Slashdot Mirror
Facebook's Zuckerberg To Give Away Half His Cash
Stoobalou writes "Facebook co-founders Mark Zuckerberg and Dustin Moskovitz are among the latest batch of 17 billionaires who have promised to give away at least half of their fortunes, after signing up to a philanthropic campaign led by Microsoft founder Bill Gates 3.0 and celebrity investor Warren Buffett. By signing up to The Giving Pledge, the mega-rich make a vague promise — sorry, 'moral commitment' — to give away more than half of their fortune at some point during their lifetime."
Maybe he is not such a douche after all?
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
nerds, Stuff that matters.
Call me old fashion but when you "give something away." You let it go. You don't set up a foundation and put the money in that foundation and then parcel out small percentages yearly as your foundation invests it back into businesses and countries that you have an interest in. I've bitched about this before (I'm aware that the couple hundred I've donated in my life does not measure up to tens of billions) but I think it should be clarified. A lot of these billionaires do not give the money away. They put the money into a foundation that then invests the large amounts of money into the American economy and sometimes businesses or areas of development that they hold an interest in. Once the return is netted at the end of the year, then this is what is "given away" in the strictest sense of the words. They treat researchers and poor starving nations like children. It has its benefits but I see it as largely detrimental. I understand that in doing this the foundation can continue to give indefinitely (until the American stock market dumps) but what I don't understand is that potential that the money has could be equally useful to the target medicines and poor that are supposed to be helped. If you don't think that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is American-centric and nationalistic in its investments, why don't you read his warning letter about China developing alternative energy. To quote Kenny Powers: "Sure, I've been called a xenophobe, but the truth is, I'm not. I honestly just feel that America is the best country and the other countries aren't as good. That used to be called patriotism."
Here's my prediction for Zuck's money: He's going to pledge a trillion dollars it to something like stopping malaria in Africa. It's going to go into a foundation. The foundation will make money yearly by investing in indexes and mutual funds spread across American (not African) companies managed by some genius living comfortably far from any malaria parasite. At the end of each year, they're going to have ~5.5% to give away. They have American medical research companies apply for research grants. They arrange to have malaria medicine created and licensed from American companies shipped to Africa. They can't give that money to governments like the Democratic Republic of the Congo because government corruption will wick away much of that. And they might buy small arms and attack their neighbors with them. They get treated like children and they stay children. At the end of that year, America prevails economically with a sound infrastructure while the DRC remains malaria infested, corrupted and without any sort of infrastructure to provide clean potable water, sewage treatment or electricity to large areas of populace.
So I have to kind of wonder if they're "giving money away" or if they're putting money into an engine that just persists existing problems while helping the American economy? Because people have been donating vast extensive sums of money to stop malaria historically and where are we at in that fight?
Don't get me wrong, I'm happy that something is happening but I really question when I read "give away" in the news articles when a better term might be "endowed" or just call it what it often is, "an investment in America resulting in good will."
My work here is dung.
I can certainly respect this. It's true altruism, quite unlike when government takes money by force and redistributes it. This is 100% voluntary, and therefore much more impressive and worthy of respect than any government program.
I hear the USA economy is in a poor way. Might be worth helping out now and investing in their local communities rather than waiting for 50 years...
But fair play to Bill Gates for getting rich folk to sign over more wealth than a lot of folk have done in the past. Some of it's blood money /guilt money and there's a big philosophical debate about the balance of happiness at the end of them giving their money away vs what troubles they might have caused getting there in some cases. But fair play for giving it away rather than building marble temples or gold swimming pools or whatever.
For anyone else who was wondering about the "Bill Gates 3.0" part, the Bill we know and love/hate is William Henry Gates III. In case you were going to confuse him for the other Bill Gates'.
Half my fortune? Okay, just let me file this bankruptcy claim...
No, no sig. Really.
ThePromenader
Bill Gates 3.0 ?
- Bill
www.GloBible.com
Like anything related to Microsoft, I guess you need to get to at least version 3 before you have something useful. *ducks*
I am officially gone from
I gave away half my net worth yesterday. I have now idea what the Salvation Army will do with the entire $20, but it sure felt good.
