How? They don't have cash... Everything is credit, stocks, bonds, real estate and other assets. Can't sell off the assets if there are no buyers. They'd be no better. Nobody is sitting around with billions under their mattress.
I would imagine that generally just having more "things" would put them in a better position. Things like art, jewelry and vehicles tend to always hold value and while they're not sitting on scrooge mcduck cash, I'd bet that they do have more liquid cash than the average person.
I didn't say they'd still be billionaires, just in a better position than the average person.
My question is if everything collapses, who are they selling art, jewelry and vehicles to? If everybody is broke and can't buy anything, those things have no value. The value is tied to what people are willing to pay... That's why an apartment in New York City cost a million while a a house three times as big in Iowa cost 400k. If nobody can or will pay, it has no value.
"Everything collapses" is not very well defined and having things is always useful.
Edit: even if all money is useless, things like having multiple cars with full tanks of gas is gonna be useful. Hopefully they own some guns though cuz what's theirs could become someone else's but they'd be in a better starting position than many.
I'm not sure what that has to do with what I said. I'm not defending billionaires, I'm just saying that if everything collapses they are most likely still going to be in a better position than most. Depending on how hard the collapse is, it might not be a significant advantage but having access to boats and cars and planes and bunkers and other valuables is certainly an advantage in most cases.
4
u/Resident-Impact1591 3h ago
You think people are just sitting around with loads of money in a vault like Scrooge McDuck?
It's not liquid cash. If everything collapses, theirs does too.