Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Bill Gates Drops To Number 2

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the still-got-a-few-to-rub-together dept.

Businesses 388

A number of readers made sure we know that Bill Gates is apparently no longer the world's richest person. His wealth, estimated currently at $59.2 billion, has been surpassed by that of Mexican tycoon Carlos Slim. Slim, the son of a Lebanese immigrant, runs businesses in a number of industries from Mexico City. Stock in his wireless company, American Movil, recently surged in price by 27%, boosting his net worth to $67.8 billion. Last April Slim passed Warren Buffet, who had long held down the number 2 spot. In this audio Bill Gates says he won't care when he is no longer number 1.

cancel ×

388 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

We still hate him (5, Insightful)

Harmonious Botch (921977) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740387)

There seems to be a misunderstanding by some people - including Gates himself - that Bill Gates is hated because he is rich. This is not true. We envy him because he is rich.
We hate him because he produces crappy software and uses unethical techniques to promote it. Being surpassed in the richest person list does not change this.

Re:We still hate him (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740399)

Does to change.

I envy him a little less.

Re:We still hate him (5, Insightful)

garbletext (669861) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740991)

I envy him a little less.
But his wealth didn't change; it grows every day. All that's changed is a meaningless position relative to other rich men.

Bill Gates. Bankrupt? When? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19741095)

Bad business for Bill Gates.
His velocity of win $/second drops down drastically!!!.
Bill Gates has not money to pay to his company.

More Money = Better Than (1)

poopdeville (841677) | more than 7 years ago | (#19741105)

You must not be familiar with Worthington's Law.

Re:We still hate him (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740517)

Um, either reason is missing the point.

Technology rules and shapes the human race. He seeks to control all technology. *That's* the real reason to hate him. For 25 years the world has concerned itself with pittiances like who's president and which country has a despot in charge, while right under our noses the biggest monopoly in human history has effectively brought the globe under the dictatorship of Bill Gates - through the computers.

Wait til we rely on biotech to live past 150 years and we're colonizing space. There Gates will be, deciding who lives and who dies and charging everybody 50 cents to breathe. Think the people will wake up then? If so, do we want to wait until it's that bad before we start to resist?

Re:We still hate him (1, Insightful)

Mikachu (972457) | more than 7 years ago | (#19741077)

I don't understand why this was modded funny. Mod parent up, insightful.

Re:We still hate him (0, Troll)

Taco Meat (1104291) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740589)

"We hate him because he produces crappy software and uses unethical techniques to promote it"
Honestly, do you really believe that? Or are you just being sucked along with the groupthink? Providing real examples of crappy* software is one thing, but merely echoing what you read at 2600.org doesn't make you sound smart. Seriously, what has he done that is unethical? I am calling shenanigans, so back it up.

*try not to be subjective, mmkay? And MS BOB seriously doesn't count. Try something from this decade. Anything from this decade is fair. By todays standards, everyone's software was crappy in the 90's.

Re:We still hate him (1)

TodMinuit (1026042) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740677)

*try not to be subjective, mmkay? And MS BOB seriously doesn't count. Try something from this decade. Anything from this decade is fair. By todays standards, everyone's software was crappy in the 90's.
I completely agree with what you said... But, there was something that completely sucked from this decade: Windows Me [wikipedia.org] .

You can also peck at some of the lesser-used software, like Windows Movie Maker. But, by in large, the system is solid.

You seriously want a list? (2, Informative)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740923)

Windows ME
Windows 2000 pre-SP3
XP pre-SP1
Most of the first-party XBox 1 titles save for Halo, which wasn't really first-party
MS SQL Server
Internet Explorer 5
Internet Explorer 6
Internet Explorer 7
Frontpage
Microsoft Messenger
Windows Messenger
Live Messenger
Office 97 (barely within the last decade, but it was truly horrible)
Windows Mail
Outlook Express
Microsoft Mail
Netmeeting
MSN Explorer
Microsoft Sharepoint Server
Microsoft Works
Microsoft Money
Virtual PC
IE For Mac
Microsoft Anti-Virus
Office Assistant
Visual FoxPro
Microsoft Binder
Hotmail

And don't forget blunders like PlaysForSure, Zune, etc.

