111–120 of 147 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What on earth does "what most people feel" have to do with anything? Nobody in Germany seemed to care that much about what Hitler was doing until they lost the war.
Off-topic but: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would always prefer the wealth coming from inside the system, not being first taken by individuals and then spread at their whim. Such wealth would much rather be a sustainable source. A well functioning society/government would know exactly how to spend it well. In many cases, to me, the good the rich do does not nearly weigh in for their wrongdoings.
Where does your faith on government spending come from? Because I have exactly the opposite impression. The most extreme form of government spending is communism, and that didn't work out at all. The problem with governments is that they spend other people's money, so they have less incentives for being prudent with it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Off-topic but: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law
I know very well about the frustrating action on the internet where if you use Hitler for an extreme example of anything to make the point clear, someone's going to link Godwin's law.
The guy gave 500 million dollars to improve something in this world... The way he runs his company (or as someone else in this thread said, the company "runs itself") has nothing to do with it.
Still on the Hitler topic, I don't think you could opt-out of being german, nor could you voice your opinion freely against whatever was happening without fear of the consequences.
What I think, and in this I think you agree with me, is that Facebook should be more transparent as to what is done to your data, so that people would make a conscious choice of using it or not.
Some quotes below on why.
"The world is complex, and it can't be entirely fair from a what you contribute to what you get - it's very very uneven." - Ben Horowitz (source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqI7fa04atc&t=106m0s see 1:46:00)
"I've worked in an economy that rewards someone who saves the lives of others on a battlefield with a medal, rewards a great teacher with thank-you notes from parents, but rewards those who can detect the mispricing of securities with sums reaching into the billions. In short, fate's distribution of long straws is wildly capricious." - Warren Buffet (source: http://givingpledge.org/#warren_buffett)
I'm getting a bit miffed at the comments talking about this being a "PR move" or helpful for a "tax break". Did I read this wrong or did it not say 500. MILLION. dollars? The cynicism must be pretty darn strong to try and explain that away by anything other than Zuck wanting to do some good with his shares and money. We should be applauding it, not over-analyzing it for how it benefits him.
Agreed. Who cares if there is a tax break for this. I think this donation is well-timed and I would like to see more "rich" corporations follow suit. I was initially thinking he might do something for Sandy Hook. There is a community torn to shreds that will never be the same. Here is a list of ways we can all help now: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2012/12/14/connectic...
This kind of dignity just doesn't apply when it comes to solving certain problems. I doubt the kids with new opportunities in Newark, or the people without TB or Malaria in Africa give two shits about what motivated the people who helped them.
Edit: One other thing worth noting is that tax breaks for charitable donations in the US are actually a really, really awesome thing for the government to do. It's basically Uncle Sam saying "yanno what, we understand that there are certain things that government doesn't do well, so we're going to approve you diverting some of your taxes to these other organizations who do it better."
I'm getting a bit miffed at the comments talking about this being a "PR move" or helpful for a "tax break". Did I read this wrong or did it not say 500. MILLION. dollars? The cynicism must be pretty darn strong to try and explain that away by anything other than Zuck wanting to do some good with his shares and money. We should be applauding it, not over-analyzing it for how it benefits him.
> Did I read this wrong or did it not say 500. MILLION. dollars? This isn't directed at Zuck or Facebook, or anything. Because I really don't know him. But regarding your shock about the dollar amount... Keep in mind that it's incredibly easy to be generous when you are at the top. It's actually so easy, that it's almost effortless . There really is a difference between a man that writes a check that makes no differe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not celebrate both? Beyond that, even if we accept the premise that it's easier for Zucker to give away $500MM than someone with little to donate a fraction of that amount, the money will absolutely have a great net impact on society as a whole. Isn't that contribution to the betterment of all worth a major celebration? I think part of the problem is that it's hard to conceptualize what sort of impact donations a…
If you think the aid is effective, you can celebrate that. But (for example purposes - not targeting Zuck) why would you celebrate a person who is using a donation as a tax write-off?