27 ms·

This is a great idea, but Eli doesn't need to wait for the law to be changed. He can donate as much as he wants directly to the US government right now. https:/

This is a great idea, but Eli doesn't need to wait for the law to be changed. He can donate as much as he wants directly to the US government right now. https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html

tylerhou 7y ago
Except raising tax rates on everyone above a certain income is much more effective than one person voluntarily donating.
- slang800 7y ago
  Sure, but why does he need to wait for everyone else to support it? He should set a positive example by dumping his own money into the treasury first. After all, he really does believe in this and it's not just virtue-signaling.
  - komali2 7y ago
    What is your take on the reasoning he put in the article on why he doesn't "just" do that? > Two decades ago I turned full-time to philanthropy and threw myself into supporting public education, scientific and medical research, and visual and performing arts, believing it was my responsibility to give back some of what had so generously been given to me. But I’ve come to realize that no amount of philanthropic commitment will compensate for the deep inequities preventing most Americans — the factory workers and farmers, entrepreneurs and electricians, teachers, nurses and small-business owners — from the basic prosperity we call the American dream.
    - slang800 7y ago
      That's not a reason why he can't do it, he's just saying that other people will need to do it too. I completely agree with him on that, he certainly can't do it alone. However, I think that he should set an example without waiting for others to join him.
      - komali2 7y ago
        What more can he do that would be considered "setting an example?" He devotes himself full-time to philanthropy.
        slang800 7y ago
        > What more can he do that would be considered "setting an example?" Eli can take his money and send it as a gift directly to the US government. > He devotes himself full-time to philanthropy. Giving money to private charity is very different from giving money to the government.
        komali2 7y ago
        Ok, fine, so how much money does Eli have to give to the US government for his opinion to count, by your measure? Because I give literally no money to the US government voluntarily, and I think the hyper-rich should be taxed more. Why are we attacking the individual with ad hominem? His argument is sound. Philanthropy alone is not enough. This whole time I've basically been arguing around the fact that lots of people are participating in the rhetorical fallacy known as Ad Hominem.
  - enraged_camel 7y ago
    This is a dumb argument because it assumes that others would follow his example.
  - atonse 7y ago
    Errr you can’t just hand the government money randomly. You have to owe it to them. It all has to add up in some way and be accounted for.
    - slang800 7y ago
      That's not true. There's a system for sending gifts to the treasury right here: https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html
      - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
        It's a funny and forgotten relic. Many countries had similar schemes from around the same era. There was a fashion to bequeath part of your estate to the government "to pay down the national debt". It was thought the patriotic thing to do. Obviously little impact was made on national debts. :)
      - atonse 7y ago
        Wow I truly learned something new, thanks :-)
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - docdeek 7y ago
      You can make a gift to the government to pay down the debt - they even take PayPal. https://www.pay.gov/public/form/start/23779454 https://www.pay.gov/public/form/start/23779454
  - tylerhou 7y ago
    I don't understand why you assume that he isn't doing both. Pushing for higher tax rates, and donating money to the treasury.
- JackFr 7y ago
  Similarly spending other people's money is more effective than spending ones own.
Kye 7y ago
Money at that level is power, and giving it up means letting people with similar wealth have more power over you. People don't generally unilaterally disarm.
mfoy_ 7y ago
I've thought a lot about that option, but the problem is that wealth provides a disproportionate amount of influence in politics. If all the people who didn't want to give any of it up hoarded it and spent it lobbying to keep inequality at a maximum and the people who wanted equality gave the majority of their wealth away then we would very quickly find ourselves in a dystopian nightmare. It has to be everyone, equally. It has to by a systemic change.

tylerhou 7y ago

Except raising tax rates on everyone above a certain income is much more effective than one person voluntarily donating.

slang800 7y ago
Sure, but why does he need to wait for everyone else to support it? He should set a positive example by dumping his own money into the treasury first. After all, he really does believe in this and it's not just virtue-signaling.
- komali2 7y ago
  What is your take on the reasoning he put in the article on why he doesn't "just" do that? > Two decades ago I turned full-time to philanthropy and threw myself into supporting public education, scientific and medical research, and visual and performing arts, believing it was my responsibility to give back some of what had so generously been given to me. But I’ve come to realize that no amount of philanthropic commitment will compensate for the deep inequities preventing most Americans — the factory workers and farmers, entrepreneurs and electricians, teachers, nurses and small-business owners — from the basic prosperity we call the American dream.
  - slang800 7y ago
    That's not a reason why he can't do it, he's just saying that other people will need to do it too. I completely agree with him on that, he certainly can't do it alone. However, I think that he should set an example without waiting for others to join him.
    - komali2 7y ago
      What more can he do that would be considered "setting an example?" He devotes himself full-time to philanthropy.
      - slang800 7y ago
        > What more can he do that would be considered "setting an example?" Eli can take his money and send it as a gift directly to the US government. > He devotes himself full-time to philanthropy. Giving money to private charity is very different from giving money to the government.
        komali2 7y ago
        Ok, fine, so how much money does Eli have to give to the US government for his opinion to count, by your measure? Because I give literally no money to the US government voluntarily, and I think the hyper-rich should be taxed more. Why are we attacking the individual with ad hominem? His argument is sound. Philanthropy alone is not enough. This whole time I've basically been arguing around the fact that lots of people are participating in the rhetorical fallacy known as Ad Hominem.
- enraged_camel 7y ago
  This is a dumb argument because it assumes that others would follow his example.
- atonse 7y ago
  Errr you can’t just hand the government money randomly. You have to owe it to them. It all has to add up in some way and be accounted for.
  - slang800 7y ago
    That's not true. There's a system for sending gifts to the treasury right here: https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html
    - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
      It's a funny and forgotten relic. Many countries had similar schemes from around the same era. There was a fashion to bequeath part of your estate to the government "to pay down the national debt". It was thought the patriotic thing to do. Obviously little impact was made on national debts. :)
    - atonse 7y ago
      Wow I truly learned something new, thanks :-)
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - docdeek 7y ago
    You can make a gift to the government to pay down the debt - they even take PayPal. https://www.pay.gov/public/form/start/23779454 https://www.pay.gov/public/form/start/23779454
- tylerhou 7y ago
  I don't understand why you assume that he isn't doing both. Pushing for higher tax rates, and donating money to the treasury.
JackFr 7y ago
Similarly spending other people's money is more effective than spending ones own.

Kye 7y ago

Money at that level is power, and giving it up means letting people with similar wealth have more power over you. People don't generally unilaterally disarm.

mfoy_ 7y ago

I've thought a lot about that option, but the problem is that wealth provides a disproportionate amount of influence in politics. If all the people who didn't want to give any of it up hoarded it and spent it lobbying to keep inequality at a maximum and the people who wanted equality gave the majority of their wealth away then we would very quickly find ourselves in a dystopian nightmare. It has to be everyone, equally. It has to by a systemic change.