508
Steve Wozniak reply about his 'bad decision' to sell his stock in the '80s: 'I gave all my Apple wealth away because wealth and power are not what I live for'
(programming.dev)
Comments
Context
.
Stephen Gary Wozniak (/ˈwɒzniæk/; born August 11, 1950), also known by his nickname Woz, is an American technology entrepreneur, electrical engineer, computer programmer, and inventor. In 1976, he co-founded Apple Computer with his early business partner Steve Jobs. Through his work at Apple in the 1970s and 1980s, he is widely recognized as one of the most prominent pioneers of the personal computer revolution.
Source: Slashdot Comment, by Steve Wozniak.
I bet it's so strange to be wealthy and think you're not wealthy because you think others that have more wealth are the wealthy ones. Steve doesn't realize a couple of homes and opening museums isn't something a poor person can do. Plus his happiness is directly related to his financial stability. Oh well. Good PR can perform magic.
I didn’t read that as him not thinking he’s wealthy, I read that as him saying that wealth wasn’t the goal, and therefore isn’t something he’s optimizing for. He’s talking about funding things and paying his fair share in taxes as proof that he’s not optimizing for building wealth, but instead cares about other things.
I suspect that, if you took away from his remark that he thinks of himself as being poor, then you may have misinterpreted it.
No I understood fine.
Perhaps you could quote for me where he said he was poor?
Wozniack is moderately wealthy. He's also a baby boomer, brilliant electrical engineer from silicon Valley. Moderately wealthy is expected for someone like that. He also was a founder of one of the most profitable companies in the world, but his financial choices prioritizing happiness over money resulted in him not having "buy politicians" money. Really what this is is him saying that he doesn't have gold sickness and that that's why he doesn't regret the financial decisions I'm certain he gets frequent unsolicited comments from strangers on and why he's happier than many tech company founders.
If having 10 million USD is "moderately wealthy" to you, and if you think that it is fine that people have that kind of money, maybe you should go out and explore the world a bit.
I mean, as she nears retirement my mother has a little more than a million dollars in net worth after working as a teacher/school librarian for her entire career. The founder of Apple having 10-15 times that honestly sounds low.
He’s definitely wealthy, but that’s about the upper range of what I consider acceptable levels of wealth for one to have. The difference between him and a billionaire is about a billion dollars still.
But also he can write a book or attend events or do consultancy and get one more million in a heartbeat. Let’s see your mother (or mine…) pull that one.
Sure, so if the only thing he cared about was having more money, then there are ways he could go about getting more money. He has made it very clear, though, that is not the only thing he cares about—at least, ostensibly; it's not like I know the guy personally or anything.
I mean, it is arguably a subjective and context-dependent measure as to exactly how "wealthy" someone is. From the perspective of someone who eats beans and rice every day of their life, anyone able to eat a "Western" diet is obscenely wealthy. That does not mean that it is not useful to distinguish between relative levels of wealth in the West.
The problem is not public speakers and pro athletes who make millions from their own labor. The problem is the owner class who make money from other people's labor.
Sure. That is the systemic problem. But the solution to that systemic problem would effectively mean that no one has 10 million USD.
If public speakers and pro athletes aren't part of the problem, then why would solving it make them poorer?
The point is that in a fair world, no one should have ten million USD.
Even when you are a great speaker or an athlete, you shouldn't want to (or be allowed to) accumulate that kind of money.
Because that kind of money stands for the ability to command too many people, decide on what happens with too many resources, etc.
I think you are making total sense, and that the people who are downvoting you are idiots.
"He only has ten million USD! Such an example of modesty and discipline! 😻🙀"
People are not praising the comment for showing evidence of modesty and discipline, they are praising it for the attitude it advocates that there are better things in life to care about than merely the number of money points that you have. (Obviously this is only true to a point since being in poverty makes it a lot harder to be happy, but this post was in response to someone arguing that if he had chosen differently than he could have been a billionaire rather than merely a millionaire, which is important context.)