Mark Zuckerberg Agrees to Give Away Fortune

Post by nickpinkston » Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 1:52 PM UTC

lionhearted wrote: post #63

Fantastic. I wonder if all these very public proclamations are going to shift people's attitude towards taxes? Most people think of the government as wasteful, inefficient, incompetent, and corrupt to more or less degrees, and I know I'd prefer to see money allocated by smart people like Gates, Buffet, Zuckerberg than by politicians who need to keep constituents happy and win votes. I committed a while back to giving…

Post by klbarry » Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 2:06 PM UTC

xiaoma wrote: post #47

burgerbrain wrote: post #39

I'd rather see more people following the lead of Elon Musk than Bill Gates. Instead of throwing money at problems that will always exist and producing no real value, Musk is creating high-tech jobs and advancing the state of humanity.

I share neither your certainty that malaria will always exist, nor your belief that ending the epidemic would produce no real value. Along with HIV, it has crippled a continent and caused immeasurable suffering. Elon Musk is doing great things. How many other potential Musks are there whose opportunities to do such things were cut short due to the very problems the Gates foundation addresses? Even just in his home co…

Post by hugh3 » Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 2:12 PM UTC

rfrey wrote: post #135

bertil wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although some isolated initiative are great (Zuckerberg's pledge to education is presumably very much needed) most private charities are more expensive to manage and often counter-productive. Government redistribution can have in well-run countries handling cost around 3-5%; too many charities are closer to 15%. Government handles essential concerns, permanent efforts, infrastructure investment, etc. while many priva…

Government redistribution can have in well-run countries handling cost around 3-5%; too many charities are closer to 15%. The charity costs include publicity and fundraising drives. To make apples-to-apples comparison you'd have to include the cost of the IRS infrastructure and the cost to society of the entire tax collection and avoidance machine. Government handles essential concerns That this is not self-evident i…

Post by loewenskind » Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 2:25 PM UTC

grandalf wrote: post #25

I think of this as sort of a cop out (on the part of all the people who do it). If you're good at business, then you can have a far bigger impact by creating businesses than by simply giving your money to some charity. It's ultimately a socially lauded thing to do that divorces the donor from any ultimate responsibility for the amount of "greater good" done with the funds. I think they do it out of fear that they wer…

Post by loewenskind » Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 2:28 PM UTC

grandalf wrote: post #58

mquander wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, not a fair question. What does this even mean? If you really think you know anything at all about how Bill Gates should spend his time and money, feel free to go ahead and actually say what you think he should be spending it on, instead of mouthing platitudes about "bigger ideas" and "investing in himself."

I don't know how he should spend his time, nor do I claim to. Personally, I'd like to see him start a company that would invent a mobile phone battery that lasts for a month and can power an RC aircraft to fly all the way around the world. I also worry about the overall risklessness of what he's doing. He's pledged all of his money, so who can criticize it? For most people it's beyond reproach just because of the sta…