Bill Gates Plans To Give Away His Wealth, Shutter Foundation Over Next 20 Years (axios.com) 88
joshuark shares a report from Axios: Bill Gates, once the richest man in the world, vowed to give away "virtually all" of his wealth through the Gates Foundation over the next two decades. Then, the foundation will close its doors on Dec. 31, 2045. [...] Gates wrote in a Thursday Gates Notes essay that the original plan was to sunset the foundation several decades after he and his then-wife died. Now, Gates believes that a "shorter timeline" is feasible.
Gates pledged three "key aspirations" to guide the foundation's funding over the next two decades, which center on promoting child and maternal health and fighting infectious diseases and poverty. He emphasized that progress is not possible without government cooperation, as the U.S. and other nations slash their foreign aid budgets. "The reality is, we will not eradicate polio without funding from the United States," Gates wrote. It's unclear whether the world's richest countries will continue to stand up for its poorest people," Gates wrote. He added, "But the one thing we can guarantee is that, in all of our work, the Gates Foundation will support efforts to help people and countries pull themselves out of poverty."
Gates pledged three "key aspirations" to guide the foundation's funding over the next two decades, which center on promoting child and maternal health and fighting infectious diseases and poverty. He emphasized that progress is not possible without government cooperation, as the U.S. and other nations slash their foreign aid budgets. "The reality is, we will not eradicate polio without funding from the United States," Gates wrote. It's unclear whether the world's richest countries will continue to stand up for its poorest people," Gates wrote. He added, "But the one thing we can guarantee is that, in all of our work, the Gates Foundation will support efforts to help people and countries pull themselves out of poverty."
Dilemma (Score:1)
Spend it all now on speculative ventures, most of which won't come to fruition.
Or invest for 50 years when more advanced technologies have a greater impact in the 22nd century.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes you make a point. The point you make is that using farmland for farming is killing children. It's a stupid point, but a point none the less.
Bill Gates Evil. He should just be building rockets shaped like penises like every normal rich person.
Re: (Score:2)
"Yes you make a point. The point you make is that using farmland for farming"
He purchased tons of farmland, that part is not disputed. Who said anything about using it to feed people?
Re:Dilemma (Score:5, Insightful)
Hi, Pakistan? Bill Gates here. I wish to eliminate polio in your country.
Pakistan: Why thank you. We'll escort you to our Islamic nutjob friends on the border with Afghanistan. They like people like you.
Hi, Pakistan? U.S. here. I wish to eliminate polio in your country.
Pakistan: Why thank you. We'll escort you to our Islamic nutjob friends on the border with Afghanistan. They like people like you.
U.S.: No, you'll do what we say or we'll cut off your military aid and side with India.
Pakistan: Oh? Uh, okay.
The rest of what you wrote may well be true, but I don't know and you haven't supplied links and I cannot be arsed to fact check you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Dilemma (Score:4, Insightful)
What makes you think we'll have advanced technologies in the 22nd century, over say a Mad Max style scramble for oil, water and ammo? I mean the world's biggest military is cosying up to a bloodthirsty invader and Germany is rearming. The 22nd century is looking more and more in doubt for many.
He should do it now (Score:1)
Re:He should do it now (Score:4, Insightful)
Nobody elected him
Democracy is not the form of government where collective people decide how other people spend their money. For that you're looking to communism.
Re: He should do it now (Score:3)
Exactly. He didn't pay taxes because there were no taxes for him to pay. How foolish would it be for him to pay more than what the government says he owes. when people have access they donate to, wait for it, charities. he just happens to be rich enough to have his own charity and dictate how every dollar will be spent.
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly. He didn't pay taxes because there were no taxes for him to pay. How foolish would it be for him to pay more than what the government says he owes. when people have access they donate to, wait for it, charities. he just happens to be rich enough to have his own charity and dictate how every dollar will be spent.
This is laughable. Trump made several million in "charitable" contributions to his own foundation and then used the money for personal uses. He lost a New York court case regarding this.
Furthermore, the key reason Trump has paid virtually no taxes is his use of business expenses to claim business losses. No, Trump is not a philanthropist.
Charity versus human rights (Score:2)
Seems to be the comment that comes closest to my thinking on the topic... In the form of a bad joke:
Charity? Bah. Who needs it?
The problem (as I see it) is that either you think people deserve help or you think people don't deserve help. If you think human beings have some kind of intrinsic value, then you may conclude that they deserve help when they have problems. Now if you expect charities to provide that help, you are basically saying "Good luck getting the help you need because you're going to need it
Re: (Score:1)
The problem (as I see it) is that either you think people deserve help or you think people don't deserve help. If you think human beings have some kind of intrinsic value, then you may conclude that they deserve help when they have problems. Now if you expect charities to provide that help, you are basically saying "Good luck getting the help you need because you're going to need it." You basically have to hope that some charity exists with the resources to help you, that the charity is interested in your specific problem, and that you are lucky enough to get the help before other people who need the same help exhaust the resources of the charity. In theory there could be weird cases where charities are so "blessed" that they can help everyone, but in practice I've never heard of such a case.
Me? I think people do have intrinsic value and that there are lots of things that shouldn't happen to them. Easy example: Children shouldn't starve to death. But I think it should be the job of the government to address such problems for EVERYONE. Okay, it's nice if a charity can help prevent a few deaths from starvation, but it's really the job of the government to prevent all deaths from starvation. (And of course the details get messy, whereas a charity can just ignore the details 'out of its scope'.)
The only problem with all that is for it to work we would need to get rid of all our tribal tendencies and have a single government for the whole world. But then the rich that got rich by taking advantage of our tribal natures wouldn't like that and would do everything in their power to stop it. Leading to the shithole that is the world as we know it.
Re: (Score:2)
Eh? Care to clarify?
My tentative assessment of your misformatted response is that you don't care. Perhaps about anything. Self-justifying or even projecting your personal bleakness?
Re: He should do it now (Score:1)
Increasingly, it seems to be just that.
Re: (Score:2)
Democracy is not the form of government where collective people decide how other people spend their money. For that you're looking to communism.
No, a pure democracy is explicitly where the people make all the decisions. Pure communism is where the people in the form of the state own everything but decisions are made by a small group of individuals. Of course, pure communism has never existed on a national scale. We've seen many totalitarian regimes that happen to pick superficial communist ideologies as a marketing scheme but don't follow communist ideas, don't know what those ideas are, and don't care.
Re: (Score:2)
Pure communism at the state level always degenerates into a totalitarian regime. It's a function of how actual humans behave when attempting to implement such a system.
The old saw that "communism has never been tried" is as false as ever.
Re: (Score:2)
Because you think the government is so good at deciding how to invest large sums of money?
Everybody has a right to do with their money, what they want to do with their money. I believe he's genuinely trying to put it to the best possible use. I wish more people had the same attitude.
As little as I trust Bill Gates, I trust the government even less.
Re: (Score:2)
Bill Gates has consistently advocated for closing tax loopholes in the US, with specific recommendations. He also pays about 18% income tax.
Re: (Score:2)
If he sold all his stock today, it'd tank the value. Supply and demand. Selling it gradually is sensible, although I don't know if 20 years is needed. No doubt the reason he picked 20 years is because that's as long as he's likely to live and he wants it to be a project for the rest of his life.
The real question is, why didn't he do it 40 years ago? And why do we give billionaires the power to decide where all the money they passively earn faster than they can ever possibly spend gets donated instead of usi
Re: (Score:1)
why do we give billionaires the power to decide where all the money they passively earn faster than they can ever possibly spend gets donated instead of using it for priorities decided by democracy?
Because we may have learned something from the mistakes of the 20th century.
Re: (Score:2)
I heard a recent interview. He claimed it was because la Presidenta had cut U.S. foreign aid as to why he's doing it all now. He may as well been lying, it isn't as though he hasn't done that before, but that was he stated reason.
Re: He should do it now (Score:2)
20 million people will die of AIDS worldwide if US foreign aid funding is not restored and nobody else steps in.
Bll Gates is doing the right thing here.
Re: (Score:3)
If he sold all his stock today, it'd tank the value. Supply and demand.
Correction; that would tank the blatant bullshit value given to stocks in a company that can’t justify that price outside of a self-serving “market” that gets turned into a house of cards every other decade because of valuations like this.
Re: (Score:3)
If he sold all his stock today, it'd tank the value. Supply and demand.
Correction; that would tank the blatant bullshit value given to stocks in a company that can’t justify that price outside of a self-serving “market” that gets turned into a house of cards every other decade because of valuations like this.
