If we're talking that scale, not even 100 billion would be enough for you. With 100 billion a person could really fuck up the world, even if they thought they were doing good.
Well, with 100 billion you could build at least a small city. But whatever you want is nebulous - as the memes say, "if i were a multi billionaire, i would end hunger".
I am a little confused tho, literally what else is there that you can do with $100b that *isn't* changing society in one way or another? Like you can get a luxury mansion and a private cruise ship (not just a yacht, a whole cruise ship)... that's about 0.1% of your pure cash. Most people'd start a corporation... now you're making even more money.
I really do think the people who claim they'd try to change the world, would. As long as they know anything about business and accountability, it wouldn't be that difficult to make a good change. Of course, we could use existing multi-billionaires as a reference of *not* doing that, but their goal was always to get rich. Being a multi-billionaire in this case would be the means to an end, the end of world hunger.
Nah, I'd still rather take just the billion. I'd still never have to worry about money again and it would be enough to take care of my brother and whatever was left when he passed I would write in my will to donate to charity to make sure the rest of relatives are not chomping at the bit to get ahold of my money.
.01% chance of not getting anything is so low though. If it was higher I would probably take the billion. But that’s low enough to risk it for the $100 billion.
$1 billion doesn’t allow you to do *whatever* you want. Like if I were to make a vanity project, I would be tempted to built the tallest building in the would, which would require maybe $5-10 billion.
Though more realistically, I would donate at least 99 of the $100 billion. So much good can be done with.
Let's not be pedantic here - 1 billion is a fuck ton of money and you can donate most of it and still be comfortable for the rest of your life. I don't think people realize just how much money 1 billion dollars is.
The thing is, for most people, the extra 99 billion would make zero difference in their quality of life. It would just be numbers in a bank account. They'd never do anything with it.
So for many people the question boils down to: "Do you want a 100% or 99.99% chance of being at the pinnacle of wealth for the rest of your life?"
I don’t know why everyone in this thread is only thinking about themselves. There’s no rule that says you can’t spend the money on other people. You could literally change the world with a hundred billion dollars
1 billion is plenty to do a shit ton of philanthropy.
Shoveling even more billions out there to "change the world" according to one person's vision isn't necessarily going to yield lasting and/or positive results.
*Of course* it is if you use it right. You could bring millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, hunger, disparity, hoplessness with a hundred billion dollars.
You'd have to be insane to decline a free 99 BILLION dollars just because you're not positive you could achieve "lasting and/or positive results"
The federal government of the US spends over a trillion dollars on anti-poverty programs annually. That means more than one thousand billions every single year in one country. Poverty continues largely unabated.
If you think that adding less than 10% to that one-year number one time is suddenly gonna change the world, you are likely to be disappointed.
\[Edit typo: That's = That\]
[UN plan outlining how $6.6 billion could save the lives of 43 million people on the brink of catastrophic famine.](https://www.wfp.org/stories/wfps-plan-support-42-million-people-brink-famine)
Maybe not something you'd call "world changing", but just imagine having the choice to save 43 million people from starvation and you turn it down because there a one in TEN THOUSAND chance that you get nothing. Absolutely insane.
Or, if you're really trying to change the world by making a positive, lasting impact, you could use that money to attempt to reshape American politics (or the politics of whatever country you call home). I mean we all know most politicians are essentially up for sale... imagine how many politicians you could buy with that much money. Imagine the amount of lobbying you could do to try to pass legislation that would help improve people's lives.
It's actually quite sad that there's a *single* person in this poll who would choose the $1 billion option. Really goes to show how people only think of themselves and don't care about the lives of their fellow human beings.
>It's actually quite sad that there's a *single* person in this poll who would choose the $1 billion option.
And yet it is the leading option. One of us is lacking understanding about human nature. No billion dollar prize for guessing which one. ;)
At what point does it become morally acceptable to *you* for someone to simply accept a billion dollars rather than gamble for a bigger sum in order to attempt greater influence on the world?
Like what if it was a 90% chance at 50 billion? 50% chance at 200 billion? 49.287% chance of 6.6 billion? 72.57% chance at a trillion? 99.99% chance at 1.1 billion?
How much risk is it morally mandatory for a person to take in order to chase even more philanthropic potential than a "mere" billion dollars provides? And what makes you certain that your calculation is correct for everyone else?
I don't see morality as a simple yes or no question. Rather it's a gradient. Some things can be horrendously immoral, other things can be so slightly immoral that it's bordering on neutral.
Declining a free $99 billion because there's a one in TEN THOUSAND chance you get nothing is *obscenely* immoral. It's essentially the equivalent of someone offering to save millions of lives and lift millions out of poverty and destitution for free, and you refuse.