Place nail here >+
'cause conservatives like to laud this kind of thing as a sign that their take on capitalism works. But why should us lower classes have to go begging to some rich guy just to get what they need? Random generosity & hoping for the best isn't a good way to stabilize human society.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Let's see...
I promise when and if I ever obtain wealth in the 20-30 billion dollar range, I'll give away half my fortune at some point during my lifetime (preferable just moments before I bite the big one).
Wow... I feel like Mother Theresa now, and I didn't even have to deal with a bunch of lepers!
Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an oncoming train.
I am not for certain, but I am willing to bet that this 'cash' will be spent on things that will not immediately benefit poor people and the working class.
People need jobs, not cash. No amount of cash donated to a is going to help in the short-term pull us out of the financial crisis we are in right NOW.
If facebook, Microsoft or others were to provide more stable, good-paying jobs to people, that would be more beneficial in the short-term and the long run for our country.
Although I commend the philanthropy, the reality is that people who are unemployed and underemployed couldn't care less about Mark Zuckerberg's philanthropic billions and the billions he has left over to live his extravagant lifestyle.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Unbeknown to the plebeian masses, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have been secretly funding research to extend human life. Since the materials and techniques are too expensive to replicate to anything but a select group of individuals, Gates and Buffet have invited only the most elite in to the know under the condition that they give up lots of money. Unfortunately for them, this is only the icing of achievements for Gates and Buffet in the one game they love more than anything else, knowing how to hoodwink lots of money out of people by being one step ahead of them.
If this douche decides not to, who's there to enforce this pledge? "I was under the influence of several different controlled subs... medications when I signed the papers. I have no idea what I signed. I have changed my mind since, and if you have a problem with that, talk to my lawyers."
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
They now stand outside of his door with their hands out waiting expectantly.
Unless I loose or spend it on something I want.
oooo look a pony!
So they support a 50% tax rate on income? During Eisenhower's time, the nominal rate for the very rich was 91%, and the nation was very prosperous.
No, they do not support any such thing of course. They will spend their money the way they see fit (queue ignoramus libertarian armchair economist rant). They will call it "charitable" and get a tax write off. In Gate's case, the way he spends his money also advances his investment interests in biotechnology, because there are strings attached to accepting his "gift."
The world does not need the largess of billionaires, it needs an equitable (not "equal") distribution of wealth so that the free market economy can function efficiently. It's not the billionaire's fault that the system is set up this way. They are making their way through the world the best they can given the circumstances they live in. That doesn't change the fact that our economy is grossly out of balance because of the enormous distortion in wealth distribution encouraged by a certain strain of frontier capitalism rooted in sophomoric economic libertarianism. If these billionaires really wanted to make the world a better place, they would use their great wealth to agitate for progressive economic changes, rather than just dump cash into this or that charity. In fact, both Gates and Buffet have made such arguments, but in a cruel twist of irony, the hoi polloi who would benefit from such change continue to fight against it. How sad and stupid.
TFTI, I was ready to wait for Bill Gates 3.1
If there is one thing I have learned it's this, never trust "future me". Doesn't matter whether it's billionaires, congress or myself.
Gates and Buffett, like so many of the Industrialists before them, appear to subscribe to the Gospel of Wealth...
what seems to be forgotten in the ensuing adulation is how these folks acquired their wealth... we know about Gates,
but Buffett is no kindly grandfather type... the Berkshire Hathaway Reinsurance Group has reaped BILLIONS in just
the last several years via policies that ensured insane increases in homeowner insurance policy...
If they really cared about giving and helping people, and not just about patting themselves on the back for the world to see, they would make this a legal contract, monitor how much is given, and open it to anyone that wants to give. If some homeless guy wants to give 20 of his last $30 why should it matter that he isn't ultra-rich socialite? Nice sentiment, but (hopefully) anyone can see it for what it is...
NT
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
No, you're full of bullshit. A one-time shot of a half-billion dollars will get pissed away in a year. Put that money in a foundation and consistently donate the interest, however, and you get a significant chunk of change going to the cause every year, forever.
Forever? Just like the stock market is going to last forever? Just like the money the foundation lost from the BP oil spill? They lowered their payout they had promised following the American housing and financial crisis and I'm sure it's because they didn't get the money they thought was "already in the bag." Of course we can't get at any hard figures of how much they had pre-market crash and right after it but I'm going to go ahead and say you're full of bullshit in thinking that they are investing in things that are consistently going to help. They are investing in the stock market. The stock market is a gamble. Any thoughts otherwise are true bullshit.