Re:You seriously want a list? (1)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 7 years ago | (#19741107)

have you even used SQL server? its a good product, it shits all over mysql which people so rabidly support here. and it's hardly fair to list different versions of the same software. also, wtf is the difference between windows and microsoft messenger? i'm sure you could have produced a plenty big list of crap stuff MS have put out, but don't think it's ok to bullshit like that.

Re:We still hate him (1)

Yaztromo (655250) | more than 7 years ago | (#19741069)

By todays standards, everyone's software was crappy in the 90's.

Yes, but by the 1990's standards MS's then-current software was still crappy. There were always better alternatives, but MS used a lot of dirty, underhanded, and illegal tactics to ensure they stayed on top, and other alternatives were forced out of the market.

Yaz.

Re:We still hate him (2, Interesting)

GodOfCode (878337) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740671)

There seems to be a misunderstanding by some people - including Gates himself - that Bill Gates is hated because he is rich. This is not true. We envy him because he is rich. I couldn't agree with you more on this part. We hate him because he produces crappy software and uses unethical techniques to promote it. Being surpassed in the richest person list does not change this. On this one, I am not so sure. Do we all hate all other "producers" of "crappy software" just as much? I am sure a lot of these folks would also be using unethical practices somewhere or the other.

Be honest with yourself (5, Insightful)

ClosedSource (238333) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740675)

"We hate him because he produces crappy software and uses unethical techniques to promote it."

There are lots of guys out there running software companies that produce crappier software than MS and are less ethical. Since they aren't rich, however, nobody gives a shit.

Re:Be honest with yourself (2, Insightful)

Aliriza (1094599) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740731)

Well maybe it is because he never gives up , if most of us were as rich as him we'll not work :)

Re:Be honest with yourself (1)

Nqdiddles (805995) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740915)

Since they aren't rich, however, nobody gives a shit.
Since they aren't rich, or since the crappy software they produce isn't an integral part of the lives of many, many people. I'd go with the latter. Most software can easily be replaced or rewritten if it's no up to par. A lot of microsoft software is so entrenched in mainstream use, and our everyday lives, that it has far more of an impact than anything those smaller vendors could contribute to.

Re:We still hate him (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740735)

"We envy him because he is rich."
I don't, so please don't use "we", OK? Speak for yourself, please?

"We hate him because he produces crappy software and uses unethical techniques to promote it."
Nor do I hate him. Again, speak for yourself.

Re:We still hate him (2, Insightful)

Seumas (6865) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740757)

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Outside of certain tech circles, a lot of people love Bill Gates. And outside of the tech world altogether, most people have extremely favorable opinions of Gates.

Personally, I don't care much for the guy. His whole charitable foundation and generosity does get a great deal of favor from me, though.

Re:We still hate him (1)

HuguesT (84078) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740951)

Only remember that the money that he is giving away, he took from you and me and millions of others. I personnally have paid many many times over a MS O/S tax, even though I haven't used their O/S on any of my PCs since 1991 or so. The money he got didn't grow on tree. It's easy to be generous with a few extra billions you don't need anyway.

Re:We still hate him (1)

TheoMurpse (729043) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740973)

Outside of certain tech circles, a lot of people love Bill Gates.
Amen to that. I was working as a server in a restaurant, and when my brother let it leak that I was a computer geek, this one baker started calling me Bill Gates and the like (my last name, as you can tell from my email here, is Goetz).

He was genuinely shocked when I asked him not to call me that, and I proceeded to explain why I wasn't a fan of the man.

I will concede, however, that Bill's recent actions make me more of a fan.

Re:We still hate him (2, Insightful)

TheGreatHegemon (956058) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740761)

Bill Gates? He hasn't really being doing that all so much recently. Seriously, the Microsoft hate is still valid, but Gates himself really ain't doing much of the evil, screwed up practices.

Re:We still hate him (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740811)

Is this news worth being on slashdot?

Everything about Bill Gates is not eligible enough to be posted on /.

This is crap news[Don't give me those eyes there, i don't envy him :) ].

News is not worthy enough but alas...

I guess its time to have a drink from the Firehose.

