Now imagine if there was some way a government could take a percentage of that and put it towards improving society as a whole.
Oh well, guess we’re fucked.
Bill and Melinda French Gates and Warren Buffett’s Giving Pledge after 15 years: Only 9 of the 256 billionaires actually followed through on giving away half their wealth
Submitted 3 weeks ago by Davriellelouna@lemmy.world to mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world
Comments
OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Slovene@feddit.nl 3 weeks ago
BUT THAT WOULD BE COMMUNISM!!1!
Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 1 week ago
stop stop i’m already hard
merc@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Now imagine if there was some way a government could take a percentage of that and put it towards improving society as a whole.
Yes, some form of “giving pledge” where the amount was standardized and there was no option to back out. Radical thinking here.
sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 3 weeks ago
Lol... While gates foundation does do some decent work. Let's be real it is astroturf operation inherently
Also, Warren already back out.
So this is just a shill op for these "good" parasites.
Read between the lines folks, these people are your enemies
IndiBrony@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
To people like this, the number in their bank account is like a scoreboard. They didn’t get that high up the leaderboard purely by accident.
Anyone who thinks that kind of person is just going to give up their place on the scoreboard is either incredibly naïve or gullible.
Don’t get me wrong, there are some people to there who may have some semblance of empathy, but as seen by the title, that’s about 1 in 20.
They also don’t do good things out of the goodness of their hearts, they do it to win social points so that they don’t get gunned down in the middle of a NYC street.
it_depends_man@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
To people like this, the number in their bank account is like a scoreboard.
It’s not just that.
Besides the humanitarian work that the gates foundation does do “voluntarily”, money is agency, it is power.
There is very little argument and reason to believe that “people” and “countries” would actually be more responsible in spending it.
If there was a big, motivated, carefully planned social movement that had a solid idea and spending plan, things would be different. And such a group could also force them to give up that money to spend it on these things. But such a movement doesn’t exist.
As it stands, the idea that they would voluntarily give up money is dumb. To do what? Feed the corruption and nepo network in their country, that then will benefit only the people that are just like them, but less rich? That makes no sense.
It has to come from public pressure and equal wealth taxes.
null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
This doesn’t make much sense to me.
Sure. Gates is not a “nice” person. The business practices involved in becoming a billionaire require him to be a vile human being. Granted.
That said, he has given up his place on the leaderboard. He has become dramatically less wealthy as a result of his philanthropic work.
What are you claiming is Gates’ motivation here? Not getting murdered? Come on. There are much more practical, reliable, and cheaper means to achieve that.
brachiosaurus@mander.xyz 3 weeks ago
They didn’t get that high up the leaderboard purely by accident.
You also don’t stay up there in the leaderboard by accident
DandomRude@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I assume that tax avoidance is also a factor.
sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 3 weeks ago
You wouldn't expect these clowns to pay taxes that's what w2 slaves are for. In fact, the treasury should be paying them. Just look at the national debt since 1980s then look at how fat these swine got.
Crux of the everything crisis we got on our hands.
But hey the good parasites paid 15k for a fluf piece, put on a suit and say thank you!
forrgott@lemmy.sdf.org 3 weeks ago
Let’s not forget
lobbyingbribery. And since days political influence is ostensibly being bought for the sake of charity, nobody would even blink.Just my theory, mind you. But every one of these charitable foundations is primarily done for tax avoidance. No question. Well that is every one of these foundations except for the one set up by Mr President Tiny Dick. He just can’t resist the temptation of embezzlement. I mean seriously, he bankrupted THREE casinos, and had a judge not just dissolve his foundation, but also bar him from running one of these so-called charitable foundations ever again.
I don’t even want to know how you can fuck up that egregiously. One of those things where you have to wonder if successfully finding understanding of how it happened is going to hopelessly corrupt your own soul for all of eternity.
null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Why would you waste $10 to save $5 in tax?
crandlecan@mander.xyz 3 weeks ago
It always has been (points gun)
resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
What taxes?
galoisghost@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
The only good billionaire is a dead billionaire whose stolen wealth has been returned to the people
null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
Does that mean Gates will be “good” if he spends all his money on vaccines and then dies of natural causes?
