Billionaires at Inauguration Have Since Lost $209 Billion

Friday, March 14, 2025

As Donald Trump took the oath of office on Jan. 20, he was flanked by some of the world's wealthiest people. The billionaires present that day -- including Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg -- had never been richer, flush with big gains from frothy stock markets. Seven weeks later, it's a different story.

Posted by qcp at 10:31 AM | 44 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry |

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Make the corrupt Oligarchs pay!

[image or embed]
-- DianePE (@dianepe.bsky.social) March 13, 2025 at 3:52 PM

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Well, I guess now they can't afford to eat out.

#1 | Posted by Zed at 2025-03-11 12:57 PM | Reply

They think of this as an investment that will earn them trillions... and they are prolly right.

That their coming tax cut is the largest transfer of wealth from the poor and the middle class to the already very wealthy in our history is just another accomplishment to them.

#2 | Posted by Corky at 2025-03-11 01:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

So Biden was better for billionaires?

#3 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-03-14 10:47 AM | Reply

So Biden was better for billionaires?

#3 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Better for everyone.

Sanity is better for everyone.

#4 | Posted by Zed at 2025-03-14 10:50 AM | Reply

Biden was unarguably better for the economy.

#5 | Posted by qcp at 2025-03-14 10:56 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

So Biden was better for billionaires?

#3 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Stability was better for billionaires.

And everyone else.

STFU idiot.

#6 | Posted by jpw at 2025-03-14 11:11 AM | Reply

Biden was unarguably better for the economy.

#5 | Posted by qcp

Democrats are demonstrably better for the economy.

And the budget.

#7 | Posted by jpw at 2025-03-14 11:12 AM | Reply

"So Biden was better for billionaires?"

Biden was better for everybody.

#8 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-03-14 11:53 AM | Reply

Biden was better for everybody.
#8 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Only if you owned a home. Do you own a home? Biden was paying for millionaires FHA loans FFS, keeping prices artificially high.
www.wsj.com

Long term Trump/Biden's spending was unsustainable Or as you like to call it "transitory".

There's going to be withdrawal pains given the spending binge since COVID.

#9 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-03-14 12:02 PM | Reply

Biden was unarguably better for the economy.

Anyone with credit can leverage the future to look good today, making you poorer in the future..

You're probably the kid that buys a Ferrari with 0% down, and thinks he's rich.

#10 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-03-14 12:04 PM | Reply

That their coming tax cut is the largest transfer of wealth from the poor and the middle class to the already very wealthy in our history is just another accomplishment to them.

My understanding is Trump is floating the idea of no federal income taxes for those earning less than $150,000.

Do you approve or disapprove of idea?

#11 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-03-14 12:05 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

Do you approve or disapprove of (Trump's) idea?

#11 | Posted by oneironaut

Crazy men have ideas?

#12 | Posted by Zed at 2025-03-14 12:40 PM | Reply

Do you approve or disapprove of (Trump's) idea?

#11 | Posted by oneironaut

Invading Canada?

#13 | Posted by Zed at 2025-03-14 12:41 PM | Reply

Do you approve or disapprove of (Trump's) idea?

#11 | Posted by oneironaut

Invading Geenland; war with Denmark?

#14 | Posted by Zed at 2025-03-14 12:41 PM | Reply

Do you approve or disapprove of (Trump's) idea?

#11 | Posted by oneironaut

Invading Panama?

Well, Hell. I guess it's true after all. Crazy men do have ideas.

#15 | Posted by Zed at 2025-03-14 12:42 PM | Reply

-So Biden was better for billionaires?

Better question would be would Harris had been better for billionaires?

and even more important question is....will the next republican be better for billionaires vs the democratic candidate???

#16 | Posted by eberly at 2025-03-14 12:51 PM | Reply

-Do you approve or disapprove of idea?

You won't get a straight answer which tells you that yes, they do approve of such an idea.

They just can admit it.

#17 | Posted by eberly at 2025-03-14 12:52 PM | Reply

can't

#18 | Posted by eberly at 2025-03-14 12:52 PM | Reply

would Harris had been better for billionaires?

Yes.

Donald Trump is destroying America. Our relations with allied nations. With our trade partners.

He's going to destroy the value of the dollar.

Which, in turn, will make life worse off for all Americans, even the billionaires.

#19 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-03-14 12:56 PM | Reply

My understanding is Trump is floating the idea of no federal income taxes for those earning less than $150,000.

Your understanding comes from where? Some X.com post?

Trump isn't going to eliminate taxes on people earning less than $150,000.

Just like there's been no action taken to eliminate taxes earned on tips.

Trump just says anything he wants at anytime.

It's suckers, like you, who choose to believe him.

#20 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-03-14 01:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Do you approve or disapprove of (Trump's) idea?"

Just like Trump, my answer is "Yes."

Remember how Trump created the USMCA to replace the awful NAFTA deal?

Remember how Trump inherited the awful USMCA trade deal from Trump, a deal so bad that Trump unilaterally started a trade war?

#21 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-03-14 01:04 PM | Reply

"Neither Trump nor congress is going to eliminate taxes on people earning less than $150,000."

#22 | Posted by eberly at 2025-03-14 01:15 PM | Reply

You saved the day.

#23 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-03-14 01:17 PM | Reply

I'm just pointing out that idea is spectacularly unrealistic. Trump knows it.