Some people say Gates is Satan. Satan hates that. (1)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740859)

Sometimes, the dislike of Bill Gates is more than dislike, sometimes people say he is Satan, or a friend of Satan: Bill Gates: Disliked. [slashdot.org]

Here are some other reasons he is disliked: Don't accept abuse. MS apparently lied. [slashdot.org]

Re:We still hate him (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740867)

No. His corporation does this.

Bill Gates donates massive amounts of his own money to charity.

Microsoft = evil.
Bill Gates = good.

Re:We still hate him (1)

HuguesT (84078) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740913)

Hate and envy are both mortal sins. At any rate there is no difference between the #1 and the #n spot, with n small. These people are way too rich to make effective use of their money anyway.

Re:We still hate him (1)

loganrapp (975327) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740959)

Though part of me really wants to see what Bill's going to do once he's completely done with Microsoft. In that dual Steve Jobs-Bill Gates interview earlier this year (or 2006, I forget, very recent), the thing Jobs said he liked about Gates was that "he doesn't want to be the richest man in the graveyard."


I really want to see if he maintains that image Steve has of him as a man. I hope so.

But For How Long? (5, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740395)

I thought I had heard that Ingvar Kamprad [wikipedia.org] , the Swedish owner of Ikea, had surpassed Gates due to the slide in world markets of the American dollar versus the Swedish crown.

Of course, Forbes never registered that because, I believe, the slide was temporary and the dollar rebounded somewhat and some reports put Kamprad in front of Gates and some didn't.

It's kind of funny when your ranking in the world's richest raises and falls with small market fluctuations. Regardless, I'll throw out the idea that it is extremely likely that Slim's net worth will be 'adjusted' by the stock market in the coming days when his stock is re-evaluated. I could be wrong but Kamprad saw his worth rise on something that is (usually) much more stable than the stock market--his country's currency.

Placing an unprecedented 27% increase in his stocks makes his position as the world's richest man all that much more volatile to me. Then again, I'm not an economist or finance specialist so I could be wrong. How the stock market index seems to consistently return 11% on investments baffles my simple computer scientist mind.

I would also like to point out a few things relating to this #1 position of world's richest man. It's obvious in (at least America) you often need money to make money. More money you have, the easier it seems to be to make money.

I've half a mind to go on a rant about the questionable business model that Gates employed to gain his position as world's richest and keep it ... but I'm too tired and it's obvious [wikipedia.org] by now [wikipedia.org] that some people agree. Though I'm sure there won't be a lack of posts on that topic for this particular news story.

Reason Gates won't care that he's not #1 is probably because he's giving a lot of it away anyway in the end. That and he's made his mark on history ... will we remember Kamprad or Slim? Highly unlikely. But Gates has touched entire generations with software we been forced to and have chosen to use for better or for worse.

Re:But For How Long? (2, Informative)

CriminalNerd (882826) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740401)

He did pass Bill for a day at most, but then Bill passed him again on the same day.

Re:But For How Long? (0)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740411)

I thought I had heard that Ingvar Kamprad, the Swedish owner of Ikea, had surpassed Gates

Yeah, but what paper wants to put the name "Ingvar Kamprad" in the headline ;-)
       

Re:But For How Long? (5, Informative)

drawfour (791912) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740469)

Meh, let me know when someone surpasses Rockefeller. In today's dollars, he would have been worth around $200 billion [askmen.com] . And you wanna talk about monopolies, predatory pricing, and anti-trust? The Sherman Antitrust Act [wikipedia.org] was DIRECTED at Rockefeller's Standard Oil.

Oh, I guess since it was over 100 years ago, no one cares anymore.

Re:But For How Long? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740497)

Oh, I guess since it was over 100 years ago, no one cares anymore.
Sorry to disappoint you but you can't sidetrack me on threats from men that are dead. I'd much rather stick to the man that is A) alive and B) forcing software into companies which then makes my life as a developer much harder.

That's like saying "George Bush is bad but what about Andrew Johnson? They impeached that guy. Oh, I guess that was over a hundred years ago so you don't care about that."

Congratulations, you can name someone worse than Gates at a crime his company was found guilty of. Doesn't make his wrong doings any less wrong in my eyes.

Re:But For How Long? (1)

Cosmic AC (1094985) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740725)

Ahh, the 19th century moguls. Definitely interesting to read about.

