4 ms·
I feel like Bill Gates's idea of giving away all your money so children won't die is the only rational and sane thing to do. I cannot imagine having billions o
by asdfman123 7y ago
I feel like Bill Gates's idea of giving away all your money so children won't die is the only rational and sane thing to do.
I cannot imagine having billions of dollars and being like, "Nah, forget the children. I need three more yachts." I genuinely don't get it.
- ptah 7y agoBill Gates come from multi-generational wealth and his kids are not any different. They will inherit $10 million each as well as expensive education etc etc.
- asdfman123 7y agoYeah. I'm not asking rich people to go into poverty to save the world, just to share some of the excess.
- paulpauper 7y agogoing from billions to 10 million is a big downgrade though
- ptah 7y agonot so much in terms of lifestyle, would be my guess
- whamlastxmas 7y agoInheriting the Gates name is probably worth a lot more than $10mm.
- jdironman 7y agoAnd if they're smart, they can make that 10m make them even more money. I just cant imagine ever needing that much money unless I did my dream of travelling and staying somewhere new all the time.
- afiori 7y agoI feel like a better suggestion is to put your money to good use, you can be the one to invest/donate/spend that money where it can do good. Something funny but working could be picking random small towns with debts and loan problems and just zero out all of the debt.
- asdfman123 7y agoI feel like billionaires and private capital in general should not have that much power over the world because it's undemocratic. Bill Gates is going the right thing and I would hopefully do the same thing as him in his shoes, but do we need more Koch brothers spending money where they think it will do good?
- ernst_klim 7y ago> but do we need more Koch brothers spending money where they think it will do good? Would you rather prefer a Stalin guy in charge of funds and money? You are talking about extremes here, as if private money are inherently bad, while governments are inherently good and democratic. Even in our "liberal democracies" governments spend on bailouts, subsidies for big biz, countless wars, foreign bloody dictatorships. This is better than Koch brothers? Democratic, hah? The good thing about private money is the diversity, there are different rich people, on the scale from Hitler to Jesus, with different ideals and views, spending on different things. With governments it's way more centralized, and if your government is fucked, it's abysmally fucked due to the concentration of power.
- asdfman123 7y agoThe argument that any kind of wealth distribution is akin to Soviet-style communism is the extreme idea. It's been practiced peacefully throughout Europe. Authoritarianism is a different political dimension.
- afiori 7y agoThat is not wealth distribution, that is a social state that prioritize the minimal needs of its people. Rich people poses no problems with that. (many people who do are rich and they use their money as a tool to get more money, but being rich itself is not a problem)
- hycaria 7y agoDo you really genuinely care about the children ? I don't.
- asdfman123 7y agoThanks, Melania.
- hycaria 7y agoI genuinely don't get how one would blame others for something they don't even do themselves.
- cpursley 7y agoMeh, we already have a lot of people. Making more people is a solved problem; feeding, clothing, and educating them is not. I'll start paying attention when wealthy people start preserving entire ecosystems (like Ted Turner, Doug Tompkins, etc). * https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/south-america/chile/articles/kristine-tompkins-donates-land-in-patagonia-to-chile-government/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/south-americ... * https://www.tedturner.com/turner-ranches/turner-ranches-faq/ https://www.tedturner.com/turner-ranches/turner-ranches-faq/
- AnimalMuppet 7y agoMaking people not die early is a bit less of a solved problem, though...