4 ms·

Not trolling, but how much money is too much? Most everyone on this site is the top 1% of global households. Where is our morality then? Rhetorical question: do

Not trolling, but how much money is too much? Most everyone on this site is the top 1% of global households. Where is our morality then? Rhetorical question: do you give away a substantial portion of your largesse? But let's say he gave away all his wealth, which would be about $60 to every household in the world. Is that more helpful? I think sometimes big problems take resources. My biggest complaint is that he has shown the ability to execute at scale and most of the companies they invest in don't. Spending even three months operationalizing one of these companies could be like a 100x on the money in.

justicezyx 6y ago
> he gave away all his wealth, which would be about $60 to every household in the world. No one is asking for such naive approach to redistribute wealth. It's to find better ways to utilize the wealth, which Bill himself would also agree in principle. What exactly the format requires discussion. But the first step is to allow such discussion to happen. And we are sure that a lot of the world people are not believing the meaningfulness of such discussion... And that's a big problem.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- snarf21 6y ago
  I guess I'm missing something. Isn't that the whole point of the foundation? To give away its money in ways they find most impactful? They don't tells us how to distribute our charity dollars. It seems silly for us to tell them how to distribute theirs.
hoka-one-one 6y ago
It's always been interesting to me that the people most opposed to wealth gaps live in SF and LA. I'm sure they love the weather but I don't think that's all they're after. A counterargument is that "nothing happens in a vacuum" and their lack of economic fulfillment is due to this wealth gap. But I think we owe billionaires this same level of uncertainty. They only exist because society doesn't want to know what would happen if they were forced to give their wealth away. Side note, in my experience living in California many of my "broke" friends are actually terrible with money. I was talking to a guy the other day who spends $800/month on rent and $1500 on food. I'm sure it doesn't represent the whole, but in general I look at California liberals with a critical eye when talking about the wealth gap.

justicezyx 6y ago

> he gave away all his wealth, which would be about $60 to every household in the world. No one is asking for such naive approach to redistribute wealth. It's to find better ways to utilize the wealth, which Bill himself would also agree in principle. What exactly the format requires discussion. But the first step is to allow such discussion to happen. And we are sure that a lot of the world people are not believing the meaningfulness of such discussion... And that's a big problem.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
snarf21 6y ago
I guess I'm missing something. Isn't that the whole point of the foundation? To give away its money in ways they find most impactful? They don't tells us how to distribute our charity dollars. It seems silly for us to tell them how to distribute theirs.

hoka-one-one 6y ago

It's always been interesting to me that the people most opposed to wealth gaps live in SF and LA. I'm sure they love the weather but I don't think that's all they're after. A counterargument is that "nothing happens in a vacuum" and their lack of economic fulfillment is due to this wealth gap. But I think we owe billionaires this same level of uncertainty. They only exist because society doesn't want to know what would happen if they were forced to give their wealth away. Side note, in my experience living in California many of my "broke" friends are actually terrible with money. I was talking to a guy the other day who spends $800/month on rent and $1500 on food. I'm sure it doesn't represent the whole, but in general I look at California liberals with a critical eye when talking about the wealth gap.