Steve Jobs Ranked World's 110th Richest Person With Net Worth of $8.3 Billion

Clearly you did not. Bill Gates siphoned off 28B. 3.5 times stevies net worth.

Jobs is greedy and doesn't donate to charity. He wants it all for himself.

and an ego to match.

Say what you will about Microsoft and Gates, but he does offer up a lot of his money and time to charities (including establishing his own). it is a shame $teve doesn't share that same enthusiasm for helping his fellow man, but in the end he's more concerned with running a tight ship and checking his bank account each night. But hey.. people seem to still love him and his products, so being selfish and egotistical does pay off.

I'll be buying an ipad2 tomorrow, along with others, in a bid to get him at least in the top 100 before he croaks. YOU CAN DO IT STEVE!!! :apple:

I'm gonna make a very ****** comment now, but I feel it's one of those facts in life we cannot deny.

I'm not very rich, but I'm healthy.

Why do you think he should give to charity, or anyone? It's his money and he can keep it if he wants.

When someone passes the money isn't going with them, that's why billionaires such as Gates and Buffet have pledged to give up 50% of their wealth over their life times, it feels good to help others, and it makes no sense to just let the money sit there for nothing, they have more than enough to support themselves and their families.

One quote from the link in the first post says it all:



Petty. Selfish.

A few million from Jobs' stash of billions could have saved the mansion for a public legacy. But it's been destroyed.

There were a lot of people arguing for the historical significance of the property - so saying it had "little significance" is just parroting Jobs' argument.

..and likewise, you're just 'parroting' the argument of those who say it DID have significance. You know I've learned? You'll get people who oppose ANY building being torn down. There was this huge, ******, run down department store in the city I used to live in, deprecating in prime downtown land. It took YEARS of battling for the city to finally tear it down, and make something useful that the public might actually benefit from. All these people protesting that it had significant 'historical' value were full of ****, and they wasted millions of city money just to delay the inevitable. So your argument that it should have stayed because of these people's arguments means nothing, as they dont tend to be objective nor rational, often desperately seeking a 'cause' they can run with. I haven't seen a single credible source that had a strong argument for the historical value of this building- quite the opposite.

What's hilarious is that some here actually pretend to give a rat's ass about that place. If jobs hadn't lived in it, nobody would know about it. Grow the **** up, and stop trying to paint the man as evil/selfish/whatever because of this. The judgemental attitude in this thread is sickening.

Thats all he cares about, MONEY and how he can extract the maximum amount from people, profit above everything, **** him.
Shame the guys such a tosser cos his company does great products

How do you "move" a 14K sq ft plus house?

Chainsaws and trucks. Lots of 'em.

And no that's not a stupid snide remark. That's how they move lots of buildings.

I know it's already an absurd amount of money, but I wish Steve would break the #100 stop before he dies. I just hate how stupid people (like Bernard Arnult) who are born into being the richest.

While none of us (except the turtlenecked guy and his accountants, if they're reading) know what Jobs' charitable contributions are, he did miss one chance to leave a legacy to Silicon Valley.

In 1984, Jobs bought a stunning, historical mansion in the foothills above Silicon Valley - the Jackling House (http://us.gizmodo.com/#!5763219/exclusive-shots-of-steve-jobs-demolished-house), a 14,540-square-foot, 14-bedroom home designed by a famous architect.

Whereas other wealthy people have left significant homes for the public (Villa Montalvo and Filoli in the immediate area, for example), Jobs decided that he wanted to build something shinier.

Therefore, instead of leaving a legacy for the region, an architectural gem has been


(click to enlarge)

What a petty, selfish act - when a small fraction of his wealth could have left the "Jobs-Jackling House" as an enduring legacy.

It seems interesting to me that for example in wikipedia, the amount of text describing how the Evil Steve Jobs demolished the house far outweighs any text about the house itself. For example in the page for George Washington Smith, nothing is said about this house at all, except that Steve Jobs pulled it down. The page about Jackling gives no information about the house itself except the year it was built and the architect, followed by a length article about Steve Jobs, longer actually than the text about Daniel C. Jackling himself.

I would conclude that the only thing of importance about the house is that Steve Jobs demolished it.

Maybe Jobs does give to charity but we don't hear about it?

Not a chance in hell.