10 ms·

I'm on board if charities* could somehow get in on the action and convince the bored rich to part with their money. * Real charities, not those billionaire tax

by oefrha 5y ago

I'm on board if charities* could somehow get in on the action and convince the bored rich to part with their money. * Real charities, not those billionaire tax avoidance schemes.

Tenoke 5y ago
I'd wager billionaires donate a lot more to charities than they spend on nfts. Look at the Gates Foundation.
- oefrha 5y ago
  You don't need to be a billionaire to count as "bored rich", which I take to mean anyone who has too much money lying around and can't find better uses than shitty computer-generated "art" (note that this doesn't include people who buy these with the sole purpose of flipping them to a greater fool). There are a surprising number of bored rich people, especially when you consider all the new-found crypto wealth. Most of them probably haven't contributed any of their excess wealth to help the hundreds of millions of people who are still starving, so if NFT is one way to extract some of that, so be it.
  - zrobotics 5y ago
    >> (note that this doesn't include people who buy these with the sole purpose of flipping them to a greater fool). Hate to burst your bubble, but that is 99.99% of the NFT market. There is maybe 5 people total who bought a NFT for art appreciation reasons, but aside from that rounding error the only reason anyone owns one is as a speculative investment.
    - oefrha 5y ago
      Sure, even in that scenario, if a slice of the MLM money can be used for societal good, it’s still something.
whywhywhywhy 5y ago
> Real charities, not those billionaire tax avoidance schemes. No such thing.
- javert 5y ago
  Do you even know what you're talking about? In the US, a billionaire has more money at the end of the day if they just pay taxes on it than if they give it to charity and take the deduction. The only other way a charity helps a billionaire save on taxes is if they use the charity's assets (e.g. boats, helicopers, real estate) as personal assets. But that's felony tax fraud. A billionaire wouldn't be likely to risk prison for that kind of chump change. The crooked thing about charities is the people who run them, focus on fundraising, and pay themselves a huge salary. But those people aren't billionaires. Now, you could rent your real estate to a charity you control at an inflated price, or sell them other services, but I think that's probably an edge case.
  - d0gsg0w00f 5y ago
    Yeah, charities aren't full tax avoidance for the rich. It's more of a dick swinging contest amongst the wealthy with some tax breaks to take some of the sting away. At least some good may come from these contests though. Even if 90% of the funds go to pay charity management salaries it's better than nothing.
    - javert 5y ago
      That's way too cynical. That's out of touch with reality. Lots of really rich people give to charity and don't talk about it.
  - azundo 5y ago
    It isn't about having money, it's about control of that money. Zuckerberg doesn't "have" the money he gives to his foundation, but he still controls it, vs taxes which he wouldn't.
    - 5y ago
pamplemoose 5y ago
I liked the idea of the moonshot bots https://decrypt.co/79606/moonshot-bots-nfts-gitcoin-ethereum-grants-1-8-million https://decrypt.co/79606/moonshot-bots-nfts-gitcoin-ethereum... where the funds raised are used for public goods.

by oefrha 5y ago

I'm on board if charities* could somehow get in on the action and convince the bored rich to part with their money. * Real charities, not those billionaire tax avoidance schemes.

Tenoke 5y ago

I'd wager billionaires donate a lot more to charities than they spend on nfts. Look at the Gates Foundation.

oefrha 5y ago
You don't need to be a billionaire to count as "bored rich", which I take to mean anyone who has too much money lying around and can't find better uses than shitty computer-generated "art" (note that this doesn't include people who buy these with the sole purpose of flipping them to a greater fool). There are a surprising number of bored rich people, especially when you consider all the new-found crypto wealth. Most of them probably haven't contributed any of their excess wealth to help the hundreds of millions of people who are still starving, so if NFT is one way to extract some of that, so be it.
- zrobotics 5y ago
  >> (note that this doesn't include people who buy these with the sole purpose of flipping them to a greater fool). Hate to burst your bubble, but that is 99.99% of the NFT market. There is maybe 5 people total who bought a NFT for art appreciation reasons, but aside from that rounding error the only reason anyone owns one is as a speculative investment.
  - oefrha 5y ago
    Sure, even in that scenario, if a slice of the MLM money can be used for societal good, it’s still something.

whywhywhywhy 5y ago

> Real charities, not those billionaire tax avoidance schemes. No such thing.

javert 5y ago
Do you even know what you're talking about? In the US, a billionaire has more money at the end of the day if they just pay taxes on it than if they give it to charity and take the deduction. The only other way a charity helps a billionaire save on taxes is if they use the charity's assets (e.g. boats, helicopers, real estate) as personal assets. But that's felony tax fraud. A billionaire wouldn't be likely to risk prison for that kind of chump change. The crooked thing about charities is the people who run them, focus on fundraising, and pay themselves a huge salary. But those people aren't billionaires. Now, you could rent your real estate to a charity you control at an inflated price, or sell them other services, but I think that's probably an edge case.
- d0gsg0w00f 5y ago
  Yeah, charities aren't full tax avoidance for the rich. It's more of a dick swinging contest amongst the wealthy with some tax breaks to take some of the sting away. At least some good may come from these contests though. Even if 90% of the funds go to pay charity management salaries it's better than nothing.
  - javert 5y ago
    That's way too cynical. That's out of touch with reality. Lots of really rich people give to charity and don't talk about it.
- azundo 5y ago
  It isn't about having money, it's about control of that money. Zuckerberg doesn't "have" the money he gives to his foundation, but he still controls it, vs taxes which he wouldn't.
  - 5y ago

pamplemoose 5y ago

I liked the idea of the moonshot bots https://decrypt.co/79606/moonshot-bots-nfts-gitcoin-ethereum-grants-1-8-million https://decrypt.co/79606/moonshot-bots-nfts-gitcoin-ethereum... where the funds raised are used for public goods.