3 ms·

There are two things people want money for: pleasure or power. In general, pleasure isn't that big of an issue. Go ahead buy all the nice cars, art, villas, et

There are two things people want money for: pleasure or power. In general, pleasure isn't that big of an issue. Go ahead buy all the nice cars, art, villas, etc. The big danger is when money is converted into power. I think one of the big issues with all these billionaire foundations is that they are are vehicle for converting money into power. Think of the early 90's when Gates was making all his money as Microsoft CEO. He had a lot of money, but (outside of computers) he had relatively little power (as the Justice Department demonstrated). Now, through his foundation, Gates was able to turn that money into power. He has tremendous influence over policies that govern people who may never have even used Windows or Office. I am sure, he can pick up his cell phone and get in touch with dozens of presidents/prime ministers/etc immediately. He can tell elected (or not elected) leaders of countries exactly how they should be able to run their countries. This is tremendous power, and I can see the danger of allowing a single person to amass so much power. And foundations make it easy to hide that power in a velvet glove. The headline is that Bill Gates is giving all his money away. However, because of his foundation, he still retains much of the power of that money.

froh 5y ago
... which presumes the dozens of world leaders are doing as told when Bill calls them up, as if they were puppets. this is not how that works.
- the_optimist 5y ago
  Can you please kindly tell us how it works? I’ve seen some pretty remarkable interactions between wealthy people and, say, for example, the US State Department.
  - froh 5y ago
    oh how I wish I could... I agree there is an asymetry in influence of "the wealthy" to "legislation", compared to the influence of "the many", especially in the US. yet it's not as simple as Bill calls Angie and then Angie makes a bill for bill. some things that help "the many" are proportional representation (in contrast to fptp based systems) and popular vote, see Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands... I wonder what it takes short of a war to get such dramatic improvements into an established democracy?
- jmiskovic 5y ago
  I did not arrive at same presumption after reading the parent comment. Just to be able to get in touch with world leaders is already too much power for a single man, even without the puppetry aspect.
  - froh 5y ago
    > He can tell elected (or not elected) leaders of countries exactly how they should be able to run their countries. how else would you read that?
    - jmiskovic 5y ago
      He can influence campaigns and election results. He can open channels to most powerful people and have his words heard. If no leader bends to their will, it is still far more influence than what you and I have. Politicians invest whole careers and lives to play the game of politics. They gain power but not much wiggle room, too much is at stake to keep them in positions. Rich people on the other hand can buy the ticket to sit at the table, and they can leave any time they get bored. Having that kind of power without inherent responsibility is dangerous.

froh 5y ago

... which presumes the dozens of world leaders are doing as told when Bill calls them up, as if they were puppets. this is not how that works.

the_optimist 5y ago
Can you please kindly tell us how it works? I’ve seen some pretty remarkable interactions between wealthy people and, say, for example, the US State Department.
- froh 5y ago
  oh how I wish I could... I agree there is an asymetry in influence of "the wealthy" to "legislation", compared to the influence of "the many", especially in the US. yet it's not as simple as Bill calls Angie and then Angie makes a bill for bill. some things that help "the many" are proportional representation (in contrast to fptp based systems) and popular vote, see Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands... I wonder what it takes short of a war to get such dramatic improvements into an established democracy?
jmiskovic 5y ago
I did not arrive at same presumption after reading the parent comment. Just to be able to get in touch with world leaders is already too much power for a single man, even without the puppetry aspect.
- froh 5y ago
  > He can tell elected (or not elected) leaders of countries exactly how they should be able to run their countries. how else would you read that?
  - jmiskovic 5y ago
    He can influence campaigns and election results. He can open channels to most powerful people and have his words heard. If no leader bends to their will, it is still far more influence than what you and I have. Politicians invest whole careers and lives to play the game of politics. They gain power but not much wiggle room, too much is at stake to keep them in positions. Rich people on the other hand can buy the ticket to sit at the table, and they can leave any time they get bored. Having that kind of power without inherent responsibility is dangerous.