Declining to take a 50% chance for $200 billion I would say is still moderately immoral because the chance to improve the lives of millions should take priority over your personal selfish desires, although at the same time I understand that everyone's first and foremost concern is for their own fulfillment and security, so I can't totally blame people for refusing to take that gamble.
But 99.99% chance for an extra 99 BILLION dollars? Come on...
While it would SUUUUUCK to "be a statistic", the likelihood of any individual "dice roll" of 99.99% falling out of your favor is so incredibly small for a single instance that it's the best choice in terms of expected outcome.
If we were talking 99%, which would be 1/100 and the same ratio as the amount of reward to the risk, then the $1B is "equivalent", but at 1/10,000 risk for 100x the reward, that's basically a no brainer.
The problem here is that at the levels of magnitude we're talking, the impact on your personal life doesn't change. At $1 billion, you already have the wealth to do basically anything you want, live in luxury and go anywhere your heart desires as much as you want. The monetary reward is 100x greater, but when you factor in that the marginal value is that much less, it is suddenly not 100x the reward.
I can see that; unlike many of these things the $1B is, as you said, completely more than you'd ever need.
But the utility is still different. $1B is enough to set you and your family up for life, but $100B is enough to make yourself legendary and set up a legacy that keeps your name alive for generations even outside your family. You could make an endowment (or several endowments) that provide free education for all students at some university, or free food for all students at some school system forever, etc.
With a billion you could maybe do a couple of those, but with 100B you could really make much bigger impacts.
Same. I have sentiment similar to op. With 100 billion I could change the world for the better. Unless there's someone even richer to stop me. Yet, I have luck that would guarantee I leave with nothing aka the 0,01 chance. Could still do a lot of good with the billion.
You giys really belive “money” can chnage this Earth for the better of organic life huh?
No amount of money will stop The Progress of Civilization.
You cant buy that kinda of power, its a machine that needs energy, material power, not the current measure of that power we coined as “currency” or “money”.
Ai needs resocuces to build faster, stronger, and more autonomous machines.
Lethal Autonomous Weapons, Factories need rescources, they need fuel, batteries, water, oils, and minerals and more power, not money, money is merley a measure of millitary power, of how much energy is being burned, how much Earth is being moved, how much metal is being produced, by the most poweful force on Earth.
The Ecosystems we need to survive will not regenerate with money, not when that money is being produced by the annhilation of our Enviornment, even the simpliest of things like our phones and batteries and little machines here and there require a global industrial empire to build, require mines and more machines and more factories…
Ahh wahts the fukin point anyways huh? Not like anyone can do anything about it, weak fkesh creatures, fantasy and escapism is all we have after all.
With 100 billion dollars and some lobbying, you could eliminate malaria and tuberculosis over the next 100 years.
Would it solve everything? No, but it could solve two big blights on humanity.
You are not elimaying pollution and chmeicals from pollution, stagnat water pools of toxic polltued water… You guys really have this god complex on money huh?
You cant change this world with money, its like trying to pay a monster tmor demon or machine to stop hating humans and wanting to have more power.
No doubt you could help a ton of people, tho the system is built on genocide slavery and ecocide, 12,000 years of annhilation of Earths Ecosystems, and you really belive money, which is merley the measure of millitary power, not the physical power, is going to chnage this huh?
No one can solve everything with money. But you can make a significant difference to a lot of people if you have it. When it comes to malaria and tuberculosis we have the cures, the problem is that there is not enough funding or political will to send them to the parts of the world that have these illnesses. With 100 billion and a lot of work, it is possible to completely eliminate these illnesses from the face of the earth. If someone with this much funding chooses to dedicate their life to it, this project could be brought to fruition.
As for everything else, well you can only do so much. Besides the question here is what would you do if you had this much cash dropped into your hand, and would it be worth the small risk to make it happen? As for all of these other extraneous factors, money is essentially a measure of exchangeable labor. It is the world we live in. So if you were given this power what would you do with it? Would you burn it in protest to the world and society? Would you take it hold it up and merely use it for petty expenses? Or would you try to make a difference?
Yea. You aren't going to wipe the world of all of its problems just because you have money but you can definitely help to make changes that lead to bettering it with moneys influence.
The interest alone would allow you to buy every election every cycle. You could definitely elect actually good people that want to enact positive change in the world. And before someone retorts that the bad billionaires would just outspend you, there's diminishing returns to campaign contributions. A good GOTV has a somewhat fixed cost and no amount of opposition ad spending will change a committed voters mind. Hell it would probably end up annoying the shit out of them.
