4 ms·

Two conclusions that are leaking about the "rich", like pus from an abscess: * their abysmal greed and asocial psyche: When you already have billions, what doe

Two conclusions that are leaking about the "rich", like pus from an abscess: * their abysmal greed and asocial psyche: When you already have billions, what does it matter if you pay any percentage in taxes? How does it have any material or imaterial impact on your quality of life if you contribute back to society a fraction of what it gifted you with? * their deep fear of the societies they plunder: most people do accept some spread in wealth distribution if it is somehow "legitimate" and "kosher". Hidding their tracks and actions in complex constructions is how to engineer top-heavy, artificial, pyramids of wealth and power that exceed what would be acceptable under the cleansing light of transparency

heurisko 5y ago
> their abysmal greed and asocial psyche: When you already have billions, what does it matter if you pay any percentage in taxes? How does it have any material or imaterial impact on your quality of life if you contribute back to society a fraction of what it gifted you with? I don't think welfare should be based on philanthropy, but I do think some billionaires are still philanthropic, e.g. Bill Gates. I think there is also the situation where these tax arrangements arise out of a lack of thought, rather than conscious greed and asociality. If you pay a team of accountants and say "save me money", they're going to do everything possible to minimise your tax, some methods which should be classed as tax evasion, not avoidance. I don't expect billionaires to have a conscience. I vote for our system to stop damage from people acting without a conscience.
- null_object 5y ago
  > I don't think welfare should be based on philanthropy, but I do think some billionaires are still philanthropic, e.g. Bill Gates. Billionaires shouldn't get a pass because of 'philanthropy'. That is an extra contribution that any person can make if they choose and can afford it. Paying your taxes - that is, contributing back to society to keep it functioning in a healthy, balanced way, is not only a requirement of civilization (in my view) it's even in these ultra-rich peoples' self-interest: they help to maintain the stability that underpins their massive wealth.
  - streamofdigits 5y ago
    totally agree. philanthropy was once upon a time the only mechanism to align more primitive (red in tooth and claw) societies with evolving humanistic morality. we are now in 2021, or the "modern era" as we claim. we know for a fact that broad based welfare and individual economic freedoms can perfectly coexist in well regulated societies. philanthropy should become the exception, not the rule, practiced again by forward looking humanists that identify and remedy blind spots rather than being a crutch to a systemically broken system.
  - heurisko 5y ago
    > Billionaires shouldn't get a pass because of 'philanthropy'. You're responding to a comment I didn't make. Bill Gates is a philanthropic person. That's not to say I think he shouldn't pay tax, or Microsoft not be the target of antitrust regulation. I also said welfare shouldn't depend on philanthropy. > Paying your taxes Billionaires (and high net worth individuals) are paying their taxes, even though what they count as "paying their taxes", should really count as tax evasion. I don't think appealing to the conscience of billionaires and high net worth individuals is effective. The rules need to change, and be enforced. In the EU, such tax evasion is built into the system [1]. This should have been solved already. It's an open secret; I don't find these data dumps revelatory at all. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/nov/05/-sp-luxembourg-tax-files-tax-avoidance-industrial-scale https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/nov/05/-sp-luxembo...
- Gargyle 5y ago
  In the lower class "Philantropist" is a most sarcastic word. If you spend huge amounts into your de-facto own NGO's and use that to buy ridiculous amounts of land. This is not anything like contributing back. Its just charity-washed wielding of power. Because these "philantropists" still determine how their "donations" are actually used.
jeffe 5y ago
I think it's more simple human nature. When you have billions, it's so easy to delegate work that tax avoidance becomes as simple as flipping a switch that says 'pay less taxes'. And if your highly distanced from the effects of your actions, I doubt many people would not flip the switch.

heurisko 5y ago

> their abysmal greed and asocial psyche: When you already have billions, what does it matter if you pay any percentage in taxes? How does it have any material or imaterial impact on your quality of life if you contribute back to society a fraction of what it gifted you with? I don't think welfare should be based on philanthropy, but I do think some billionaires are still philanthropic, e.g. Bill Gates. I think there is also the situation where these tax arrangements arise out of a lack of thought, rather than conscious greed and asociality. If you pay a team of accountants and say "save me money", they're going to do everything possible to minimise your tax, some methods which should be classed as tax evasion, not avoidance. I don't expect billionaires to have a conscience. I vote for our system to stop damage from people acting without a conscience.

null_object 5y ago
> I don't think welfare should be based on philanthropy, but I do think some billionaires are still philanthropic, e.g. Bill Gates. Billionaires shouldn't get a pass because of 'philanthropy'. That is an extra contribution that any person can make if they choose and can afford it. Paying your taxes - that is, contributing back to society to keep it functioning in a healthy, balanced way, is not only a requirement of civilization (in my view) it's even in these ultra-rich peoples' self-interest: they help to maintain the stability that underpins their massive wealth.
- streamofdigits 5y ago
  totally agree. philanthropy was once upon a time the only mechanism to align more primitive (red in tooth and claw) societies with evolving humanistic morality. we are now in 2021, or the "modern era" as we claim. we know for a fact that broad based welfare and individual economic freedoms can perfectly coexist in well regulated societies. philanthropy should become the exception, not the rule, practiced again by forward looking humanists that identify and remedy blind spots rather than being a crutch to a systemically broken system.
- heurisko 5y ago
  > Billionaires shouldn't get a pass because of 'philanthropy'. You're responding to a comment I didn't make. Bill Gates is a philanthropic person. That's not to say I think he shouldn't pay tax, or Microsoft not be the target of antitrust regulation. I also said welfare shouldn't depend on philanthropy. > Paying your taxes Billionaires (and high net worth individuals) are paying their taxes, even though what they count as "paying their taxes", should really count as tax evasion. I don't think appealing to the conscience of billionaires and high net worth individuals is effective. The rules need to change, and be enforced. In the EU, such tax evasion is built into the system [1]. This should have been solved already. It's an open secret; I don't find these data dumps revelatory at all. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/nov/05/-sp-luxembourg-tax-files-tax-avoidance-industrial-scale https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/nov/05/-sp-luxembo...
Gargyle 5y ago
In the lower class "Philantropist" is a most sarcastic word. If you spend huge amounts into your de-facto own NGO's and use that to buy ridiculous amounts of land. This is not anything like contributing back. Its just charity-washed wielding of power. Because these "philantropists" still determine how their "donations" are actually used.

jeffe 5y ago

I think it's more simple human nature. When you have billions, it's so easy to delegate work that tax avoidance becomes as simple as flipping a switch that says 'pay less taxes'. And if your highly distanced from the effects of your actions, I doubt many people would not flip the switch.