40 Billionaires To Give Away Half Their Wealth

Bananas

Endangered Species
#11
Hybrix; said:
So you'd be just fine receiving a charitable donation of 75% of a poor person's wealth instead of 10% of a billionaires wealth...? Right. :rolleyes:
Seriously, is this what you think I said?:sigh:

I would be grateful for both donations because both are charitable donations and neither being more generous than the other.

It is clear from the OP "the money" and "political ideologies" are more important to you than the humanitarian compassion.

Hybrix; said:
And thanks to capitalism, they were able to create the jobs that allowed them to earn all of that money.
Thanks to socialism they were all given the education, infrastructure and security to prosper in a capitalist society. I dont see why political philosophies come into play; money is money, charity is charity.

Sure, but that wasn't my point. My point is that people are always ragging on the "rich" for being greedy.
Are they?


Hybrix; said:
Nobody can look at somebody who gives away billions and say they are greedy for keeping the rest.
Who would be saying this?
 

Mirage

Administrator
Staff member
V.I.P.
#12
And you know what, I'm gonna look at a lot of these billionaires and call them greedy. They're successful and I applaud that, but they could never spend that much money in their lifetimes. Even if they donated 90% they'd have enough left to support their families until their great grand children graduated college. Once they've got enough to support their family like that, it's incredibly greedy to just hoard the money. 10% of billions and billions seems like a lot on paper, but in reality it could disappear from their bank accounts and they probably wouldn't ever notice.
You do realize that most of these people don't have "liquid" cash just lying around, right? They own huge companies, and in some cases, thousands of companies. It's not a matter of hoarding the money, sitting on it and doing nothing. In most of these cases these people are providing jobs for hundreds of thousands of employees by KEEPING their assets.
 

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
#13
The real question here is what is the better solution: The rich bequeathing wealth as they please or a repeal of the death tax and letting government take their money and use it per government's demands?

Easy question for me.
 

Bananas

Endangered Species
#14
The real question here is what is the better solution: The rich bequeathing wealth as they please or a repeal of the death tax and letting government take their money and use it per government's demands?
Do you think that is what their motive in being so generation was?

TBH..I dont see the question at all, all I see is are people being generous, be that before or after tax, it does not matter.

I do not think for a moment they made the donations as a political statement. I also think it wrong (although I am not surprised) that Hybrix tried to use their generosity as a political statement. Is that really all people see...:(
 

Mirage

Administrator
Staff member
V.I.P.
#15
I do not think for a moment they made the donations as a political statement. I also think it wrong (although I am not surprised) that Hybrix tried to use their generosity as a political statement. Is that really all people see...:(
If this thread had been "40 Billionaires Mandated by Govt to Give Away Half Their Wealth", how would you have responded?

It's political because some people think such a thing would be perfectly acceptable. Not saying you are in that camp but there are definitely people out there with the "screw the rich, they can afford it" mentality.
 

Shwa

Gay As Fuck
V.I.P.
#16
Which is true on most levels when that term comes to mind Brix, they will always ponder and speculate that even though this act was done, it's not like they will suffer personally or financially from it since they're income can replace it withing months/years.

What these individuals did to support the common man and various charities I think was admerable, especially during the time's that we're in now. Kinda weird that 40 did it, but hey whatever helps right?

~Shwa
 

Mihael_langley

Formerly "Maikeru"
#17
So the goodness of a person should be measured by the amount of money they hand out?

So good for them, they snap out for reality and realized all that money is worthless so they might as well put it to good use and do something good once in their lifetime. Half of each these man's wealth can save millions of lives, these 40 billionaires i guess you could give them merit for becoming humans once again. The rest are still rooting corpses, taking their fortune and infamy to the grave.
 

Gavik

Registered Member
#18
You do realize that most of these people don't have "liquid" cash just lying around, right? They own huge companies, and in some cases, thousands of companies. It's not a matter of hoarding the money, sitting on it and doing nothing. In most of these cases these people are providing jobs for hundreds of thousands of employees by KEEPING their assets.
The cash is their, it's just not liquid for tax purposes. And they're not going to be pulling this money out of their businesses and shutting down offices to donate it elsewhere.

If this thread had been "40 Billionaires Mandated by Govt to Give Away Half Their Wealth", how would you have responded?
That isn't likely; it's not a choice between charity or the government "stealing" their money.

It's political because some people think such a thing would be perfectly acceptable. Not saying you are in that camp but there are definitely people out there with the "screw the rich, they can afford it" mentality.
It's not political, it's hardly even economic. There are a lot of wealthy people in European "socialist" countries that donate large sums of charity, but that doesn't make it an argument for socialism. This literally has nothing to do with politics.
 

Bananas

Endangered Species
#19
If this thread had been "40 Billionaires Mandated by Govt to Give Away Half Their Wealth", how would you have responded?
The article has nothing to do with the government mandating anything, it is you who decided to go a round about way to make this a political issue, to a person without your agenda's it is just an article about people being generous.

Had this thread been "40 Billionaires Mandated by Govt to Give Away Half Their Wealth" my response would of been to ignore it as I rarely bother posting in the political section on this forum any more. Perhaps what you were supposed to do was post this in Disivie Issues with the question "Should the Government levy inheritance tax?"

Hybrix; said:
It's political because some people think such a thing would be perfectly acceptable.
Some people think it is acceptable to snort cocaine off prostitutes thighs, but I don't see what relevance it is to the article in the OP other than that it is a popular pastime of the heirs and heiresses of some of the 40 billionaires and all the more reason they should part with their extraordinary net worth.

Hybrix; said:
Not saying you are in that camp but there are definitely people out there with the "screw the rich, they can afford it" mentality.
There are people out there of every flavour and variety. There are some who say "screw the poor we live in a capitalist society it is their choice to be poor" but I find it unusual that anyone would make such an indirect approach as you have in the OP to question such people.
 

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
#20
Its a political issue because the estate tax is set to come back in January 2011. Except the estate tax is not 50%, its 55% and its not for billionaires it is for people with $1M+.

This OP points out that the wealthy do a fine job of philanthropy without the government getting involved and they tend to invest their wealth into things that actually make the world a better place.
 
Top