Yeah, there's a non-obvious qualifier there. There's definitely things that Musk can do that those people can't. But the number of things that richer person A can do that poorer person B can't do exponentially decreases based on B's net worth, not on A's.
So yeah, Pierre Chen is gonna have a hard time buying Twitter but he's still not going to have a hard time buying a mega yacht, multiple million dollar homes, and could start a space company if he wanted to. We're quibbling over some pretty fine nuances here but from technical correctness I agree that you're correct. Just not in the "practical" (for lack of better words) sense. They're approximately equal. Much more equal than, say, between you/me and John Bogle (created Vanguard: net worth ~80m). I'd say there's even a bigger gap between Bogle and Chen than Chen and Musk. However you define value (things, capital, good life, whatever) is not linearly or exponentially tied to monetary wealth, but that's a sublinear function that looks exponential near the origin.
So yeah, Pierre Chen is gonna have a hard time buying Twitter but he's still not going to have a hard time buying a mega yacht, multiple million dollar homes, and could start a space company if he wanted to. We're quibbling over some pretty fine nuances here but from technical correctness I agree that you're correct. Just not in the "practical" (for lack of better words) sense. They're approximately equal. Much more equal than, say, between you/me and John Bogle (created Vanguard: net worth ~80m). I'd say there's even a bigger gap between Bogle and Chen than Chen and Musk. However you define value (things, capital, good life, whatever) is not linearly or exponentially tied to monetary wealth, but that's a sublinear function that looks exponential near the origin.