[The Phlegmy One!111]

The two richest people are so safe - http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americ...icle1097107.ece

I always stood behind Bill Gates. He's to give 90% of his wealth before he dies and this dude it giving pretty much all of it.

[Echoes]

is it really that cool? He's still a billionnaire, many times over. This isn't going to affect his standard of living whatsoever - it's not even a sacrifice!

[The Phlegmy One!111]

And Bradley, yeh it is still cool, whether their standard of living will go down or not, because they accumulated the wealth through their own hard work and they don't have to give it away. They can just pass it oin to their kids like ALL of us will do.

[Echoes]

oh, don't get me wrong. He's a hugely inspirational rags-to-riches story, with a strong belief in a meritocratic society (hence he wouldn't pass much of his fortune onto his kids - to quote him it would be like "choosing the 2020 Olympic team by picking the eldest sons of the gold-medal winners in the 2000 Olympics.". I also like how when he buys a company he doesn't interfere with the management. The guy even lives in a house he bought in 1958, before he got really rich!

And of course he doesn't have to give it away. But why would you not? It seems like a no-brainer to me. He still has enough left over that even if he did change his mind about inheritance he'd still have enough to make his three kids billionaires many times over! It's not a sacrifice, hence I don't find it that awesome. I'm just very glad it's going to the B&MG Foundation, which I really respect. They're doing good work and it's an inspiration to all the other people sitting on 'extra' money that makes no difference to their lives or to people close to them.

There are nearly 800 billionaires in the world. Their combined wealth is about $2.6 TRILLION (2.6 Million Millions) - let's say they kept a billion each (not that it would make the slightest bit of difference to them whether they had 0.5 billion or 1 billion), and gave the rest to charitable causes. That would mean 1.8 Trillion dollars to improve the world. Bear in mind that 1.6 Billion people in the world live on less than a dollar a day, and how big a difference that dollar would make to their diet, their education - even their life expectancy (and overall, their economy)

[The Phlegmy One!111]

It's easy to say when you haven't worked for every bit of it. It'd be easy for us to tell rich people to give their money away, but especially those that worked for it themselves, I wouldn't see any wrong with them keeping it all. Hence if they do give it away, it's a very good thing (if keeping it is neutral). None of us will ever be in that position so it doesn't matter :-P

[Forgone Conclusion]

If i'm ever a billionaire siva, i will give u one million pounds

[Echoes]

The Phlegmy One!111, on Jun 27 2006, 02:00 PM, said:

It's easy to say when you haven't worked for every bit of it. It'd be easy for us to tell rich people to give their money away, but especially those that worked for it themselves, I wouldn't see any wrong with them keeping it all. Hence if they do give it away, it's a very good thing (if keeping it is neutral). None of us will ever be in that position so it doesn't matter :-P

i don't buy that argument for one second. people can slave away their whole life making absolutely nothing compared to the money these people make just off the interest on their fortunes, accumulating ever more. They've worked hard, and worked smart, to get rich (usually) - mind you, not harder than somebody making bricks in India, or trying to raise crops in Africa. But get anywhere near being a billionaire and you can pay people to invest your money and make you even more, whilst you sit by the pool. The only possible explanation for keeping money which neither you nor your kin need is greed.

Now, I have absolutely no problem with people keeping enough money so that they never need to work again, and/or enough so you can still invest, play the stock market, get involved in businesses - these people aren't just motivated by the money, the thrill of business goes beyond that. But to sit on billions that are worthless to you whilst people starve its just fucking retarded, and I can't see how you see 'nothing wrong with it'.

[where_i'm_calling_from]

...especially as when you die the government takes 70% of it. might as well donate it to charity while you're living so hopefully it effects some positive change.

[The Phlegmy One!111]

Bradley, do you actually believe 40billion is too much money to spend if you earnt it (whether it was eventually by getting people to run your company or not, it was of your mind they're building on). I would buy an island and research some really hi-tech stuff. There is NO amount of money too much to spend. You don't NEED to spend it, but I don't need to spend any money my parents give me or I earn because I have food and shelter, but I do anyway. You're putting a limit to material pleasure, which there isn't a limit on IMO. And isn't inheritance tax 40%. If not my teachers lied to me. Bastards.

