In the world we live in today, one individual holds more wealth than the combined wealth of the bottom 46% of humanity. That person is Elon Musk, widely regarded as the world’s first trillionaire.

Some would argue that he deserves his fortune — that he worked for it, planted the seeds, took the risks, and was rewarded by the extraordinary growth of the companies he built. As the old saying goes, “To the victor go the spoils.”

However, Musk’s trillion-dollar net worth does not mean he has a trillion dollars sitting in a bank account earning interest. Quite the opposite. The vast majority of his wealth is tied up in stocks and company shares. If the value of those companies declines, billions of dollars could disappear from his net worth almost instantly.

Musk is estimated to hold hundreds of millions of dollars in liquid assets — actual cash available in bank accounts — but the precise figure is difficult to verify. Rather than selling large portions of his holdings and triggering major tax consequences, ultra-wealthy individuals often borrow against their assets. Banks are willing to provide these loans at extremely favourable interest rates because the underlying shares act as collateral.

This is why the term “billionaire” can be misleading. A large portion of such fortunes exists on paper, represented by ownership stakes in companies rather than cash sitting idle.

That said, the accumulation of wealth on a trillion-dollar scale raises broader questions about inequality, economic power and the role of extreme wealth in society. What does one person do with a fortune of that size? This is precisely the question raised by economist Professor Richard Wolff during a YouTube discussion, in which he sharply criticised Musk’s accumulation of wealth and questioned its broader social purpose.