Sometimes very active discussions about peripheral issues overwhelm a thread, so this is a permanent home for those conversations.
I’ve opened a new “Sandbox” thread as a post as the new “ignore commenter” plug-in only works on threads started as posts.
You’re not a Communist, are you, phoodoo? 😨
Alan Fox,
American capitalist wealth only makes sense if we ignore the rest of the entire history of humans on the planet.
Unfortunately, that is what we now call people who believe that 5 people shouldn’t own everything on the planet.
I remember when I was a kid asking my father what communism was (I think we may have been listening to the wireless and it came up on the news). I was puzzled to learn it was a bad thing because everyone shared resources.
Bad? Devil worshiping is bad. Its much worse than that. Just ask any republican.
Alan Fox,
One thing you learn traveling around the world is, in some of the poorest places in the world, the people smile and will almost always offer to share food with you.
I am willing to bet drumpf has never offered an orange to anyone in his life. And I know he has never smiled.
Roughly speaking, he’s worth about $100 billion. It’s been as high as $107, but dropped lately to a mere $91 and change.
He put $5 billion into the Foundation in 2000, and by 2010 he and the wife had made charitable donations totaling $17 billion (per the BBC), and by 2012 (per businessweek) the total was up to $28 billion.
So you are off by an order of magnitude, and we can add one more item to the extremely long list of things that phoodoo is certain of, or pretty sure of, but are in fact WRONG.
As for the rest of your diatribe, you don’t like rich people. Okay, I guess.
DNA_Jock,
Let me see if I can work the math. Is 28 billion dollars 28% of 100 billion? Or is there another answer?
The number of confirmed cases in my county is about 1000 with 15 deaths attributed out of a population of about half a million. But if the number of actual cases is 10 times the confirmed cases, that’s about 10,000 people.
So about 1 out of 50 in my county have it or had it. If I go to big store then, a rough guestimate is that at any given time, there is probably someone in that store that has it. So they go through the check out line. I’m guessing there is a good chance they put some of their germs on the same conveyor belt where I put my groceries.
That’s not reassuring. I hope it’s not quite that bad…
stcordova,
Wash your hands thoroughly, should be fine. It’s relatively difficult to transfer an infective dose by casual surface contact (though this goes up with each additional touch). More likely is transfer by respiratory droplet and aerosol from someone nearby – which is no particular comfort, of course.
The gentleman over the road from me uses his leaf-blower every morning, sweeping his yards front and back towards the road. I can only assume he thinks he’s blowing the virus away. Does no particular harm, but I feel he’s overestimating the risk. I think he subscribes to the myth that cyclists (of whom we get a lot) are spreading it by ‘panting’, which seems absurd – someone passing at 20mph is more likely to pass it on than someone stationary? If it really was on the ground, I’m not sure I’d want to be whipping it up – I wouldn’t be squirting a leaf blower at anthrax, put it that way.
Thanks. I heard about that sort of transfer too.
I was glad to see people wearing masks in the store, but I saw this little girl about 12 feet away from me sneezing into here arm several times.
Even though in my county and nearby localities indicate a relatively low death rate relative to the population size (in my county 15 deaths attributed out of 500,000 individuals), the hospital beds are filling up in some counties.
In Virginia about 20,000 beds serving a population of 8 million, 324 deaths, 9,630 confirmed cases, so maybe…hmm 100,000 cases??? So maybe 1 out of 80 people? The fill up, not surprisingly, is in hospitals in densely populated counties.
https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/04/23/842818125/coronavirus-has-infected-a-fifth-of-new-york-city-testing-suggests
The study was quoted by NY Governor Cuomo.
DNA_Jock,
You are a mathematician? Holy shit. If you are going to add up all his money in a charitable pledge (which is dubious to begin with) , you don’t then subtract that from what money he has right now to get his total percent of contributions. You are a mathematician again, right? Please do tell, what percent of his wealth did Gates give to charity in say 2018? How about 2019?
Lets take a look shall we?
So in 2018 he gave 138 million to charity. What percent of his wealth at that time was that, math genius?
Now I am pretty sure he didn’t give 1 billion to charity in 2019, but let’s make is easier for you, so you don’t have to do higher math. Let’s call it 1 billion in 2019 even though it wasn’t. If he was worth 100 billion in 2019, what percent did he give that year? You could probably work out what percent 1 billion is of 100 billion, right? I can lend you a calculator if you like?
The largest donation he has given since 2000 was 4.6 billion in 2017, which was roughly 5 % at the time. That was the HIGHEST year. Are you starting to understand the percent game yet? You do understand that he keeps earning money right? Is that what is throwing you off?
Fucking math genius.
After you get the math worked out (try to remember that math isn’t just numbers, it is supposed to represent real things, that always seems to trip you up in the past) , then we can talk about how the money has actually been spent.
I think that is what Jock thinks. The math wizard. Add up everything for 30 years and subtract that from one year-brilliant.
When you think numbers aren’t supposed to be real things, I guess it is easy to make that mistake.