What should the valuation of these mega-corporations be? The PE ratio of Microsoft is around 34. The equal-weighted PE ratio for the 500 S&P 500 companies is around 20. So, Microsoft's valuation isn't that far off from most companies, and considering its future prospects, 34 sounds about right. As for being a house of cards, Microsoft has generated huge profits over many decades. All companies should aspire to be this type of a "house of cards."
Why now (Score:3, Insightful)
The real question is, why didn't he do it 40 years ago?
From the summary:
Subtitles: he has finished stashing away mountains of money and making sure that his kids will remain in the billionaire class.
He can let a few peanuts trickle down to the masses, under the guise of helping the world, to buy himself a nice public image.
Re: (Score:1)
Yup, just like the rest of the billionaires, this guy is and has been a piece of shit forever. So nice of them to throw some peanuts out as the planet burns to generate better images of shrimp jesus.
Re: (Score:2)
The real question is, why didn't he do it 40 years ago? And why do we give billionaires the power to decide where all the money they passively earn faster than they can ever possibly spend gets donated instead of using it for priorities decided by democracy?
Forty years ago in 1985, Gates was worth a few hundred million dollars, with most of that money tied up in pre-IPO Microsoft.
There are plenty of reasons to criticize and hold disdain for rich people. I'm not a fan of Bill Gates. However, he stands as the person who has donated the most money of anyone in history. No one else is close. Even 25 years ago, he donated $5 billion in one year, so it's not a deathbed or old age spurt of giving.
Why do we allow rich people to decide what to do with their gobs of
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:He should do it now (Score:4, Interesting)
He can give away 99.99% of his wealth and still be rich, he should just do it now and not wait 20 years when he might change his mind.
It probably took some real effort to bob and weave all of that personal wealth gain through every tax-dodging loophole over the last half-century.
20 years seems reasonable to unwind it all through more tax-dodging loopholes limited in size by annual deduction.
Re: (Score:2)
20 years seems reasonable to unwind it all through more tax-dodging loopholes limited in size by annual deduction.
Mod Parent Up
Re: (Score:2)
He can give away 99.99% of his wealth and still be rich, he should just do it now and not wait 20 years when he might change his mind.
It probably took some real effort to bob and weave all of that personal wealth gain through every tax-dodging loophole over the last half-century.
20 years seems reasonable to unwind it all through more tax-dodging loopholes limited in size by annual deduction.
I don't doubt that Bill Gates uses accountants and lawyers to minimize his tax payments. However, he has paid around $10 billion in federal income taxes over his lifetime. Apparently he's sort of incompetent in the tax dodging area.
If you want a tax dodger to complain about, look at the current president who has paid virtually no income taxes by claiming perpetual business losses. Somewhat perplexingly, he holds up these putative losses as evidence of his business acumen.
Re: (Score:2)
He can give away 99.99% of his wealth and still be rich, he should just do it now and not wait 20 years when he might change his mind.
It probably took some real effort to bob and weave all of that personal wealth gain through every tax-dodging loophole over the last half-century.
20 years seems reasonable to unwind it all through more tax-dodging loopholes limited in size by annual deduction.
I don't doubt that Bill Gates uses accountants and lawyers to minimize his tax payments. However, he has paid around $10 billion in federal income taxes over his lifetime. Apparently he's sort of incompetent in the tax dodging area.
If you want a tax dodger to complain about, look at the current president who has paid virtually no income taxes by claiming perpetual business losses. Somewhat perplexingly, he holds up these putative losses as evidence of his business acumen.
Sure. Bill paid his personal taxes. Probably more to avoid prison. But let’s not assume one could actually compare his business fuckery to Trump given how much of Microsoft’s revenue has been purposely funneled through an Irish tax haven for decades. Trump can only dream of earning trillions to launder in that way.
Re: (Score:2)
It probably took some real effort to bob and weave all of that personal wealth gain through every tax-dodging loophole over the last half-century.
If by effort you mean pay an accountant then sure. Do you honestly think Bill Gates ever did looked at any tax code or did any dodging himself? Shit I earn just 0.00001% of what he does and I do that too. As should you. Any competent accountant literally pays for themselves.
