in Vietnam, abandoned by their government—and our media.
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored