Previously in British English (but not in American English), the word "billion" referred exclusively to a million millions (1,000,000,000,000). However, this is no longer common, and the word has been used to mean one thousand million (1,000,000,000) for several decades. So blame the influence of the Mericas....
So historically people did have similar amounts of money but it wasn't recognised as such. If that's the case then thank you, because it appears ridiculous at face value. It's just a shame that people aren't being paid in line with inflation rates. Edit: Separate issue, I know.
i believe there were billionaires (the pretend fake bastardised yank definition of billion, that is) in the 1960s, but we mostly didn't know who they were or hadn't had confirmation as such. those people were the crooks behind world banking establishments and generally took the low publicity route. people such as the gettys and rothschilds. inflation is a factor. the bank of england's inflation caculator show around 24 times what they were in 1960 and 16 times what they were in 1970. or, to put it another way, a pound now is worth about 4p of its 1960 value or 6p of its 1970 value.
There have always been people who have become vastly wealthy compared to their peers. If you convert that wealth into todays terms they'd have been billionaires. Andrew Carnegie would have been a Billionaire in todays money, he gave much of it away on philanthropic projects. He built libraries all over the US and the UK including one in Hull on the corner of West Park. The richest many in history is estimated to be Manu Masa, emperor of the vast Mali Empire, with an estimated net worth of $400 billion. On a trip to Cairo in 1324 he gave away so much gold to the poor it wrecked the economy for a decade.
This country's littered with stately homes, there's been the equivalent of billionaires for hundreds of years.
In the 18th Century, Matthew Boulton's personal fortune was the equivalent of twice Bill Gates' current wealth.
Very pretty litter though. Oddly enough many stately home owners don't have that much money these days.
It's even more extreme in France. A ride through the countryside in France makes the reasons for their revolution self-evident, with miles of small houses, then the grand palace comes into view...rinse and repeat.
On the plus side it has created loads of daytime TV. Rich brit goes to France, buys a run down Chateau for relative peanuts, renovates it and now runs a venue for weddings.
The first person said to have amassed personal wealth of 1,000 million (in dollars which were worth a lot less than pounds sterling in those days) is Rockefeller in, 1916. People before that will have been worth a lot more in relative terms. People have been paid more than being in line with inflation rates for a long time. Look at sites which show how long it takes to earn items now compared to 50 or 60 years ago. The majority take far less nowadays. Don't know how old you are but inflation rates hit 25%. This was caused in part by higher inflation leading to large wage increases in wage demands which lead in turn to more inflation...
Don't know. But he was the one that was always named in quotes about rich people, wealthy as Rockefeller etc.,.
Just to but a slightly different slant on relative wealth, I can't remember which particular wealthy person they were on about or they ailment, but at least one lost a child through ill-health, as despite their vast wealth, they couldn't get a cure. That same illness today is remedied with medications we can all get from the local pharmacy.
0.6% of the population own more than half the land in this country. A lot of that 0.6% are direct descendants of the barons in William the Conqueror’s.
