Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

BlueTommyD t1_iwwwxee wrote

It's almost like money itself can make money quicker than hard work ever can.

67

MrsJangoFett t1_iwwxbd5 wrote

Let’s not oversimplify. The answer might change when we look at how labor & investment income are taxes in the US…oh wait, never mind…

26

EthanBeast t1_iwwxa39 wrote

Being rich is easy for that literal reason. You’ll never lose it so long as you’re not dumb as a door knob

13

Bright-Ad-4737 t1_iwx0x98 wrote

I dunno about "quicker". That investment was started 34 years ago. :P

4

dataslacker t1_iwx2d2c wrote

A bar chart to compare two numbers is unnecessary and therefore not beautiful.

31

Malcyn42 t1_iwx1jiy wrote

Buffet invested his money (hundreds of millions), the CEO isn't taking any risk other than getting fired.

13

GoonerAbroad t1_iwx281l wrote

Berkshire currently owns coca-cola shares valued at $22.7 billion.

5

theverybigapple OP t1_iwx283o wrote

Can’t compare like this

If something shitty happens both lose, but CEO has more skin in the game in non-monetary terms. He may fuck up his career, go to jail etc. whereas Buffet will lose lots of money.

−8

SwooPTLS t1_iwxcc81 wrote

Agree.. it’s almost like saying this car is red and that one is blue..

2

jrm19941994 t1_iwz79mn wrote

LOL no, if Coke goes bankrupt due to something other than the CEO doing illegal shit, he will be fine.

0

pamdathebear t1_iwwxtj8 wrote

Buffett has 2 Ts

Berkshire earned those dividends not Warren himself

Dividends aren't free. It's deducted from the stock price.

11

autoencoder t1_iwwz9e9 wrote

Dividends are when a company pays out profits when it has nothing better to invest them in.

Coca Cola has no growth potential, all they do now is cannibalize what's left of the branded plastic sugar water industry.

−5

Bright-Ad-4737 t1_iwx1be3 wrote

WTF are you talking about "no growth potential?"

Its revenue has grown 25% over the past 4 years and market cap has grown 25% over the past 5.

Did you even open the financials before you made that statement?

11

autoencoder t1_iwx2xbp wrote

I mean long-term; over decades. It's my impression that Coke is everywhere, and nowhere left to expand. The market is saturated.

If people realized the harm sugary drinks do to them, they wouldn't buy any. But if they do, there are plenty with almost the same taste as Coke, but at least 2x cheaper.

−5

reckonthedead t1_iwx3xst wrote

Coca cola doesn't only sell sugar drinks. Do you even invest?

5

autoencoder t1_iwx5gnf wrote

Well, that is a fair point.

1

hotmodel1234 t1_ix0nb0r wrote

To be fair, you're not wrong, as the core Coke product is saturated! It's why Coke bought VitaminWater from 50 Cent and his investors, to energy drinks like Monster as they have a huge chunk of that. Just last year, they spent $5.6B, for Body Armor, which is damn good imo.

3

Lens2Learn t1_iwwyzbz wrote

Now... what is the median income for employees?

11

covidcares t1_iwwy8m0 wrote

Neither of those choices are a likely option for my life track. Life is good anyway.

10

KJtheThing t1_iwx4rxt wrote

Oh no that poor millionaire

5

DanDanDan0123 t1_iwx19s3 wrote

I have to ask…are the dividends from the total amount of dividends that the stocks earn and they will be passed to the investors or are those his dividend’s because he owns shares?

Big difference if this money is going to pay dividends to investors.

1

MarkVarga t1_iwxab2f wrote

That's the amount that he (his company, Berkshire Hathaway) received as dividend. But due to how the market works, if it wasn't paid as a dividend, it would have been realized in share price increase instead.

1

[deleted] t1_iwx53mf wrote

[deleted]

1

theverybigapple OP t1_iwxb8s4 wrote

Theoretically this is Financially neutral.

1

MisterPublic t1_iwxqrjd wrote

Yes, you get something here and the exact amount is taken away there. That's what they said

1

jrm19941994 t1_iwz74in wrote

Its almost like owning a company is better than working for said company.

Sensational

1

Pig_Benis-1234 t1_iwx51id wrote

I wish I could stuff all the plastic pollution these fuckers helped generate right down their throats.

0

theverybigapple OP t1_iwwwvh6 wrote

Source: on the chart

Tool: Excel

−2

theverybigapple OP t1_iwwx1la wrote

thanks for the immediate downvotes, not-kind strangers.

−10

autoencoder t1_iwwzfew wrote

I think the choice presented is interesting. But I don't think the chart is made beautiful by the data, which is what this sub is about.

10

MisterPublic t1_iwxqlnx wrote

Not just that, almost nobody in this sub is ever going to even have one of those as a choice, so what is even the point of comparing these two numbers?

2

DamnImBeautiful t1_iwxa04y wrote

  1. Bad Visual Design: There's literally two numbers, and the numbers are hard to read since they're vertical.
  2. Misleading 1: Warren Buffet != Berkshire Hathaway
  3. Misleading 2: Not the same time frame for the comparison of the two entities
  4. Shit Sources: Dividend yield of 704M is based off of 2022Q1-2022Q3 of 2022, true dividend yield is unknown as it has not been announced for 2022Q4.
8

Elbynerual t1_iwwyohn wrote

Buffett started with gift money, much like musk or Trump.

7

MarkVarga t1_iwx9ds4 wrote

It still took quite a lot of good decisions to get where he is now.

3

Elbynerual t1_iwxfhu9 wrote

That's the other half of it. You can work hard and be in the right field and almost certainly be a CEO somewhere. In investing a stroke of bad luck can bankrupt you overnight.

2

MarkVarga t1_iwxfoub wrote

Yeah. Roughly 70% of investment accounts are on the red. For every Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger, there are literally tens of millions of people who lost money trying to trade/invest.

1