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
also Gates have accused of vaccine colonialism by african countries, hes not doing out of his own heart, its most likely his way of laundering money, plus to distance himself from epstein.
null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
This doesn’t make any sense.
He’s been doing this since long before Epstein was arrested.
He also doesn’t need to launder money because he’s already paid tax on all his money. He’s becoming demonstrably, significantly less wealthy in the course of distributing vaccines. If he were laundering money he would be becoming more wealthy.
nonentity@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Financial obesity is an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.
Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
I really like that as a term, never come across it before.
anarchy79@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Financial obesity is literally capitalism. That’s the disease. Period.
nonentity@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
Financial obesity is a large part of capitalism, but it’s by no means exclusive to it. Replacing capitalism with anything that tolerates obscene wealth accumulation would be a categorical failure.
lowleveldata@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
tbh I’m surprised that there are 9 who did
pyre@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
as a reward we should leave them for last
Jankatarch@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
On an unralted note Bill Gates was in the epstein list.
anarchy79@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
And he didn’t donate shit without an economic incentive, it’s all a tax writeoff, it’s all a scam. Even that shit he did pumping money into AIDS research as “charity” went into companies where he held stake himself. It’s so fucking vile.
guillotine.jpg
Bloomcole@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Didn’t know that, but not surprised.
Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
In an email sent after Gates went to have dinner with Epstein in his Manhattan mansion he wrote A very attractive Swedish woman and her daughter dropped by and I ended up staying there quite late
HubertManne@piefed.social 3 weeks ago
Meh. I actually don't think its a good idea. You just draw power away from the best of a segment empowering the biggest assholes. Taxes should be progressive and include all sources of income not just wages and the tax brackets should go all the way up to the highest income level. So there should be a level for over 100 billion and another for over 10 billion and over 1 billion and so on. Five figure income should be zero.
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Taxes should be progressive
Yeah ofc. Why do you think the billionaires came up with this BS plan instead?
yyprum@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
I agree with you and your proposal with the exception of 5 figure income having no income tax. At a billion level it might not be so important the difference between one or two billion. But on the 5 digits salaries, the difference of someone making 30k or someone making 80k is definitely meaningful. And as someone being in a comfy point in between there I do think everyone in my bracket should be paying taxes. Not high, but definitely something. Then lower incomes then yes, definitely 0% tax. But the amount of people on 5 digits salaries that are on the higher end is definitely worth having some tax, even when a small amount it already helps support the system with so many.
HubertManne@piefed.social 3 weeks ago
At the upper end you might be able to swing the more modest of housing and put away for retirement and that is great but it is not like changes circumstances that much. I would argue that opposite that the 2billion is one billion of funny money over what the one bilion guy has and should be taxed along the lines of lottery winnings.
jsomae@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
Five figure income should be zero? $10,000/year is not a livable income.
HubertManne@piefed.social 3 weeks ago
as papastevesy said im advocating for zero tax on five figures which would go up to 99,999.99
PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
They’re saying the tax rate should be 0 for 5-figure incomes.
Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
It’s not a serious income. Why penalise the ppl at the bottom?
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 3 weeks ago
and the tax brackets should go all the way up to the highest income level
What does that even mean? They’re lower limits. Everything that exceeds the lower limit for the top bracket is taxed the top rate, which has no upper limit.
HubertManne@piefed.social 3 weeks ago
It means the highest tax bracket should not be in thousands when the top makes hundreds of billions.
buddascrayon@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
The fact that there are 256 billionaires is an absolute failure of our society.
qarbone@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
256 billionaires that we know of!
limer@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
Soon to be a few trillionaires and a thousand billionaires
x0x7@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
If there were 3 billion would that be a failure?
Deflated0ne@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Wowza scoob. Imagine that. Rich people lying.
Just wow.
jouhija@sopuli.xyz 3 weeks ago
Sound like rich people ought to be dying
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Ruh roh!
resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
They broke their arms patting themselves on their backs and can’t write checks anymore. 😢
kSPvhmTOlwvMd7Y7E@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
why did they only use an 8-bit number to count billionaires , surely there are more of em
/dumbface
ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
What are you, one-based or something? If it were an 8-bit integer there would have been 255.
kSPvhmTOlwvMd7Y7E@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
it’s 255 for maximum index, but still 256 for maximum count though lol but agreed, 255 would be more obvious
nandeEbisu@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
You don’t understand, they’re making money so much faster than they can reasonably give away.
brax@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
making money
I think you mean stealing money.
Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Not true.
They’re also using imaginary methods to make money grow out of other money.
Hobo@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
This is kind of the actual problem though. It’s hard to actually have effective charities. Even some of the most ethical, and well run charities, end up with surplus funds (Dolly Parton’s charity for example). The government is setup to spend that much money helping people though. But paying taxes is somehow bad and wrong. I don’t know if I had a real point other than maybe we should actually tax these rich folks so they can achieve their dream of giving away at least half their wealth.
nandeEbisu@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
There was a post a while ago where a German person posted that they were confused by the US nonprofit systems, they basically said I pay my taxes and the government makes sure it’s spent feeding the needy and foreign aid and all that. Why should I go through the trouble of researching all these charities trying to find a good one to donate to.
Not that Germany doesn’t have non profits, but they really should be for special interest type cases where you explicitly want to send money to a cause, not general global well being.
anarchy79@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Paying taxes is only wrong when its to a democratically elected government. But paying tithes to the church or tribute to monarchs is MORAL!
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Please do not compare Dolly Parton to Bill Gates.
Jeffool@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Then they’re not really trying. I get what @Hobo@Lemmy.World is saying, but I find it hard to believe. If their bar for “respectable charities” leads to them not being able to find charities, then just lower the bar. Or just give money to people.
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Yep, pay for everyone’s university for a year, pay everyone’s healthcare debt, do something.
ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I forget where I heard this story, but apparently Bill and Melinda were at a dinner party during the Obama Presidency. Bill said that he had “way more power than Obama” and Melinda kicked him under the table. TBF I think he was completely right: politicians in the US derive their power from their ability to raise money from rich donors, while rich donors derive their power directly from their money. And they continue to derive power from their money even when they deposit it into a “foundation” which doles it out tax-free to favored recipients.
In Gates’ case, a lot of his “charity” involves donating patent-protected drugs to third world countries to forestall their saying “fuck your patents” and producing life-saving drugs for themselves. Preserving intellectual property rights is the primary goal here, with actually helping people secondary. Anyone who thinks these ruthless multi-billionaires suddenly become benign, caring people in their advanced years is a rube.
boonhet@sopuli.xyz 3 weeks ago
politicians in the US derive their power from their ability to raise money from rich donors, while rich donors derive their power directly from their money
Technically they derive their power from the electoral mandate, but to achieve it requires a lot of money from said rich donors. The second half is true. The rich are just rich, nobody voted them in, that’s why they’re more powerful than the politicians.
answersplease77@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
by followed up you mean: “Ok after I die, I will donate half of my money to my tax-exempt family-owned-and-operated charity, that just happened to only pay salaries and donatations to causes that serve the intersts of our family-owned-and-operated shell companies”… :D
it’s like sequeezing your late’s father dry-drenched cumsocket which he used his entire life, then drinking it, and brag about it… to which I say thanks but no fucking thanks.
__VA_ARGS__@feddit.org 3 weeks ago
Who would have thought
anarchy79@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
And I don’t believe shit of it. I think all their “donations” to foundations and “charity” are tax scams. I’ve seen so many of these deeply immoral and greedy fucks do this and go on charity drives and I’m not buying any of it, I know these people are just scamming us somehow, they don’t do anything out of the kindness of their hearts and betterment of society, it’s all about money.
The worst part is- they are not the problem per se, the system is. The system creates this, capitalism creates this, it promotes these people to the top sure, but if not them then anybody else willing to sell their souls to the literal antichrist.
Capitalism is a malignant cancer and needs to be excised and chemod or we all die. DIE. Civilization GONE. Humanity GONE. Culture GONE.
It’s us or capitalism.
panicnow@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Link to report instead of awful Fortune link: Giving Pledge
sanguinepar@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Is any of that because what would have been half their worth 15 years ago is now less than half of what it would be?
Like, if someone had 100 billion in 2010, and did give away 50 billion in that time, but also made a further 20 billion in that time, did they give away half they or worth or not?