#24 | Posted by eberly at 2025-03-14 01:23 PM | Reply

#25 | Posted by C0RI0LANUS at 2025-03-14 01:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"eliminate taxes on people earning less than $150,000"

Is this before or after the $5k DOGE handout?

And does the $5K DOGE handout count towards earnings?

#26 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-03-14 01:27 PM | Reply

Stability was better for billionaires.

#6 | Posted by jpw at 2025-03-14 11:11 AM | Reply | Flag

Oh look, Dr. Strangelove now cares about stability for billionaires.

#27 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-03-14 01:51 PM | Reply

#27 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTURDS

You're nothing more than a pathetic troll.

#28 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-03-14 01:53 PM | Reply

#27 | Posted by lfthndthrds

JFC you're dumb

Swallow it.

#29 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2025-03-14 01:56 PM | Reply

#26 I noticed you contextomy the sentence.

I have read the idea is being floated.

Even all the other ideas, do you agree or disagree with it in principle?

It's pretty much a yes or no

As Eberly states you can't even bring yourself to like or dislike a direct question.

You're pretty much useless.

#30 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-03-14 02:20 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Stability was better for billionaires.
#6 | Posted by jpw

Stability is good for everyone, the issue was government spending was making to stable.

This couldn't continue.

Doling out cash to NGOs and their board of directors $500k at a time had to stop.

#31 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-03-14 02:23 PM | Reply

IAMRUNT is ok with nazi Leon siphoning $40 billion from the government.

#32 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2025-03-14 02:25 PM | Reply

You're nothing more than a pathetic troll.

#28 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-03-14 01:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

Actually, there wasn't anything trollish about my post. Democrats with their renewed love for billionaires is the epitome of hypocrisy. Tell us again what Biden told the billionaires at that dinner in NYC back in 2020... Tell us again how many billionaires donated (how much) to Harris' campaign...

You're not the brightest bulb in the strand, and you definitely have no business calling anyone out on how they vote.

#33 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-03-14 03:15 PM | Reply

"Democrats with their renewed love for billionaires is the epitome of hypocrisy."

It has been

Days since Deplorables invoked the "Appeal To Hypocrisy" Logical Fallacy.

#34 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-03-14 03:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Democrats with their renewed love for billionaires ...

... only exist in your imagination.

Harris had stated she planned to increase taxes on billionaires.

Trump is doing everything he can to eliminate what remains of the middle class.

And you, you're all for the destruction of the United States of America.

Because liberals and progressives wanted us to be treated as equals.

The horror!

#35 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-03-14 03:53 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Oh look, Dr. Strangelove now cares about stability for billionaires.

#27 | Posted by lfthndthrds

STFU you useless sack of s(*&.

#36 | Posted by jpw at 2025-03-14 04:15 PM | Reply

Actually, there wasn't anything trollish about my post.

You're right. It was just stupid.

Democrats with their renewed love for billionaires is the epitome of hypocrisy.

Case in point.

You're not the brightest bulb in the strand, and you definitely have no business calling anyone out on how they vote.

#33 | Posted by lfthndthrds

STFU you useless sack of s(*&.

#37 | Posted by jpw at 2025-03-14 04:16 PM | Reply

"Democrats with their renewed love for billionaires"

The next time you feel love for anyone will be the first.

And that's why all you Deplorables identify with Trump!

#38 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-03-14 05:50 PM | Reply

It's become pretty obvious that if Republicans haven't figured out that their Cult Leader is a Billionaire, owned by a much bigger Billionaire, and currently implementing the Project25 for Billionaires Plan.... as they haven't figured that out by now, it's hardly likely to ever happen.

Billionaires (and millionaires) don't pay Soc Sec taxes on more than $176k of income, and pay much less as a percent on all their income than most people do.

So that's a sweet deal for them that will disappear if Soc Sec continues to exist; so they have to kill it and healthcare... because they won't go after banks, the MIC, and other Corporations who eat up most of the Treasury.

#39 | Posted by Corky at 2025-03-14 06:43 PM | Reply

STFU you useless sack of s(*&.

#37 | Posted by jpw at 2025-03-14 04:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

From the fvkkin raetard who posts parodies as actual news. And rOlLiNg sToNe sAyS tRuMp iS gOiNg tO pRiSon!!!!!

This is what happens when the mother discards the child and keeps the afterbirth.

#40 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-03-14 08:25 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

It wasn't rolling stone who said it you stupid f$&*.

And you still think voting for Trump was a good idea. Can't get stupider than that, dips^*.

#41 | Posted by jpw at 2025-03-14 11:40 PM | Reply

It wasn't rolling stone who said it you stupid f$&*

#41 | Posted by jpw at 2025-03-14 11:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

Who said it, Dr. Strangelove? Some sap that the RS paid to say it? You quoted the article from the RS. Now STFU and find another parody in the feed at X and post it before you even open the thing up.

#42 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-03-15 08:04 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Go back and look at the article you stupid f%^*.

Then, Google the legal scholar they were quoting.

You stupid f*^%.

#43 | Posted by jpw at 2025-03-16 03:51 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Go back and look at the article you stupid f%^*.

Then, Google the legal scholar they were quoting.

You stupid f*^%.

#43 | Posted by jpw at 2025-03-16 03:51 AM | Reply | Flag

Not much of a "leading scholar" you gagged on, huh?

#44 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-03-16 01:21 PM | Reply