Why a German billionaire says that pledges like Mark Zuckerberg’s are really bad • Hacker News Board

Re: Why a German billionaire says that pledges like Mark Zuckerberg’s are really bad

#31

Post by HiLo » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:20 PM UTC

RHSeeger wrote: post #23

HiLo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You take it as a given that the private sector is well-run and wise. Nobody is saying either solution is great. All it's saying is that: wouldn't it be better to have all this power be in the hands of the democratically chosen, versus billionaires who may or may not be making relevant investments? edit: Just downvotes, no response?

I take it as a given that, when a private individual uses their money, at least one person probably thought the way it was used was a good idea. I do not take it as a given that, when the government spends money, anyone thought how it was spent was a good idea (like spending 8 billion dollars to design a tank... yes, that's billions, with a "b" (also, I love that movie))

This is such a retarded argument. How did it get into the budget if nobody thought it was a good idea? Do you know how much of a fight it is to get anything in there at all?

Furthermore, all you're doing is cherry picking data points to support your argument without factoring in that military and medical equipment all have huge, onerous requirements for tracking every step of the supply chain, to the mine the metal came out of, which makes cost structures very weird.

What about the Manhattan Project, or the Hoover Dam, or the Interstate System. Bad investments? See, I can cherry pick too.

Re: Why a German billionaire says that pledges like Mark Zuckerberg’s are really bad

#32

Post by mnx » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:21 PM UTC

guntars wrote: post #10

Afforess wrote: post #2

There is no real explanation for why the pledge is "bad" except for the tired argument that the state is good and private foundations imitating the state are bad . There is no further clarification or explanation; We are supposed to accept this as some sort of given, without pretext or afterthought. Articles like this are bad .

The explanation is that it's the government (or rather the people) that's subsidizing the charitable work of the billionaires via tax breaks, but giving up any say in how the money is used.

It's not giving up any say, just most of it - after all, there is some government process to be an approved tax-break eligible charity, no? [not familiar with US law on this]

Re: Why a German billionaire says that pledges like Mark Zuckerberg’s are really bad

#33

Post by Afforess » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:21 PM UTC

thomnottom wrote: post #14

Afforess wrote: post #2

There is no real explanation for why the pledge is "bad" except for the tired argument that the state is good and private foundations imitating the state are bad . There is no further clarification or explanation; We are supposed to accept this as some sort of given, without pretext or afterthought. Articles like this are bad .

That's not what the article said at all - nor the German billionaire. He said that having a few very wealthy people decide what were the most important causes was bad compared to having the democratically elected government decide. You may disagree with that, but it is quite different from simply saying public good and private bad.

> He said that having a few very wealthy people decide what were the most important causes was bad compared to having the democratically elected government decide.

This sentence is really amusing to me, because our democratically elected government, at least at the congressional level, is nearly all wealthy millionaires. So either way, important causes are decided by the wealthy.

Re: Why a German billionaire says that pledges like Mark Zuckerberg’s are really bad

#34

Post by JoshTriplett » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:21 PM UTC

thomnottom wrote: post #14

Afforess wrote: post #2

There is no real explanation for why the pledge is "bad" except for the tired argument that the state is good and private foundations imitating the state are bad . There is no further clarification or explanation; We are supposed to accept this as some sort of given, without pretext or afterthought. Articles like this are bad .

That's not what the article said at all - nor the German billionaire. He said that having a few very wealthy people decide what were the most important causes was bad compared to having the democratically elected government decide. You may disagree with that, but it is quite different from simply saying public good and private bad.

> He said that having a few very wealthy people decide what were the most important causes was bad compared to having the democratically elected government decide. You may disagree with that, but it is quite different from simply saying public good and private bad.

How is that any different from the comment you're replying to? If the government is running something, it's a government ("public") program rather than a private one.

Re: Why a German billionaire says that pledges like Mark Zuckerberg’s are really bad

#35

Post by Kinnard » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:22 PM UTC

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10670604

Re: Why a German billionaire says that pledges like Mark Zuckerberg’s are really bad

#36

Post by HiLo » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:22 PM UTC

bmmayer1 wrote: post #26

HiLo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You take it as a given that the private sector is well-run and wise. Nobody is saying either solution is great. All it's saying is that: wouldn't it be better to have all this power be in the hands of the democratically chosen, versus billionaires who may or may not be making relevant investments? edit: Just downvotes, no response?

"wouldn't it be better to have all this power be in the hands of the democratically chosen" This assumes the money in question belongs to the state to begin with, and we're merely deciding how it is to be allocated. That is not the case. This is not the rich deciding what to do with the public money, it's the rich deciding what to do with their own money. I think we would all agree, regardless of level of income, we…

"it's the rich deciding what to do with their own money."

No, I wouldn't agree on that at all. That runs entirely counterproductive to what our society is built on. This is the arrogance people talk about - you think you know what is better for people than they do.

Re: Why a German billionaire says that pledges like Mark Zuckerberg’s are really bad

#37

Post by shmerl » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:22 PM UTC

> It is all just a bad transfer of power from the state to billionaires.

Complaining about that is missing the forest behind the trees. With Citizens United and general ineptitude of the legislative branch to produce any significant fixes to the system, that power is long transferred.

Re: Why a German billionaire says that pledges like Mark Zuckerberg’s are really bad

#38

Post by BjoernKW » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:23 PM UTC

Yeah, rather leave that money to the state who will spend it on actually useful things such as new wars that will make the military-industrial complex even wealthier.

This kind of thinking unfortunately is common in continental Europe, particularly in Germany and France. This is not all about the common good or democratic legitimacy. It's really all about redistribution of wealth and getting back at "the rich". It's about slave-moral thinking that strives to punish the well-off and make everyone feel equally miserable.

Re: Why a German billionaire says that pledges like Mark Zuckerberg’s are really bad

#39

Post by Afforess » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:23 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #25

Afforess wrote: post #2

There is no real explanation for why the pledge is "bad" except for the tired argument that the state is good and private foundations imitating the state are bad . There is no further clarification or explanation; We are supposed to accept this as some sort of given, without pretext or afterthought. Articles like this are bad .

Private charities have on average been terribly inefficient in the US. However, in terms of Conspicuous consumption ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspicuous_consumption ) they are better than building ever larger boats.

I think the key question is whether private charities are more or less efficient relative to governments, not whether they are efficient in an absolute sense.

Re: Why a German billionaire says that pledges like Mark Zuckerberg’s are really bad

#40

Post by wyldfire » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:23 PM UTC

thomnottom wrote: post #14

Afforess wrote: post #2

There is no real explanation for why the pledge is "bad" except for the tired argument that the state is good and private foundations imitating the state are bad . There is no further clarification or explanation; We are supposed to accept this as some sort of given, without pretext or afterthought. Articles like this are bad .

That's not what the article said at all - nor the German billionaire. He said that having a few very wealthy people decide what were the most important causes was bad compared to having the democratically elected government decide. You may disagree with that, but it is quite different from simply saying public good and private bad.

I suppose that makes sense, but it's not really a dichotomy. The ultra-wealthy pays taxes and the state does decide how to spend it. Should the ultra-wealthy get taxed more than they are now in the US? Yes, probably.