The Billionaire Class Created Their Own Wealth Tax. It Failed
https://prospect.org/power/billionaire-class-created-failed-wealth-tax-giving-pledge/
Well, I can manage division. I am sorry that you find arithmetic so difficult.
When I did my calculation, I took Bill’s highest reported net worth, $107 billion, and I added to that the $28 billion that he has given to charity for the denominator. I was being as charitable as I could to your claim that “he has only given 2% to charity”, but 28 ÷ (28 + 107) is still over 20%. That’s why I noted that you were off by an order of magnitude.
You could consider how much he was worth in 2000, when he donated $5 billion. (Hint, it was less than $250 billion…) I really don’t care how much you want to rant pathetically about how stingy he is.
You.Were.Wrong.
Which surprises me not at all.
And yeah, you still don’t like rich people. Okay, I guess. Some rich people are assholes, some are not.
DNA_Jock,
I already said in 2017 he gave 4.6 billion, which was five percent for that year. That was his highest year in twenty years. So in the last 20 years the highest he has given per year is five percent. You think it’s more like 28 percent. Haha. Math genius.
You still don’t understand math do you. You think just write numbers down and they mean something. Maybe it’s the English part you don’t understand.
Right.
Because you are not smart, that is what you did.
oh phoodoo,
Now you are just indulging in numeroproctology.
I am curious as to where you came up with $4.6 billion in 2017 being the “highest ever” when your own (massively biased) American Prospect source says he gives away “about $5 billion a year”.
There’s little argument about the $5 billion in 2000 number, when he was worth a lot less. Your own source is saying that he gives away $5bn a year, and he’s never been worth more than $110bn. I’m only claiming that it’s $28bn total, yet you are trying to defend your claim that “Now in that time [so cumulatively], I am pretty sure he has not given over 2% of his wealth away.”
Splutter on your PC’s screen all you want, you are wrong.
Let me see if I can help you. It’s from a British paper, so its in English, but you can use Google translate to change it to whatever language you understand better if its a problem:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/aug/15/bill-gates-charity-donation-microsoft-shares-foundation
Its been widely reported, you don’t even have to trust the British.
Try to save yourself from looking dumb, somehow. I get that you can’t understand that he also earns and spends money each year, I know you want to just make that disappear, so it makes you look less uninformed, but try.
Math what a fun game when you can just write numbers without understanding their meaning. I see why you majored in it now.
DNA_Jock,
Now I see why you could never understand the M&M problem.
ROFLMAO
From your link
but phoodoo is still tyring to defend this claim
You appear innumerate.
Are those amounts in today’s value or at the time of the donation?
DNA_Jock,
Since 2000 (you know, during the 20 years he has been the richest man on the planet) ONE year he gave 5% of his net worth. That was the highest. Other years it has been much less. I already showed you 2018. It was 138 million. Let’s say in 2018 he was worth 90 billion, just to be fair to you and take 10 billion of the top for partying expenses. What percent did he give that year, numbers genius?
Numeroproctology seems to be your specialty.
In a 20 year span he averages less than 2% per year. But hey, you can call it 3% if you like. Now when you want to call it 28% and make Alan Fox all confused, don’t worry, I get the math game you play.
Read more: https://www.inquisitr.com/4393714/laurene-powell-jobs-steve-jobs-widow-in-flirty-dress-with-bf-aboard-100m-yacht-husband-built-never-used/#ixzz6KVGVkgax
Lauren Powell Jobs explaining that at least she was a prostitute. It’s not fair to have millions you didn’t earn.
This is what the American capitalist model has done to people’s brains.
You are confusing without any help from anyone. Tax on income and on wealth are two different things.
Glad you see your error now.
Alan Fox,
Apparently Gates was just as confused as you when Warren proposed her wealth tax.
Alan Fox,
If Gates loses everything he owns except for ten dollars tomorrow, betting on horses, tomorrow what percent are you going to claim he gave to charity? Does that help you to see your problem?
Which problem? Wealth?I don’t have that problem. How percentages work? Nope.
Do I think tax on income is reasonable, yes. Do I think wealth tax on capital is reasonable, no.
Just been hearing from our two cantonniers* (collecting our rubbish as the transfer station is closed for Covid). Both have had the disease – and both spouses – and are now back at work but the older one, Michel, tells me he still needs to take a day’s rest after two or three days feeling OK. Tht’s almost two months after the initial infection.
*Employed by the village to do anything that needs doing.
Alan Fox,
Alan Fox,
No Alan, I am talking about your 28 percent answer. So if you think that answer is reasonable, I asked you what happens to that figure if tomorrow he loses all his money gambling. Do you still compare the 28 billion to what he happens to have on another day? So he then gave 28 million percent or 28 billion percent of his money to charity then? Or do you want to stay with the same nonsense figure?
Alan Fox,
Or maybe then you would just like to say he has given 100 percent of his wealth to charity, it would make just as much nonsense.
Wait let me guess, you prefer to obfuscate your way out?