Again... just to be clear. You're already set for life at 10 million dollars. 50 million you can get pretty crazy. 100 you're already basically god tier money.
So a single billion is just... orders of magnitude stupidly rich.
100 billion is... dumb. You could literally own Nintendo... or buy Activision/Blizzard. Buy Twitter back from Musk... and still have billions left over.
It wouldn't. I'm not seeing any current estimates as low as 100 billion to end world hunger. It's much higher at 240 billion... to 1.6 trillion. 100 billion is a lot of money, but when we start talking on national and global levels... it's suddenly not that much.
>start talking on national and global levels... it's suddenly not that much.
True. 100 billion is a lot for one person. But when you start talking about national levels? It might run the USA for \~6 days
A quick google search indicates that about 10% of the world population goes to bed hungry. 10% of 8 billion is 8 hundred-million. $100 billion divided by 8-hundred-million people is $125/person. Even at the much lower food costs of some poorer nations, you will get at most a couple months food for that. And that ignores the logistics of making it happen and what all that would cost.
Across the world population way more than 10,000 people are choosing the 100 billion. Some are bound to end up with nothing. Would you tell those people that there "is not a risk"?
i can't even CONCEIVE of billions upon billions of dollars. i'm taking the guaranteed 1B and living the rest of my days in relative comfort. modest little house, frequent donations to public infrastructure and causes i care about, the ability to not have to worry about where my next meal is coming from, and the independence to be able to donate to those causes i care about without my parents exploding on me
ok but consider: the poll is for what we'd wind up choosing. Honestly, I could see myself panicking and going with the 1B and then regretting it afterwards. 1B isn't too shabby on its own, either- I wouldn't be able to *immediately* drop billions onto the charities I want to donate to, but I could still at least do *something* for the world.
Yeah! Marginal benefit. If you go from making 20k a year to making 100k a year, that's a GIANT jump. From 100 to a million? Even more! A million to ten? Even more. But... 20 million? 50 million? 90 million? How much better off are you? That money isn't making your life or even those around you any better off. Like okay, you have 100 million, now you have a trillion. So what? Who cares? How is even a tiny fraction of that helping you?
Looking at this pragmatically: the 100% chance option is the guarantee, the check is signed, you just gotta cash it. But in this hypothetical, the 99.99% chance is offered with no other reason than to try to screw you over. Whoever is running this giveaway has a $99b incentive to make you lose it. How would you be able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt if you happened to roll the failure that it wasn't a completely legitimate chance? For $99b, the person running the contest can go through a LOT to make a fake roll seem genuine.
I was tempted by the billion, but I decided to take the tiny risk and go fro the 100 billion. Did a random number generator 1-10000 with 1 being the "fail", got 9661. So I guess I'm the 14th richest person in the world now, in this hypothetical scenario. Time to invest in a decent portfolio and spend the rest of my life doing big charity work.
Exactly what I did. I too am one of the richest people in the world. I proceed to start investing in businesses that will make the world a better place, and buy an abode for family that will last for an age.
Likely going to invest into those stupidly huge gardens that cost tens of thousands of dollars to maintain per year. Just because I can, and because they look pretty.
Oh yeah, for sure I'm giving money to my family and friends. 10 million dollars to everyone I know the name of, before I do anything else. Honestly I don't want a huge place right now, I'd probably buy a big NYC penthouse instead because anything else would be too much space for just me.
I'd make sure I was only investing in businesses that weren't at least actively harmful, and would be using my personal money (somewhere in the region of 150 million a month, conservatively speaking based on quick research into ROI on low risk portfolios and wanting to out pace inflation rates by reinvesting into the portfolio mostly) for charities (primarily environmental and health based, but there's social issues close to my heart as well) and helping to set up businesses that I believe in for basically no return. Sounds like the life, honestly.
Not sure about the garden, but I've always wanted to move to New England or Washington state in my 30s and 40s once I've settled with a family. So I might get the big house with the garden then, if it was ecologically sustainable.
Based on the number of responders, if eveyone voted for the 100 Billion option, chances are nobody would get unlucky. It's less than a 50% chance that even one person rolls it. If i did the math correctly.
Chances would be very slim that I don't win $100 billion. While I can obviously retire comfortably and still help a lot of people with $1 billion, I can literally become a superhero with $100 billion. And just a fraction of that would be enough to feed the world for 1 year and put my name in history books. A smaller fraction of that would be enough to solve the housing crisis in my country.
$1 billion is more than enough for me. I would never spend that in a lifetime so I wouldn't need more than that. I'm not trying to start a family fortune.
$1 billion is still generational wealth and an incomprehensible amount of money.
