40 Billionaires Pledge Away Half Their Wealth

[NoShot]

They should all fund the creation of true artificial intelligence combined with revolutionary computational technology. Assuming the resulting tech didnt kill us all (or is even possible), this would likely lead to the greatest advances (and thereby benefits) mankind has ever known. I'm not a singularity freak awaiting the nerd rapture, I just think that vastly superior AI (if such a thing is possible) would be the single most important creation man would ever make.

 

[pale paladin]

Good for these people of wealth. I am consistently amazed and impressed with Mr. Gates. I hope all of that money could lead to cures and better lives for people in need.

 

[JamesSneed]

Forbes says in their 2010 worlds billionaires report that there are 1,011 billionairs. So 4% of the worlds billionairs are giving away wealth at death. I guess you have to start somewhere.

 

[Guest]

Hey Steve Jobs, you should join this list. Or at least donate to the family of the guy who you got your liver from.

 

[ta152h]

[citation][nom]acadia11[/nom]"You read, but you apparently didn't understand.Motivation is the key. There are exceptions, but when you start getting into huge sample sets, as in millions, the exceptions become unimportant.Capitalism works because it understands the nature of man, and motivates him. Communism has failed. Even China has moved away from it.Having a greater population than the United States, and greater resources, yet having half the GNP, is hardly an example of success. In fact, the system collapsed.Do you think it's coincidence that all Communist countries have been poor? Just look at Germany after WW II. West Germany was very wealthy, East Germany was miserable.It's not all coincidence.Reading books is great. But, living life is what matters. In books, even Communism can look OK. In life, it can't. "I think you are the one that don't understand, China does not have more resources than the US, by far one of the main reasons for the US success is it's access and influence over resource, one the largest being Oil. You don't know your world economics, this is the #1 defining factor for the success of any nation, not it's economic system.Also, you are putting the horse before the cart, all communist nations with the exception of Russia at it's height were poor, therefore they turned to Communism, there is no nation that has turned to either economic system and then became rich. Furthermore, China is turning away from Communism, they are a hybrid-system which has government owned and operated entities, planned economics, as well privatization, for example, where private investors and invest firms own vast quantities of foreign currency in the US, the Chinese government itself owns vast quantities of US notes. Either, case, the argument is not whether communism or capitalism is good or bad, the argument, is that it's really naive to think that capitalism is the end all be all, it's an economic system, that will eventually pass like others like feudalism, mercantilism, communism, etc ... because well that's what happens, P.S. China is still a communist nation, and it's getting richer, why because, although they have adopted free markets (actually always had free markets just not much privitization), the government still plays an essential role in promoting growth and directing growth in the economy, as opposed to letting markets dictate the growth. Seems to be a winning combination at the moment. Anyway, this is a vary vast subject and your comment that "reading" or understanding "the actual mechanisms" of an idea as stupid, shows, that it's simply not a conversation worth having with you (I would classify you as well another fellow ignorant American) who simply thinks he knows it all and has never been or even cared to look outside of his little sphere of knowledge. *End Generalization*On another note, back to the point, success is not defined by moitivation, it's simply a factor, of many that will aid in being successful, being motivated is simply not the defining answer, it's why the idea of "pull yourself up by your britches" simply is a delusion, the vast majority will work very hard, and not attain those levels of success, because, circumstance, opportunity, chance, accumalated advantage, or disadvantage, simply are in the way, it's jsut nature. It's like all the lions don't get to mate, no matter how motivated they are to do so.[/citation]

I couldn't read all of it, I guess you struggle with brevity.

It sounds like I've hit a personal note with you, and you consider yourself a failure, and don't want to consider being lazy your problem.

You could be right, but, you keep missing the point entirely. When you do it over millions of people, the exceptions don't matter.

Look at countries like Germany. One side was capitalist, one was communist. Look at which one came out better.

The Soviet Union had far more resources than the United States, but had HALF the GNP. You can come up with your BS, but that's it. Why is China moving to capitalism if communism works so well?

Maybe you're rationalizing your own life, and I'm not meaning to insult it, but, when you take a higher view, communism is a failed economic system, and it's been demonstrated very amply.

There are hardworking people that never make a lot of money, either by lack of talent, or bad decisions, or fate. But, in almost all cases, if they were lazy, they'd be even worse off, everything else being the same. If they were unmotivated, and got the same things regardless of the work output, they would be less productive. Multiply this by 100,000,000, or whatever, and you see why capitalistic countries have been wealthier.

When you get older, you'll understand, I'm guessing you're idealistic and young, and think you can change human nature. You can't, you just have to develop a system that works with it, instead of against it. It's not perfect, but it's less imperfect than one that completely misses what human nature is, and tries to say it's something it is not.

 

[Guest]

Money is no use to you when you're dead, and their families would live very comfortably on even a small fraction of what they have. Nice to see some common sense at play here.

 

[68vistacruiser]

[citation][nom]Stryter[/nom]Yea and how often do you see that happen? I'm still waiting for the bum that comes up and asks for a sandwich instead of asking for a few bucks to buy one (which really means buying booze). These billionaires are wealthy for a reason, not chance. They worked their asses off, were creative and competitive. They have absolutely no obligation to share their wealth with anyone else because it is their money and no one elses. Yea they would look like douches for hoarding it all and just sitting on it but they can if they want.I think it speaks well to their character when they give back, no matter how big or small the amount.[/citation]
You forgot to include that some of them got rich by abusing the free-market system by price fixing and other unfair competitive practices. Perhaps guilt is getting to them?

 

[killerclick]

[citation][nom]ta152h[/nom]Are you a Commie?[/citation]

Is the fact that your username TA-152H is the designation of a Nazi fighter plane in any way connected to the rabid right wing political and militant views you express on this site?

 

[eyemaster]

[citation][nom]eklipz330[/nom]yeah, im sure its really hard living off of $500 million dollars -_-[/citation]

It's hard when your expenses for the year are in the millions, yes. Over the years, I've noticed that it doesn't matter how much I make in a year, I spend most of it anyway. Salary increase = living cost increase.

 

[xythrax4420]

steve jobs needs all the money he can get to cure his retardation that isn't cheap to cure

 

[quicksilver98]

[citation][nom]matt314[/nom]Not Steve Jobs?[/citation]

He doesn't know how. They haven't written an app for it yet.

 

[husker]

[citation][nom]Clintonio[/nom]You're forgetting that a lot of them inherited companies, or took them over by manipulation, or they grew by luck. Look at Microsoft, prior to Win7 absolutely everyone hated them, and yet, we all have to buy their products, making them a mint.I'd say the people who worked under them deserved most of their fortune.[/citation]
Really? We had to buy their products? Are you one of those people want things because of self-serving and materialistic reasons and then they whine about how you were "forced" to buy them? Also, which of the billionaires in this list inherited their fortunes or "manipulated" their way into them, as you suggested? Or did you just make up that information to support an anti-capitalist viewpoint?

 

[kartu]

I rather wonder what which organizations will actually receive that money and how it would be spent.

Donating stuff AFTER you die sounds like a silly idea. Spend it on the RIGHT things (alternative energy sources RD, hydrogen highways, WHATEVER) YOURSELF, don't just give it to some mofo "charity fonds" who spend money on God knows what.

In Tbilisi (Republic of Georgia) I've witnessed UN funded organization that spent millions to produce a couple of thousand magazines that nobody read. Charity, my a**...

 

[kartu]

[citation][nom]ta152h[/nom]...communism is a failed economic system, and it's been demonstrated very amply...[/citation]
Get your facts straight please:

1) There wasn't A SINGLE COMMUNIST (in economic sense) state on this planet. Ok? Understand it? NOT A SINGLE ONE. You were probably talking about capitalism vs planned economics. Well, I assume you were.
2) There are gazillion of poor countries that had never ever had anything to do with anything but capitalism. There was only a bunch of countries that have tried to do it USSR way. USSR itself was on the one hand under pressure from USA (which was a much better developed country at the beginning of the race) and had to spend gazillions on military crap. On the other hand, soviet economists very very constrained because morons like Brezhnev were afraid of changing anything. But anyway, 1920-1940 and even into 50th USSR was rapidly developing, in times of Khruschev actually twice as fast as USA.
3) Capitalism has its flaws and there is little doubt it would evolve into something different. EU is already heading this way, regulating (and successfully, I have to say) a lot of stuff, including, for instance, mobile tarifs.

 

[nuvon]

You think Capitalism is a success? Look at the US economic right now? Quite a few of major corporations require government subsidies or help in one way. Is this capitalism?
Neither capitalism and communism is perfect alone; you need both, depending on circumstancs.
Capitalism promotes GREED!
Communism promotes LAZYNESS!

 

[gm0n3y]

[citation][nom]shin0bi272[/nom]This is why capitalism works people... humans with excess money give it away out of the goodness of their hearts. sort of defeats the whole premise of tax the rich now doesnt it?[/citation]
I'm going to take this as a joke.

 

[DejaVuBoy]

Great, we have to wait 20-40 years for these guys to die. Fat lot of good it will do with the wreck we're in now.

 

[JonnyDough]

[citation][nom]bunz_of_steel[/nom]Really really really like to see these guys give away some of their monies to charities that are desperate situations. Research and medical, education is noble causes and I respect their donations. Why are they not giving to organizations like the open door mission, World vision,Pilgramafrica, voice of the martyrs, AFA, inner city programs. These charities could definitely use some help. We live so fat and healthy and ignore or turn a blind eye to poor situations. We walk by them everyday and say it's pathetic or it's their fault maybe. Justifying our distance. Do they want to give to feel better about themselves or do they really want to help? Just my thots imho, I'm just as guilty as they are The silent Majority[/citation]

To answer your question: If you save millions of dying people by feeding/clothing/sheltering them, they will make millions of more people who need the same kind of help. Education, birth control. These are future societies two best friends. Sustainable living is key to long-term human survival and quality of life. Education helps to reduce reproduction, which in turn lowers our destruction of earth and depletion of resources. I hope this answers your question.

 

[JonnyDough]

[citation][nom]kartu[/nom]Get your facts straight please:1) There wasn't A SINGLE COMMUNIST (in economic sense) state on this planet. Ok? Understand it? NOT A SINGLE ONE. You were probably talking about capitalism vs planned economics. Well, I assume you were.2) There are gazillion of poor countries that had never ever had anything to do with anything but capitalism. There was only a bunch of countries that have tried to do it USSR way. USSR itself was on the one hand under pressure from USA (which was a much better developed country at the beginning of the race) and had to spend gazillions on military crap. On the other hand, soviet economists very very constrained because morons like Brezhnev were afraid of changing anything. But anyway, 1920-1940 and even into 50th USSR was rapidly developing, in times of Khruschev actually twice as fast as USA.3) Capitalism has its flaws and there is little doubt it would evolve into something different. EU is already heading this way, regulating (and successfully, I have to say) a lot of stuff, including, for instance, mobile tarifs.[/citation]

You contradict yourself in what you're saying...I think you had some valid points but seem confused. You say that the U.S.S.R. was behind us in development, but then say they were ahead of us. The fact is that in technological developments they were quite a bit ahead of us. However, they could not sustain it not only because of the war, but because of the iron curtain, lack of support from within, and they way the government ruled their country. The fall of the U.S.S.R. had little to do with war, we were at war as well and did not fall. We have been at war for a large majority of our young history. In actuality, war has brought us wealth...probably why we do so much of it. Many credit WWII with bringing us out of the great depression. Although I believe there were other factors as well that stretched well beyond the "spirit of America".

 

[xerroz]

I'm glad these people are doing this. especially since they're doing it for mostly education and medical which are the most important things.


Im surprised steve jobs isnt in this list