money is just a paper. change political system and money gets used as toilet paper. Similar with assets, they get redristributed. Too few people too much assets, triggers animal spirits in people as with just getting rid of these few, can enrich many. This guy looks like did it before this type of events emerge. Smart.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Bill gates: will not pass down fortune to children.
- Thread starter MohdSalleh
- Start date
Quote from CaptainObvious:
There are thousands of Verterans who could use some financial help. There are tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of Americans living in abject poverty. Yet this dope chooses to give his money to some corrupt African government which will do nothing but enrich the officals who oppress their people.
It's painfully obvious that any success Mr. Gates has enjoyed was the result of dumb luck. He has no brains!
The jerk is a globalist. If it were not for the US business environment, he would not have the fortune to begin with
If I were Gates I'd do the same thing. Considering he owns 620MM shares of MSFT, if he was to leave it to his kids, they'd have to dump 100's of MM of shares to pay the estate tax, which would send the stock tanking. So half would go to the govt and the remainder would shrink in value.
He obviously would set up his kids as trustees of the foundation so they would have broad control over it, and that would be their careers. So, they're set up pretty nicely regardless.
He obviously would set up his kids as trustees of the foundation so they would have broad control over it, and that would be their careers. So, they're set up pretty nicely regardless.
Quote from olias:
Are you implying that Gates is an asshole because he cares about people in other parts of the world, rather than just Americans?
First of all, I called him a jerk. Not AH. It was in reply to CO comment on veterans and the needy in the US. Since the US gave him the opportunity, he ought to address his fellow citizens first. But when you are a globalist, you forget where you came from, as he seems to be doing.
Quote from Scataphagos:
Total BS. The big house and yacht cost a lot of money to build and maintain... employed/employs a lot of people... and pays a lot of taxes to some local revenooer. All of that money goes back into the economy.
Is this a velocity of money argument? On one level that is true, but...
Any economic activity will employ people and result in taxes. That doesn't mean that all economic activity produces wealth for society. Think about it like this, if I pay someone to dig a hole and then fill it back up again over and over all day, every day, that would employ someone and result in taxes. However, it does not create any wealth. All it does is shuffle some wealth around, and waste a lot of human capital (some Keynesians believe this is necessary during periods of low monetary velocity, but I digress). On the other hand, if I employ someone to build a skyscraper or a bridge, those things have lasting value to society. Hiring a 40 person yacht crew is about as productive to society as paying 40 people to dig a hole, and then fill it back up again.
Warren buffet, on the other hand keeps his capital working in places that create the most wealth for society (as measured by his returns on capital). Warren Buffet's employees are more than just a velocity of money machine, and a tax revenue generator. His army of employees are improving society.
Quote from Scataphagos:
Besides, who is better qualified to spend the money he/she made?
Apparently my point went right over your head.
Noone is better qualified to invest or spend personal wealth than the owner of that wealth. That is kinda the point of capitalism. This is orthogonal to the discussion.
I was pointing out that a billionaire, like Gates, should keep his wealth invested in a wealth producing industry. Providing capital for productive industry to thrive is MUCH better for society than handing billions in capital to a supposed charity. Teach a man to fish vs give a man a fish type of thing.
Quote from NYDreamer:
They only seem to contradict from a short-sighted point of view. Most of it is 'invested' in improved health care and education, which, according to Gates, will pay of eventually. Sure, efficiency can always be improved, but I'm sure that's what he'll work on for many years to come.
This is the most accurate post on here. Maybe some who are quick to criticize should actually read something about what the Gates foundation does.
A few thoughts:
Severe debilitating or chronic infections that many in Africa and central America suffer from are a tremendous drain on human productivity. One cannot work, run a farm, or get an education in such a state. Without an educated populace, it is likely that these various megalomaniac dictators that tend to rule these places will continue in power.
FYI, improved health care and education, particularly for women, do in fact, lead to lower birth rates. There are many studies demonstrating this fact. I would venture to guess, though Iam not an economist, that these improvements probably also lead to less corrupt governments.
There is no poverty in the US that can begin to equal what is seen in the world's poorest countries in central Africa.
All you care about is money? Ok, then consider what great things will happen to your wallet if you invest in these countries as they emerge from poverty. Emerging or so-called frontier markets are often a terrific investment and Africa is the emerging-est emerging market there is.
I will confess that my company has been on the receiving end of a very tiny portion of Gates Foundation funds. Gates is not squandering money by any means--if anything, they are pretty tight-fisted. I won't go so far as to call them efficient. But by starting with the world's worst problems, they are focusing on the right things.
I agree 100%, it's what I'm saying.Quote from HotTip:
If I were Gates I'd do the same thing. Considering he owns 620MM shares of MSFT, if he was to leave it to his kids, they'd have to dump 100's of MM of shares to pay the estate tax, which would send the stock tanking. So half would go to the govt and the remainder would shrink in value.
He obviously would set up his kids as trustees of the foundation so they would have broad control over it, and that would be their careers. So, they're set up pretty nicely regardless.
Don't forget:
-If you control the foundation you can "borrow" from it from example a 100 million mansion and the IRS won't be able to touch you because a) it's not yours it's the foundation's b) the foundation is tax exempt. Same thing for art works, yachts etc etc
-If stock sales to meet inheritance and gift tax obligations are avoided, you not only save money, you also able to transmit to your heirs the same control on the company you already have.
- Talking about tens of millions donations from Gates' estate is like talking about $5 dollar tips from the rest of us.
I'm not criticizing the guy he's just doing what every rational person would do given the rules of the game in America.