Re:But For How Long? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740479)

I would also like to point out a few things relating to this #1 position of world's richest man. It's obvious in (at least America) you often need money to make money. More money you have, the easier it seems to be to make money.

It is easier to make money since you have funds available for speculation where the gains are higher, but also a lot easier to loose money. Hence the fluctuations are much greater for a rich person... If you start to become the world's richest, you're going to opt for some level of stability, and that is going to drive the gains down. I'm sure you've heard of interest rates. That's the level of gains you can acheive with stability. Everything on top of that carries risk, and while you may average above the risk-free interest over time, you risk loosing a lot short-term.

will we remember Kamprad or Slim? Highly unlikely. But Gates has touched entire generations with software

Hey, Kamprad's IKEA gave the world more furniture than you can shake a stick at. He will be remembered, and his furniture will outlive you. And don't miss out on those Swedish meatballs at IKEA, they're yummy.

Re:But For How Long? (1)

AaronBrethorst (860210) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740603)

Thankfully, my Microsoft salary has long since enabled me to replace my Ikea furniture ;-) The meatballs are excellent, though, I must say, as are the lingenberries.

Re:But For How Long? (1)

Imsdal (930595) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740631)

It's lingOnberries [wikipedia.org] , even though Wikipedia strangely calls the article Vaccinium vitis-idaea. Strange; blueberries are found under "Blueberry"

Re:But For How Long? (1)

AaronBrethorst (860210) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740691)

Thanks for the correction. My Swedish and Norwegian ancestors are-no doubt-spinning in their graves right now.

Re:But For How Long? (1)

Bender Unit 22 (216955) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740961)

I still have my Pöpli.

Re:But For How Long? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740741)

He will be remembered, and his furniture will outlive you.
No, it won't. IKEA crap is cheaply made.

Re:But For How Long? (4, Informative)

fractoid (1076465) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740789)

LOSE!! It's LOSE! The only way you could 'loose' money is by untying it, or making it less tight.

Gah. Other than that your post is correct.

Re:But For How Long? (1)

StoatBringer (552938) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740987)

Oh god yes. "Lose" seems to be most commonly mis-spelled word on the net.

Followed a close second by "rouge" instead of "rogue" in Warcraft, of course.

Extra points for combining the two - "don't duel that rouge, you will loose."

Re:But For How Long? (1)

Imsdal (930595) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740995)

"Lose" seems to be most commonly mis-spelled word on the net.

I find your claim rediculous.

Re:But For How Long? (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 7 years ago | (#19741087)

Why are you so uptide? Losen up, man!

Re:But For How Long? (1)

Imsdal (930595) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740613)

How the stock market index seems to consistently return 11% on investments baffles my simple computer scientist mind.

That one is quite simple to explain: it doesn't. Did you really miss the bubble burst six years ago?

And in Tokyo, the Nikkei 225 peaked at 38957 18(!) years ago. Now it's at 18000. If it had gone up by 11% a year for 18 years it would have stood at 250,000. (I assume that the Nikkei 225 is a price index and thus doesn't include dividends. If so, the real performance is slightly better, but still far, far from 11% per year.)

Re:But For How Long? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740621)

Check out Slim's history. He makes Gates look like a saint.

Re:But For How Long? (1)

Mr. Flibble (12943) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740861)

I would also like to point out a few things relating to this #1 position of world's richest man. It's obvious in (at least America) you often need money to make money. More money you have, the easier it seems to be to make money.


This can be true, however, it need not be *YOUR* money. This is known as leverage.

Re:But For How Long? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19741081)

Yeah, it's also pretty much untrue.

Gates, Buffet, Sam Walton -- the biggest and most enduring fortunes of recent years have been due to true self-made riches. Of course they did not do it alone and have detractors, and in Walton's case he has dispersed his fortune amongst his family. But Gates and Buffet alone make for a very impressive legacy.

Add in the whole Internet fad (hee hee, 90s talk here) that made Filo, Wang, Page etc etc billionaires. To be honest I find it harder to characterise fortunes made over short stints like these (short compared to Microsoft, Berkshire and Wal-Mart), but the legacy of Apple COmputer which followed this quick-to=stardom approach does suggest that early founders can have enduring effect (Steve Jobs beutifully demonstrating that although his NeXT years did not register him as a tycoon, his first Apple stint was not a fluke).