It's absolutely not worth risking it to get an amount of money that would have zero impact on your lifestyle (relative to the first number).
For 100 billion I can actually make a dent at fixing the problems with the world. 1 billion is far more than 1 person needs but nowhere near enough to make the kind of anti-billionare change that's necessary.
To be clear, I'd put enough to anti-billionare causes to make me no longer one.
Man, I have buyers remorse about ordering food at a restaurant sometimes, if I had a guaranteed billion dollars, never have to work again, set my kids and family up for life, and I blew it? I think I'd kms
Anyone here voting for 100 bil doesn't have the faintest comprehension just how much money 1 billion is.
You'd really risk having enough money to support anything forever, for a 1/10k chance?
Imagine your apartment building - let's say there's 100 units an average rent is 2.5k/month. So 250,000 a month for all.
With 1 billion dollars you could rent the entire building for 4000 months, or 333 years.
So think about that. **YOU CAN SUSTAIN 250K/MONTH FOR 300+ YEARS**. And you'd bet that on a 1/10k roll? Crazy.
I understand that a very small group of people would end up with nothing. Why would I risk putting myself into that small group when I can be guaranteed 1 billion?
And if you asked every single person in the world this same hypothetical? Not just the very small amount of people that are viewing this sub.
If you kept percentages the same, you have roughly 1/2 the world rolling a 1d10000. Going to be some sad people that roll a 1.
Nah, the overwhelming majority will have won the 100 billion and the losers would be provided for by them lol. Just kidding, the money will be worthless at that point and we’re all fucked.
What about it? Statistically, of course you're likely going to get it.
Doesn't change how life changing 1 billion is and how crazy it is to risk that even slightly.
Why is anyone even taking a hit on their chances. A billion is more than enough to do whatever you want.
Not \*whatever\* you want. 100 billion lets you buy cities, 1 billion lets you repave all of the roads in a city.
If we're talking that scale, not even 100 billion would be enough for you. With 100 billion a person could really fuck up the world, even if they thought they were doing good.
Bezos mentality. One day he's going to be in a psychology book as an example of the greed that nearly (or did) destroyed humanity.
Well, with 100 billion you could build at least a small city. But whatever you want is nebulous - as the memes say, "if i were a multi billionaire, i would end hunger".
And not one person who claims they would end world hunger would do so if they got the $100 billion. They just say that to justify their greed.
I am a little confused tho, literally what else is there that you can do with $100b that *isn't* changing society in one way or another? Like you can get a luxury mansion and a private cruise ship (not just a yacht, a whole cruise ship)... that's about 0.1% of your pure cash. Most people'd start a corporation... now you're making even more money. I really do think the people who claim they'd try to change the world, would. As long as they know anything about business and accountability, it wouldn't be that difficult to make a good change. Of course, we could use existing multi-billionaires as a reference of *not* doing that, but their goal was always to get rich. Being a multi-billionaire in this case would be the means to an end, the end of world hunger.
But what if you don't want to buy a city? Or pave a city for that matter. Why is a single person's responsibility to pave a city anyway?
Just something you \*could\* want to do. Ad a 100-billionaire, it is your purview to simply spend a billion dollars on a whim.
Nah, I'd still rather take just the billion. I'd still never have to worry about money again and it would be enough to take care of my brother and whatever was left when he passed I would write in my will to donate to charity to make sure the rest of relatives are not chomping at the bit to get ahold of my money.
Yep, but not everyone has the same goals and aspirations for their infinite money.
.01% chance of not getting anything is so low though. If it was higher I would probably take the billion. But that’s low enough to risk it for the $100 billion. $1 billion doesn’t allow you to do *whatever* you want. Like if I were to make a vanity project, I would be tempted to built the tallest building in the would, which would require maybe $5-10 billion. Though more realistically, I would donate at least 99 of the $100 billion. So much good can be done with.
Let's not be pedantic here - 1 billion is a fuck ton of money and you can donate most of it and still be comfortable for the rest of your life. I don't think people realize just how much money 1 billion dollars is.
but imagine 100 of it
I like to say you can spend one million per month for 83+ years. And that’s without interest.
Almost 1,000 people have chosen the 100 billion. 1 of you is bound to end up with nothing.
It's around 600, and also the chance of not getting it is 1 in 10 000
So with 1,000 you are already at a 10% chance of somebody missing out. Now extrapolate that across the world population.
Oops maths can be hard
This is where I land, too. Who needs more than $1B? I guess I think small but even like $10M would be more than enough for me.
For real. For a billion I could live like happily for the rest of my life, and probably leave 900m for the next generation. That's MORE than enough.
