>>16054746>It's not even about the material wealth for them, either. More so status and influence.Right. Well, at least some of them. People definitely care less about accumulating material wealth when they already have so much of it, and, yeah, they focus much more on the status and influence, it's like an addiction. Actually, yeah, I was underestimating the status and influence. Even the people who aren't ridiculously wealthy still obsess over status, hell, even the people who aren't wealthy obsess over it. Money itself doesn't have value, its value is derived from what it gives you, and fancy cars and Rolexes give value by expressing status. Of course, not to say everyone that wants to be rich wants fancy cars and Rolexes, but that motivations run deeper than the monetary transaction. People can be accruing material wealth, but not for the sake of material wealth, but for the status, as you said.
>if I were insanely rich, I'd pay scientists millions of dollars to engineer the most comfortable bed of all timeI think I remember seeing your wall of text talking about that, lol. I didn't read it all, though. If I get bored enough I might look it up on the archive sometime.
If I were insanely insanely rich, I'd like to create media, like movies or television shows. I'd also like to attempt to create the infrastructure around it for self-sufficience, essentially minimizing dependence on outside parties for things such as distribution. I could go on and on about that but, I don't feel like it right now for some reason. Random last point I'll add is, the phrasing of "like to create media" and "like to attempt to create infrastructure" was deliberate, because although the former is complex, it's largey solved with money, whereas the latter is both complex and enigmatic. A relevant example is how EA and 2k tried to create their own digital stores, but failed to gain any meaningful market share, despite making billions of dollars.
