Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: The True Adonis on July 08, 2009, 06:22:53 PM
-
The Homeless Billionaire
(http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MI-AQ440_BERG_20080518172015.jpg)
When I first met Nicolas Berggruen, I was struck by two things. First, he was a multi-billionaire I’d never heard of — the most interesting kind. Second, he didn’t own a home.
“I stay in hotels,” he told me.
A billionaire without a home? This, I figured, was worth a story. My article about Mr. Berggruen in today’s Journal focuses mainly on his investing life and his push toward socially responsible investing. But what interested me most was his unconventional personal life.
After making his billions, Mr. Berggruen, 46, lost interest in acquiring things: They didn’t satisfy him, and in fact had become something of a burden. So he started paring down his material life, selling off his condo in New York, his mansion in Florida and his only car. He hatched plans to leave his fortune to charity and his art collection to a new museum in Berlin.
For him, wealth is about lasting impact, not stuff.
“Everybody is different and I think that we live in a material world,” he told me. “But for me, possessing things is not that interesting. Living in a grand environment to show myself and others that I have wealth has zero appeal. Whatever I own is temporary, since we’re only here for a short period of time. It’s what we do and produce, it’s our actions, that will last forever. That’s real value.”
When I pressed him on why he no longer got much enjoyment from acquiring more “things,” he said this: “First, I don’t need it. Secondly, maybe in a bizarre kind of way, I don’t want to be dependent on it or have the responsibility. I don’t get that much enjoyment out of saying ‘I own it.’ ”
Mr. Berggruen makes clear that his philosophy is his own, and he has nothing against those who want to enjoy their wealth by having big homes, cars and all the rest. And of course it’s easy for a billionaire to say “money and things aren’t important.”
But his perspective seems to be increasingly common among today’s superwealthy — and even wealthy — who are looking for more lasting meaning in their lives beyond their possessions. I’m not saying they’re right or wrong or that possessions are inferior to other measures of wealth — people should use their wealth however they choose. Yet for all that, Mr. Berggruen’s personal downsizing may be a sign that the voluntary simplicity movement could be moving up the wealth ladder.
-
-
That's not Hetty Green.
-
The Homeless Billionaire
(http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MI-AQ440_BERG_20080518172015.jpg)
When I first met Nicolas Berggruen, I was struck by two things. First, he was a multi-billionaire I’d never heard of — the most interesting kind. Second, he didn’t own a home.
“I stay in hotels,” he told me.
A billionaire without a home? This, I figured, was worth a story. My article about Mr. Berggruen in today’s Journal focuses mainly on his investing life and his push toward socially responsible investing. But what interested me most was his unconventional personal life.
After making his billions, Mr. Berggruen, 46, lost interest in acquiring things: They didn’t satisfy him, and in fact had become something of a burden. So he started paring down his material life, selling off his condo in New York, his mansion in Florida and his only car. He hatched plans to leave his fortune to charity and his art collection to a new museum in Berlin.
For him, wealth is about lasting impact, not stuff.
“Everybody is different and I think that we live in a material world,” he told me. “But for me, possessing things is not that interesting. Living in a grand environment to show myself and others that I have wealth has zero appeal. Whatever I own is temporary, since we’re only here for a short period of time. It’s what we do and produce, it’s our actions, that will last forever. That’s real value.”
When I pressed him on why he no longer got much enjoyment from acquiring more “things,” he said this: “First, I don’t need it. Secondly, maybe in a bizarre kind of way, I don’t want to be dependent on it or have the responsibility. I don’t get that much enjoyment out of saying ‘I own it.’ ”
Mr. Berggruen makes clear that his philosophy is his own, and he has nothing against those who want to enjoy their wealth by having big homes, cars and all the rest. And of course it’s easy for a billionaire to say “money and things aren’t important.”
But his perspective seems to be increasingly common among today’s superwealthy — and even wealthy — who are looking for more lasting meaning in their lives beyond their possessions. I’m not saying they’re right or wrong or that possessions are inferior to other measures of wealth — people should use their wealth however they choose. Yet for all that, Mr. Berggruen’s personal downsizing may be a sign that the voluntary simplicity movement could be moving up the wealth ladder.
Possessions aren't supposed to be measures of wealth. A Ferrari, among other toys, are supposed to be fun.
What a dummy.
-
Interesting how the article didnt mention that he hasnt given up his private jet or multi million dollar art collection.
-
easy to have nothing if you still have enough to not care about not having anything
-
Stupid. Just but a fucking house. If you don't give a shit about "possessions", just buy a cheap apartment. Would be much cheaper in the long run.....
-
Stupid. Just but a fucking house. If you don't give a shit about "possessions", just buy a cheap apartment. Would be much cheaper in the long run.....
Perhaps he likes to stimulate the economy by choosing to spend more money to help more people in various industries.
