4 ms·
This is how you transfer intergenerational wealth.
by ipnon 6y ago
This is how you transfer intergenerational wealth.
- closeparen 6y agoGates is famous for rejecting intergenerational wealth transfer. Well, $10m is definitely wealth to you or me, but not to Bill Gates. https://www.bankrate.com/financing/wealth/what-will-gates-children-inherit/ https://www.bankrate.com/financing/wealth/what-will-gates-ch...
- cool_dude85 6y agoHe's been giving his money away for many years now and strangely is still one of the richest men in the world. I suspect that his desire to not give his kids money will work out much the same way - he gives them "only" $10m (of course, enough to live comfortably on for their entire lives) - but also, control of some billion dollar philanthropic fund.
- Permit 6y ago> He's been giving his money away for many years now and strangely is still one of the richest men in the world. My understanding is that most of his wealth is held in MSFT stock which has increased in value by over 4x since 2016. So if he had given away 75% of his wealth in 2016, he'd still have the same net worth today.
- mywittyname 6y agoNot to mention that he probably owns a lot of stakes in tech startups, which have, on paper at least, appreciated quite dramatically in recent years. I think Gates is probably to the point where it's functionally impossible for him to give away all of his money. The value of his personal brand and network is such that startups will probably give away decent chunks of their business just to be a part of that network.
- ceilingcorner 6y agoFunctionally impossible? He could vacate all his positions and donate it in a month. The billionaire apologia is really getting out of hand.
- mywittyname 6y agoHe's still worth a shitload of money just by being him. His name, brand, network, intelligence, and the cache of knowing him are worth a lot of money. That's wealth that is inherent to him, thus can't really be given away, and could be tapped at anytime. He could walk away from everything tomorrow, and be a millionaire the next day by just asking for money. He could probably be a billionaire again in a decade if he tried.
- ceilingcorner 6y agoImagine if he did that and put his new millions toward the growing income inequality and other problems in this country, instead of buying more farmland.
- minhazm 6y agoBill Gates holdings are actually pretty diversified. Most of his wealth is not in microsoft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascade_Investment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascade_Investment
- Permit 6y agoThanks for the correction, I didn't know this!
- ceilingcorner 6y agoReframe “donations” as “PR expenses” and his continual wealth increase will make sense.
- motoboi 6y agoYeah, but no. The problem is that the man invested in Microsoft, which has been proving itself to be a hell of an investment.
- ceilingcorner 6y agoSorry but spending / donating money is not a difficult thing to do. If you have billions of dollars, claim to be donating much of it, but somehow your wealth continues to increase, perhaps you’re not trying hard enough?
- Karunamon 6y agoThere's no "claim" - those donations and the records of the foundations are a matter of public record. Also, completely liquidating and giving away his assets would result in a large payout once.. and then nothing ever again. You need money to make money, so holding onto some to appreciate in value (investments, interest, etc) results in more money being donated over a longer amount of time.
- ceilingcorner 6y agoYet somehow he has X houses, X private jets, X acres of farmland, etc. etc. It’s completely absurd that we should think he’s an ethical hero. A pauper that donates $5 has made more sacrifices.
- closeparen 6y agoImpact on others isn't a function of how painful the sacrifice is to you, it's a function of how much value you provide to them.
- kevmo 6y agoThat's just a PR job.
- corpMaverick 6y agoCan you elaborate a little bit ?
- xxpor 6y agoA lot of "family farms" in the US these days are essentially a tax dodge. https://twitter.com/SarahTaber_bww/status/1128445471658319872 https://twitter.com/SarahTaber_bww/status/112844547165831987... Basically, there's a lot of tax breaks available if you designate your land a "farm", even if you don't grow anything. About 22% of farms in the US produce 0 output.
- mmmBacon 6y agoThis is true and visible in the Bay Area. There are a number of large properties where the owners have a vineyard. The vineyard is really so some of their land can qualify for agricultural proprietary tax rate.
- Reedx 6y agoHow do you know that's the reason and not that they legitimately wanted to have a vineyard? They don't tend to it and harvest from it? All the ones I've seen looked to be in use, but don't know for sure.
- TuringNYC 6y agoMany are in use, often with operations leased out. This produces some modicum of revenue to cover the farm designation. The real upside is the ownership and associated capital appreciation w/o as large an annual carry given reduced property taxes. On the east coast you often see alpacas; their fur get harvested periodically. Unfortunately these tricks are common in many states, especially in high tax states with wealthy residents trying to dodge taxes.
- kickout 6y agoHmm...I have this data, I'm going to double check. Need to ensure the linked twitter thread is referring to sales, and not profit. Easy to hid profits in farming (nothing dodgy about it either). No better, no worse than every other industry in America. They take advantage of the laws as they are written.