3 ms·

You haven't been paying attention to Mark Zuckerberg's past philanthropic initiatives if you think that this is just a tax scheme. He wants to have an impact on

You haven't been paying attention to Mark Zuckerberg's past philanthropic initiatives if you think that this is just a tax scheme. He wants to have an impact on the world.

celticninja 10y ago
I'm sure he does but that doesn't mean he is not setting up a tax shelter for his children and himself. If you think otherwise then you may have sipped a little too much kool aid.
- onewaystreet 10y ago
  > If you think otherwise then you may have sipped a little too much kool aid. I know a few critics of Mark Zuckerberg who would be very happy if all he did was sit on his money. They fear what he will do, not if.
  - celticninja 10y ago
    Fear what? I would see him as more Bill Gates than Ernst Stavro Blofeld.
    - onewaystreet 10y ago
      The second half of this piece states the fear pretty well: https://medium.com/@anildash/how-to-look-at-the-chan-zuckerberg-initiative-f357e5dd8c63 https://medium.com/@anildash/how-to-look-at-the-chan-zuckerb...
    - duaneb 10y ago
      I fear that he will waste his money e.g. providing facebook to the world out of "charity". Gee thanks!
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
chimeracoder 10y ago
> He wants to have an impact on the world. Every founder of a billion-dollar company wants to have an impact on the world. The question is whether the impact he wants to have is something that needs (or deserves) preferential tax treatment, as well as the massive public praise he received for this act of 'philanthropy'. It is true that the wealthy commonly use foundations that they control in order to advance initiatives that also financially benefit themselves or for-profit companies they own. In itself, this isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it's almost definitionally true that Zuckerberg is using the foundation structure for the tax benefits.
- 794CD01 10y ago
  >The question is whether the impact he wants to have is something that needs (or deserves) preferential tax treatment. Which is itself really a question about whether the government should be able to spend that money how it likes, or whether the zuckster should be able to spend it how he likes. Has the American government really earned your trust in its competence in managing money?
  - ryandrake 10y ago
    Is "managed to amass a fortune" adequate qualification for ANYONE to decide which social good gets funded and which one does not?
    - davidivadavid 10y ago
      But Zuckerberg doesn't decide "which social good gets funded and which one does not." Things will or will not get funded independently of Zuckerberg's decision to fund or not fund additional things. He decides where to spend his own money. Does he need a qualification for that?
    - 794CD01 10y ago
      Perhaps not adequate, but a hell of a lot less inadequate than "got a job in the government bureaucracy" or even worse, "got elected by the voting public".
duaneb 10y ago
I mean, so did Ghengis. He didn't call his rape + pillage a charity, though. It just so happens Mark is conquering by forcing the world to depend on him by rewriting "the internet" to mean "facebook".
- estel 10y ago
  > I mean, so did Ghengis. He didn't call his rape + pillage a charity, though. It just so happens Mark is conquering by forcing the world to depend on him by rewriting "the internet" to mean "facebook". Are you seriously comparing MZ pledging to spend millions on fighting disease and poverty around the world to the (actual) rape, murder and conquest of thousands of people?
  - duaneb 10y ago
    > Are you seriously comparing MZ pledging to spend millions on fighting disease and poverty around the world to the (actual) rape, murder and conquest of thousands of people? I'm seriously suggesting that wanting to have an impact on the world doesn't imply anything positive.
- r3bl 10y ago
  So sorry for the downvote. Shitty mobile experience.
- zrail 10y ago
  Could you please post a link to where either Chan or Zuckerberg have described CZI as a charity? Because as far as I can tell they never have. Because it's very intentionally not a charity.

You haven't been paying attention to Mark Zuckerberg's past philanthropic initiatives if you think that this is just a tax scheme. He wants to have an impact on the world.

celticninja 10y ago

I'm sure he does but that doesn't mean he is not setting up a tax shelter for his children and himself. If you think otherwise then you may have sipped a little too much kool aid.

onewaystreet 10y ago
> If you think otherwise then you may have sipped a little too much kool aid. I know a few critics of Mark Zuckerberg who would be very happy if all he did was sit on his money. They fear what he will do, not if.
- celticninja 10y ago
  Fear what? I would see him as more Bill Gates than Ernst Stavro Blofeld.
  - onewaystreet 10y ago
    The second half of this piece states the fear pretty well: https://medium.com/@anildash/how-to-look-at-the-chan-zuckerberg-initiative-f357e5dd8c63 https://medium.com/@anildash/how-to-look-at-the-chan-zuckerb...
  - duaneb 10y ago
    I fear that he will waste his money e.g. providing facebook to the world out of "charity". Gee thanks!

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

chimeracoder 10y ago

> He wants to have an impact on the world. Every founder of a billion-dollar company wants to have an impact on the world. The question is whether the impact he wants to have is something that needs (or deserves) preferential tax treatment, as well as the massive public praise he received for this act of 'philanthropy'. It is true that the wealthy commonly use foundations that they control in order to advance initiatives that also financially benefit themselves or for-profit companies they own. In itself, this isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it's almost definitionally true that Zuckerberg is using the foundation structure for the tax benefits.

794CD01 10y ago
>The question is whether the impact he wants to have is something that needs (or deserves) preferential tax treatment. Which is itself really a question about whether the government should be able to spend that money how it likes, or whether the zuckster should be able to spend it how he likes. Has the American government really earned your trust in its competence in managing money?
- ryandrake 10y ago
  Is "managed to amass a fortune" adequate qualification for ANYONE to decide which social good gets funded and which one does not?
  - davidivadavid 10y ago
    But Zuckerberg doesn't decide "which social good gets funded and which one does not." Things will or will not get funded independently of Zuckerberg's decision to fund or not fund additional things. He decides where to spend his own money. Does he need a qualification for that?
  - 794CD01 10y ago
    Perhaps not adequate, but a hell of a lot less inadequate than "got a job in the government bureaucracy" or even worse, "got elected by the voting public".

duaneb 10y ago

I mean, so did Ghengis. He didn't call his rape + pillage a charity, though. It just so happens Mark is conquering by forcing the world to depend on him by rewriting "the internet" to mean "facebook".

estel 10y ago
> I mean, so did Ghengis. He didn't call his rape + pillage a charity, though. It just so happens Mark is conquering by forcing the world to depend on him by rewriting "the internet" to mean "facebook". Are you seriously comparing MZ pledging to spend millions on fighting disease and poverty around the world to the (actual) rape, murder and conquest of thousands of people?
- duaneb 10y ago
  > Are you seriously comparing MZ pledging to spend millions on fighting disease and poverty around the world to the (actual) rape, murder and conquest of thousands of people? I'm seriously suggesting that wanting to have an impact on the world doesn't imply anything positive.
r3bl 10y ago
So sorry for the downvote. Shitty mobile experience.
zrail 10y ago
Could you please post a link to where either Chan or Zuckerberg have described CZI as a charity? Because as far as I can tell they never have. Because it's very intentionally not a charity.