The point is that Forbes shouldn't be using terms like broke to describe millionaires when there are millions of people who are actually broke living incredibly difficult lives.
Are they former billionaires though? The point of him being "broke" isn't that he has nothing, it's that he has shared almost all of what he had, to a much greater extent than most of us could ever dream of.
Ask anyone who has shared more of their worth than this man has. Plenty of parents have done more than give up "everything" to support a kids. Talk to any bail bondsman. Plenty of people regularly go past 0 and into negative net assets to help a family members in need. Talk to any veterinarian. They see people give their last dollar, and then leverage out every credit card beyond that last dollar, to save a pet. Broke means broke, not 2mil, not even really 0. Broke means broken. Forbes should not attach that word to this situation because this man is not.
