Terrible for him. Great for everyone else that that 40 billion is now in the hands of other people. 
Terrible for him
Not really, and that’s the obscene part. Literally absolutely nothing changed about his standard of living by losing $40B.
He could have solved world hunger for years with that money, and wouldn’t even have had to give anything up for it.
40 billion going into the bank accounts of investors that previously owned Twitter stock certainly is a redistribution of wealth, but I doubt it’s the kind you’re referring to.
Depends what they do with it, I guess.
NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 1 year ago
That's not really how that works. He just reduced the value of the site. He nuked value out of existence.
Fraylor@lemm.ee 1 year ago
I mean he did spend 44 billion prior to said nuking. Site isn’t worth as much now sure, but the volume of currency still traveled into the hands of others.
NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 1 year ago
Good point actually.
DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
Is the previous owner also a fuckhead though?
elvith@feddit.de 1 year ago
But he hasn’t realized his losses yet - HODL!
chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
Twitter having overwhelming dominance may have had value to shareholders, but IMO that is at the expense of everyone else. Not having to use Twitter is valuable.