Homes of the Billionaires.

[MrPerson]

http://finance.yahoo.com/real-estate/article/106725/Homes-of-the-Billionaires

Only Warren Buffett should be allowed to keep his house.

He lives modestly.

The rest of these fuckers are obscene.

And yes that makes me a commie.

[upi402]

1. lol

commie or a fan of justice???

[Deja Q]

2. Nice home for $31k

:9

[MrPerson]

3. 31K in 1958.

[Warpy]

4. My parents bought a house for a tenth that cost

that year. It was a very nice two bedroom house in a nice area. I looked it up on Zillow recently and it's gone up 1000% to well over $300,000.

However in 1958, that $31,000 bought a mansion.

[MrPerson]

5. I'd have to see the inside. It does not look like a castle.

[cali]

9. Not where I grew up it didn't

It may have bought a nice house in Nebraska, but you sure couldn't buy a mansion with that money in Fairfield County CT

[Warpy]

27. NC wasn't that much more expensive a market

than Nebraska was in 1958.

Trust me, it's a mansion.

However, kudos to him for not upgrading from a mansion to a monstrosity.

[JohnnyRingo]

25. My dad bought our home back then for $5,000

It wasn't anything you can call a castle, but at the time it was the American dream realized.

I still respect Buffet's refusal to upgrade as he accumulated unimagined wealth, and I know he doesn't stay at the Motel6 when he's on the road.

[onehandle]

6. Although the homes are obscene, it is their money.

If I had Billions, my main home would not be a giant monstrosity. I would have numerous apartments and homes around the world and travel frequently.

They would be nice, but not obscene.

Oh, and as always. Michael Dell is a prick.

[MrPerson]

8. See I disagree. There should be a limit to what you can spend.

I think we need a higher tax rate on the rich.

Or just take these homes off these bastards.

They should be ashamed of themselves.

[ddeclue]

19. I think tax rates should be higher on the rich but I don't fault all of these as "robber barons".

I think, for instance, that Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, George Lucas, and Oprah Winfrey largely came about their fortunes legitimately.

Taxes should be higher on the rich but ultimately it IS their money and they should be allowed to spend it how they see fit.

Doug D.

[SOS]

7. The Russian diamond guy needs a bullet-proof front door.

What a strange life.
Living in a $65 million mansion, waiting to be gunned down by rival gangsters.

[Warpy]

10. I'll be thrilled when all those monstrosities

are turned into resort hotels.

Really.

Most of them have dozens of bedrooms to house servants and guests. They're already hotels of a sort and conversion wouldn't be difficult.

This obscenity is why this country desperately needs to return to the sanity of a progressive tax structure. The combination of that plus trust busting plus escalating fuel costs will end the gilded class.

If we want a democracy, it has to be done.

[MrPerson]

11. If you had a billion dollars, would you stlll not live practically?

[provis99]

12. if I had a billion dollars, I'd give almost all of it away to poor people

Guess I'll never be a billionaire.

[shimano1]

13. billionaires

suprising that you dont see that more often, being poor is horrible, why dont the ultra rich seem to give a damn about the poor. I would give it away. After youve been THAT poor i dont think you would be able to live with yourself having all that money while others suffer.

Order flowers, Relationships

[SOS]

15. To become a billionaire

you have to being willing to take it from working people and not care about them in the least.
Preferable to have a mocking disdain, bordering on hatred, for the average guy.
"Losers" as the zero sum gangsters like to call us.
It's a conundrum.

[Kitty Herder]

18. Ain't that the truth. nt

[ddeclue]

23. That's simply not true - it is stereotyping people and making canonical assumptions without any

basis in reality.

[SOS]

31. Will defer to Balzac on this one

"Behind every great fortune there is a crime."
-Honore de Balzac

[Warpy]

16. I actually did inherit a shocking amount of money three years ago

but I'm still living in a shabby little house in an area called the War Zone. The neighborhood is actually quite nice and no longer deserves the title it earned in the 80s, but I haven't considered taking my dad's last advice to move out of the "bad" house and hood and into a "better" house and hood.

Squalor suits me, in other words.

Buffet's house is a mansion, but I'm sure it still suits him perfectly like my place suits me, which is why he hasn't moved into some opulent showplace.

[ddeclue]

24. Buffet's house is a mansion in some respects but totally out of keeping

with his actual wealth and status.

My parents are upper middle class and have a 4,000 sq foot house with a separate 1600 sq foot garage.

Mr. Buffet's house is described as 6,000 sq ft.

Bill Gate's house on the other hand is 66,000 sq ft - about the size of a large chain supermarket store or 11 times Mr. Buffet's house.

I on the other hand rent a 2,300 sq foot house.

Doug D.

[JohnnyRingo]

14. When I was young, wealth was unpopular

Surplus army wear and patched jeans were corps d' riguer for the hip, and even John Lennon wore government issued glasses. If one was monied, they did their best to not show it, as wealth was seen as a connection to "the man" and the backing for war.

Since then, the cool people began wearing their clothing labels proudly across their chests, in displays that showed you payed extra for Hillfiger or Nike. Hats became emblazoned with Joop and accessories went from a simple earing to gold chains and medallions so large it affected posture. Kids were mugged of their expensive shoes.

Maybe capitalism's popularity spawned from young generations that had little to complain about except their own failure to acquire status quickly enough, but as the pendulum swings back, I see a new day coming where the Madoffs and Pickens become the bad guys instead of role models for a new generation that struggled to survive.

I think we'll soon see a return for the working class hero (and that's something to be).

[azmouse]

17. Oprah long ago lost touch with the common person and that house shows it.

Yeah, she still does a lot of charity work and that's a good thing but she thinks nothing of telling her audience about buying very expensive items as though everyone can afford what she can.

[Stephanie]

28. "At a Barack Obama fund raiser last year, guests were strictly prohibited from entering the house...

She doesn't even let her own guests in her house!

[Stevenmarc]

30. Because there's a difference between being a GUEST and a guest.

Anyone who paid the money to attend the fundraiser is a guest, that doesn't mean you are in Oprah's Blackberry and she'll call you up to come over for brunch, that's a GUEST.

[leftofthedial]

20. accumulated wealth is theft.

[ddeclue]

22. Such a profoundly simple statement is profoundly wrong.

You simply can NOT expect anyone to grant it legitimacy.

Are you saying that George Lucas stole people's money when they decided to go to his movies for instance?

Your claim is utter nonsense.

[leftofthedial]

26. in your opinion.

[ddeclue]

29. NO as a matter of FACT...

How for instance is George Lucas (one of the billionaires from the article) a "robber baron"?

People willingly put out their good money to see his movies over many years and I've never heard anyone accuse him of stealing their money.

How is Oprah Winfrey a "robber baron"?

Whose money did SHE steal?

:crazy:

Absolute proclamations such as you have made here are preposterous.

[Kitty Herder]

21. Is that Warren Buffet's only home?

If so, I'm impressed. And I'm wishing you could still buy a home for 31,500. But I'm wondering if Buffet has hideous, huge monstrosities for vacation homes.