Who is really the richest (money wise) person in the world?

I know most will say Jeff Bezos with a recently much reduced 116 billion. Yet personal monitory wealth is very much deceptive.

A smaller minority will say its the Rothchild family with its 2 trillion dollar wealth. And they also could be correct, because of who holds various proxies, head of estates and even guardianships.

Yet even that is misleading because who controls what in the corporate world.

Below I am giving some estimate worths. They are only approximates. Yet some of this could give a better picture of just who controls what and possibly who really is the richest.

Note of warning some of this may be surprising if not disturbing.

[sep]

World wide three richest families:
https://www.trendrr.net/3894/top-10-richest-families-in-world-usa-famous-net-worth-income/

1. Rothchild family 2 trillion Germany
2. The House of Saud – Saudi Arabia: $1.4 trillion
3. The Walton Family – United States: $152 billion

[sep]

Now to give some corporate world wide comparisons because family ties are truly based on their businesses.

Corporations by assets:

https://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/10-largest-companies-in-the-world-by-assets-589803/?singlepage=1

1. Industrial and Commercial Bank of China $3.47 trillion,
2. Fannie Mae $3.28 trillion.
3. China Construction Bank $3.01 trillion
4. Agricultural Bank of China $2.82 trillion
5. Bank of China $2.61 trillion
6. Mitsubishi UFJ Financial $2.59 trillion.
7. Japan Post Holdings $2.522 trillion.
8. JPMorgan Chase & Co. (NYSE:JPM) $2.51 trillion.
9. HSBC Holdings plc (ADR) (NYSE:HSBC) London-based $2.37 trillion.
10. Bank of America Corp (NYSE:BAC) $2.196 trillion.

By net worth:

1. Apple (AAPL) Market Cap: 943.57B
2. Microsoft (MSFT) Market Cap: 928.57B
3. Amazon.com (AMZN) Market Cap: 919.65B
4. Alphabet (GOOG.O) Market Cap: 859.25B
5. Berkshire Hathaway (BRK-A) Market Cap: 521.35B
6. Facebook (FB) Market Cap: 511.35B
7. Alibaba Group (BABA) Market Cap (China): 481.91B
8. TenCent (TME) Market Cap (China)8: 480.78B
9. Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) Market Cap: 369.1B
10. JP Morgan Chase (JPM) Market Cap: 363.75B

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

I don't really understand what you are trying to say here. A bank's assets, for example, don't belong to the bank; they belong to the depositors.

Similarly, the market capitalization of Apple belongs to the stockholders.

Or are you just saying that you don't like so much money to be under the investment control of so few?

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@Thinkerbell you didn't look at the first three? 😔

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@DeWayfarer

Yes, I did, and I also have looked up the total estimated net worth of all the billionaires in the world, which comes to about about $8 trillion, so something doesn't quite add up.

[c=#009E4F]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World%27s_Billionaires[/c]

If all their wealth is confiscated and redistributed, it would amount to about $1000 per person in the world.

Not that I'm defending the accumulation of such wealth, far from it, just pointing out that redistributing it would not exactly make a night-and-day difference.

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@Thinkerbell argue it with forbs or whoever. I believe they are more knowledgeable about it than Wikipedia. Links are given.

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@DeWayfarer

That's exactly where the Wiki article got some of its data. But directly from Forbes:

[quote]"In raw terms, the world’s billionaires are worth $8 trillion, down $700 billion from 2019."[/quote]

[c=#009E4F]https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/[/c]

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@Thinkerbell look at the links. I was generalizing. Wikipedia isn't really a good source is my point.

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@DeWayfarer

Um... and Trendrr is...? "The 10 Most Handsome Men in the World", etc.

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@Thinkerbell actually they reported Operas wealth before anyone else. Even forbes didn't want to until later. You get info where it's forthcoming which has later proven accurate. Forbs isn't forthcoming until after the fact. Such is the case with Kylie Jenner. Forbs goofed!

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@DeWayfarer

I think Forbes included their estimates of the Saudi princes' net worth, and it doesn't approach $1.4 T. In any case, if we throw in 2 or 3 trillion more for Trendrr, that still only amounts to $11 T for all the billionaires in the world, still not enough to make a huge per-capita difference if redistributed.

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@Thinkerbell this is laughable. When you have that kind of wealth, what's one or two billion as is the example averages you gave elsewhere.

Those are popers. These are at least 1000 times greater if not 2000.

Add up all your billionaires wealth along with these three then divide by the world population and see what you get. Bet isn't not 1000 dollars.

And we still don't know a single thing about those who control in China. There's no record of even individuals much less families.

With China being the #1 industrial bank there just got to be quite a few.

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@DeWayfarer

[quote]"Add up all your billionaires wealth along with these three then divide by the world population and see what you get. Bet isn't not 1000 dollars."[/quote]

Even accepting Trendrr's unverified figures for the Saudis and the Rothschilds, it comes to about $1400 per person.

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@Thinkerbell now discount China's population because that's a complete unknown for billionaires much less families.

All we know is they are #1 industrial banking.

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@DeWayfarer

Which brings me back to my original comment:

[quote]I don't really understand what you are trying to say here. A bank's assets, for example, don't belong to the bank; they belong to the depositors.

Similarly, the market capitalization of Apple belongs to the stockholders.

Or are you just saying that you don't like so much money to be under the investment control of so few?[/quote]

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@Thinkerbell no it doesn't.

All I said is that china is the world largest banker.

That inference only relates to that there has got to be billionaires in China that we know nothing of. Possibly even families.

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@DeWayfarer

Maybe so, but I still would like to have your explanation as to why you included all those non-Chinese banks and corporations in your original list.

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@Thinkerbell should be obvious. So I can make such inferences.

Look at those groupings. China is not only just first. They are 1st, 3rd,4th and 5th.

Now tell me there are no billionaires in China that we know nothing about?

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@DeWayfarer

I already said it's possible there are Chinese billionaires we know nothing about. The Chinese are notorious for fudging their figures, as were the Soviet Russians before them.

I asked about the non-Chinese banks and corporations on your list. What inferences are you drawing from them?

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@Thinkerbell just gone through all your references here on this post. This is the first acknowledgement other than "maybe so" which is not really an acknowledgement.

And this post is a general post. Yet other things like the number of billionaires in china can be gleened. Like why are there so few continents represented in that. It's well known the Rothchild holdings are in India. So why isn't India in that list.

Saudis seem to be involved in the terrorists in India. So what is the Rothchild involvement in all this.

It goes on and on. Yes none of it has an economic basis yet other things are at work here. This is why I made this list.

This list is for a bigger picture. I only showed it to you for the top three items. And you looked at everything else but the top three.

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@DeWayfarer

I said "maybe so" because your list of uncorroborated figures is altogether too vague for me to draw any firm inferences.

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@Thinkerbell and I will say it again.
[quote]This list is for a bigger picture. I only showed it to you for the top three items. [u][b]And you looked at everything else but the top three.[/b][/u][/quote]

It seems like you are doing this because you don't want to see it or acknowledge it. So you look at and complain about everything else when it has nothing to do with what we were talking about.
[big][u]It's just the top three.[/u][/big]

Thinkerbell · 41-45, F

@DeWayfarer

I already commented on the top three. Even if those figures are correct (and Forbes doesn't agree with them), it makes little difference to redistribution of wealth.

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@Thinkerbell And you know my opinion on how reliable forbs is.[quote]Forbs isn't forthcoming until after the fact. Such is the case with Kylie Jenner. Forbs goofed![/quote]