Saw this today, and it seemed to be so fitting.
Baseball wrong. Man with four balls cannot walk.
Steve Jobs
- Thread starter JRoss
- Start date
Baseball wrong. Man with four balls cannot walk.
I personally consider all philanthropists to be hypocrites. If they are so concerned about the suffering of others why don't they give more of their money away and live the life of a middle class American? Despite all the money they "donate" they still live a life of decadence. It's not about charity, it's about their public image.
Meanwhile, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation contributes nearly as much money to global health as the WHO's yearly budget and provides ~17% of the global funding for the elimination of polio. And that's just the start. Is it for public image? I don't think so but even if it is, who cares? It still helps and it helps a lot.
That's ridiculous. They don't have to give away any of their money. I think it's fair to criticize Bill Gates for a lot of things, but his charitable work is not one of them. He and his wife don't just give money away, they actively work for the causes they're interested in, primarily childhood health and education.
Yes, but who is going to come out and call him on it? All of his employees were not going to bite the hand that fed them. If asked if Jobs invented such-and-such a product, of course they are going to say he did, regardless of the work of all those drones in their labs and cubicles.
And let's not pretend the US patent system is some kind of tightly-run, efficient organization. It's a disaster that lets pretty much any stupid thing through.
You're right they don't have to give away any of their money or found charities, but it's great for public relations. You can't tell me he's only doing it all out of the goodness of his heart.
So only middle class or lower class people who make charitable donations, do it from their heart?
Didn't say that. I'm talking about people who give millions away and advertise the shit out of it.
Why does Bill Gates have to care about his own PR? He's rich enough he never, ever has to give a fuck if he doesn't want to. He has enough money that what other people think of him does not matter. He can do absolutely anything he wants for the rest of his life. What has he chosen to do? He is trying to make a difference in the world.
I'm going to agree with everyone else and call this statement pretty much the dumbest thing I have read in the last six months.
Bill Gates has no need for good PR, he's not running for any office and he's constantly in the running for the richest man in the world, he has no need for you or anyone else to approve of him.
He has a vast fortune he could do anything he wanted to with, and yet he spends a very significant part of it eleviating suffering in the world.
For you to criticize that is just ridiculous and the arguments you give are downright silly.
Ditto. I don't see Bill Gates putting out a press release every time he does something charitable. For one thing, that would be a full time job. For another thing, he obviously doesn't care what people think of him. I mean, look no further than Windows ME for evidence of that.
Gates is a class act.
Gates is a class act.
If he's drawing attention to it at all I would think the purpose is to get other people to give to the foundation, but I could be wrong there.
No, you're exactly right. One person can't effect global change all on their own. You have to draw attention to what you're trying to do and get other people on board. The money helps but it's the public awareness and participation that actually makes it work.
But if I was Bill Gates and I read shit like this being said about my efforts to improve the world, I'd probably get pissed off, pull my money out of the bank/stock market as cash, and make a big fucking bonfire.
The level of ungratefulness about this is just astonishing.But if I was Bill Gates and I read shit like this being said about my efforts to improve the world, I'd probably get pissed off, pull my money out of the bank/stock market as cash, and make a big fucking bonfire.
I'm sure if you were Bill Gates you'd be above that kind of pettiness and take pity on all us little people.
Except Gates didn't give away millions; he gave away billions, as in half of his fortune. What's left is pretty much locked up in various cookie jars at Redmond or in trusts for his kids. The remainder is stashed in secure investments that will be transferred to the foundation upon his death.
And find me one example of Gates advertising his charity work. He just doesn't do it. In fact, when someone brings it up in interviews he usually tries to change the subject.
The only "advertising" he's ever done is with his campaign with Buffet to other rich fuckers to give away half their fortunes.
And yet despite all this the public's perception of him is still Locutus of Bill. If he was advertising his philanthropy as you say, then he's doing a really crappy job of it.
I took my dad to the doctor this morning and got to read the Time article. If a piece of writing was ever capable of necrophilia, then it was the one. And people are still celebrating in the streets over a guy who basically punked half the free world. Yeah. He really did.
I wish people actually thought long and hard about what they pay for with ipods and iphones and what they actually get.
Punked half the free world? Because he sold a lot of something? It's not like you get your iPod out of the box and it's a black painted piece of wood with a note saying "GOTCHYA!"
Most of us do. That's why we buy them.
Let's not be too hasty. I'm sure it's possible to build a quality product and make a profit charging a fraction of the price Apple does. Look at this value-based alternative.
I've always seen that hypocritical element in charity. And I don't think it makes you a bad person if you address it.
Top actors that make 20 million per film, and once in a while take part in charity events that raise 100,000-500,000 dollars. That amount they could have paid out of their pockets.
You can always ask "You own 40 billion, so why do you only spend 40 million? What are you doing with the rest?"
Why doesn't he/she spent 39 billion? He'd still have another billion left, which is more than enough. 500 million would still be more than enough. Heck, 1 million would be still more than enough.
Or if you walk down a street and there are a hundred beggars. Unless you give everyone something, it'd be unfair.
Top actors that make 20 million per film, and once in a while take part in charity events that raise 100,000-500,000 dollars. That amount they could have paid out of their pockets.
You can always ask "You own 40 billion, so why do you only spend 40 million? What are you doing with the rest?"
Why doesn't he/she spent 39 billion? He'd still have another billion left, which is more than enough. 500 million would still be more than enough. Heck, 1 million would be still more than enough.
Or if you walk down a street and there are a hundred beggars. Unless you give everyone something, it'd be unfair.
Similar threads