My work here is dung.
Funny how most of these rich, aging guys suddenly want to buy their way into Heaven.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
I can haz ca$h plz? Srsly though, how about helping the many millions of jobless, uninsured and struggling families. Considering the fat republican cats in government gave the super-rich major tax cuts in the Bush years I think it is only right that they give back to the lower and middle class people who took a greater share of the tax burden.
"at some point during their lifetime"
So, after facebook goes down the toilet and he's got a dollar to his name, he'll give away 50 cents.
Facebook hasn't gone public. Facebook hasn't been sold.
Facebook could collapse tomorrow, and he wouldn't have more than whatever he has saved of his yearly salary recently...
I'd love to know how Zuckerberg thinks he's rich right now.
Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
The purpose of that site was not known.
would be time. A rich guy like Bill Gates could give away 99% of what he's worth and still be rich. We each only have 24 hours a day though.
If they want to buy their way into heaven, they should read this quote from Jesus: “Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven. “So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. (Matthew 6: 1-4)
But sinking fangs into the taxpayers and throwing billion after billion at "solutions" that continually fail is an example of sound reasoning?
But why should us lower classes have to go begging to some rich guy just to get what they need?
LOL! What is this, a Dickens novel?
"Please, sir, may I have some more?" No, wait, that was just in the musical, right? I forget.
If you see yourself as "lower class" don't expect much else. Cripes, how many rags to riches success stories (or just people living their lives normally and comfortably because they act like responsible adults) does this country need before you class warriors give up?
If you bothered checking the actual numbers, you'd know that the lower and middle class do not shoulder a greater share of the tax burden. But don't let facts get in the way of your envy!
If they do it right, they may never pay a dollar of income tax for the rest of their lives.
Very rich people find away to donate money in a way that lets the money KEEP giving every year, and there not 'giving their money away'
Theya re being SMART with the money they give away by goinging it to a 'engine' that allows the money to help over and over again. this is BETTER then just a one time use of the money.
If you do give the charities, it would be smart of you to put money into a fund that supports what you want it to.
To answer your question: They're making progress, but the biggest hold back are 'environmental' groups who keep pressuring government to stop the production of DDT.
And just so you know, there has never been a causation found between DDT and Condor shell thinning.
DDT is a powerful tool in eliminating malaria, and a whole host of other nasties.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
"at some point in their lives"
just marketing , the guy is not even 30, he has almost 3 generations ahead before he actually gives away his cash.....
just plain marketing...
He will soon regret pledging his fortune away when he finds out that he could have used that money to create mice from 2 fathers.
http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3/1NnJOhmfGAs/story01.htm
perhaps the money could be given to certain governments with a doomed philosophy of simultaneously lowering taxes and increasing spending,
Trickle down philosophy:
It a water shortage, the government should give all the water to rich corporations. The rest of us, including the government, can hope for the trickle down (in one form or another).
Don't give it away, invest it! We need jobs not temporary handouts!
they should read this:
http://www.atheists.org/
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Wow, are you really that stupid? seriously? Facebook sells advertising, makes money from the largest online game in the world, sells spots in those games to major corporations. In farmville you can get a McDonalds.
http://www.businessinsider.com/how-does-facebook-make-money-2010-5
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Here's what I want to know: Will the money be put to use creating major research organizations or will it be pissed away on something nebulous such as foreign aid which inevitably winds up in some warlord's plethora of palaces? Imagine how many start-ups could be created with $500 million. Imagine how many people they would employ. Imagine how many people suppliers to those start-ups would employ. Imagine how many people would be employed by companies offering services and infrastructure required to make it all work. Imagine how many spin-offs would be created. Then multiply that by 17.
But even if you don't like that idea, why would you piss the money away on third-world countries when there are a lot of people on welfare and food stamps here in this country.
The SUPER MEGA rich do these things. It all started with Rockefeller when he claimed that it was the richs' duty to spread the wealth. For the most part the rich really don't see it this way, but a way to flaunt your richness, because "they have money like that, yo".
of course this will never be read...