So I don't know why these old-style rants about needing money to make money came from. If anything there are many less entrenched families among the superrich than there were even 20 years ago. There is lots of new blood.

When he takes a #2... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740403)

He still will make more money during that time than I will in my entire life

So... (1)

martin_henry (1032656) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740413)

Does that mean Warren Buffet is now the 3rd richest man in the world?

Re:So... (5, Funny)

Don_dumb (927108) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740711)

This is a race where coming second or third (or even a hundred and third) is still winning.

Stocks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740443)

If his wealth is based on the stock market, Carlos will be slipping back down again soon enough, and Gates will be the richest man again.

Re:Stocks (1)

Imsdal (930595) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740657)

Because Gates' wealth isn't based on the stock market?

Don't worry. Slim is not very different from Bill (4, Interesting)

GNUALMAFUERTE (697061) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740451)

Telmex and Microsoft use the same monopolistic practices, Gates and Slim are not very different. They both apply the same practices in different markets. The interesting part is that we will get to see both of them competing in a few years, since POTS is disappearing and the fight will be on VoIP, that's a market both of them will be into.

I Hope we see them fighting each other for control, because if they reach an agreement, for example, m$ makes voip software, and Telmex provides the service, we are really screwed up.

Telmex got here [Argentina] only a few years ago, they acquired CTI (Biggest mobile telco), Techtel (at the time one of the 5 top players in the carrier and corporate market), Ertach (Biggest Wifi ISP), and lots of kilometers of fiber that interconnects the main cities in Argentina from other companies (metrored, etc.). They also are betting money into Telecom. So, in just a few years they become the third biggest player in Argentina (In this order: 1 - Telefonica, 2 - Telecom, 3 - Telmex), But they have a pretty tight relationship with Telecom Argentina (Read: They are buying stock, big time), And Telefonica has a policy of being friendly with the 5 biggest players, and screwing the rest, So they are now the second bigger in Argentina, and the first one keeps them safe.

Be afraid, be very afraid.

Re:Don't worry. (1)

martin_henry (1032656) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740515)

we are really screwed up.

Speak for yourself!

You sure? (5, Informative)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740543)

Telmex and Microsoft use the same monopolistic practices, Gates and Slim are not very different.
They both may be monopolies, but there IS quite a difference. The difference is that Telmex *IS* a competitive and efficient company. If it wasn't for Slim's investment in telecom infrastructure, we mexicans would still be calling the state-driven phone company to complain that our 24K modems disconnect too often. I do remember those times... Slim practically saved the country from stagnating in the information era.

Microsoft is an artificial monopoly, reeking with planned obsolescence and lack of innovation. In contrast, Telmex already gives us the videophone [telmex.com] service.

Re:You sure? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740587)

out of curiosity, how do you pronounce his name "Slim" -- I believe it's Arabic normally spelled and pronounced as Selim (unless it's some odd Lebanese pronunciation..) is it like that in Spanish too? Slim or Selim?

Re:You sure? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740953)

It's just Slim, but some dumb people try to pronounce it like it's an English word and say eslim.

Re:You sure? (2, Insightful)

ClosedSource (238333) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740727)

"They both may be monopolies, but there IS quite a difference. The difference is that Telmex *IS* a competitive and efficient company."

If Telemx is really competitive compared to MS, then there must be stronger telecom competitors in Mexico than MS had in computers in the US. What competitors does Telemx have that are stronger than Sun, Oracle, IBM, and Apple?

Isn't there evidence that Telmex maintains it's monopoly through political influence and protectionism rather than through providing better service than competitors could provide?

Re:You sure? (1)

aldo.gs (985038) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740865)

The main reason why telmex has virtually no opposition here in Mexico is because it was once a government company (or whatever te correct name is), and it regulated and provided all telephony services until its privatization (guess who bought it).

Now, I'm not gonna say that Telmex saved the day or something, but as it is, there are not any good alternatives right now.

Re:You sure? (1)

ClosedSource (238333) | more than 7 years ago | (#19741071)

There are no good alternatives because the government isn't allowing it.