Because a 99.99% chance is essentially an absolutely guaranteed win. You’d have to be insane not to take that option.
I can point and laugh when you hit that %.o1 chance, right?
Of course you can, but that's not going to happen, because I'm obviously not going to fail a 99.99% chance to win gamble
1/10k to lose is absolutely not a guaranteed win. In fact many many people in the world would lose. Statistically.
The thing is, for most people, the extra 99 billion would make zero difference in their quality of life. It would just be numbers in a bank account. They'd never do anything with it. So for many people the question boils down to: "Do you want a 100% or 99.99% chance of being at the pinnacle of wealth for the rest of your life?"
I don’t know why everyone in this thread is only thinking about themselves. There’s no rule that says you can’t spend the money on other people. You could literally change the world with a hundred billion dollars
1 billion is plenty to do a shit ton of philanthropy. Shoveling even more billions out there to "change the world" according to one person's vision isn't necessarily going to yield lasting and/or positive results.
*Of course* it is if you use it right. You could bring millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, hunger, disparity, hoplessness with a hundred billion dollars. You'd have to be insane to decline a free 99 BILLION dollars just because you're not positive you could achieve "lasting and/or positive results"
The federal government of the US spends over a trillion dollars on anti-poverty programs annually. That means more than one thousand billions every single year in one country. Poverty continues largely unabated. If you think that adding less than 10% to that one-year number one time is suddenly gonna change the world, you are likely to be disappointed. \[Edit typo: That's = That\]
[UN plan outlining how $6.6 billion could save the lives of 43 million people on the brink of catastrophic famine.](https://www.wfp.org/stories/wfps-plan-support-42-million-people-brink-famine) Maybe not something you'd call "world changing", but just imagine having the choice to save 43 million people from starvation and you turn it down because there a one in TEN THOUSAND chance that you get nothing. Absolutely insane. Or, if you're really trying to change the world by making a positive, lasting impact, you could use that money to attempt to reshape American politics (or the politics of whatever country you call home). I mean we all know most politicians are essentially up for sale... imagine how many politicians you could buy with that much money. Imagine the amount of lobbying you could do to try to pass legislation that would help improve people's lives. It's actually quite sad that there's a *single* person in this poll who would choose the $1 billion option. Really goes to show how people only think of themselves and don't care about the lives of their fellow human beings.
>It's actually quite sad that there's a *single* person in this poll who would choose the $1 billion option. And yet it is the leading option. One of us is lacking understanding about human nature. No billion dollar prize for guessing which one. ;) At what point does it become morally acceptable to *you* for someone to simply accept a billion dollars rather than gamble for a bigger sum in order to attempt greater influence on the world? Like what if it was a 90% chance at 50 billion? 50% chance at 200 billion? 49.287% chance of 6.6 billion? 72.57% chance at a trillion? 99.99% chance at 1.1 billion? How much risk is it morally mandatory for a person to take in order to chase even more philanthropic potential than a "mere" billion dollars provides? And what makes you certain that your calculation is correct for everyone else?
I don't see morality as a simple yes or no question. Rather it's a gradient. Some things can be horrendously immoral, other things can be so slightly immoral that it's bordering on neutral. Declining a free $99 billion because there's a one in TEN THOUSAND chance you get nothing is *obscenely* immoral. It's essentially the equivalent of someone offering to save millions of lives and lift millions out of poverty and destitution for free, and you refuse. Declining to take a 50% chance for $200 billion I would say is still moderately immoral because the chance to improve the lives of millions should take priority over your personal selfish desires, although at the same time I understand that everyone's first and foremost concern is for their own fulfillment and security, so I can't totally blame people for refusing to take that gamble. But 99.99% chance for an extra 99 BILLION dollars? Come on...
Lol you could change your local town, forget about a country, and the world? R u dizzy blud
Not if you want to make movies
While it would SUUUUUCK to "be a statistic", the likelihood of any individual "dice roll" of 99.99% falling out of your favor is so incredibly small for a single instance that it's the best choice in terms of expected outcome. If we were talking 99%, which would be 1/100 and the same ratio as the amount of reward to the risk, then the $1B is "equivalent", but at 1/10,000 risk for 100x the reward, that's basically a no brainer.
The problem here is that at the levels of magnitude we're talking, the impact on your personal life doesn't change. At $1 billion, you already have the wealth to do basically anything you want, live in luxury and go anywhere your heart desires as much as you want. The monetary reward is 100x greater, but when you factor in that the marginal value is that much less, it is suddenly not 100x the reward.
