Surely there should be at least a passing mention of Carlos Slim in here? Or maybe he just doesn't influence NYT?http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/05/28/business/media/behind-the-scenes-billionaires-growing-control-of-news.html?_r=0&referer=http://apple.com/spotlight-suggestion …
-
-
So in startups at least, it's closer to the truth to say that the way to become a billionaire is to be passive about your interests.
-
but that doesn't fit the cartoon villain narrative.
-
Also, it doesn't fit the historical pattern. In the past to get rich you had to mean to get rich.
-
Ford was among the first to get rich without meaning to. Now that's common. But few outside startups grasp it.
-
I think this is because nearly half the people in this country are broke and live paycheck to paycheck: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/05/my-secret-shame/476415/ …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Not doing it for the money? Do you honestly believe that? Highly skeptical. Perhaps that's how it should be but its def not.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
if success is measured by 'admired & respected' then I agree, but becoming a billionaire surely isn't serendipitous?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.