Mohamed Al-Fayed began life as a porter in Alexandria and died as a billionaire
arabnews.com
arabnews.com
If the average man's labor is worth $15/hr, and he never spent (nor was taxed) a dime of that, Al-Fayed was either more than 700 times smarter, faster, stronger, and harder-working than the average man... or he acquired that wealth by doing something other than hard work.
Wonder what the average HN reader's labor is worth, and whether our output would be described as "honest work".
Everyone is paid for the last 5% of performance though not the first 95%. People get confused about that when they complain about the BS of jobs. You're not getting paid for the BS - you're getting paid for the moments when you bring something to the table.
Steve Balmer is a billionaire today due to landing a job as an early employee at Microsoft.
There’s a perception that guys like Ballmer created $10B of value and managed to capture $1B of it. Just because he was lucky to be there doesn’t mean he didn’t hold a pivotal role and make a huge difference in the outcome of the enterprise, and may have been awarded a small % of that value created.
Maybe other people could have created that value too, but he was lucky to be there, they were lucky to have him there instead of someone worse, and he still only captured “10%” (or whatever) of the value created.
My thought is that many of these billionaires do have a large “value over replacement” where replacement is just some random person with the resume for the position.
But I don’t think the enterprise creates nearly as much value as has been assigned to it. I think much of the value is created by the public infrastructure, an existing public education system which provides affordable skilled labor, and much of the laborers themselves.
So personally I think Steve Ballmer did get lucky, did create a lot of value for Microsoft, and captured some portion of that MSFT +value, but Microsoft captured a lot of value that was created by others (the government/public) and likely more should have been captured by them instead.
So, while I philosophically agree that it’s obvious anyone with a billion dollars has not earned the vast majority of it, I also personally believe it’s slightly harmful to suggest that we should be paid in direct proportion to how hard we work.
There’s a lot more to be said on the topic, but I think the truth for “how much value can one person create; and how much of that value should they capture for themselves?” lies in-between “scales linearly with hard work and smartness” and “it’s great that they were able to capture a tiny $1B slice of the value they created in their lifetime”.
It is absolutely possible to make that (and more) by doing honest work.
> If the average man's labor is worth $15/hr, and he never spent (nor was taxed) a dime of that, Al-Fayed was either more than 700 times smarter, faster, stronger, and harder-working than the average man... or he acquired that wealth by doing something other than hard work.
Other reasons someone can vastly outperform others:
- more leverage from one's work (e.g. plumbing vs. software engineering, or starting a business that employs 100 people rather than sole proprietorship)
- higher demand for one's skills
- capitalize on luck (e.g. he had very influential connections early on that he leveraged)
- ambition
- risk taking
- etc.
I’d agree with you under our current ethical system.
Under my personal moral system, I think anyone “capturing” $1 billion as a “portion of the value they created” most likely involves greatly undervaluing the contributions of the system they built upon/in (which should have been captured by taxes and reinvested into that system), as well as much of the labor they employed (other key employees were probably given too little equity, and much of the bottom rings are likely underpaid on an hourly basis for the value they provide).
Personally I’d like to see significantly higher taxes on top-end earners to help allow the “system” which provided the infrastructure, skilled and educated labor, and favorable market environment, to capture a little bit more of the value it provided to billionaires and reinvest that in K-12 education to create a strong workforce for the next generation of business owners to rely on.
I personally think even with say, an absurdly high tax rate of 90% on earnings over a billion dollars, folks like Elon Musk and Sam Walton and Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos would still have nearly as much personal incentive to earn money past their first $1 Billion.
I personally feel that Jeff Bezos would absolutely still fight for growing his net worth from $1B to $13B at 90% tax rate, instead of $1B to $130B at his current tax rate.
Hundreds of thousands of customers that willingly gave them money, would seem to disagree.
—————
I think the most important thing this misses are that there are more parties to an economic enterprise than just a single seller and their buyers. At one extreme, let’s envision a fictional world:
Walmart builds a small empire on the back of public highways. They pay fair taxes which allows the highways to capture and reinvest the value they created for Walmart.