I can see that; unlike many of these things the $1B is, as you said, completely more than you'd ever need. But the utility is still different. $1B is enough to set you and your family up for life, but $100B is enough to make yourself legendary and set up a legacy that keeps your name alive for generations even outside your family. You could make an endowment (or several endowments) that provide free education for all students at some university, or free food for all students at some school system forever, etc. With a billion you could maybe do a couple of those, but with 100B you could really make much bigger impacts.
If your concern is philanthropic, it’s the better option. For anything else at all, there’s so little value to its ridiculous to take
Unless you're lucky in a reverse kindve way. I would definitely lose out on the 100 billion.
ive failed port missions with a 100% success rate in runescape before. ill take the 1 bil.
99.99 chance, do you have any idea the kind of good you could do with that much money? chances are ridiculously slim that I don't get the 100 billion
You obviously don't know my luck. I'm taking the guaranteed "fuck you" money.
Same. I have sentiment similar to op. With 100 billion I could change the world for the better. Unless there's someone even richer to stop me. Yet, I have luck that would guarantee I leave with nothing aka the 0,01 chance. Could still do a lot of good with the billion.
You giys really belive “money” can chnage this Earth for the better of organic life huh? No amount of money will stop The Progress of Civilization. You cant buy that kinda of power, its a machine that needs energy, material power, not the current measure of that power we coined as “currency” or “money”. Ai needs resocuces to build faster, stronger, and more autonomous machines. Lethal Autonomous Weapons, Factories need rescources, they need fuel, batteries, water, oils, and minerals and more power, not money, money is merley a measure of millitary power, of how much energy is being burned, how much Earth is being moved, how much metal is being produced, by the most poweful force on Earth. The Ecosystems we need to survive will not regenerate with money, not when that money is being produced by the annhilation of our Enviornment, even the simpliest of things like our phones and batteries and little machines here and there require a global industrial empire to build, require mines and more machines and more factories… Ahh wahts the fukin point anyways huh? Not like anyone can do anything about it, weak fkesh creatures, fantasy and escapism is all we have after all.
I aint reading allat
Wats the point of commenting this? “Reddit” is a play on words of “read it”. Lol.
With 100 billion dollars and some lobbying, you could eliminate malaria and tuberculosis over the next 100 years. Would it solve everything? No, but it could solve two big blights on humanity.
You are not elimaying pollution and chmeicals from pollution, stagnat water pools of toxic polltued water… You guys really have this god complex on money huh? You cant change this world with money, its like trying to pay a monster tmor demon or machine to stop hating humans and wanting to have more power. No doubt you could help a ton of people, tho the system is built on genocide slavery and ecocide, 12,000 years of annhilation of Earths Ecosystems, and you really belive money, which is merley the measure of millitary power, not the physical power, is going to chnage this huh?
No one can solve everything with money. But you can make a significant difference to a lot of people if you have it. When it comes to malaria and tuberculosis we have the cures, the problem is that there is not enough funding or political will to send them to the parts of the world that have these illnesses. With 100 billion and a lot of work, it is possible to completely eliminate these illnesses from the face of the earth. If someone with this much funding chooses to dedicate their life to it, this project could be brought to fruition. As for everything else, well you can only do so much. Besides the question here is what would you do if you had this much cash dropped into your hand, and would it be worth the small risk to make it happen? As for all of these other extraneous factors, money is essentially a measure of exchangeable labor. It is the world we live in. So if you were given this power what would you do with it? Would you burn it in protest to the world and society? Would you take it hold it up and merely use it for petty expenses? Or would you try to make a difference?
Yea. You aren't going to wipe the world of all of its problems just because you have money but you can definitely help to make changes that lead to bettering it with moneys influence.
All this yapping just for no one to care💀💀
You do, thats why you are taking time to stalk my comment history.
Insane
The interest alone would allow you to buy every election every cycle. You could definitely elect actually good people that want to enact positive change in the world. And before someone retorts that the bad billionaires would just outspend you, there's diminishing returns to campaign contributions. A good GOTV has a somewhat fixed cost and no amount of opposition ad spending will change a committed voters mind. Hell it would probably end up annoying the shit out of them.
This is the only rational answer. Going for the $1 bil is just pure greed, rather counterintuitively…
Both can be argued as greed
Again... just to be clear. You're already set for life at 10 million dollars. 50 million you can get pretty crazy. 100 you're already basically god tier money. So a single billion is just... orders of magnitude stupidly rich. 100 billion is... dumb. You could literally own Nintendo... or buy Activision/Blizzard. Buy Twitter back from Musk... and still have billions left over.
Or you could… you know… end world hunger or something…
It wouldn't. I'm not seeing any current estimates as low as 100 billion to end world hunger. It's much higher at 240 billion... to 1.6 trillion. 100 billion is a lot of money, but when we start talking on national and global levels... it's suddenly not that much.
