Mansion Therapy?

There's something really admirable about the fact that the second richest man on Earth lives in a home he purchased in 1958 for $31,500. Yes, it's a nice spacious home of 6,000 square feet, and he also own a Laguna Beach estate worth a big chuck of change as vacation residence. But how many of us worth $52 billion dollars would be apt to live contently in a modest Omaha, Nebraska home?

Apparently none of the other several billionaires included in Forbes Homes of Billionaries list. Think of the list as a momentary fantasy departure from the world of Apartment Therapy, for sheer entertainment's sake, in a galaxy far, far, away....

Comments (8)

I would. I lived in Omaha for a total of 6 years. Grew up in Nebraska.

It's a pretty great city. Granted, it's nothing like San Fran, Chicago or Boston (I have not yet visited NYC) but it's a fine city in it's own right.

I lived in two buildings that were around 90 years old... Gorgeous. Gives you that big city feel. Omaha suburbs are crap in my opinion... but that's where everyone wants to live. If you want a city feeling... live in Midtown... or Downtown. Omaha is finally joining the trend of condo and townhome development in Midtown and Downtown. Some neat old lofts too.

Don't knock it if you've never actually visited.

posted by click chick on 2007-03-20 11:21:58

That house has Amityville windows. Creepy.

posted by Grant on 2007-03-20 11:59:08

i guess that's one of the secrets to amassing wealth... live simply (relative to your wealth)

posted by mar on 2007-03-20 13:01:51

Click Chick: That wasn't intended as a knock or judgment of Omaha, honest! I could have easily changed the neighborhood to Northridge, CA (where I was raised) and the question would remain valid. I'd gander that most people would relocate to somewhere more posh at that level of wealth, whether they live in NYC, LA, Boise, or San Antonio. I'm only complimenting Mr. Buffet's frugality.

posted by gregory on 2007-03-20 13:06:41

No no.. I wasn't directing my last comment at you Gregory!

Just a comment in general. I make it one of my life's missions to train people not to pass judgement on someplace they've never been. BIG pet peeve of mine.

Thats why I cant comment on NYC never been there (though I saw Manhattan once at night while flying into Newark Airport. Manhattan looked very small. Like Downtown Denver with lots more people and taller buildings)
Have been to San Fran Loved it!
Chicago was my favorite city before I went to Boston now theyre tied. And Seattle. Absolutely freaking amazing!
Still don't have anything nice to say about Texas though! Wink wink!

posted by click chick on 2007-03-20 14:55:32

Haha, don't mess with Texas! My best girl Friday is from San Antonio, and I have to say, the Texan landscape, the friendly people, the BBQ (!!!), and the old west architecture of Austin and San Antonio (beautiful Victorians I might actually like even more than SF's lovely painted ladies) won me over.

posted by gregory on 2007-03-20 15:01:14

I've gotta weigh in here:
I'm a native Texan, transplanted to San Francisco. While I HEART SF - the Victorians, the culture, the parks, the surrounding areas - I will always HELLA LOVE Austin. It's an eclectic mix of architecture, depending on the neighborhood you're in. Big hearts, great food, laid back atmosphere, and large bodies of water that you can actually swim in!
(I can't vouch for the rest of the state - it's an acquired taste.)

posted by michele on 2007-03-21 09:15:24

michele--you must be a transplant to northern california: "hella"!

posted by Shannon on 2007-03-21 17:49:09