It takes 11 days to reach a million seconds and 32 years to get to a billion. Under the old British definition of a billion, used before 1974, it would have taken even longer.
Using time is a useful way to comprehend scale and help understand why billionaires are now attracting renewed attention. They are firmly on the political agenda, often because they encapsulate a wider debate about wealth and influence.
In recent years, the question of whether there needs to be a global approach to billionaires has featured at G20 meetings. In the UK, meanwhile, the debate about taxing wealth is likely to be given a renewed boost if Andy Burnham is elected to Parliament and, as expected, makes a tilt at No 10.
In the US this week, Elon Musk’s SpaceX will go public in what may be the largest initial public offering (IPO) in history.
It is expected to raise around $75bn (£55bn), valuing the company at close to $1.8 trillion (£1.3 trillion), making many employee shareholders wealthy, and further boosting the fortune of Musk.
Not long ago, SpaceX was valued at $1.25tn, as it merged with another branch of Musk’s empire, xAI, his artificial intelligence venture.
According to Forbes, there are now more than 3,400 billionaires worldwide, with a combined wealth exceeding $20tn (£15tn). One in 2.5 million people is a billionaire.
What then is the issue? While their numbers are tiny, their share of global income and wealth is not only high, but increasing. As their economic might has risen, so too has their political influence.
At a time when many countries face fiscal stress, the amount of tax they pay is often seen as disproportionately small.
It is therefore understandable that questions about fairness, taxation and the social contract have moved from the margins to the mainstream.
It is important to approach any debate on billionaires rationally, or bad policy will follow. They should pay their fair share of tax. The debate, though, is not really about billionaires. It is about the kind of capitalism we want.
SpaceX highlights an important aspect of this. For most of history, great fortunes were associated with land ownership, inheritance or control of resources.
Today’s billionaires are more often linked to entrepreneurship, technology and the ability to scale ideas globally. SpaceX is transforming access to space, and is a business which investors believe will generate significant value.
Capitalism rewards risk-taking. That is one of its strengths.
Britain, if anything, suffers from having too few people willing and able to take risks or build globally significant businesses. Of course, businesses, whatever their size, should look after their staff and stakeholders. But our current problem in the UK is a lack of risk-taking.
We may celebrate innovation in hindsight, but are often uncomfortable with the wealth it creates along the way. Yet starting and growing a company is rarely quick or easy. Those who create successful enterprises should expect to share in the rewards.
Here we need to appreciate that giant oaks grow from acorns. Too often we see small firms as the soft underbelly of the UK economy, when in reality they are its backbone – and the incentives should be there to help them grow.
A large public sector does not create a competitive global economy. Yet small firms are often taxed and regulated heavily.
Part of the problem is that we do not allow small firms to grow and then, when they need scale-up capital, the City often fails to support it. Too frequently, they have to look to the US for investors.
Those who worry about the concentration of wealth and the growing gap between those at the top and everyone else should not be dismissed. Extreme concentrations of wealth can translate into disproportionate influence over markets and policy. Fairness and social cohesion matter.
There was once a belief that fortunes rarely survived beyond three generations. Today, family offices and sophisticated wealth management may mean that wealth persists for much longer.
Yet there is a legitimate warning that some proposed solutions could do more harm than good.
Capital is mobile. Wealth taxes have often been cited as the answer, but frequently have proved difficult to administer and relatively easy to avoid.
The danger is that policies designed to target a tiny number of billionaires end up falling instead on a much larger group of professionals, entrepreneurs and middle-class savers who are far less mobile.
The prospect of higher taxes on billionaires may deter some from coming, and encourage others to leave, with the associated loss of spending.
An overlooked factor is the role of central banks. Years of exceptionally low interest rates boosted asset prices, benefiting those who already owned them. Inflation then hit lower-income households hardest.
If policymakers are serious about inequality, monetary stability should be part of the discussion.
The bigger question is not simply how much to tax billionaires. It is how to create societies in which more people have the opportunity to build wealth themselves. This is where the SpaceX IPO becomes particularly relevant.
The real challenge for modern capitalism is whether enough people have the chance to participate in wealth creation and share in the returns from economic success.
The UK already has a progressive tax system, which is welcome. The top 10pc of income-tax payers contribute close to two-thirds of income tax receipts.
We also tax wealth through a succession of taxes, including property taxes higher than anywhere else, although we do it stupidly through a stamp duty which deters turnover.
Britain should not become hostile to success. Nor should it ignore concerns about fairness and opportunity.
The challenge is to build a form of capitalism that rewards enterprise, broadens ownership, allows more acorns to become mighty oaks and encourages people to stay here once they succeed.
Dr Gerard Lyons is chief economist at Netwealth
Try full access to The Telegraph free today. Unlock their award-winning website and essential news app, plus useful tools and expert guides for your money, health and holidays.