Logic fallacy (2, Interesting)

Derling Whirvish (636322) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740829)

The difference is that Telmex *IS* a competitive and efficient company. If it wasn't for Slim's investment in telecom infrastructure, we mexicans would still be calling the state-driven phone company to complain that our 24K modems disconnect too often. I do remember those times...
There's a logic fallacy in your argument. I could just as easily say: "The difference is that Microsoft *IS* a competitive and efficient company. If it wasn't for Gate's investment in GUI-based operating systems for personal computers, we Americans would still be using a command-line interface to telenet into mainframes when we needed to use a computer. I do remember those times... " And if I did, I would probably be as wrong about how the future of PCs played out over the last 20 years as you are about how the future of the Mexican telecom industry played out over the same period. If not Gates then someone else. If not Slim, then someone else.

Re:Don't worry - charitable gifts? (1)

elwinc (663074) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740931)

How much has Slim given to charity? One difference that separates Gates from his fellow super-rich is the amount (or percent) he has given to charity, specifically to the Gates Foundation. He gave the foundation $20 billion in either 2000 or 2001. At the time I believe it was over a third of his net worth. Had Gates been trying to win the "richest man" contest, he shouldn't have given so much money. I don't believe Slim has made any comperable donation. Even Warren Buffet's $30+ billion commitment to the Gates Foundation is 5% per year spread out over 20 years.

According to http://www.gatesfoundation.org/MediaCenter/FactShe et/ [gatesfoundation.org] , the Gates Foundation's current endowment is $33.4, and they made grant payments of $1.56 billion in 2006 (a U.S. charitable foundation must grant a minimum 5% of its net worth each year.) Think what you will about Microsoft, but few people have given as large a percentage of their wealth at as young an age as Gates did.

Does Bill get an eyepatch? (3, Informative)

Itninja (937614) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740455)

I just watched the 'complimentary' download from Xbox Live Marketplace of Austin Powers. It looks like Bill is now on par with Robert Wagner as 'Number 2'. Coincidence? I think not.

In other news, Slim is now (apparently) Dr. Evil. Go figure.

VIVA MEXICO CA.... (-1, Flamebait)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740473)

:D Feels glad to be mexican.... *sigh* :)

Re:VIVA MEXICO CA.... (5, Insightful)

nomadic (141991) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740555)

:D Feels glad to be mexican.... *sigh* :)

Why? Are you sharing in his success?

Re:VIVA MEXICO CA.... (1)

Cosmic AC (1094985) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740775)

Isn't slim Lebanese?

Re:VIVA MEXICO CA.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740925)

Porque mexico nunca pierde!!

Okay... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740485)

Who gives a shit?

As Q Would Say... (4, Funny)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740487)

"Well, well. If it isn't number 2..."

Hmmm (1)

wolf369T (951405) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740501)

Mexic, you say? I predict that in max. 3 years, Mr. Slim will be assasinated by the local mob. Or at least one of his familly member will be taken hostage, for a huge, huge ransom.

Re:Hmmm (1)

martin_henry (1032656) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740541)

Mr. Slim will be assasinated by the local mob. Or at least one of his familly member will be taken hostage, for a huge, huge ransom.

You predict? Or you imply? [m-w.com]

Re:Hmmm (2, Funny)

wolf369T (951405) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740571)

I foretell.
Better now?

More Vista Fallout (0, Offtopic)

run4ever79 (949047) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740539)

Looks like yet another consequence of the debacle that is Vista.

Re:More Vista Fallout (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740693)

No, no. The cumulative weight of all the Windows trolls pulled Gates' wealth down below Mexico. But don't worry, the buoyant hot air of all the Windows True Fans will bring Bill back to the top in no time.

Weird. (0, Troll)

Seumas (6865) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740559)

So the richest man in the world comes from the country where people hide in gutted tires and engine compartments and risk life and limb to flee, so they can find a job where they can make a buck a day picking green-beans?

Oh, by the way, this guy is worth 7% of the entire country.

Exaggeration (1)

XchristX (839963) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740833)

You're exaggerating.While Mexico is certainly a developing country with large poverty problems, it's significantly better off both politically and economically compared to most other developing countries, especially elsewhere in Latin America Just look at nearby Haiti. What about Honduras & El-Salvador, both countries wrecked by nearly continuous warfare for decades? Compared to that, Mexico is a paradise (in fact, I believe that Mexico suffers from an illegal immigration problem with fence-jumpers from Guatemala, ironically...).

