Mark Zuckerberg’s Philanthropy Uses L.L.C. For More Control • Hacker News Board

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Philanthropy Uses L.L.C. For More Control

#71

Post by grhino » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 4:15 PM UTC

vezzy-fnord wrote: post #42

phillmv wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you think so, then donate 100% of your income to the government and live on public assistance. I've always found these arguments to be poor attempts at a reductio ad absurdum. While some people do take vows of poverty, by and large this is not what's meant by advocates of public institutions. The thing is that there is a large body of services and capital investments that are most efficiently - for both economic…

The thing is that there is a large body of services and capital investments that are most efficiently - for both economic and political reasons - conducted by accountable, democratic institutions. The canonical example are roads and firemen but also education and public transit and healthcare and some kinds of housing. Extremely debatable. That said, public education is such an evident failure that it's doing you a d…

Do volunteer firefighters provide their own equipment as well? I could believe that most firefighters are volunteer. I would be surprised to hear that most firefighting was volunteer.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Philanthropy Uses L.L.C. For More Control

#72

Post by gotothrowaway » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 4:16 PM UTC

This is interesting only because Mark didn't address it head on from the start, but honestly it's not all that surprising.

Private foundations have something called "expenditure responsibility" which makes giving funds to a taxable entity (a grant) tremendously annoying. Any misstep makes you liable to some massive surcharges, public scrutiny, and potentially major headaches. It's the antithesis to Mark's "move fast and break things"

There's some argument he should push for a public charity instead. There, expenditure responsibility isn't expressly required, but you're still expected to see that the money you grant is used for our charitable purpose, and still subject to audit.

I'm expecting them to write quite the essay in response. On it's face, I don't think people should fault this decision. I'm fully expecting a strong effort to use this money efficiently, which is no easy task with such a massive sum. Check out GiveWells recent post about trying to "give away" Dustin Moskiwitz and Cari Tuna's money - which I believe is an order of magnitude less in volume, but still very challenging.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Philanthropy Uses L.L.C. For More Control

#73

Post by mikeash » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 4:16 PM UTC

CPLX wrote: post #68

adsche wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least please finish reading the second sentence you tried to quote.

I did. If he's retaining control over how it's going to be given away then that makes it clear that he hasn't given it away yet. Giving a thing away means you no longer have control of the thing. That's not a side effect, it's the literal plain meaning of the concept. Him saying he is going to give it away $44 billion in the future should be evaluated in much the same way as my claim that I will receive $44 billion i…

OK, let's say he's completely full of it and he's not giving anything away.

So what? That's fully within his rights.

A rich dude might by lying? That's not headline news.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Philanthropy Uses L.L.C. For More Control

#74

Post by outside1234 » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 4:17 PM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #47

I don't think I've seen a single positive statement about Zuckerberg's foundation. It would have been 100% fully within his right to simply keep it all, or blow his fortune on snorting Fabergé eggs, or buying classic cars and crashing them. Instead, he's giving almost all of it away. He's choosing to retain control over how it's given away? Well so what! It's still way better than keeping it all. I am no fan of Faceb…

I think what he is doing writ large is great.

My quibble is that his "birth announcement" makes this sound "all charity" when clearly putting it in an LLC makes it a "all power play" move.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Philanthropy Uses L.L.C. For More Control

#75

Post by monochromatic » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 4:20 PM UTC

christoph wrote: post #59

mikeash wrote: post #47

I don't think I've seen a single positive statement about Zuckerberg's foundation. It would have been 100% fully within his right to simply keep it all, or blow his fortune on snorting Fabergé eggs, or buying classic cars and crashing them. Instead, he's giving almost all of it away. He's choosing to retain control over how it's given away? Well so what! It's still way better than keeping it all. I am no fan of Faceb…

The reasons for this are quite simple. When the richest 1% make a very grand gesture like this, there will always be an element of analysis about how they plan to do it, for better or worse. When it's somebody in the very top 1% who up until now has taken large measures to completely avoid and drastically minimise paying tax in numerous countries (which can have substantial benefits for the populace of said countries…

> minimise paying tax in numerous countries (which can have substantial benefits for the populace of said countries)

I'm not sure there's a less efficient way of helping people than giving money to the government.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Philanthropy Uses L.L.C. For More Control

#76

Post by harryh » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 4:22 PM UTC

matt-attack wrote: post #25

I thought it was impossible to donate money (in a tax deductible manner) if you the donor had any direct control of how the money was spent. This was supposed to prevent folks from, say, donating their money to a charity which then sends their own child to college.

The act of giving money (or shares) to the LLC won't be tax deductible.

If/when the LLC gives money (or shares) to a charity that will be tax deductible.

If/when the LLC spends money (or shares) on something not classified as a charity that will not be tax deductible.

If/when Zuck & his wife die and there is still money (or shares) in the LLC those assets will be subject to the estate tax.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Philanthropy Uses L.L.C. For More Control

#77

Post by mikeash » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 4:23 PM UTC

outside1234 wrote: post #74

mikeash wrote: post #47

I don't think I've seen a single positive statement about Zuckerberg's foundation. It would have been 100% fully within his right to simply keep it all, or blow his fortune on snorting Fabergé eggs, or buying classic cars and crashing them. Instead, he's giving almost all of it away. He's choosing to retain control over how it's given away? Well so what! It's still way better than keeping it all. I am no fan of Faceb…

I think what he is doing writ large is great. My quibble is that his "birth announcement" makes this sound "all charity" when clearly putting it in an LLC makes it a "all power play" move.

It wouldn't be the first nor will it be the last time that somebody's Facebook post was self-aggrandizing.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Philanthropy Uses L.L.C. For More Control

#78

Post by kaonashi » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 4:27 PM UTC

christoph wrote: post #59

mikeash wrote: post #47

I don't think I've seen a single positive statement about Zuckerberg's foundation. It would have been 100% fully within his right to simply keep it all, or blow his fortune on snorting Fabergé eggs, or buying classic cars and crashing them. Instead, he's giving almost all of it away. He's choosing to retain control over how it's given away? Well so what! It's still way better than keeping it all. I am no fan of Faceb…

The reasons for this are quite simple. When the richest 1% make a very grand gesture like this, there will always be an element of analysis about how they plan to do it, for better or worse. When it's somebody in the very top 1% who up until now has taken large measures to completely avoid and drastically minimise paying tax in numerous countries (which can have substantial benefits for the populace of said countries…

The bad thing about it is that you have a single person dictating how a large portion of economic activity is carried out. Very anti-democratic, and my intuition would say very inefficient.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Philanthropy Uses L.L.C. For More Control

#79

Post by djrogers » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 4:29 PM UTC

grhino wrote: post #71

vezzy-fnord wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is that there is a large body of services and capital investments that are most efficiently - for both economic and political reasons - conducted by accountable, democratic institutions. The canonical example are roads and firemen but also education and public transit and healthcare and some kinds of housing. Extremely debatable. That said, public education is such an evident failure that it's doing you a d…

Do volunteer firefighters provide their own equipment as well? I could believe that most firefighters are volunteer. I would be surprised to hear that most firefighting was volunteer.

Most firefighters calls are not to fight fires - they are acting in a paramedic role with very loud and big transport.

This isn't an anti-firefighter screed, but 75% of what they do can be (and is in some cases) done more efficiently by ambulance crews.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg’s Philanthropy Uses L.L.C. For More Control

#80

Post by billmalarky » Thu, Dec 03, 2015, 4:29 PM UTC

kaonashi wrote: post #78

christoph wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reasons for this are quite simple. When the richest 1% make a very grand gesture like this, there will always be an element of analysis about how they plan to do it, for better or worse. When it's somebody in the very top 1% who up until now has taken large measures to completely avoid and drastically minimise paying tax in numerous countries (which can have substantial benefits for the populace of said countries…

The bad thing about it is that you have a single person dictating how a large portion of economic activity is carried out. Very anti-democratic, and my intuition would say very inefficient.

Well, anti-democratic and efficiency go hand in hand. For better or worse.