It is like "omni-gel" in Mass Effect: just apply enough to the problem and it goes away! Ya well, not so much. Money is NOT magical, and just throwing lots at a problem in many cases doesn't help and in some cases makes it worse.
A simple example that is on a scale that many people can relate to would be a drug addict. Suppose a friend of yours is badly addicted to something, and has ruined their life with it. They can't hold down a job, are homeless, are in poor health, etc. Now suppose I make essentially an unlimited amount of funds available to fix the problem (we'll say $500,000,000 if you need a number to put on it). What do you do with it? If your answer is "Give them the money so they can turn their life around," then that's the wrong answer. Sure, they could fix some immediate problems like getting a house, and a job wouldn't be a concern. However all that would do is enable them to continue buying drugs. It might well lead to a quick death by overdose, but if not it would lead to a slower one by sustained abuse. You also would discover that the money would vanish at an amazing pace, as bad decisions get made all the time (druggies are not know for rational thinking).
If you wanted to do any good, you'd need to maintain control of the money and use it towards useful ends, like treatment programs and so on. You would need to make sure it was spent on things that actually help the problem, not things that just allow it to continue and mask some of the overt symptoms.
Well guess what? Same is true on a larger scale when dealing with countries with a great deal of dysfunction (like lack of basic infrastructure, long civil wars, oppression of large parts of the population, etc). Just saying "Here's a bunch of money have fun!" does nothing useful. In fact in many cases it'd make things worse, only entrenching corrupt people in power. To do any good the money has to be spent on things that help like, say, running water or generators or medicine and so on.
That is something a good foundation can do (and it would seem the Gates foundation does). They can figure out what to spend the money on and provide things that make useful improvements to quality of life, not just toss it at a corrupt government and let them run amok.
I'd be willing to pay greater taxes to support you if you gave up your rights to self-determination. You want free money? Cool. You work like we tell you, learn what we tell you, live where we tell you and how we tell you. I don't see why you should get something for nothing.
It's like an allowance. You can earn money on your own and live your life, or you can have my money and live like I want you to.
The real reason Zuck is giving his money away is the fear of negative PR that is the Bill and Warren Shakedown...Many people think Zuck is a douche. Facebook as we know is worth billions, but Zuck doesn't have billions in his bank account, it's Facebook that is worth billions. His billions of assets could be cut drastically if people stop using facebook. So, Bill (Capone) and Warren (Gatti) show up at Zucks doorstep and say "give us half your money...or we tell the world you are good-for-nothin selfish douche...you wouldn't want your asset to plummet in value due to the bad PR, would you?"
Ah, the fallacies of liberalism, on display for all to see. Your argument starts with a faulty premise - namely the belief that all money belongs to the government, and that letting you keep more of the money that you earned somehow qualifies as a hand-out. Embedded within your faulty premise and argument is another fallacy - that somehow letting high-income earners keep more of their money only benefits them. When a millionaire buys or leases a Gulfstream 6, literally thousands of blue and white-collar Americans were involved in the design, production, and selling of that jet. When Nancy Pelosi invests hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax-free municipal bonds, those municipalities benefit. And if Uncle Scrooge just wants to let a billion dollars fester in a savings account, well guess what? The bank spends that money for him anyway to finance their lending operations. People like you just have no fucking clue how the world operates. You live in a complete delusion, and I'm not sure there's any point even trying to reason with you, except that perhaps by refuting your ignorance some other curious mind won't be poisoned by your bullshit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpAMbpQ8J7g
Charity only improves things in the short run. It's only through less feel-good methods (progressive taxation of the rich being only the most moderate of working methods) that the problems of the world can be changed for the better.
It's a fundamental problem I have with charitable giving in the US. The "value" you donate gets taken off your gross income, which reduces your taxes.
Say what you will about taxes, but by reducing your tax liability by $1, you've not changed the amount it takes to run the country, and have effectively raised everyone elses taxes to compensate for it.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
There are people right now who would take that deal.. for example military recruitment goes up during recession. Recent figure reported atleast a 25% increase of college grads joining the military because of a lack of jobs.
Big Corporations would love to dictate how, where, when you live your life if that means you pay them and buy their products. Its not hard to find evidence of that.
Good thing we have laws, rights and the courts to give us some measure of freedom.
