31–40 of 136 posts
What the F is going on. Apparently this is in response to a lot of criticism towards Jeff on how he should spend his money? I mean, excuse me? He can spend his money any way he freaking wants IMHO.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should his wealth reduce?
If I give $10 to charity, my wealth is reduced by $10. The naive assumption is that if Bill Gates gives $10B to charity, his wealth is also reduced by $10B. Can you explain why the naive assumption is wrong? Because I actually can't, not without more thought and research than I've given it.
You're going to see a lot of cynicism in this thread so I want to be a dissenting voice. This is a great thing. I'm glad the ideas behind the Giving Pledge are catching on.
If someone can accumulate that much wealth in a lifetime it means way too much was extracted from each individual. Then they distribute it back to mend the damage as they see fit, not as society deems needed. I'm not against millionaires but the exponential level up to billionaires probably shouldn't exist because it means the balance in the system is beyond broken. No-one has contributed billions of value to society…
you may not like them, but a lack of imagination is no reason to condemn others
Billionaires really don't like being loathed do they?
Billionaires really don't like being loathed do they?
I'm the last who thinks he cares about people well-being, but.. What the F is going on. Apparently this is in response to a lot of criticism towards Jeff on how he should spend his money? I mean, excuse me? He can spend his money any way he freaking wants IMHO.
Quoted post unavailable.
No you're not the only one, plenty of people think like that which is why they keep capturing most of the value created by their employees and getting away with it.
For a comparison, an amazon warehouse employee making $15 an hour, would have to work 40hrs a week, 52 weeks a year for almost 4 million years to accumulate the wealth Jeff has. Personally, I don't think that's equitable.