You’d Be Surprised How Many Billionaires Don’t Have a College Degree – by Lucinda Shen AUGUST 8, 2016, 3:36 PM EDT

Joining the ranks of Michael Dell, Ralph Lauren, and more.

The Mark Zuckerbergs and Bill Gates of the world might seem like an impossibly rare species, but there are a surprisingly high number of billionaires who have made it without earning a college degree.

About three out of 10 billionaires—29.9%—around the world did not have at least a bachelors degree in 2015, according to a billionaire census by Wealth-X. That’s 739 out of the total 2,473 billionaires. The percent of billionaires with a university degree, though, has fallen since 2014, when roughly 35% of billionaires had no degree.

Quite a few billionaires then, join the ranks of FacebookCEO Mark Zuckerberg, who left Harvard during his sophomore year and now claims a $53.5 billion net worth, and Microsoft founder Bill Gates, who also bowed out of the same university in 1975.

The vast majority of billionaires however did make it to a bachelors degree, and many went farther. Twenty-two percent went on the nab a Master’s degree, while 13.1% of all billionaires earned an MBA. About 9.5% took home a PhD, 3.4% can tout a JD, and a lesser 0.7% can hang an MD behind their desks.

Article continues:

Got a Beef With the Media? Pay Someone Else to Sue Them – DAVEY ALBA AND JENNIFER CHAUSSEE. 05.28.16. 7:00 AM.

Terry Bollea, aka Hulk Hogan, meets with his lawyers before his trial against Gawker Media, in St Petersburg, Florida, on March 17, 2016. — DIRK SHADD/TAMPA BAY TIMES/POOL/REUTERS

The revelation that Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel bankrolled Hulk Hogan’s sex tape lawsuit against Gawker sent shockwaves through the media industry. Commentators had barely recovered from the $140 million in damages awarded to Hogan. Now they were grappling with a bigger question: Is this kind of financial arrangement even legal? Could it happen to them?

The short answer to both is yes—picking up the tab on someone else’s lawsuit is now perfectly legal (it wasn’t always), and people who do it aren’t required to reveal that they’re doing it or why. The practice is reviled by the business community, and yet Thiel, a staunch pro-business libertarian, has shown billionaires everywhere that it’s possible to not only sue a media company indirectly for revenge but to make money doing it. Now that the message is out, there’s nothing to stop other billionaires from following his lead.

‘This case could really change the landscape. Everyone who has gripes about the media is going to start thinking about dollars and cents, and running to their lawyers.’ Thomas Julin, lawyer specializing in the First Amendment

“This [case] could really change the landscape, because everyone who has gripes about what the media has done is going to start thinking about dollars and cents and running to their lawyers,” says Thomas Julin, a partner at Miami-based law firm Hunton and Williams who focuses on First Amendment litigation.

“And it’s going to get lawyers thinking, ‘Maybe I should be more willing to represent other individuals against the media.’”

Article continues:

Billionaire Wang Says Disney No Match for Wanda ‘Wolf Pack’ – Bloomberg News May 23, 2016 — 9:06 PM PDT

Billionaire Wang Jianlin, chairman and president of Dalian Wanda Group Co., speaks during the Hong Kong Asian Financial Forum (AFF) in Hong Kong, China, on Monday, Jan. 18, 2016. Dalian Wanda Group, the property-to-entertainment conglomerate headed by Asia's richest man, is planning five "substantial" acquisitions this year as the company braces for a drop in sales. Photographer: Justin Chin/Bloomberg *** Local Caption *** Wang Jianlin

Billionaire Wang Jianlin, chairman and president of Dalian Wanda Group Co., speaks during the Hong Kong Asian Financial Forum (AFF) in Hong Kong, China, on Monday, Jan. 18, 2016. Dalian Wanda Group, the property-to-entertainment conglomerate headed by Asia’s richest man, is planning five “substantial” acquisitions this year as the company braces for a drop in sales. Photographer: Justin Chin/Bloomberg *** Local Caption *** Wang Jianlin

Chinese billionaire Wang Jianlin, whose Dalian Wanda Group Co. is in the midst of launching a chain of theme parks and entertainment complexes across China, has taken aim at rival Walt Disney Co. ahead of the Magic Kingdom’s June 16 opening in Shanghai.

Disney “should not have come to China,” and Wanda aims to surpass the rival entertainment company as the world’s largest tourism company by 2020, Wang said in an appearance on a China Central Television show that aired Sunday. The chairman and founder will preside over the opening of a Wanda City featuring its own theme park, movie complex and hotels in the southeastern Jiangxi province that neighbors Shanghai this weekend.

Though Wang has jeered at Disney before, his latest comments signal an escalation in the rivalry between the world’s biggest entertainment company and China’s biggest as both prepare to open multi-billion-dollar parks. At stake is dominance of China’s burgeoning entertainment industry as the number of middle-class Chinese consumers is expected to swell.

“One tiger is no match for a pack of wolves,” he said on the talk show. “Shanghai has one Disney, while Wanda, across the nation, will open 15 to 20.”

Article continues:

7 Billionaires Worried about Income Inequality by Erik Sherman NOVEMBER 28, 2015, 10:00 AM EST

Some surprising names on the list. 

Income inequality is a complicated issue. The U.S. is the richest and yet most unequal country in the world when you consider wealth, according to Allianz. And yet, there is economic mobility; many Americans shift income brackets, with 70% of the population experiencing at least one year in the top 20th percentile of income and 53% landing in the top 10th percentile in at least one year.

But as the disparities in wealth and income have become more marked, the national conversation over income inequality, as well as how to shore up America’s middle class, has gained urgency. It has even become a cause célèbre with surprising bedfellows. Democrats and Republicans have both focused on the topic, albeit with different solutions in mind. Harvard Business School alumni have cited it as a major concern — just like union activists and minimum wage workers at the fast food protests.

 And billionaires are no exception. Entrepreneur and investor Nick Hanauer, who sold his Internet advertising company to Microsoft for $6 billion in 2007, most famously warned fellow one-percenters, “If we don’t do something to fix the glaring inequities in this economy, the pitchforks are going to come for us. No society can sustain this kind of rising inequality.” But he has plenty of company. Some are concerned on moral grounds; others cite the impact on the economy. Here are seven other billionaires who say they are worried about how income inequality will affect America.

2013: Year of the liberal billionaire – By ALEXANDER BURNS and MAGGIE HABERMAN | 11/1/13 4:59 AM EDT

(From left) Tom Steyer, Michael Bloomberg and Mark Zuckerberg are shown in this composite image. | AP Photos

Groups tied to Steyer, Bloomberg and Zuckerberg have spent over $25 million this year. | AP Photos

Democrats and liberal interest groups spent much of 2012 bemoaning an avalanche of outside spending from billionaires on the right, warning that ideological tycoons like the Koch brothers and casino magnate Sheldon Adelson could threaten the legitimacy of the American electoral system.

What a difference a year makes.

In the off-year campaigns of 2013, liberal and Democratic interests have enjoyed a decisive advantage in the billionaire spending bracket. Indeed, groups tied to just three billionaires — New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, California investor Tom Steyer and Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg — have spent well more than $25 million this year pushing progressive candidates and causes.

Their arrival on the political scene, at the same time as many conservative donors remain disheartened from the GOP’s 2012 defeat, represents a shift in power in the arena of big-money campaigns. And it’s the clearest sign that Democrats have abandoned their initial revulsion about outside money in favor of a recognition that they have to play and win by the same political rules as their opponents.

Read more: