Would Bill Gate's life style really suffer if he awoke with Oprah's money?

Chris Rock says as part of his comedy routine that “everyone thinks that Oprah’s wealthy, but if Bill Gates woke up with Oprah’s money he would throw himself out a window.” However, aside from the shock of losing billions of dollars, and the ranking as one of the world’s wealthiest persons would his lifestyle really change?

After all much of the money of the really wealthy is in terms of the value of their stock. Furthermore, they can’t get their hands on most of that since selling the stock (in the kind of quantities necessary for serious money) would cause it to fall precipitously. So if Gates became a “simple” billionare is there anything in terms of material posessions or lifestyle that he would likely have to give up?

Well, for Bill to lose that much money, the value of Microsoft would have to totally crash. Whatever it was that caused M

I didn’t post that. Really. I composed a somewhat longer post, and then abandoned it because it didn’t really address the OP. I have no idea how that fragment got here.

From what I understand about Gates, money isn’t really what drives him. My impression of him is that operating the machine that is Microsoft is what he truly derives satisfaction from, not his money. I would imagine that as long as he still had enough to maintain his house and lifestyle, he wouldn’t be effected all that negatively by the loss of his money itself. I would imagine he would be far more negatively impacted by the failure of his company, if such were to occur, or by no longer being able to function and acheive in a business sense.

I tend to agree with the basic concept expressed in the OP. Beyond a cirtain point, more money is pointless. At some level of richness, you can buy absolutely anything you want; you can live as lavishly as is possible. You can have multiple homes, plenty of servents, buy anything you want, travel anywhere you want, any time you want, etc, etc. Once you’ve achieved this level, why seek more money? If you loose a chunk of your dough, but are still above the miniumum needed to maintain the situation described above, what would be the problem?

Why not leave personalities out of it, and ask, if someone with Bill Gates’ amount of money suddenly found himself with only Oprah’s amount, would it be a major blow? A big problem / disapointment? If so, why? Surely Oprah’s amount of dough should be plenty? She not only has a persona chef, she can afford to give everyone in her audience a can, for god’s sake!

Minor nit-pick, she didn’t pay for them. it was one big ad, hence the car company paid for them. Opera, also, did not cover the tax on the car that the people who got the “free” car had to pay.

I could afford that, too!

I mean, as long as they were those dented cans from the everything’s-a-dollar grocery store that that church runs a charity…

:smiley:

But would she pay for a plumber to install it?

Must have been one hell of an evening, especially if he woke up with her face too. :eek:

If Bill woke up with Oprah’s money, it probably means he woke up in Oprah’s bed.

So his lifestyle had already changed(presumably).:smiley:

Oprah keeps her money in her mattress?

The definition of rich is that you already have as much money as you’d like to spend. When a rich person gets richer, he’s not going to spend any more. When a mega-wealthy guy loses a billion, hey, big deal. If Gates woke up with a mere Oprah pile of money, he wouldn’t have to fire a single gardener.

Does that mean Gates is a “complex” billionaire or are you inferring that Oprah is “simple” by appealing to the lowest common denominator of society?

Oh, I don’t think his lifestyle would suffer much if you are speaking clearly in monetary terms.

I believe the implication was that Gates is a multibillionaire, and that becoming a “simple” billionaire entails dropping the “multi.”

Heck, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he slips into the number 2 slot on the next Forbes list - Warren Buffett is only a few billion behind him now. Somehow, I doubt that swapping their relative rankings will be that much of a significant event for either of them. Billionaires may care about the size of their fortune as some sort of abstract scoring mechanism, long after the money ceases to have any direct impact on their daily lives. For corporate founders, the money may be thought of as a measure of how their company is doing, which is what really matters to them, as observed.

This discussion reminds me of the lottery ticket buyers who spend ten times more money if the pot is $150M than they would if the pot were a mere $50M.

I’m not sure I would be able to tell the difference between winning $50 and $150 M, but apparently it matters to some folks.

Interestingly, Gates has said several times that, aside from a bit of cash for his kids, he plans to end up with nothing at the end. Meaning, he plans to give it ALL away. The Bill & Melanie Gates Foundation gives away millions every week, and they still can’t keep up with the interest the big pile of money makes.

Actually, most of Gates’ fortune is still represented by Microsoft stock - he has about a billion shares, probably about 60% of his net worth. It used to be a much higher percentage, but he’s been selling it off and investing elsewhere steadily for the last several years (as you would expect him to). That didn’t USED to yield him any income - Microsoft only started paying a dividend recently (2003). They were more or less shamed into it by being the only Dow component that didn’t pay a dividend at one point. The first few dividend payouts were small $0.08 and $0.16 per share payouts. Even those obviously generated many millions of dollars in income for Mr. Gates. Their recent $3/share one-time dividend gave him a whopping $3 billion in income.

Just a nitpick, but Bill’s wife’s name is “Melinda”, not Melanie.

And Melinda’s been asking Bill a lot of questions about what he did to get all of Oprah’s money.