Isn't that what USA is about?
Or do you want to start over and re-write the constitution?
If you have $2B and give away half, you are still a billionaire.
Still, it's nice they are doing it.
I like what the Gates are doing after they die even better though: To prevent financial dynasties and the laziness that can come with it a generation or two later, they are making sure the bulk of their estate goes to a foundation that will "spend it all" within a generation or two. Their kids will get a nice sum that will leave them set for life but it won't be anywhere close to a billion.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
NO. I've seen the documentary. Uncle Scrooge swims around in gold coins in a big vault on a hill. How could the bank be using that money to "finance their lending operations" when Uncle Scrooge is swimming, bathing, and probably even peeing in it? (It's a swimming pool. It happens.)
You and your fanciful "investment" theories. Get real! The rich just stockpile gold bars, everybody knows it.
If you plan on leaving me more than enough to have me "set for life" please don't.
Give the excess to a cause you believe in besides my bank account.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
...they'll wait and 'give' this money away at a time when they are guaranteed a 'return' on this 'investment'. You can't rehabilitate a hardcore capitalist. Greed is the most important prerequisite to their financial success...
Is he about to get married?
What Happened to the lawsuit against him & facebook ? I thought ~80 percent of his and facebooks worth isn't technically his?
How about your corporations just pay the proper amount of Taxes and skip the old double irish cop out. Then you bastards can keep your money and the people we elect can decide how to distill it out.
I remember seeing a quote on a t-shirt that went something like this
Instead of donating their fortunes to charity, it would be better if these billionaires put their money to work at ending the reasons for charities being needed in the first place. I'm not talking about "socialism", but about donating money in such a way that any given cause will not need future donations. In other words solving a problem instead of helping to manage the results.
Not to take away from their generosity.....it is epic, with no ifs ands or buts.
Just offering a thought......
I still don't trust him or Facebook with my information, but my opinion of him as a human being has just changed for the better.
This epically generous move would seem to indicate he is what he portrays himself as, a coder who cares about coding and not much else. I'm sure he will still be comfortable after giving all of this money away, but with that money a lot of opportunities will also leave his life. Though, if he is one of those guys who just likes spending the bulk of his day coding he will not care.
...as the US Government has already pledged it for them. We call it "Death Taxes".
It's the most popular form of taxes, since no person materially involved with the fortune ever makes any complaints!
It would be great if someone would re-animate Elvis so he can make a formal complaint about his 100% contribution. Even if he lost, I'm sure there are ways to put a zombie Elvis to good use. Provided you don't get sued by Elvis Presley Enterprise, Inc for trademark infringement....
I give away half my money too.. it's called taxes.. :-(
They should be using that wealth to change public policy to stop taxing economic activity and start taxing net assets. Enormous concentrations of wealth cannot exist without government so those benefiting should pay for the service.
By engaging in "philanthropy" rather than fixing the bug in the tax system, these guys are engaging in moral vanity -- essentially trying to buy respect. They don't get it from me nor anyone really concerned about the welfare of humanity.
Seastead this.
The Constitution says nothing about Corporations vs. People. It's a set of restrictions on Government and nothing more. (eg: There can be no law that ______.)
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
Don't give out the secret to being rich!
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
I may be dating myself, but no release is worth it before version 5.0, right?
So what's the number to call for the FREE cash again? Or can I just slashdot it! Hurry,Please,it's my cash and I need it NOW!
When someone has this kind of wealth, it's analogous to the old proverb: You should always keep lots of boats. Then when your wife gets mad you can get rid of some, and you'll still have lots of boats.
Allow me to explain.
1) Donate $1 million to the "Me Foundation".
2) The "Me Foundation" gets another $1 million in matching federal money to do their good work (education, medicine for the poor, whatever)
3) Given a near-total lack of oversight, the "Me Foundation" spends this $2 million on bullshit services provided by their for-profit vendor, "Me Incorporated LLC."
4) "Me Incorporated LLC" only spend about $200,000 to provide these bullshit services.
5) $800,000 of profit, on "leveraged philanthropy."
Gates and Buffett are profiteering scum, and their so-called philanthropy is a travesty. Their educational initiatives are an outright scam (as outlined above), and even their much-ballyhooed HIV work is a travesty, which diverts - sorry, "leverages" - public money away from cheap and effective interventions.