I spent a week in Mexico City in the early nineties and saw what the citizens lamented (and American tourists condemned) as "slums". They were bad, but not nearly as bad as other slums that I have seen elsewhere in the developing world (so-called "slums" in Mexico City have electricity and running water).

Re:Exaggeration (1)

Seumas (6865) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740965)

I don't doubt that Mexico might have seemed nice to you. That doesn't chance the fact that approximately 1.7 million Mexican citizens come to America for employment every year. That accounts for one full percent of Mexico's population. Every year. And they do so in creative, unfortunate and clearly desperate ways such as sewing themselves into a bus seat or jamming themselves on top of a truck's engine, suffering severe burns in the process.

I'm sure it's a wonderful country when you're the one man who is worth 7% of your entire country, but I doubt a full percent of the country is fleeing to America under terrible conditions, because their homeland is wonderful.

I'm not for forcing people to give their money away, but clearly there is a severe problem in that country and this guy only further illustrates that.

Re:Exaggeration (1)

XchristX (839963) | more than 7 years ago | (#19741045)

That probably has more to do with a combination of proximity to the US border, coupled with social inequalities wrt race in Mexico (notice that the illegal immigrants who jump the fence to the US are generally darker in skin-tone to the more well-off caucasoids in Mexico). There is obviously severe social and economic problems with the country, but not as bad as the others in the region, where rampant poverty, lack of education and lack of opportunity gives rise to socialist terrorism from the likes of Castro,Chavez and Guevara (all unpopular characters in Mexico, btw).

What's more, trying to connect all that to one tycoon like Slim requires quite a stretch of the imagination, barring any concrete proof. Saudi Arabia is considerably better off than Mexico economically , but the wealth distribution inequality problem is far far worse than in Mexico. Saudi Arabia is basically a small cabal of ultra-uber-rich and batshit crazy Islamist Arab Oil Sheikhs who control almost ALL the wealth of Saudi Arabia, a good deal more than 7 percent(not to mention that they hold the entire civilized world a hostage to their insanity using their oil), and the rest of the country is dirt poor, with no functioning or statistically significant middle class. In contrast, Mexico HAS a reasonably well-educated (for a third world country, anyways) urban middle class. YOU may not know of them because they don't jump the borders, but they're there nonetheless.

Re:Exaggeration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19741103)

In a country where 3 million plus are imprisoned and 40 million plus are too poor to afford health care, a country with 1000 billionaires shows clearly that there is a severe problem in that country.

Re:Weird. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740997)

"hide in gutted tires and engine compartments" I've no idea what the fuck you're talking about and I've lived here 24 years. You just perpetuate the "stupid american" stereotype that's oblivious to the rest of the world. People aren't literally dying of starvation here and move to the US because it's the only way they'll survive. America has many things that are better than here and people just want to go to where things are already fixed instead of working to improve theirs.

Carlos Slim Fortune (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740567)

Slim was one of the first traders in mexican stock market (before he was stock operator in usa) but really become mega-rich after getting TelMex from the goverment (at that time the monopolic, state owned telephony company) from former mexican presindent Carlos Salinas (due to corruption)

Talk about, how not to sell a state monopoly: just making it private, instead of dividing it to form a competitive market. To this day méxico suffers from that.

America-Movil its the celular telephony company from Grupo CarSO (Carlos Slim keiretsu that started with TelMex)

Today CarSO participates in the telephony of most countries in latinamerica, and soon also in spain

Both Gates and Slim are unfair market monopolist... because the ones in power dont care

Sorry but it has to be said (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740577)

No Slim pickings here!

Too Much Garbage (1)

pipingguy (566974) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740595)

After listening to the link provided, I can't help but think that Gates is just like the rest of us normal humans - far too much noise coming into the inbox as compared to the signal.

oh, drops TO number two! (5, Funny)

hobo sapiens (893427) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740609)

At first I thought it read "Bill Gates drops A number two".

I though "man, is this a slow news day or what?!" and "Did he flush?"

I guess it's time to get some sleep. Or stop smoking crack. Either way.

