40 billionaires pledge to give away half of wealth

[TwoSevensClash]

A little over a year after Bill Gates and Warren Buffett began hatching a plan over dinner to persuade America's wealthiest people to give most of their fortunes to charity, more than three-dozen individuals and families have agreed to take part, campaign organizers announced Wednesday.
In addition to Buffett and Gates — America's two wealthiest individuals, with a combined net worth of $90 billion, according to Forbes — 38 other billionaires have signed the giving pledge . They include New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, entertainment executive Barry Diller, Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison, energy tycoon T. Boone Pickens, media mogul Ted Turner, David Rockefeller, film director George Lucas and investor Ronald Perelman.


Thoughts?

[KurtFF8]

like I said over at PoFo, I think I like what Zizek (regardless of what you think about him, you may like this too) says about charity: it's like a chocolate laxative.

[jake williams]

A) I don't think it'll happen.

B) It doesn't really matter either way. They'll probably funnel a bunch of money that will get recycled back into the ruling class itself, who do you think staffs "foundations" set up by billionaires? (Never mind, what do you think they do). Even if it gets spent on ostensibly charitable projects, capitalism works quickly, and it'll be reaccumulated pretty quickly.

[Ele'ill]

This was already posted.

I think it's a joke. Having a 'group' support the treating of symptoms isn't sustainable. It's fucking absurd.

[empiredestoryer]

i think its a good thing if it HAPPENS

[Pretty Flaco]

Let's see a list of who they're donating to.
"And, I think I'll donate this billion to microsoft corporation..."

[Peace on Earth]

After gaining said wealth through less-than-loving means, they get to look like Santa Clause as they bestow upon the poor people of the world endless riches...or not. If they were going to build houses, provide food, education, and jobs for millions of Africans, I might say "good job." But instead it will go to faulty charities that look good on paper.

[FreeFocus]

Even if these pigs donated all of their wealth, they are still enemies for the untold horrors their activities have brought upon innocent people struggling to survive.

[Widerstand]

Fuck this bourgeois welfare.

[fa2991]

It might be impressive if they wouldn't be getting almost all that money back in tax breaks, thus further depriving working people of decent public education, housing, and health care.

[leftace53]

My mom told me about this a little while ago. Its frankly quite pathetic, they made their millions and billions on the back and sweat of exploited workers, and now they are deemed to be "generous" when they give away money (or resources if you will) that shouldn't even belong to them in the first place? Ridiculous.

[Jimmie Higgins]

i think its a good thing if it HAPPENSI guess it's better than nothing, but it isn't always good and can often be bad. Charity by philanthropists can come with strings attached or a political agenda. "Giving" to schools can mean giving on the condition that funds go to develop charter schools or whatnot.

Considering that in the US, the combined deficit of all the states is a a few billions, they could use that money to fix all state budgets, save education, services, pensions, and jobs for a huge number of people. Better yet, if they want to give all that money away, why not increase the tax rate for millionaires and billionaires instead? Eventhough taxes are used poorly and for the benefit of the capitalists at least there is the illusion of responsiveness to popular demands in government run services and relief. Private charity is like the dictatorship of the rich over social services and welfare.

Most importantly, as other people have said, charity does not address the root causes of poverty and other problems - in fact most of these problems come from the inequality and exploitation and alienation necessary for these few scores of people to have billions in private funds.

On a social level, these guys giving away some billions in a country with incredibly high inequality and who made their fortunes at at time when inequality was increasing dramatically, is a little like a slave master giving his slaves fancy ball gowns and tuxedos: thanks, but it doesn't do much to help, I'd rather decide what happens with the wealth I create than to get a fancy suit from it, and it definitely doesn't make me forget about the basic injustice of this system.

[thesadmafioso]

I found this article on the subject matter to be quite good.

http://socialistworker.org/2010/08/10/philanthrobbery

[RebelDog]

The 3 richest people on earth have more wealth than the 48 poorest countires. I doubt in history has there been such an appalling disparity in wealth distribution. Only global tyranny can lead to such outcomes. If some of these gangsters are going to give some of their ill-gotten gains away why don't they do it anonymously? I wouldn't trust any of them as far as I could throw them. Every last penny should be expropriated from every billionaire on the planet and given to the poorest people. Then the former billionaires should be sent to work in the sweatshops that produce their criminal wealth, and they can experience first hand the hell that others must endure to pay for the mansions, private jets and yachts.

[Adi Shankara]

Look at it this way. they're giving away Half. not all, not 95% (which would still leave them filthy rich), but only measly half.

that means Larry Ellison will still have 10 billion dollars after that. what does he need 10 billion dollars for? what need for 10 million dollars?

I wouldn't be surprised if this was a scheme to get a nice tax write-off. I mean, if they were to donate even 80% of their wealth...but only fucking half.

half.

[Volcanicity]

Egotistical fuckers!You want to giveaway money just do it you dont need to tell the whole world.How much have they already made just by the publicity of this.

[Hoggy_RS]

Maybe they should share the rest of their wealth with the workers who helped create their fortunes.

[Bright Banana Beard]

They already realize their wealth is fucking useless but could turn it useful to get even more wealth for themselves.

[durhamleft]

Those kind, generous, bourgeoisie wankers

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Heh... After years spent building a fortune on the backs (and blood and bones) of workers in Pittsburgh, the surrounding coal fields, and elsewhere, Andrew Carnegie sold his company to J.P. Morgan and spent the rest of his life as a "philanthropist." Pittsburgh's public library system was one of the results (for years steel workers and miners who worked for Carnegie refused to enter).

It was basically a bigger version of an earlier scam he and his cohorts carried out. After the poorly constructed expanded dam of the lake he and 50 others built (as their own private fishing resort) collapsed and destroyed the town of Johnstown--killing 2,209 people in the process--Carnegie and co. formed the "Pittsburgh Relief Committee" to rehabilitate his image and avoid real responsibility.

It's a lot like what BP is doing now.. promoting environmentalism after destroying the natural environment.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

The Andrew Carnegie Dictum:

- spend the first third of one's life getting all the education one can.
- spend the next third making all the money one can.
- spend the last third giving it all away.

:rolleyes:

[Nolan]

The Andrew Carnegie Dictum:

- spend the first third of one's life getting all the education one can.
- spend the next third making all the money one can.
- spend the last third giving it all away.

:rolleyes:

But wasn't he a railroad worker or something like that?

[DunyaGongrenKomRevolyutsi]

Don't fully understand American tax laws very well, but if they were to give away more than the amount they pay tax on (let's say 40%), would that not entitle them to a further discount on the 1/2 of the money they have left? 10% at least?


But wasn't he a railroad worker or something like that?

Margaret Thatcher came from a working-class background too, its ultimately irrelevant in every sense.

[ZeroNowhere]

1. Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.

2. Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

3. But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth:

4. That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.

Jesus may have had a point.

[Tatarin]

I'm interested... is there any declaration of exactly where all this money goes? I mean, can I read somewhere on paper how those billions were spliced up, and who gets what?

Anyway, even if we were living in "stupid capitalism", it would be like sawing together a half human. In fact, the latter would probably be easier. A simple look on decades of giving - are the world better off now? Are there fewer poor people now than, say, 20 years ago? If not, then why is charity upheld as something almost holy?

Hell, in less than 50 years Cuba managed to get it's people up and running, yet the countries "living on" charity seems to get worse. Shouldn't that be like a red light to givers?

What if Adolph Hitler had won the war, and 50 years later gave half of Germany to all "lesser races"?