Depends what the alternative use of that capital is. What “value” led Elon to buy Twitter and flush it down the toilet? When people have enough money, they stop valuing money much when they make decisions.
Having more and more money in the coffers of a tiny group of billionaires is actually deeply anticapitalistic because it prevents market forces from working.
Single-handedly taking your stock from 70 down to 30 is not something you can do if you can’t afford it. It’s bumped back to 53 or whatever, and lots of external stuff has happened too…but I think it’s hard to deny that his actions caused a massive dive in the stock price.
Anyway, my point was that Musk, Bezos, Gates, etc. can afford to act freely in ways (constructive or destructive) that violate all the behaviors that economics textbooks posit as being universal.
My experience is the opposite: while the Big Exodus didn't seem to happen, anecdotally the people in my online chat circles post fewer Twitter links than before.
I'm actually curious about HN posts: has the frequency of Twitter submissions changed since Musk's acquisition? Or, probably more usefully, has the average number of points per Twitter submission (or maybe number that make the front page) changed?
Having more and more money in the coffers of a tiny group of billionaires is actually deeply anticapitalistic because it prevents market forces from working.