-
you are still an unemployed anti social loser dear true anus. Stop worshiping other people you frigging loser and do something about your own life.
-
you are still an unemployed anti social loser dear true anus. Stop worshiping other people you frigging loser and do something about your own life.
Seek help and free yourself from envy or jealousy.
-
The Homeless Billionaire
(http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MI-AQ440_BERG_20080518172015.jpg)
When I first met Nicolas Berggruen, I was struck by two things. First, he was a multi-billionaire I’d never heard of — the most interesting kind. Second, he didn’t own a home.
“I stay in hotels,” he told me.
A billionaire without a home? This, I figured, was worth a story. My article about Mr. Berggruen in today’s Journal focuses mainly on his investing life and his push toward socially responsible investing. But what interested me most was his unconventional personal life.
After making his billions, Mr. Berggruen, 46, lost interest in acquiring things: They didn’t satisfy him, and in fact had become something of a burden. So he started paring down his material life, selling off his condo in New York, his mansion in Florida and his only car. He hatched plans to leave his fortune to charity and his art collection to a new museum in Berlin.
For him, wealth is about lasting impact, not stuff.
“Everybody is different and I think that we live in a material world,” he told me. “But for me, possessing things is not that interesting. Living in a grand environment to show myself and others that I have wealth has zero appeal. Whatever I own is temporary, since we’re only here for a short period of time. It’s what we do and produce, it’s our actions, that will last forever. That’s real value.”
When I pressed him on why he no longer got much enjoyment from acquiring more “things,” he said this: “First, I don’t need it. Secondly, maybe in a bizarre kind of way, I don’t want to be dependent on it or have the responsibility. I don’t get that much enjoyment out of saying ‘I own it.’ ”
Mr. Berggruen makes clear that his philosophy is his own, and he has nothing against those who want to enjoy their wealth by having big homes, cars and all the rest. And of course it’s easy for a billionaire to say “money and things aren’t important.”
But his perspective seems to be increasingly common among today’s superwealthy — and even wealthy — who are looking for more lasting meaning in their lives beyond their possessions. I’m not saying they’re right or wrong or that possessions are inferior to other measures of wealth — people should use their wealth however they choose. Yet for all that, Mr. Berggruen’s personal downsizing may be a sign that the voluntary simplicity movement could be moving up the wealth ladder.
Spoken like a true socialist.
-
He's more like a lonely Billionaire... no wife no kids...
He'll say wife is something that would not satisfy him because he has to pay for maintenance.. Kids... don't even bother
He's free to roam around only carrying himself.. He can travel without luggage.. he can buy clothes anywhere..
-
If I was a billionaire i'd be doing good things with my money... not being some nomad that goes from hotel to hotel... ::)
-
if he slays 2-3 highprice hookers poonany in each hotel, then I'd say he has the life. no strings bliss.
-
Its a brilliant move really...Try suing a guy who has no property...
-
Its a brilliant move really...Try suing a guy who has no property...
Brilliant how? He still has lots of a$$$$$$$$$$etts.
-
His status is probably first a tax-driven one. Eg, he personally has "no assets", but you can be sure he has assets in a trust that he benefits from.
Secondly, I doubt he is a bilionnaire - multi-millionaire yes, but bilionnaire, I am not sure sure...
-
Cheap jew who doesn't want to spend any money
-
i actually think that guy has a much more interesting life than all these uber rich people who settle themselves in huge mansions and surround themselves with cheap empty luxury.
-
The Homeless Billionaire
(http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MI-AQ440_BERG_20080518172015.jpg)
When I first met Nicolas Berggruen, I was struck by two things. First, he was a multi-billionaire I’d never heard of — the most interesting kind. Second, he didn’t own a home.
“I stay in hotels,” he told me.
A billionaire without a home? This, I figured, was worth a story. My article about Mr. Berggruen in today’s Journal focuses mainly on his investing life and his push toward socially responsible investing. But what interested me most was his unconventional personal life.
After making his billions, Mr. Berggruen, 46, lost interest in acquiring things: They didn’t satisfy him, and in fact had become something of a burden. So he started paring down his material life, selling off his condo in New York, his mansion in Florida and his only car. He hatched plans to leave his fortune to charity and his art collection to a new museum in Berlin.
For him, wealth is about lasting impact, not stuff.
“Everybody is different and I think that we live in a material world,” he told me. “But for me, possessing things is not that interesting. Living in a grand environment to show myself and others that I have wealth has zero appeal. Whatever I own is temporary, since we’re only here for a short period of time. It’s what we do and produce, it’s our actions, that will last forever. That’s real value.”
