Ok lets call it total compensation then.
Facebook, Amazon etc....
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
heartbreaking
I can give you a long list of capitalists if you want.
No it's true that Besoz gets paid more than his workers, it's not true that he should.
Last edited:
Never amazes me how some people think bezos just stumbled into his Amazon wealth as if anyone would have.
pretty sure his salary is low because he hates paying tax but whatevs
It's not total compensation either. He doesn't receive $100bn every year. He owns $100bn of the company, if the stock price went to zero so would his stake in it.
His total compensation is $1.7 million. His salary is only $80k. The rest is security costs that Amazon pay on his behalf. He gets nothing else new from them.
Amazon's model has long been to reinvest all their profits into the business. That's a big part of why they have grown so fast whilst others messed about paying dividends and bonuses.
That was never my argument.
Although fair play to Bezos for stumbling into $250,573 worth of investment from his parents. Now thats hard work!
That's nothing in the grand scheme of things. Turning 250k into what he did requires special mental ability and a lot of hard work.
I mean yeah if Bezos was poor maybe he never would have reached the heights he did but he most likely would have achieved some level of success unless he was so poor he didn't even get a proper education.
Was that your argument?
That wouldn't make a difference. Bezos is in the highest bracket anyway.
Not sure what the issue is with him fundraising within his own network. People do this all the time, and I don’t see anything wrong with it.
- That $250k was a loan. Could have easily lost it all.
- Should people not be allowed to choose how to invest?
- That $250k investment is worth billions today!
Some people are just jealous. He can't possibly have made it all himself, he has to have been given some advantage *I* don't have access to. I just need to find it.
Gosh how ever will we find it?
It's a bit of both in this case. Most people absolutely do not have access to 250K of start-up capital from family. But, it's also true that most people that do have that access can't turn it into something like Amazon. It's a case of him being both fortunate with advantages and good with building a company at the right place at the right time.
was referring to the typical avoidance methods using a low base salary that CEOs use because CGT is much lower
his stock is already worth over $100bn though so he's incentivised enough already
Wait what? Your parents gave you a quarter of a million?
How is a quarter of a million that much? Pretty ridiculous to point it out.
By the time Bezos was starting Amazon he was one of the most successful youngest executives are D.E Shaw. To say they least you have to be extremely sharp to be in that position.
Yeah he had your privileges of an upper class family and access to quality education but he was extremely smart and certainly not some kid using daddy's money to expand his family business.
What the hell is this? A nuanced argument on the internet? Heathen.
Bezos clearly deserves credit for what he’s achieved - he’s a business genius IMO and likely to end up a success whatever his situation but it is also fair to say most people on the planet are prevented from showcasing their own business acumen as they would never get access to that start up capital.
Just using my own situation - I’d say I’m pretty entrepreneurial but if I was to raise funds from my family - I’d max be able to raise about 5K - so that severely limits what ideas I can put into practice and for most people that means you just end up taking a normal salaried role because the thought of starting a revolutionary business is too much of a risk or just impossible to get off the ground.
Therefore the number of people you’re competing with is very small. Having said that it isn’t impossible for a rags to riches tale or business growth - just Bezos journey was definitely made easier than others.
Last edited:
your take is pretty ridiculous in my opinion
99.999% of people in the world don't have parents who can afford to gift them this for a punt on a startup (with 95%+ chance of failure)
the type of safety net we're talking about here goes way beyond that dollar amount, if he spunks it away there's is plenty more where that came from
and his fall-back is probably take a high paid job at a tech-firm and live a life of comfort
the chance to take a few years out to pursue your dream is something very very few people ever get the chance to do.. its just impossible for most people
that doesn't take away anything from what he's achieved, it's still insanely difficult to do what he's done
The wrong arguments are being made here. Yes, you have highlight the privilege he got from his family and ability to turn that into a success.
However, the critique builds out of that in multiple directions.
1. He's built a company on the backs of cheap and abused labour.
2. He's benefited from state backed intervention to make Amazon what it is today.
3. The "entrepreneur" myth has been used by governments to tear down unions, workers rights, social safety nets in the name of "everyone can be self-made if you get the state out of the way".
4. Governments/politics use Bezos/Amazon et al. to perpetuate the "bootstraps" ideology.
I don't care if Bezos got 250k from his family, what I care about and what I think others should as well, is how that success is sold to people in terms of labour, the political ideology of entrepreneurship and the dismantling of the social state. Bezos feeds into that and like many out of touch rich people, thinks philanthropy is the answer to social safety nets and the woes of the state and thus does not challenge how his "story" is used to influence politics.
If Bezos got 250k from his parents, made amazon what it is today, yet didn't try to bust unions, pay poverty wages, dis-endorse philanthropy, and fought back against his "story" being held up as an example that "everyone else just doesn't try as hard as Bezos and thats why you're poor", no one would give a flying feck. The argument should move beyond "250K and he's self made" to how their success also feeds into societal failures.
However, the critique builds out of that in multiple directions.
1. He's built a company on the backs of cheap and abused labour.
2. He's benefited from state backed intervention to make Amazon what it is today.
3. The "entrepreneur" myth has been used by governments to tear down unions, workers rights, social safety nets in the name of "everyone can be self-made if you get the state out of the way".
