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

#111

Post by jaggederest » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:50 PM UTC

applecore wrote: post #93

Afforess wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Your argument makes no sense: the people control everything in a democracy, literally, by voting for their representation in government.

How well does that representation actually fulfill the wishes of their constituency as a whole, let alone any individual voter? That's the point - by being representative with no accountability, there's only the binary ability to hire or fire with no ability to manage.

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

#112

Post by HiLo » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:50 PM UTC

lloyddobbler wrote: post #48

jobu wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. The article boils down to this: Krämer: "It is all just a bad transfer of power from the state to billionaires." It's just a philosophical difference in opinion about who should decide what to do with the money - elected officials or billionaires.

It's just a philosophical difference in opinion about who should decide what to do with the billionaires' money - elected officials or billionaires. Fixed that for you.

Actually, the Treasury funds itself by issuing bonds to the dealer banks or the Fed, where its account is then credited.

Taxes are used as inflation control or to incentivize certain activities.

What you're suggesting is that Treasury would have a cash flow problem if people payed less taxes, which isn't the case. Although you could start to see an inflation problem.

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

#113

Post by lawnchair_larry » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:51 PM UTC

applecore wrote: post #93

Afforess wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Your argument makes no sense: the people control everything in a democracy, literally, by voting for their representation in government.

I wonder what country that applies to. Certainly not any that I'm familiar with.

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

#114

Post by thomnottom » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:51 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #34

thomnottom wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Because neither the article nor the German billionaire (sorry, I really should go back and get his name instead of referencing the title, but I'm being lazy) are saying that private foundations are inherently bad - which is what the comment I replied to stated.

What he says is bad is shifting the decision to the wealthy instead of the public.

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

#115

Post by thomnottom » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:52 PM UTC

Afforess wrote: post #33

thomnottom wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You are correct in that the current state of US politics almost makes it the same thing. However it is possible that the US electorate could fix that problem over time.

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

#116

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:53 PM UTC

HiLo wrote: post #112

lloyddobbler wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just a philosophical difference in opinion about who should decide what to do with the billionaires' money - elected officials or billionaires. Fixed that for you.

Actually, the Treasury funds itself by issuing bonds to the dealer banks or the Fed, where its account is then credited. Taxes are used as inflation control or to incentivize certain activities. What you're suggesting is that Treasury would have a cash flow problem if people payed less taxes, which isn't the case. Although you could start to see an inflation problem.

> Actually, the Treasury funds itself by issuing bonds to the dealer banks or the Fed, where its account is then credited

Its ability to sell bonds is controlled by the markets perception of its ability to pay those bonds, which is tied to a number of factors including, inter alia, its perceived ability, willingness, and track record of revenue sources with which to pay them.

People paying less taxes directly effects that.

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

#117

Post by Chathamization » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:53 PM UTC

knughit wrote: post #74

Retric wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The pair do not have a sterling track record when it comes to effective charity. One of their previous efforts, a high-profile $100 million donation to fix the schools in Newark, N.J., has been widely criticized as a failure." Asking for a quote misses the point. Look into it yourself and the first link is Where Zuckerberg's $100 million gift went wrong http://www.cnbc.com/2014/05/23/where-zuckerbergs-100-million...

Note that the $100m was a gift to the government , overseen by thr governor of NJ, so it is hard to say that was a failure of private philanthropy vs government.

It wasn't simply a gift, Zuckerberg directed it towards the reforms he thought were fit. According to Business Insider:

>Zuckerberg envisioned the teacher contract reform to be a centerpiece of the reform and contributed $50 million — half of his total donation — to go to working on that cause.

So he decided to throw $50 million at teacher contract reform around the same time that, according to the CNBC article, "the state cutting $56 million in school aid."

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

#118

Post by shaftoe » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:54 PM UTC

learc83 wrote: post #59

lloyddobbler wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the money always belonged to the state, and the state simply allows its constituents to keep some of the money they earn, your logic stands. But if the money ever belonged to the individual, then the public cannot "subsidize" the individual keeping what he/she earned. Put another way: if I walk up to someone on the street and forcibly take their money - and if that wasn't mine to begin with - most people would cal…

The taxation as theft argument implies that you believe that society (through the state) isn't entitled to a share of your money as payment for providing the system that allows you to become rich in the first place. Without the infrastructure provided by society as a whole, no large business would be possible.

And without the production of the individuals and businesses that exist in a society, the state would have no ability to skim off the top and spend that money.

I believe that the state (which isn't "society", it is the governing body of a region of land), has no right to a share of anything that is not voluntarily granted or contractually agreed upon. Believing in a higher entity with more rights than any individual is verging on something akin to feudalism.

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

#119

Post by jclulow » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:54 PM UTC

adaml_623 wrote: post #94

lloyddobbler wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the money always belonged to the state, and the state simply allows its constituents to keep some of the money they earn, your logic stands. But if the money ever belonged to the individual, then the public cannot "subsidize" the individual keeping what he/she earned. Put another way: if I walk up to someone on the street and forcibly take their money - and if that wasn't mine to begin with - most people would cal…

If we talking about US dollars then yes the money comes from the state. The clue is in the name. Is there a quick shorthand way of referring to the notion that tax is theft?

"Babysitting."

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

#120

Post by HiLo » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 5:55 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #116

HiLo wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, the Treasury funds itself by issuing bonds to the dealer banks or the Fed, where its account is then credited. Taxes are used as inflation control or to incentivize certain activities. What you're suggesting is that Treasury would have a cash flow problem if people payed less taxes, which isn't the case. Although you could start to see an inflation problem.

> Actually, the Treasury funds itself by issuing bonds to the dealer banks or the Fed, where its account is then credited Its ability to sell bonds is controlled by the markets perception of its ability to pay those bonds, which is tied to a number of factors including, inter alia , its perceived ability, willingness, and track record of revenue sources with which to pay them. People paying less taxes directly effect…

Again, not true. The Federal Reserve can step in and buy bonds at any point, giving Treasury the ability to pay.

>revenue sources with which to pay them

Can you show me where Treasury says fiscal outlays are funded by tax receipts, or solely through payments from primary dealers? The government doesn't work like a business in this case.