When I pressed him on why he no longer got much enjoyment from acquiring more “things,” he said this: “First, I don’t need it. Secondly, maybe in a bizarre kind of way, I don’t want to be dependent on it or have the responsibility. I don’t get that much enjoyment out of saying ‘I own it.’ ”
Mr. Berggruen makes clear that his philosophy is his own, and he has nothing against those who want to enjoy their wealth by having big homes, cars and all the rest. And of course it’s easy for a billionaire to say “money and things aren’t important.”
But his perspective seems to be increasingly common among today’s superwealthy — and even wealthy — who are looking for more lasting meaning in their lives beyond their possessions. I’m not saying they’re right or wrong or that possessions are inferior to other measures of wealth — people should use their wealth however they choose. Yet for all that, Mr. Berggruen’s personal downsizing may be a sign that the voluntary simplicity movement could be moving up the wealth ladder.
That's pretty interesting. Most people can't really understand that type of thinking. Most people I've encountered are the "all about me" and "what can you do for me" types. It's a shame our world puts so much value into material things.
Perspective is a funny thing. No matter how bad one has it, someone else has it worse. In the end, it's just stuff...stuff we can't take with us upon our deaths. How many people will really remember you for for being a good human being?
I suppose I could be doing better "financially", had I allowed myself to subscribe to the selfish way of thinking, that has taken over society these days. I can't imagine being motivated by wanting a bigger house, a fancier car... et cetera. I don't think I could live with myself.
In the end, there really is what we need...and then there's everything else. To each his own...I guess.
-
-
how old is true adonis? my guess is 25
-
i have the homeless part down! now i just need a billion dollars!
-
i have the homeless part down! now i just need a billion dollars!
;D
-
His status is probably first a tax-driven one. Eg, he personally has "no assets", but you can be sure he has assets in a trust that he benefits from.
Secondly, I doubt he is a bilionnaire - multi-millionaire yes, but bilionnaire, I am not sure sure...
good point
-
how old is true adonis? my guess is 25
Try closer to 30 and still unemployed and proud of it
-
adonis is a thinker.
-
It must be a fu*ker of a life to have to only live in hotels, sure he doesn't own anything but with a billion dollars I'm sure he still indulges in the best of everything
-
My condition of sucess in the society.
1, Having good health in mentaly and physicaly.
2, Having enough money to do what you want to do.
3, Having plenty of free time.
These three are essential. None of them should be racked.
-
My condition of sucess in the society.
1, Having good health in mentaly and physicaly.
2, Having enough money to do what you want to do.
3, Having plenty of free time.
These three are essential. None of them should be racked.
lol ESL
-
she was more like a beauty queen on a movie scene, i said dont mind but what do you mean i am the one?
-
That's not Hetty Green.
Inherited money. ;)
-
That's pretty interesting. Most people can't really understand that type of thinking. Most people I've encountered are the "all about me" and "what can you do for me" types. It's a shame our world puts so much value into material things.
Perspective is a funny thing. No matter how bad one has it, someone else has it worse. In the end, it's just stuff...stuff we can't take with us upon our deaths. How many people will really remember you for for being a good human being?
I suppose I could be doing better "financially", had I allowed myself to subscribe to the selfish way of thinking, that has taken over society these days. I can't imagine being motivated by wanting a bigger house, a fancier car... et cetera. I don't think I could live with myself.
In the end, there really is what we need...and then there's everything else. To each his own...I guess.
Well said. If you aren't happy where you are, you won't be happy where you're going.
-
My condition of sucess in the society.
1, Having good health in mentaly and physicaly.
2, Having enough money to do what you want to do.
3, Having plenty of free time.
These three are essential. None of them should be racked.
LOL. And a good sense of humour! ;D
-
this guy still owns a private jet an a multimillion dollar art collection
-
Its a brilliant move really...Try suing a guy who has no property...
HOW IDIOTIC ARE HYOU AGAIN,,,he has money hence called, "a billionaire" not a zeroionair ::) he has more cash to flow to suers,,,in fact easier to get frmo him vs people who have assets in money not cold hard cash,,
-
HOW IDIOTIC ARE HYOU AGAIN,,,he has money hence called, "a billionaire" not a zeroionair ::) he has more cash to flow to suers,,,in fact easier to get frmo him vs people who have assets in money not cold hard cash,,
Hardly...How could you possibly prove he is actually a billionaire if he has no personal assets? His company is trusts and what not...You would be chasing a ghost if you tried to sue him personally...He's even a mystery to Forbes who don't have him listed in their top 400 riches people...
-
Brilliant how? He still has lots of a$$$$$$$$$$etts.
Says who? He may have nothing in his name...
-
he has more cash to flow to suers
lol
what crime did he commit again, or what is the compaint? and in who's jurisdiction?