4. Governments/politics use Bezos/Amazon et al. to perpetuate the "bootstraps" ideology.
I don't care if Bezos got 250k from his family, what I care about and what I think others should as well, is how that success is sold to people in terms of labour, the political ideology of entrepreneurship and the dismantling of the social state. Bezos feeds into that and like many out of touch rich people, thinks philanthropy is the answer to social safety nets and the woes of the state and thus does not challenge how his "story" is used to influence politics.
If Bezos got 250k from his parents, made amazon what it is today, yet didn't try to bust unions, pay poverty wages, dis-endorse philanthropy, and fought back against his "story" being held up as an example that "everyone else just doesn't try as hard as Bezos and thats why you're poor", no one would give a flying feck. The argument should move beyond "250K and he's self made" to how their success also feeds into societal failures.
His parents were middle class. They put up most of their life savings to back him. He was not some rich kid with an endless supply behind him.
At the same time they gave him that 250k he was raising seed funding from elsewhere, up to about $1 million that year and $8m a year later. He was a very smart guy with a great idea. Whether they had helped him or not, he would have got the money from somewhere.
Doesn't matter -- there would be only a handful of people who could've done what he did with that privilege. It's strange to be pointing that out.
People really need to stop using the word genius when describing business men. Amazon literally low balled their way to wiping out smaller vendors, and now use their platform to steal successful products from companies, and push them out of the market.
You can be both evil and genius though.
There were many internet companies in the late 90s that failed but Amazon didn't. Bezos is quite obviously very good at what he does.
There is no question he's very good at what he does, but that does not make him a genius, or anything close.
That's perfect
Could your parents have given you that money?
It's not strange at all. In fact, it's pretty much the very point itself. To this discussion it doesn't really matter that Bezos did a lot more with it than most people would have done, because he still had an advantage. It's the same with Zuckerberg, Gates, Musk, Branson and many more. None of them was handed a company worth billions, but they were all handed advantages that are unavailable to the vast majority of people.
The world has a problem when most of the super wealthy owners of mega-influential companies all come from certain priveleged backgrounds. It's not a new problem, but that doesn't make it any less worthwhile to discuss.
how is a quarter of a million that much
how is a quarter of a million that much
how is a quarter of a million that much
how is a quarter of a million that much
how is a quarter of a million that much
how is a quarter of a million that much
how is a quarter of a million that much
how is a quarter of a million that much
how is a quarter of a million that much
Pretty ridiculous to point it out.
They changed the world we live in. Companies like Microsoft, McDonalds, GE...and Amazon. There arent many that can make that claim. You can complain about their practices all you want but it doesnt change the fact it took genius to do what they all did.
For upper middle class America that is really not that much to have in a retirement account.
We don't have a lot state or social benefits for old age so most of us have to save money in stocks and 401k retirement accounts throughout our jobs to retire on and 250k in a savings account of that sort is not that insane.
Most people live off of 4 percent of their retirement money. 4 percent of 250k is 10k a year which I wouldn't say is a luxurious amount saved.
Anyway, you also have to see what Bezos turned that 250k into. A lot of you are talking as if he compound interested that 250k into a 6 percent return and I sitting pretty on a million or so no driving his kids to s country club and talking about how hard he worked.
The guy through various resources resources and a special brain turned Amazon into an incredible monster.
During the process he used his genius to take advantage of loopholes where he could and he has a ridiculous thirst for power, but for anyone to mention it's 250k he got from his parents have a weak understanding of business .
Everyone on this forum probably couldn't turn 1 million into a hundred million business
He is quite obviously a genius and anyone working in tech would testify. I am not a Bezos fan at all but he's scary smart along with some of the other tech leaders.
Theyre not some wealth inherited glazers.
It's also funny how a lot of you are quick to point out Bezos net worth.
What about some of the most successful startups founded by immigrants from India, East Europe, Nigeria etc?
Sitting in the western world most of you making minimum wage are earning at least 10 times as much as they are. Your quality of life is unfairly elevated to a standard that's near unsustainable and not even environmentally healthy. the privilege we all get in a developed country always goes unnoticed.
What about some of the most successful startups founded by immigrants from India, East Europe, Nigeria etc?
Sitting in the western world most of you making minimum wage are earning at least 10 times as much as they are. Your quality of life is unfairly elevated to a standard that's near unsustainable and not even environmentally healthy. the privilege we all get in a developed country always goes unnoticed.
You’re completely missing the point mate. The poster insinuated that everyone would have the advantage of their parents granting them a quarter of a million. Which is obviously not true. You also failed to answer the question, could your parents have given you a quarter of a million?
You’re so close to grasping it here. Yes, most people in the western world will have a massive financial advantage when compared to less wealthy countries, no one here would deny that advantage. Now take that logic and apply it to someone being given a quarter of a million , and compare it to someone who got nothing. There is a clear advantage there, but you think that it’s an even playing field.
From my first post I said there is not an even playing field.
However you're focussing on the wrong aspect. The playing field tilts imo from access to education, mentors and friends and family that help you.
For instance, I'm an immigrant and my family was poorer than most black americans in the u.s but I had the advantage of my parents being very educated in their home country. By the time I was 18 despite going to similar quality of school found in a ghetto I had an advantage and privilege of access to better mentors and family resources to help me with my school and/or education.
I don't know why I should answer anything about what my parents can afford to give me or not. Point is 250k in the world of tech startups is nothing that crazy at all.
I don’t know how to make this clearer. The poster said that he didn’t have an advantage that nobody here had access too. That’s the argument, that’s what you waded into. I asked him if his parents could have given him 250k. So now I ask for a third time, could your parents have given you 250k?