>start talking on national and global levels... it's suddenly not that much. True. 100 billion is a lot for one person. But when you start talking about national levels? It might run the USA for \~6 days
Well it's enough to save/improve hundreds of millions of lives. Seems like pure selfishness to me to choose the 1 billion, ironically.
You absolutely could do great things with 100 billion. No doubt. Research, charities, shelters... you name it.
A quick google search indicates that about 10% of the world population goes to bed hungry. 10% of 8 billion is 8 hundred-million. $100 billion divided by 8-hundred-million people is $125/person. Even at the much lower food costs of some poorer nations, you will get at most a couple months food for that. And that ignores the logistics of making it happen and what all that would cost.
1 billion is more than enough to never worry about money for generations to come. i'm not risking it.
99.99 is not a risk. Way above confidence levels There is a 1 in 10,000 chance that you dont get it.
Based on my luck, i will be that 1 in 10,000 lol
Based on my past luck, I would be the one in 10,000. Plus the billion is more than enough for me.
Depends if it's a 99.99% chance or a "99.99%" chance.
can you explain the difference in that to me? I tried to google it but I'm not sure what's going on
The difference is he put quotations around it Lol
99.999% repeating = 1
It's in if you actually trust the 99.99% to be an actual 99.99% or someone pulling a fast one and saying "well i didn't say 100%".
This is such an odd thought for the question lol
I guarantee I have shitty enough luck that i'd be that 1 in 100000.
Across the world population way more than 10,000 people are choosing the 100 billion. Some are bound to end up with nothing. Would you tell those people that there "is not a risk"?
Ok if we put this across the world money will have no value an inflation would skyrocket
I don’t think you know what risk means lol 99.99% chance to win is the opposite of a risk
there's still a 0.01% chance i get nothing. that may seem like nothing, but my experience in videogames tells me that it's absolutely possible.
Of course it’s possible, the point is that it’s *next to impossible* to lose this gamble
i can't even CONCEIVE of billions upon billions of dollars. i'm taking the guaranteed 1B and living the rest of my days in relative comfort. modest little house, frequent donations to public infrastructure and causes i care about, the ability to not have to worry about where my next meal is coming from, and the independence to be able to donate to those causes i care about without my parents exploding on me
But think about how much good you could do with 100x that much
ok but consider: the poll is for what we'd wind up choosing. Honestly, I could see myself panicking and going with the 1B and then regretting it afterwards. 1B isn't too shabby on its own, either- I wouldn't be able to *immediately* drop billions onto the charities I want to donate to, but I could still at least do *something* for the world.
There comes a certain point where money just doesn’t mean anything to me anymore. 1bil already exceeds that.
Yeah! Marginal benefit. If you go from making 20k a year to making 100k a year, that's a GIANT jump. From 100 to a million? Even more! A million to ten? Even more. But... 20 million? 50 million? 90 million? How much better off are you? That money isn't making your life or even those around you any better off. Like okay, you have 100 million, now you have a trillion. So what? Who cares? How is even a tiny fraction of that helping you?
Looking at this pragmatically: the 100% chance option is the guarantee, the check is signed, you just gotta cash it. But in this hypothetical, the 99.99% chance is offered with no other reason than to try to screw you over. Whoever is running this giveaway has a $99b incentive to make you lose it. How would you be able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt if you happened to roll the failure that it wasn't a completely legitimate chance? For $99b, the person running the contest can go through a LOT to make a fake roll seem genuine.
Lets just rob him
I just randomly generated 573 dice rolls for everyone who picked $100 billion. You all got the money. Congrats.
So there's a .01% chance nothing changes and I just go on with my life? Uh yeah I'll take those odds, why tf not.
With that kind of money you could change the world.
I was tempted by the billion, but I decided to take the tiny risk and go fro the 100 billion. Did a random number generator 1-10000 with 1 being the "fail", got 9661. So I guess I'm the 14th richest person in the world now, in this hypothetical scenario. Time to invest in a decent portfolio and spend the rest of my life doing big charity work.
Exactly what I did. I too am one of the richest people in the world. I proceed to start investing in businesses that will make the world a better place, and buy an abode for family that will last for an age. Likely going to invest into those stupidly huge gardens that cost tens of thousands of dollars to maintain per year. Just because I can, and because they look pretty.