I’ve not read the article, so maybe that question is answered in there.
iAvicenna@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
giving half their wealth to what? charities that they control for pushing agendas (and possibly money laundering if we are talking about billionaires in third world countries with much less regulations)
x0x7@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I was about to say. There’s a girl on Youtube that’s documenting how Carnage Melon’s old trust fund is alive and kicking and authoring dystopian plans to censor and monitor the internet. They are the authors of England’s new Online Safety Act. Don’t trust billionaires, especially when they turn into philanthropists. You can’t say philanthropist without making the same sounds as full on rapist.
Snowpix@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
These people are genuinely sick in the head, this level of pointless greed is not normal. Of course they aren’t going through with it.
anarchy79@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Exactly like gambling addicts. They are blinded by capitalism, because capitalism is nothing but gambling, and not only are these people addicts, the game has completely usurped society itself. Just think about it- what dictates our society? It’s not our values, or ideals, our wishes and wants and dreams, it’s the economy.
The Economy is a fucking golem that has overtaken democracy, we have no say, what The Economy wants always takes precedence, and the only thing The Economy wants is MORE MORE MORE MORE MORE MORE MORE MORE MORE MORE MORE. You know what else does that? Cancer.
Snowpix@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
Exactly! And like cancer, it will eventually consume and destroy its host. It may take time, but it will.
salty_chief@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Every country would need to adopt a universal taxation of wealthy individual for increased taxes to work. What I am saying is if US has a 75% for those earning over certain amount. Then other countries have to do the same. If not then Billionaires will run/relocate to the cheapest taxes. Which would be easy since the country they move to will be happy to get Billionaires tax money.
ILoveUnions@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Relocation is a bogus threat. Billionaires will not leave first world countries.
damnedfurry@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Someone needs to read up on “capital flight”, this is a known phenomenon we’re talking about, not speculation.
Cocopanda@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Or. If billionaires leave the USA. We seize their properties and industry in the name of national defense.
xiwi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Lmao fuck them my taxesare higher then half
phillycodehound@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Can’t say that I’m shocked.
matlag@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
Once you start to have money, you get a money dependency. No matter how rich you get, the “baseline you really need to live the life you want and nothing more” growths together with your wealth.
Take lottery winners and ask them if they could give away half of their gains. Will you be surprised if most of them say no, even though the day before they would have set their “minimum needed to live a happy life for the rest of my days” at a much smaller fraction of it?
Now take a similar population, but who in addition rationalized them deserving that money through their hard work and talent.
But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
It’s like a high score in a video games for them, nobody needs that much wealth
GiuseppeAndTheYeti@midwest.social 3 weeks ago
Look, I’m fully aware that this won’t sit well with the billionaires are horrifying monsters that not only should be slain but should be strung up in the town square and be given the blood eagle…BUT if you’re going to make the argument that traffic fines or any other monetary penalties should be a percentage of your net wealth or yearly income, then you have to acknowledge that giving away half of your lifetime earnings is a tremendous act of good will.
Now–there is a difference between me giving up $5000 of my roughly $11,000 in liquidity. We still have around $40,000 in student loan debt and $120k in a 25 year mortgage while we make about $100k per year. And these billionaires could still buy a second house in Cabo with a helipad using what is remaining, but it is SOMETHING. If they truly are “spurning” their billionaire status they should start with giving away half their fortune and continue to give away half their yearly income on top of that, but I won’t totally disregard the contribution that they’ve already made. Unless they’re republican. Then I’m nearly certain that money is going exactly where it shouldn’t.
recked_wralph@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Or their wealth has grown so rapidly that they gave away half of their 2010 wealth?
A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 3 weeks ago
Pledge
Words are meaningless.
This article has slightly more dirt but still seems a bit vague on hard numbers and names.
Ileftreddit@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Pikachu Face
lack@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
That’s 247 billionaires we could have put in the buffet. Never trust a billionaire. Eat them at first opportunity.
fluxion@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
The prospect of still being billionaires, but with less billions, was just too much to handle
Akasazh@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Exactly why they need to be taxed more.
brachiosaurus@mander.xyz 3 weeks ago
Billionaires shouldn’t exist to begin with and don’t assume tax money are used by governments for good.
SorryQuick@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
I mean, you don’t become a billionaire by giving money away.
lath@piefed.social 2 weeks ago
Uh, yeah you do. What do you think charities are for? Helping people?