[Echoes]

you're right: you don't need to spend 40 billion on yourself. I'd argue, but perhaps you don't agree, that there is a need to spend a not insignificant part of it to help people, when their need is so great and you're able to help them without even breaking a sweat/making any sacrifices. But perhaps you and I don't agree, or have a different perception of just how much money a billion dollars really is.

And you're missing the point I've been making all along if you really consider yourself to be in the same position as a multibillionaire. If you invest the money you have now, the returns on that investment will actually improve your life, a lot more than the returns on a multibillionaire's investments would improve his life. Hence it's much much more justifiable for you to not give away money. I'm only suggesting billionaires give away money they don't need, money that doesn't make a difference to them. That's what Buffett's done, and I applaud it, but the guy's not making a sacrifice, compromising his quality of life or chances of survival or whatever, and so you'll forgive me if I don't share your opinion that this was particularly great of him.

[Forgone Conclusion]

Tbh Bradley, that's a terrible attitude to take. ANY act of charity should be praised, yet someone gives away $40 bn and you seem to be shrugging it off as nothing. That's stupid! His donation will save countless lives, and improve countless others. However rich he is, $40 bn is going to be a sizeable proportion of his wealth certainly far more than I'd ever consider giving. If giving away that kind of level of money isn't that big a deal, then how come more people aren't doing it?

Tbh Bradley, it's that kind of attitude that stops people giving to charity. They think the money they gave won't make a big difference, or it will not be appreciated, and it's peoplelike you, who shrug off these HUGELY generous donations, who cause it. You're a bad, bad person

[Echoes]

Forgone Conclusion, on Jun 28 2006, 10:51 AM, said:

Tbh Bradley, that's a terrible attitude to take. ANY act of charity should be praised, yet someone gives away $40 bn and you seem to be shrugging it off as nothing.

stop thinking in absolute terms. giving away that money isn't even a sacrifice for the man, unless he's greedy, which we can see from the admirable way he lives, that he isn't. He therefore has no attachment to the money - his loved ones are well provided for, he doesn't WANT to build any wonders of the world, palaces, shit like that. He doesn't live a life that requires more than however many BILLIONS he and his family still have in their account. That, I find admirable. But I simply can't understand holding onto money that makes no difference to you - especially given the state of the world. I praise people who make REAL sacrifices to help others. This, I find perfectly normal, and I only wish it was normality.

Quote

certainly far more than I'd ever consider giving

so, you'd hold onto money you don't need, and wouldn't notice if you didn't have it, and I'M the bad bad person??

Quote

Tbh Bradley, it's that kind of attitude that stops people giving to charity. They think the money they gave won't make a big difference, or it will not be appreciated, and it's peoplelike you, who shrug off these HUGELY generous donations, who cause it.

What a complete BULLSHIT excuse for not giving to charity. You are the one just now who was underestimating how much of a difference this money will make, by saying you would hold onto it even though you don't need it. It's arguably because I think just how much of a difference it will make, and how much it will be appeeciated, that I just can't understand why on earth you would keep the cash.

And furthermore, how I feel shouldn't make the slightest bit of difference to people who are thinking of giving their excess cash to charity. What is this, a fucking popularity contest? Lives are at stake, you do it because of them, not because the public in your hometown will luvvers you.

[The Phlegmy One!111]

But imagine a massive island which is the most advanced place on the Earth and makes Japan look like Sudan. How cool would it be if you owned and lived there, coming out with the best in technology before anywhere else in the world. My point is basically that you can use ANY amount of money.

[HolteEnder]

I would probably keep the money if I'm being honest. I'm a selfish prick. Giving away 80%, I commend him for

[Echoes]

you'll forgive me if I don't think that's an excuse for not using your money to help people living on less than a dollar a day, and holding onto it instead, just because there is technically a way to spend $44 billion.

[Dave. zzz....]

I'd give it to the NHS.

Top fella that I am

[where_i'm_calling_from]

they'd just spend it on modern art.


cf. University College Hospital, who spent £770, 000 on it, right before announcing net losses of £40 mil last year.

[Justin]

Really is a great story. And I actually read somewhere that even though he has this immense amount of wealth he is rather thrifty.

[Echoes]

ironically, 'THRIFTY' is his customised number plate. slight irony there, but given how rich he is and how shit a car he drives (a Lincoln Town Car), i think we can forgive him it =)

[Justin]

haha! Oh well there you go.