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

David Rockefeller has died

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 242 posts

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#151

Post by johansch »

evgen wrote: post #146
johansch wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I prefer just to point out the hypocrisy surrounding getting acclaims for "philantrophy" in the US. Seems like even those who have the most give out back less to others than they would have done just by the regular taxation laws, living in a typical European country.

Then you should make yourself aware of the regular taxation laws in force at the time those fortunes were amassed. The difference I guess is that in the US the rich give away most of their money (often for favorable tax treatment on the remainder of their estate) and in Europe they just pass it along to their children to maintain the nominal level of Eurotrash the world seems to require.

I wasn't claiming rich Europeans are any better. :)

I'm simply claiming that this insanely rich american guy

a) percentage-wise gave away quite a bit less of his fortune than e.g. myself has given away in taxes/wealth-distribution in Sweden.

b) get's to be called a "philantrophist".

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#152

Post by kingkawn »

kbenson wrote: post #88
kingkawn wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they failed to make it be guided by scientific method, but rather taught the quacks that the only way forward was to use scientific terminology, and if they could do so propery would even be admitted deeper into medicine than they ever could've hoped before

Just think of them as the random mutation in the genetic algorithm. Keeping the progress facing forward is the job of the scientific method, but occasionally you get a big leap as some of the more outlandish claims are finally tested and found to have some merit. It's a fine line, and one we don't always walk all that well.

The ultimate groundless hubris that what is called the scientific method is an attempt to lay claim to being the only legitimate form of trial and error

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#153

Post by skyhust »

kolanos wrote: post #4

"Some even believe we [Rockefeller family] are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure -- One World, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." - David Rockefeller, Memoirs, page 4…

Here's a clip of Rockefeller laughing in response to an interviewer's introduction saying "and conspiring to enslave the nation to the machinations of the Trilateral Commission"-

https://streamable.com/video/v0cdr

And this is a longer compilation which covers his background and has some interesting parts-

https://vid.me/wde9#75s

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#154

Post by rayiner »

unityByFreedom wrote: post #144
rayiner wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I understand your point at all. How do you preserve modern European welfare states in the face of globalization?

My point is it's their choice to run their country the way they want. I don't think anyone can say for certain whether certain social programs will be sustainable or not. The US has many social programs, social security, subsidies, etc. People have been saying for years that these are unsustainable. The national debt has been an issue since founding 250 years ago. Some feel it weakens us. Others feel it ensures we ma…

> My point is it's their choice to run their country the way they want.

Right, which is why globalization tends to undermine welfare states. TPP, the EU, trade agreements, etc. All those reduce the ability of voters to "run their country the way they want."

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#155

Post by skyhust »

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #58
iliketosleep wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's frightening is that he was actually proud of it - he really believed in it. I wonder how many other powerful families are working towards the "more integrated global political and economic structure", consolidating the power of the global elite. Good luck to everybody else... Edit to clarify: in an ideal world what he stands for is right. but we're not in an idea world. where there's power there's often corrup…

I don't see why globalization must necessarily mean total domination by the "elites". Yes, it's a significant risk factor in that scenario, but the two don't come in a package, bound together with epoxy. It would only happen if we continue to refuse to address the issue of inequality - this time on a global scale. Some form of globalization is actually the best case scenario, the golden path for this world. It must i…

It doesn't have to but globalization is defined as a 7 stage process which ends with-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_economic_integration

And you can see how that grows from NAFTA, GATT etc-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_integration#Stages

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#156

Post by rayiner »

henrikschroder wrote: post #148
rayiner wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I understand your point at all. How do you preserve modern European welfare states in the face of globalization?

By moving up the value chain, by educating your own population so that they can perform skilled labour that can't be outsourced.

Where are all these "up the value chain" jobs? As someone who graduated college and graduate school relatively recently, the only thing I see is the opposite problem. Outside of a few niches, the population is overeducated. Tons of people who graduated college my year (mid aughts) couldn't get a job that required a college degree.

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#157

Post by ryandrake »

prolly_a_moron wrote: post #34
tinus_hn wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Bilderberg Group does exist, has economically powerful members and acts in private. So it's hardly a stretch to believe that not a secret group but a known group is exerting some level of control over the world economy. What else would they be doing?

> The Bilderberg Group does exist, has economically powerful members and acts in private. A bunch of wealthy and influential people assemble to discuss policy and other strategy. I'm not sure why this is unexpected, bad, or why it should be frowned upon or disallowed.

"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices."

-Adam Smith

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#158

Post by TheAdamAndChe »

henrikschroder wrote: post #147
TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Globalization is the exploitation of the lower standard of living in other areas. The reason corporations ship jobs overseas is because it's cheap. This in no way controls inequality, and in fact makes it worse.

Globalization has caused the largest transfer of wealth from rich countries to poor countries in the history of mankind, reducing inequality between countries on an unprecedented scale.

This is true, but it has also strengthened inequality significantly within countries: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2007/02/pdf/c4.pdf

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#159

Post by GCA10 »

I may be alone on this one, but I'm enchanted by David Rockefeller's long-ago crusade to create an "electronic Rolodex" of the 150,000 people he met in the course of his business career.

The dude nearly invented LinkedIn! Of course, he forgot to allow access to anyone else, which limited the value of his efforts. And boasting about 150,000 isn't quite what it used to be. (More like an Ozymandias claim, in fact.) Anyway, some more thoughts about it are here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgeanders/2017/03/20/he-knew...

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#160

Post by reckoner2 »

hkmurakami wrote: post #57
teslabox wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > Rockefeller upheld the family’s philanthropic tradition, giving away more than $900 million during his lifetime. In 1940, he joined the board of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, established in 1901 by his grandfather, and a decade later succeeded his father as board chairman, serving for 25 years. Rich people don't give money away no-strings-attached, they channel it for their purpo…

In charitable work, we often say that you either give your time or your money. The younger tend to give their time; the older tend to give their money. Similarly, people have visions for how the world should be. The young and of-less-means tend to give their time, engaging in grassroots efforts or marches. The old and rich tend to give their money. Both use their resources to shape the world towards what they believe…

In addition to this, there really is an almost fetish-like following behind the ideas that the Rockefeller's in particular secretly 'rule' or 'ruin' the world.

John D. Rockefeller Sr. stated many times that he believed that it was God's plan for him to: (paraphrasing)

1) Acquire as mush wealth as he could through business. 2) Donate this money to help humanity in the best ways possible.

And he did exactly that. And he did better than anyone else ever has. He didn't do much else. The Rockefeller's are fascinating people, but I think most of us would be surprised as to how little of the 'world-dominating' stuff is true.

It's been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, but "Titan: The Life Of John D. Rockefeller" goes into incredible detail on the family. You may not leave with a nice picture of the family, but definitely a different one than some of the comments in this thread. A lot of the private journals and business documents have actually been released to the public and it makes for a fascinating read.

Post reply on HN