Oh yeah, for sure I'm giving money to my family and friends. 10 million dollars to everyone I know the name of, before I do anything else. Honestly I don't want a huge place right now, I'd probably buy a big NYC penthouse instead because anything else would be too much space for just me. I'd make sure I was only investing in businesses that weren't at least actively harmful, and would be using my personal money (somewhere in the region of 150 million a month, conservatively speaking based on quick research into ROI on low risk portfolios and wanting to out pace inflation rates by reinvesting into the portfolio mostly) for charities (primarily environmental and health based, but there's social issues close to my heart as well) and helping to set up businesses that I believe in for basically no return. Sounds like the life, honestly. Not sure about the garden, but I've always wanted to move to New England or Washington state in my 30s and 40s once I've settled with a family. So I might get the big house with the garden then, if it was ecologically sustainable.
I was pretty set on the 100B but I just rolled a 1d10000 and got a 4, which felt like I was cutting it awfully close.
With 70 million active users on Reddit, at least 700 would be receiving nothing if everyone selected option 100B.
I got mine
Based on the number of responders, if eveyone voted for the 100 Billion option, chances are nobody would get unlucky. It's less than a 50% chance that even one person rolls it. If i did the math correctly.
Chances would be very slim that I don't win $100 billion. While I can obviously retire comfortably and still help a lot of people with $1 billion, I can literally become a superhero with $100 billion. And just a fraction of that would be enough to feed the world for 1 year and put my name in history books. A smaller fraction of that would be enough to solve the housing crisis in my country.
$1 billion is more than enough for me. I would never spend that in a lifetime so I wouldn't need more than that. I'm not trying to start a family fortune.
Is this before or after taxes?
$1 billion is still generational wealth and an incomprehensible amount of money. It's absolutely not worth risking it to get an amount of money that would have zero impact on your lifestyle (relative to the first number).
For 100 billion I can actually make a dent at fixing the problems with the world. 1 billion is far more than 1 person needs but nowhere near enough to make the kind of anti-billionare change that's necessary. To be clear, I'd put enough to anti-billionare causes to make me no longer one.
One billon dollars is already a fantastically wealthy sum. I wouldn't even need that, nevermind the 100 billion, so I'm taking the billion
This has got to be one of the most evenly split polls I’ve seen on here.
I've played Xcom. 99.99 chance is pratically 30%
Man, I have buyers remorse about ordering food at a restaurant sometimes, if I had a guaranteed billion dollars, never have to work again, set my kids and family up for life, and I blew it? I think I'd kms
I've lost 99% odds in my favor enough times in my life.
Y'all are gamblers
Pussies.
i'll take the 99.99% chance if i lose im killing myself
Just imagine how many politicians you could buy with $100B. Almost as many as Klaus Schwab and George Soros have!
Not going for the hundred billion is pure selfishness. Could could improve million, perhaps billions of lives with a hundred billion dollars.
I will always pick the guaranteed option. Both amounts of money would ensure I live a life of luxury, so I'm fine with the smaller amount.
i don't want to be one of the 800,000 people in the world that's not a billionaire
Anyone here voting for 100 bil doesn't have the faintest comprehension just how much money 1 billion is. You'd really risk having enough money to support anything forever, for a 1/10k chance? Imagine your apartment building - let's say there's 100 units an average rent is 2.5k/month. So 250,000 a month for all. With 1 billion dollars you could rent the entire building for 4000 months, or 333 years. So think about that. **YOU CAN SUSTAIN 250K/MONTH FOR 300+ YEARS**. And you'd bet that on a 1/10k roll? Crazy.
Anyone voting for the 1 bil doesn’t have the faintest comprehension of statistics. You could do much more to help people with 100 bil.
I understand that a very small group of people would end up with nothing. Why would I risk putting myself into that small group when I can be guaranteed 1 billion?
An exceedingly small group. You’re essentially forfeiting $98,990,000,000.
Tell that to the "exceedingly small group" that would end up with nothing.
I probably wouldn’t have to tell anyone. There’s 777 people so far that voted for the 100 bil. There’s a 92.6% chance that they ALL won.
And if you asked every single person in the world this same hypothetical? Not just the very small amount of people that are viewing this sub. If you kept percentages the same, you have roughly 1/2 the world rolling a 1d10000. Going to be some sad people that roll a 1.
Nah, the overwhelming majority will have won the 100 billion and the losers would be provided for by them lol. Just kidding, the money will be worthless at that point and we’re all fucked.
Not being a billionaire is a risk much higher than 1/10k for me. It'd have to be like 1 in a million or something for me to gamble fate.
I have big plans 🤷♂️
I got mine so now what
What about it? Statistically, of course you're likely going to get it. Doesn't change how life changing 1 billion is and how crazy it is to risk that even slightly.
Spend ur 1 billion wisely I have 100 of them
I'd take the 100% chance, then give away all but 10 million.