28 billion? Is that 28% of 100 billion? I was hoping non-lin might answer as he seems to operate on a different percentage basis. If you want an answer from me on some other question, you need to indicate what the question is.
As I asked is there another answer to the question, is 28 billion 28% of a 100 billion? I am asking about the general case. It was an attempt at humour bearing in mind the discussion in another thread.
Regarding Gates, net worth and income: if Bill Gates wants to give a large chunk, say 28%, of his capital away, that’s fine. I don’t know what return he gets on his capital, globally, but maybe he would be better setting up a trust and using the income generated to pay out to “good causes” indefinitely. His choice, I guess.
Alan Fox,
Well, I am not actually saying what he should do, I am saying he gets more media for being generous than he deserves. Giving away 2 percent of your fortune per year, when you have been the richest man in the world for a long time shouldn’t be looked at as super generous. If he lived in any other reasonable country he would be expected to give a lot more than that. When the maximum tax rate in the US was 90 percent, rich people still did surprisingly well. Likewise a mid level employee could afford a house, a new car now and again, he could send his kids to college and his wife could stay at home and take care of the kids, and when he retired he could be comfortable.
That American dream has long since passed.
Fair to whom? She and Steve voluntarily entered into a legal partnership that the proceeds of marriage would be equally shared. Sex was not legally required.
Those who benefit from charitable donations also did not earn that money, is that unfair as well?
Bill and Melinda have said they are leaving 10 million to each of their three children ,the rest goes to the trust which will spend all the resources within 20 years after their deaths . So anything over 30 million goes to charity . Right now that 30 million is 3% of total worth. 97% seems fairly generous .And as you point out, billionaires keep making money, which is more for charity
Then it not charity , it is required.
Not much of a dream for the original inhabitants or a captive population or women who did not care for being second class citizens
I think not. You appear to be intentionally confusing a tax on wealth with a tax on income. Safe to say that neither Warren nor Gates are confused about the distinction; remember, they are smarter than you. However, neither is particularly motivated to explain the distinction to the electorate. Had Warren stayed in the race, either Biden or (wtf?) Trump would have done the honors there.
newton,
You don’t seem to understand, SHE has said it is unfair to have money you didn’t earn, that is why she won’t give it to her kids. She has said those exact words, I quoted her elsewhere saying that.
Its not me saying it is unfair, it was her. It left quite a few journalists scratching their heads.
Billionaires make money?
LMAO!!!
Yea, that is what he has said. And I am let’s says, a little skeptical. The real kind, not the skeptics kind.
First off, he already has used some of his “charity” money to donate to his children’s private school. Ok Bill, now there is compassion! Lord knows they must need it. How do they eat?
Secondly, other things that he says about money make me skeptical of him. he has often said he doesn’t spend much money on luxuries. That is demonstrably false. Unless you don’t count 30 million dollar paintings, original Davinci manuscripts, luxury yachts, dozens of sports cars, 100 million dollar homes, private jets, and Thoroughbred horses as luxuries. if those don’t count, well then yea, ok, he doesn’t spend much on luxuries, other than importing sand from St.Lucia (they do have great sand, true) for his house in Washington, besides, he really has no taste for luxury. Except maybe the Island. Some might call a private island a luxury, I could see how he might not. And the ranches. Horses have to live somewhere. But really, he hates luxury.
But then there is this, What sane person would ever allow this?:
The dumbest child who ever lived:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/lysol-manufacturer-warns-against-internal-105047346.html
“often”, you say. You surprise me — I haven’t seen him make that broad claim.
What I have seen is the following exchange on a reddit AMA in 2016:
Q:
A:
which strikes me as pretty honest. He is only citing clothes-for-himself as an area where he is frugal. Well, that and the famous wristwatch…
You seem a mite jealous.
The more I read of and about Karl Marx, the more I think he was right about capitalism. But I don’t think Marx had any idea what should replace it, and I’m not sure anyone else has a good solution to that problem, either.
In the meantime, you have left quite a few TSZ readers scratching their heads. It is far from clear what point (if any) you are trying to make.
How about Steiner’s threefolding?
From here
This takes the good points of both communism and capitalism but confines them to the appropriate spheres. Equality doesn’t work in the economic sphere because everyone has their own individual needs, but we should all be equal under the law. And freedom doesn’t work in the judicial sphere because we cannot have different laws for different groups of people, but we should be allowed the freedom to believe as we wish.
Kantian Naturalist,
Karl Marx really was a brilliant economist, as much as the “Marxism bad” crowd wants to act like he was just a loon. And much of what Marx said has been misunderstood due to the fact that few people have actually read what he wrote and instead prefer to read what others write about his ideas. Marx didn’t so much advocate for the collapse of capitalism as just assert that it would happen on its own. As for what comes after, as far as I can tell he thought the void would be filled with a utopian society where no-one would ever be poor again. Clearly, he underestimated two fundamental points: the greed of humanity, and the ability of capitalism to disburse misinformation and distractions to convince the populace that capitalism is widely beneficial.