Walmart then lobbies government leaders to eliminate their taxes. Walmart now pays no taxes.
Walmart continues to extract value from the public highways but no longer shares that value with the government which created the value.
I’m not saying this is literally what’s happening - I’m just using it as an example to show how a company can provide great prices to customers, while inappropriately capturing value created by others. This is just to show that your model posited above fails to take into account some pretty large effects in the real world.
But if there are many people who truly believe that economics is linear and zero-sum, that explains how they got there.
From this point of view, CEO's and billionaires are of course overpaid because they couldn't possibly type/talk/work/think a million times better than a thousandaire.
It's only when you internalize concepts that came up in the last couple of centuries, like leverage, positive sum growth, exponential economic growth, and exponential technological development that modern life makes sense.
As soon as there's any perceived threat to the British establishment they'll be running the same stories as The Telegraph.
Why do you ask? Has that enlightened you any further?
Without the right connections, you get very few opportunities and even when you see a mediocre opportunity, you seize it as if it's your last.
But with the right connections, it seems like amazing opportunities just fall on your lap and whatever ones you choose will yield great results. Surely it's not difficult to succeed in such situation.
The Poor Fulham fans, there was much hilarity had by everyone else.
Also the aunt of that journalist, in case you're wondering.
For decades the rumour has been that he is bankrupt and just putting up a huge facade. (Comparisons to Maxwell). If such a hole exists it did not catch up to him in life, which is an achievement one way or another given the scrutiny he was supposedly under.
1) They have to know (they probably do)
2) They have to care
3) They have to know what to do about it
4) They have to accept the potential disadvantages of taking action
5) They have to decide it is more important than everything else they have on their plate
6) They need to actually do something about it
7) They have to succeed in the Court case, Tax investigation etc.
8) Eventually, worse-case, the wealthy criminal just dusts themselves off and finds something else to do
I'm sure that's why most Politicians just talk about stuff. It's too hard to actually do things.
I've yet to read one that explains what a person of his standing would gain from British citizenship in practical terms, surely he was wealthy enough to permanently reside wherever he wanted.
> In 1964 Fayed arrived in Haiti, one of the world’s poorest nations, hailed as a rich sheikh from Kuwait. He romanced one of Papa Doc’s daughters and persuaded Duvalier to give him an oil concession and a contract to manage the Port-au-Prince harbour. The Duvaliers’ love affair with Fayed was short-lived. Early in 1965 the fake sheikh left Haiti, never to return. More than $100,000 (almost $1m today) was reportedly found to be missing from the port authority’s bank account.
> A dangerous opponent, [Fayed] would make the wildest allegations in public as well as private against enemies or those he blamed for setbacks. He fabricated documents and paid witnesses to perjure themselves. It was often difficult to detect whether Fayed himself believed the allegations he repeated with such conviction.
> There were repeated allegations of sexual harassment of female staff. Some who complained were accused of theft and on occasions arrested by local police only too willing to accept allegations (later dropped) from a powerful patron. In 2009 the Crown Prosecution Service decided not to charge Fayed over the claim he had sexually assaulted a 15-year-old girl at the store. Fayed had been interviewed by Scotland Yard under caution. He was interviewed again in 2013 after a woman alleged he had sexually attacked her at his Park Lane apartment after a job interview. The police reopened the case in 2015 but took no further action. Fayed always denied the allegations. Further sexual harassment allegations were made by former Harrods employees in a Channel 4 documentary in 2017 and to Channel 4 News in 2018. One ex-employee claimed to have accepted £60,000 to drop a sexual harassment claim. Fayed again denied the allegations and the police took no action.
I guess you could also claim that the British press has had and continues to have it out for him, so these are just skewed portrayals of a bon vivant, or something. But from the uninformed outside he certainly looks like a guy who made his money as a fixer/corruption specialist (like the people who built industrial empires after the collapse of the USSR -- they certainly won a hard game, but it's difficult to say they did something good) and mostly used it to make life unpleasant for people around him.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/02/mohamed-al-fay...
Most of us begin as babies.
> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously
Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.