Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan pledged to give away 99 percent of their Facebook shares

Tsing Tao said:
It's a foregone conclusion because, as I said earlier, if someone wanted to give to charity, they'd just give. None of this foundation crap that is driven by ego and tax avoidance, etc.

I quoted "aisle" because you believe there's actually an "aisle" that I am a part of, panty "waste".
More...
Foundations are established to endure over time. What is wrong with leaving a legacy? There are tax advantages to both forms of giving. And I did acknowledge that it's win-win. It works for both the Zuckerbergs and the beneficiaries of their foundation.

As for the rest of it, you're just embarrassing yourself, so please don't let me stop you.
 
Frederick Foresight said:
Foundations are established to endure over time. What is wrong with leaving a legacy? There are tax advantages to both forms of giving. And I did acknowledge that it's win-win. It works for both the Zuckerbergs and the beneficiaries of their foundation.

As for the rest of it, you're just embarrassing yourself, so please don't let me stop you.
More...

Embarrassing myself in front of...you? Yeah, I'm concerned with what one of the most universally loathed members of the site - one who had to come back four times - thinks of me. That's the ticket!
 
Frederick Foresight said:
By you and the rest of the Duck Dynasty contingent on this site? You might want to step outside of that teacup from time to time.
More...

Never watched an episode of Duck Dynasty in my life. Nah, I meant the site as a whole. Of course, I'm including your previous 3 or 4 personas as well.
 
Last edited:
Frederick Foresight said:
Foundations are established to endure over time. What is wrong with leaving a legacy? There are tax advantages to both forms of giving. And I did acknowledge that it's win-win. It works for both the Zuckerbergs and the beneficiaries of their foundation.

As for the rest of it, you're just embarrassing yourself, so please don't let me stop you.
More...

Some of the posters on this site have lost all sense of reality when they complain about how an accomplished rich man wants to help good causes with his money. It's really none of their business, he's not funding the KKK or ISIS ( although ironically, the former might be acceptable to some on this site ).

The US truly is a mess today socially. I think some short term pain will occur and some of the more ridiculous and antisocial measures will be tapered back when the negative outcomes become more obvious. I'm thinking the movements to arm the people, ban Muslims, and prevent proper medical care to the populace will all go that route. And some of the more intense xenophobia and racism will reduce when the current older mostly white generation from the US south starts to die out. All these situations will have unintended consequences that the rank and file US citizens haven't understood or been too busy to notice what's coming. Those of us who occasionally read this forum can see the dangers by the words of some of the nastier posters on this site.
 
When our leaders can eliminate the risk and follow the rule of law ... then you can argue for legal immigration and the rule of law. Til then you don't even have an argument.

Its just an unnecessary risk of a very large magnitude... death vs no immigration or no muslim immigration. Why would anyone argue for a greater risk of death by terrorist attack when there is no need to increase that risk. If this were a humanitarian concern our govt would have been taking in the Christains being slaughtered by Isis... or protecting these people in syria.

Until our leaders can show they can micro manage the situation the only rational choice is the big macro policy. Its logical...its smart its real.

When you examine it everything you said is a leftist pre fascist control argumentation. Words used to make people avoid thinking about the risk reward analysis.

You want everyone to be like the neighbor who was afraid to report suspicious activity for fear of being called a racist.





Nine_Ender said:
Some of the posters on this site have lost all sense of reality when they complain about how an accomplished rich man wants to help good causes with his money. It's really none of their business, he's not funding the KKK or ISIS ( although ironically, the former might be acceptable to some on this site ).

The US truly is a mess today socially. I think some short term pain will occur and some of the more ridiculous and antisocial measures will be tapered back when the negative outcomes become more obvious. I'm thinking the movements to arm the people, ban Muslims, and prevent proper medical care to the populace will all go that route. And some of the more intense xenophobia and racism will reduce when the current older mostly white generation from the US south starts to die out. All these situations will have unintended consequences that the rank and file US citizens haven't understood or been too busy to notice what's coming. Those of us who occasionally read this forum can see the dangers by the words of some of the nastier posters on this site.
More...
 
Last edited:
Tsing Tao said:
Zuckerberg gets a lot of benefit in doing this. He escapes any capital gains taxes, he still maintains control of Facebook (through the LLC), and - since it is unlikely he will spend anywhere close to the amount in his shares during his life time - will escape the death tax and leave the foundation to his heirs who can use the money as they please.

We'll see how much of the money is actually used for charity. My guess is this is more of a dodge - you know, the ones we hear about from folks telling us that higher taxes should be implemented, but then turn around and avoid those higher taxes.
More...

The heirs can't spend the money as the see fit, the spending must be charitable in nature.

This guy is so rich by the time he dies he will probably be worth 100 - 200 billion if he doesn't give away anything. Even at an estate tax rate at 50% his heirs would be incredibly rich. So, I see little incentive for a tax dodge.

He should have pledged a lower amount than 99%. He could always up the amount.

Some foundations do important and valuable work. Such as the Foundation for the life enhancement of Globuli. A truly noble endeavor.
 
Don't underestimate the ability to use "charitable" money in ways that advance political motives, tax free.

I need to vet the Foundation of Globuli, but it sounds like it's probably a worthy cause.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jem
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top