-
HOW IDIOTIC ARE HYOU AGAIN,,,he has money hence called, "a billionaire" not a zeroionair ::) he has more cash to flow to suers,,,in fact easier to get frmo him vs people who have assets in money not cold hard cash,,
Donald Trump also claims to be a Billionaire but many people say he isn't even close...
-
The Homeless Billionaire
(http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MI-AQ440_BERG_20080518172015.jpg)
When I first met Nicolas Berggruen, I was struck by two things. First, he was a multi-billionaire I’d never heard of — the most interesting kind. Second, he didn’t own a home.
“I stay in hotels,” he told me.
A billionaire without a home? This, I figured, was worth a story. My article about Mr. Berggruen in today’s Journal focuses mainly on his investing life and his push toward socially responsible investing. But what interested me most was his unconventional personal life.
After making his billions, Mr. Berggruen, 46, lost interest in acquiring things: They didn’t satisfy him, and in fact had become something of a burden. So he started paring down his material life, selling off his condo in New York, his mansion in Florida and his only car. He hatched plans to leave his fortune to charity and his art collection to a new museum in Berlin.
For him, wealth is about lasting impact, not stuff.
“Everybody is different and I think that we live in a material world,” he told me. “But for me, possessing things is not that interesting. Living in a grand environment to show myself and others that I have wealth has zero appeal. Whatever I own is temporary, since we’re only here for a short period of time. It’s what we do and produce, it’s our actions, that will last forever. That’s real value.”
When I pressed him on why he no longer got much enjoyment from acquiring more “things,” he said this: “First, I don’t need it. Secondly, maybe in a bizarre kind of way, I don’t want to be dependent on it or have the responsibility. I don’t get that much enjoyment out of saying ‘I own it.’ ”
Mr. Berggruen makes clear that his philosophy is his own, and he has nothing against those who want to enjoy their wealth by having big homes, cars and all the rest. And of course it’s easy for a billionaire to say “money and things aren’t important.”
But his perspective seems to be increasingly common among today’s superwealthy — and even wealthy — who are looking for more lasting meaning in their lives beyond their possessions. I’m not saying they’re right or wrong or that possessions are inferior to other measures of wealth — people should use their wealth however they choose. Yet for all that, Mr. Berggruen’s personal downsizing may be a sign that the voluntary simplicity movement could be moving up the wealth ladder.
This is actually a very well thought out tax scheme, which a lot of people do. You can tax deduct any business expenditure, INCLUDING HOTEL STAYS. There are a lot of people that live this way. At his level of income, and even mine for that matter, it is better to itemize your deductions. I actually know of two physicians in Houston, that rent out hotel rooms for a year at a time, while at the same time maintaining state residency in another state. There practice is just one big tax deduction. As I am hitting almost 40, I should tell you one thing, you will never achieve billionaire or even millionaire status without abusing the poor. Unfortunately, or fortunately, that is how society works.
-
Its a brilliant move really...Try suing a guy who has no property...
We'll take it you said this cause you are just dumb. Obviously you dont know what BILLIONAIRE means. Having cash assets is probably easier to get than property.
-
We'll take it you said this cause you are just dumb. Obviously you dont know what BILLIONAIRE means. Having cash assets is probably easier to get than property.
Next to MattT, he's arguably the dumbest person on Getbig. :-\
-
i actually think that guy has a much more interesting life than all these uber rich people who settle themselves in huge mansions and surround themselves with cheap empty luxury.
spoken like a truly jealous individual........you figure everyone should live like you.......WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!
-
We'll take it you said this cause you are just dumb. Obviously you dont know what BILLIONAIRE means. Having cash assets is probably easier to get than property.
I understand that...The problem is you would have a hard time pinning down what he actually has in cash...All his art is going to go into museum's...Untouchable...
Two words for you
Bernie Madoff...
I don't think he has to many houses hidden from the feds at this point but he has enough money unaccounted for to buy a small country...
-
-
I understand that...The problem is you would have a hard time pinning down what he actually has in cash...All his art is going to go into museum's...Untouchable...
Two words for you
Bernie Madoff...
I don't think he has to many houses hidden from the feds at this point but he has enough money unaccounted for to buy a small country...
So are you saying he keeps ALL his money in his matteress. I don't think so. He has bank accounts with LOTS of cash it. Courts will just seize his accounts after you get the judgement and go through the process of collecting. Pretty sure he probably has some stocks, bonds and mutuals you can grab too. If he is living in hotel I bet you he isn't paying in cash but with credit cards. Those cards are being paid. It is alot harder to secure physical property than cash. Every collector is going to lien his property and then you have to stand in line. At least with cash they can pay off the debts as they are filed.
-
if he is rich and can live in hotels I do not consider that to be a "homeless person".
-
Guys buy luxury items to attract women, mostly.
-
the dude probably owns a shitload of realestate
there are alot of people who own 500 and 1000 units= millionairs even billionairs