OB: Spinal Tap (1)

laejoh (648921) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740647)

Well, it's one more, isn't it? It's not one. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at one. You're on one here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on one on the Forbes' list. Where can you go from there? Where?

Marty DiBergi: I don't know.

Nigel Tufnel: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?

Marty DiBergi: Put it up to two.

Nigel Tufnel: Two. Exactly. One more.

The real point (2, Interesting)

edwardpickman (965122) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740663)

Either one of them could take every breathing person to MacDonalds. The only difference is one could super size it and still have money left over. Both would actually still be billionaires.

Re:The real point (1)

Seumas (6865) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740709)

He is worth more than 7% of his country's entire economy and not only could he take every citizen to McDonald's, but he could give every single family $3,500. That's just crazy.

Not that I'm against capitalism. Hell, no. But something is wrong in a country where a man can have almost a tenth of its entire wealth while the rest of the country wants to flea to America for crappy jobs and wages. Especially when most of that wealth originated not from capitalism, but rigged corporate welfare.

We've seen this before... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740701)

In 99, Gates' net worth was over $100 billion for a while.

Stock rises and falls...Not like he was going to stay #1 forever anyway, Microsoft has ceased being a major growth stock.

Carlos who? I know, I know, we all love to hate Bill, but his legacy will be felt far longer than someone who gets a hardon for just accumulating more and more.

Bill Gates Gives His Money Away (5, Insightful)

phalse phace (454635) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740753)

But isn't part of the reason why Bill Gates isn't so rich anymore because he's giving his money away [go.com] ? He's given away more money than anyone I can think of.

How much has Carlos Slim given away to help fight AIDS? How much has he given away for education?

It's not how much money you have that's important, but what you do with it and the impact it has on others.

Re:Bill Gates Gives His Money Away (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19741101)

What difference does it make? We're broke, they're rich, life sucks and soon we're gonna' die.

And it's gonna rain tomorrow, I just know it.

QUICK ! (4, Funny)

polar red (215081) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740767)

Quick, let's all buy an overpriced vista ... we can still push him to #1

Re:QUICK ! (2, Funny)

eclectro (227083) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740893)

Luckily he does not need to rely on Vista sales. He just needs to dig the loose change out of the couch and he would be #1 again.

Cheap Joke (0, Redundant)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740879)

Breaking headline news!

Bill Gates drops a number 2!

Where can we... (1)

niceone (992278) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740917)

...donate? Come on, a few bucks each to help Bill through this difficult patch.

Re:Where can we... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740969)

We already do. Its called "microsoft tax" sure you have already seen it on slashdot.

Lebanese? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19740937)

I'm not sure the relevance of pointing out that he is of Lebanese heritage. However, as it was mentioned, it would be prudent to point out that he was Christian Lebanese and not Muslim. Lebanon, once known as "Paris of the Middle East", has gone completely to hell since being over-run with Muslims and the current conflicts there stand as testament to the Islamic 'contribution'.

How much cash... ? (3, Informative)

funkdancer (582069) | more than 7 years ago | (#19740945)

has Slim put into philanthropy? To anyone who found this question relevant (I was almost expecting "none" - and thus making the Gates foundation a very easy explanation on the #1 move), Forbes says the following [forbes.com] (plus a lot of other interesting stuff) of the man's new project:

"Lately Carlos Slim has taken up a particular interest in philanthropy, a pursuit he had neglected for most of the years he was building his businesses. He formed a foundation 23 years ago and funded it with a few million, and it has done little since then. A year ago Slim infused it with $1.8 billion; in the fall he pledged to donate up to $10 billion to the foundation in the next four years to fund health and education programs."

It is somehow good to see the world's richest doing this kind of stuff. Of course, it's not like they couldn't afford it, but still.

Talking Points (0, Flamebait)

hedgemage (934558) | more than 7 years ago | (#19741041)

This is more proof that Mexicans are taking jobs that no Americans want, just like the people on Fox News tell me. I mean, what US citizen would want to be the world's richest man!?

Give it Away (4, Insightful)

SoyChemist (1015349) | more than 7 years ago | (#19741089)

Carlos Slim should use his money to build schools in Mexico and pay adults as well as children to attend.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>