The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
I didn't know he was getting married!
Okay, so let me get this straight... he probably paid (or will pay) about 30% in federal and state taxes on his money since it's combined salary and capital gains. So, that means he takes home about 70% of it. Now, he says he's willing to give away half of that. So, he's perfectly happy to keep just 35%, actually. That's the equivalent of being taxed at 65%.
... yet here's a guy who's joining many other guys who are voluntarily, effectively, taxing themselves at about 65%.
It's interesting to think about this when I hear people freak out about the idea of raising the highest tax-bracket rate from, say, 35% to 39%. They claim that, if we did this, all of the rich people would be so incensed that they'd take their money to other countries...
he has just got a good tax advisor. After all taxes are just for us little people.
So, basically, like the feudal system. A lot of peasants were pretty happy with that system, I guess...
Distributed Denial of APK: It takes 15 seconds to reply to him anonymously, but wastes tons of his time if we all do it.
Kurt Vonnegut exposed this scam years before the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation existed: if you move a large portion of your money to a charity organization, it no longer gets taxed, and you make more in the long run. Also, when you die and you transfer control of the foundation to your heirs, it doesn't get hit with the inheritance tax.
If Zuckerberg and Gates cared about helping people, they would give money away anonymously. If they cared about helping people, they would use their power and money to expose corrupt politicians and support non-corrupt ones. But no, both of these guys and their corporations give the maximum campaign donations to the most corrupt politicians in Washington as bribes. This cocksuckers aren't changing anything, they're just trying to buy a positive public opinion.
Why is it that the Bill & Melinda foundation gives away Windows PCs to "support education?" How does having a computer that costs money to upgrade in the future help education, especially in third world countries? All schools in all countries should run Linux or Unix. If these guys were trying to change the world economically by empowering all classes, then I wouldn't be so cynical. But they're not trying to help anyone, they're just offering table scraps to keep the dogs loyal.
"From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
This is wonderful news. So let people voluntarily give away half their fortunes, or however much they want. But KILL THE ESTATE TAX. NO DEATH TAXES.
We have been taxed when we earn our income.
We get taxed when we save our income.
We get taxed when we spend our income.
We get taxed every year on our land (which places no burden on society and is a benefit).
Then the government has the gall to tax us when we die.
The death tax should be killed.
Am I the only one who read this as "Fuckerberg"?
nt
For every benefit you receive a tax is levied. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
http://www.economist.com/node/9912566?story_id=9912566 "Elroy Dimson, Paul Marsh and Mike Staunton of the London Business School examined* the record of 16 stockmarkets which were in continuous operation over the course of the 20th century. In itself, this selection showed survivorship bias by excluding the likes of Russia and China. The academics found that only three other countries could match the American record of having no 20-year periods with negative real returns. Other investors were far less lucky. Japanese, French, German and Spanish investors all suffered instances where they had to wait 50-60 years to earn a positive real return; in Italy and Belgium, the waiting period stretched to 70 years. It was no good following the famous advice to "put the shares in a drawer and forget about them"; the furniture would not have lasted that long." I'd recommend reading the whole article, but long story short, the belief that the stockmarket over the long run always goes up is based off nothing more than confirmation bias, really. So this strategy of investing in the stockmarket could actually come back to bite them in the ass. Although a one-off gift of, say, a billion dollars, might be "pissed away" relatively quickly, at least the money would definitely be used and reach those who need it.
We tend to give the most money to the least productive members of society. Just seems like an obviously self-defeating model.
Giving them money encourages the unbalanced spread of the worst genes humanity has to offer. As a race (human), why would we do this?
If I ever had billions of dollars, I would give none of it to the 3rd world, or the poor. It's bad enough that we subsidize their breeding with shiploads of free food. What's the end game there? Create more and more completely dependent humans that cannot fend for themselves? So that we can give them more and more food while they in turn give nothing back to society?
Seems very backwards to me.
I do this every month. I don't call it a 'give-away'. I call it 'rent'.
For the ultimate irony, Zuckerberg should donate the money to privacy advocacy.
If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
Govt will anyway impose http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estate_tax_in_the_United_States
Govt must constitute a panel to rewrite US Constitution and Quran