Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My new deadline: 20 years to give away virtually all my wealth

gatesnotes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 704 posts

Re: My new deadline: 20 years to give away virtually all my wealth

#191

Post by bombcar »

lesuorac wrote: post #175
bogwog wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, consider how our voting priorities would change if billionaires had less of an impact on elections? Would we be where we are today if, for example, Musk couldn't spend over a quarter billion dollars influencing the 2024 election?

I honestly don't think Musk affected 2024 to any real extent. Look at how much narrower Harris's loss was than other incumbent losses in 2024. If anything you could make the argument Musk tanked Trump's lead like Trump tanked Poilievre. Democrats running a candidate that lost their only attempts during a competitive primary. As well as that candidate being unable to read the room and saying they'd do the same economi…

It is much easier to assume that someone else funneled money somewhere on the other side and caused your side (which is always perfect and without fault) to lose.

It is absolutely disheartening and horrible to face the reality that democracy may result in outcomes you don't like, and people may have voted wrong with full knowledge and forethought.

Re: My new deadline: 20 years to give away virtually all my wealth

#192

Post by Azkron »

BSOhealth wrote: post #79
skandium wrote: post #48

One of the great tragedies of the world is that while he is arguably the philanthropist with the highest positive impact in human history, a significant part of the population seems to still think he is the literal Antichrist.

My guess would be, actually a very small number of people think he’s the antichrist. Why would anyone other than someone with decades of operating system passion even care who this guy is? They know he’s a rich guy. Big deal. I’d guess most people just live their lives and don’t care about Microsoft monopoly or FOSS or anything. The same can probably be said for his altruism—most people probably have no idea.

For many people "wealthy = evil". And "poor = good". It is easier to demonize someone that is doing better than you than to admit that maybe he is just making better choices.

Re: My new deadline: 20 years to give away virtually all my wealth

#193

Post by turnsout »

larodi wrote: post #141
skandium wrote: post #48

One of the great tragedies of the world is that while he is arguably the philanthropist with the highest positive impact in human history, a significant part of the population seems to still think he is the literal Antichrist.

This statement is so 90s and so BOFH-centered that it is irrelevant to a level of stupidity. Gates has done a lot to prove he's not a cold-hearted mf and compared to all the bros in their prime at the moment, dude, just think of Elon or Larry Ellison, well our man Billy is really very much a bright persona.

Agreed—I spent the 90s idolizing Jobs and despising Gates. But today I have deep respect for Gates and the way he's using his wealth as a positive force in the world. Jobs had better taste and was a more effective product leader, but I'm sorry to say that he sucked as a philanthropist. It's disappointing that he spent ANY of his mental energy at the end of his life building that dumb $100M yacht, rather than focusing on his legacy.

Re: My new deadline: 20 years to give away virtually all my wealth

#194

Post by tgv »

999900000999 wrote: post #133

>The Gates Foundation’s mission remains rooted in the idea that where you are born should not determine your opportunities. Arguably he's already done so much for billions of people. Had typing on computers not became the main way businesses communicate , anyone with bad, handwriting would be stuck in menial work. When I was growing up in the 90s my hand writing was so bad it was assumed I would never amount to anyth…

What an exaggeration. We had typewriters before the 90s. Apple, Commodore, and Atari arguably had an earlier influence than Gates.

Re: My new deadline: 20 years to give away virtually all my wealth

#195

Post by cjustin »

closewith wrote: post #98
skandium wrote: post #48

One of the great tragedies of the world is that while he is arguably the philanthropist with the highest positive impact in human history, a significant part of the population seems to still think he is the literal Antichrist.

No billionaire will ever be a net positive to society. The wealth he accrued was literally stolen from the labour of millions of people. No token donations at the end of your life will ever remediate that situation.

I often see this sentiment whenever a billionaire is in conversation, but I don't understand. Can you elaborate on how his wealth was "stolen" from people?

The way I see it, he's wealthy because he founded a wildly successful technology company by first creating something of value (MS-DOS). Microsoft has since grown to be one of the largest companies in the world, which hundreds of thousands of people voluntarily work for in exchange for a high salary, at least for engineers.

Re: My new deadline: 20 years to give away virtually all my wealth

#196

Post by vinceguidry »

wing-_-nuts wrote: post #116
9rx wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> without paying capital gains tax. It's a funny day when you're feeling charitable, but go out of your way to avoid helping the entity that should be the ideal charitable recipient.

If that entity used my tax dollars wisely (looking at nordic countries), yes I agree paying taxes is superior. I have no interest in contributing more towards our 1T/yr defense budget or subsidizing oil and gas.

The sovereign wealth funds of the Nordic countries weren't built with tax dollars, but rather with oil revenue. We could do the same thing here if there were political appetite for holding energy companies responsible and the wealth they produce as belonging to the people living on the land the resources are coming out of.

We're doing better now than we were 50 years ago, but the Nords are light years ahead.

Re: My new deadline: 20 years to give away virtually all my wealth

#197

Post by mgraczyk »

prvc wrote: post #174
wing-_-nuts wrote: post #39

His foundation really does seem to do a good job with 'effective altruism'. There's a reason they're marked as secondary beneficiaries on all my accounts. Also, as a recommendation, you guys should look into whether your employer matches charitable donations to 501Cs in any amount. I find giving a solid chunk of my discretionary budget to charity every year lends a sense of purpose to a job that wouldn't otherwise ha…

Have to disagree about the 'effective' part. Gates seems to have had a knack for massive inefficiencies and negative externalities in every way that he has impacted the world. Think of how many man-hours (measured in human lifetimes) have been wasted due to the shortcomings of various MicroSoft programs. Weigh that against his health initiatives in the third world. Or the impact of dimming the sun by depositing massi…

Helping to cure polio doesn't outweigh imagined future harms by George engineering that didn't happen yet?

Re: My new deadline: 20 years to give away virtually all my wealth

#198

Post by remus »

No criticism of the man, but I think he may fail in this part of his goal

> People will say a lot of things about me when I die, but I am determined that "he died rich" will not be one of them.

It's easy to forget how absurdly wealthy the very richest in society are. Say he started this initiative on his 70th birthday and he's spreading his giving fairly lineraly over the next 20 years but dies just 1 day short of his 90th birthday, he'd still have about $13,698,630 to his name. I think most would consider someone with that money to their name rich.

Re: My new deadline: 20 years to give away virtually all my wealth

#199

Post by actionfromafar »

knowitnone wrote: post #151
_bin_ wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It's his money. He can give it to North Korea or China if he wants. Entitled and selfish.

Giving it to North Korea used to be associated with risks, but things are changing fast these days.
Post reply on HN