this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2025
924 points (99.0% liked)

News

27005 readers
4194 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Since Trump’s second-term inauguration, five top billionaires have lost a combined $209 billion as markets react to policy uncertainty.

  • Elon Musk’s net worth plunged $148 billion as Tesla shares collapsed amid declining European and Chinese sales.

  • Jeff Bezos lost $29 billion as Amazon stock fell 14%.

  • Sergey Brin’s fortune dropped $22 billion following Alphabet’s weak earnings and regulatory pressure.

  • Mark Zuckerberg and Bernard Arnault each lost $5 billion as Meta and LVMH stocks tumbled.

The S&P 500 is down 6.4%, reversing gains seen post-election.

Non-paywall link

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 43 points 13 hours ago

Daily Reminder:

[–] [email protected] 59 points 17 hours ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

The Top 10 Richest Americans have a combined wealth total of $1,548 TRILLION.

$209 billion is only 0.13% of the of Top 10.

We need to get those numbers higher.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 hours ago

🔪🔪🔪🔪🔪🔪🔪🔪🔪

[–] [email protected] 8 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

That doesn't stack up, Musk is the richest, currently worth $324Bn - they can't be worth more than $3.24Tn combined.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

I think they replaced the period with a comma.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 hours ago

The %s are all out of whack too, it's more like 13%, which, while not enough, is a lot more than 0.13%.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 13 hours ago

For sure, Google tells me there's only 21.2T USD in circulation.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

It's a relatively small price to pay for the power they gained, and most of the losses are elons anyway

[–] [email protected] 8 points 16 hours ago

We need to keep pumping those numbers up

[–] [email protected] 13 points 13 hours ago

THERE'S THREE AND A HALF YEARS TO GO. THEY'RE PLAYING THE LONG GAME.

THEY AREN'T UPSET. THEY'RE GETTING EVERYTHING THEY WANT.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 13 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

^^they ^^lost ^^$209 ^^billion

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 hours ago

🥵 That's hot. Not nearly enough, but still great news

[–] [email protected] 11 points 14 hours ago

Rookie numbers. Needs more.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

How do you screw both the rich and poor at the same time?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

Sheer incompetence. Whenever he says "I'm the only one who can..." I hear "I have no fucking clue how to even begin doing this".

[–] [email protected] 10 points 14 hours ago

Oh ok, that’s sad, let me shed a few tears here before I go back to be exploited by the rich 😹😹😹😹😹😹😹😹

[–] [email protected] 6 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

and the American retirees who depend on their savings lost trillions to these idiots. A majority of those retirees voted conservative, but I feel bad for the ones who didnt.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago

As you get closer to retirement, the usual strategy is to shift from a stock-heavy portfolio to something less volatile. The retirees getting burned are the ones who were too ignorant or greedy to do that.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (6 children)

Acting like they have the billions as liquid cash is weird.

IF, and its a big if, they would start selling their assets in order to liquidate their stocks, the assets would nosedive in value to fucking hell. Most of their wealth is smoke and mirrors. Most of them spend money by borrowing cash against their assets.

Tax them so they have to lend or sell some assets to pay their fair share.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

It’s pretty common knowledge how these billionaires leverage the value of their stocks/assets as collateral against loans, in order to avoid having to pay capital gains tax.

Even though it’s not liquid cash, there really isn’t much to preclude them from taking out cash loans up to like 70-80% of their value if they ever wanted to (not that they would, as cash depreciates in value due to inflation).

So while you are correct that if they ever had to liquidate their shares the value would plummet significantly - unless something catastrophic happens and the value of those assets plunges well below an acceptable level to their financiers, it will never happen.

If you owe the bank a $100 and can’t pay it back, that’s your problem. If you owe the bank $100m, that’s their problem.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 15 hours ago

I think we might be nearing a catastrophic economic collapse. It will be interesting to see how these billionaires react.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

Good let’s make it another 200 billion EACH and even then that won’t be enough as they’ll all still have hundreds of billions of dollars which is absolutely insane

[–] [email protected] 4 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

Unfortunately our own pensions and such are also getting wiped out by the same forces. And with less access to insider information.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 16 hours ago

They would become weak enough for us to start curbstomping

[–] [email protected] 16 points 17 hours ago

These are the same billionaires that donated millions to the inauguration. How's that RoI on bribery going techbros?

[–] [email protected] 30 points 20 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 63 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (14 children)

Coverage like this makes me feel sad.

Do people honestly not realise that billionaires always enrich themselves during recessions?

This is all going to plan for oligarchs. People celebrating it are naive unfortunately.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 18 hours ago

and they have bailouts just in case they cant actually make money.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 20 hours ago

They deserve to lose so much more.

[–] [email protected] 141 points 1 day ago (3 children)

only meaningful if their stocks don't bounce back, but too soon to tell

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago

I have a theory that this is all planned. Tank share market, buy lots of shares, in a few years they get all their wealth back and more.

[–] [email protected] 73 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Also only meaningful if they can't buy up actual, tangible assets in the coming recessions, effectively converting their dead capital into more assets. (+ getting more state money for being "too big to fail")

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

No, they're gonna. It's exactly what happened last recession. The pain got offshored to the workers, and the people with assets used the moment to leverage their assets to buy more assets on the cheap.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 44 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Those are rookie numbers! We've got to pump that number!

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A good start. It takes much more to fix this problem, though.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 day ago

Them losing billions is meaningless. Don't for this: if you had 1 billion dollars, and you lost 99% of it, you still have 10 million dollars, which is more than what most people will ever have.

Their entire industries need to be nationalized and ALL their assets seized.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

So that's what, about 5 minutes with of profits between them?

[–] [email protected] 79 points 1 day ago (3 children)

So what? It's not like their bank accounts got affected. Their shares are valued less which means they did not loose money but the lost money they could have had.

[–] [email protected] 51 points 1 day ago (6 children)

They lost pretend money that could be used for business loans that they don't need because they have so much pretend money. The only time it matteds for these parasites is if it happens when they are acquiring another company worth billions of pretend monies.

Even a stock market collapse is a benefit to these chucklefucks.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 16 hours ago

They like the stock market going down, since it'll eventually go back up and meanwhile they still have billions available to buy up a lot more stock on the cheap while it's down.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 16 hours ago

proof they're not geniuses

load more comments
view more: next ›