Why 20 years? (Score:4, Informative)
Maybe you don't know how rich billionaires are. 1 million seconds is about 11 days, 1 billion seconds is about 31 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Large moves require planning and time. Moving all that money at once would cause severe unwanted side effects, such as devaluing the stock of other shareholders.
Re: (Score:3)
why make a spectacle of it? (Score:3, Insightful)
Bill Gates can do what he wants, including reducing the value of his foundation over time to zero. But why does he need to do a world tour announcing it? He could give it all away tomorrow if he likes, and none of us need to know.
Re: (Score:3)
Gates for awhile has been trying to set an example and get other billionaires to follow his lead.
No he hasn't (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah he's got a charity but he has not come close to funding that charity enough that it significantly impacts the power that his enormous wealth grants him. Meanwhile while he's supposed to be giving away all his money he's become the largest owner of farmland in America buying up tons of family farms that have been foreclosed because of the nasty little practices of the sort of neoliberal economics he's been backing with his
Re: (Score:3)
Oh I am not saying giving that outlook a normative value, private charity does good things but has a lot of bad things and it can become an impediment to real infrastructure needed.
I would much prefer he were taxed on that wealth appropriately and if the citizens of the USA want to help countries and peoples in need (and I think we should) we can set up dedicated routes to do just that, oh something like say, USAID?
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed on most of that, I think there are charities that do good work but they're really not much different than a private corporation, they can and often do have interests of their own.
A good example is that for all the charity organizations and billions what made the largest impact on HIV in Africa by far? It was PEPFAR [wikipedia.org] a US agency under the Department of State set up by George W Bush.
Re:The problem I have with private charity (Score:4, Interesting)
Hah
Give your average chronic homeless guy an empty house and watch him destroy it.
https://www.latimes.com/califo... [latimes.com]
Most chronically homeless people suffer from psychological disorders and/or addiction. They're destructive and self-destructive. Which is often why they became homeless in the first place and why they stay that way.
Sure, "we" can solve such a problem, by institutionalizing homeless people who can't function in lawful society. Criticizing a charity for failure to do the same is idiotic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah agree with him or his methods or not or think he's a liar sure but this has been a well known public position Gates has held for awhile.
I'm saying it's been over 20 years (Score:2)
If I tell you I'm going to go get my mcse and 20 years later I don't have my mcse you can probably conclude I'm not going to get my mcse and I was just telling you that for some other reason.
I don't think there is any defending Gates if you approach who and what he is objectively. But he has a lot of money and he has spent quite a bit of it making people think he's a better man than he actually is.
Re: (Score:2)
He has been publicly saying one thing and then doing something else entirely.
Yeah he's got a charity but he has not come close to funding that charity enough that it significantly impacts the power that his enormous wealth grants him.
I think we've got different ideas of whether a $100 billion donation is "significant." There are others like Trump (not just Trump but many rich people) who fund a "charity" for personal expenditures, but Gates has a bona fide foundation that has given out $100 billion mainly for health and education.
Gates is the good example (for philanthropy and not necessarily everything he does), as much as we (including myself) want to bag on rich people.
Re: (Score:2)
Poor kids (Score:5, Informative)
Bill Gate's 3 kids are only going to inherit around 1% of his worth each. His net worth is $102 billion, so that means they only get around $1 billion each. Poor kids.
https://people.com/bill-gates-... [people.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Thomas Paine advocated for an estate tax that had a top marginal rate of 100%, I am inclined to agree with him.
Re: (Score:2)
Thomas Paine advocated for an estate tax that had a top marginal rate of 100%, I am inclined to agree with him.
I think the pre-Reagan rates were sufficient. A balance is required; extremely high rates just motivate the wealthy to work harder to find workarounds.
Re: (Score:2)
Workarounds for the estate tax are "spend your money before you die" and it's not really about revenue but Paine believed in societal rot due to wealth
Paine’s advocacy for commerce did not blind him to the dangers of extreme wealth, however. His vision of peaceful and beneficial trade was focused on the small farmer or artisan, rather than the great merchants. Extreme wealth, in Paine’s eyes, “diminishes the spirit” of “patriotism,” because rich men were willing to protec
Re: (Score:2)
Gates is giving his wealth to (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
the Gates foundation so all his cronies and friends can abscond most of it while giving away a smidgen of it for appearances
Citation required.
Please produce (significant, reliable) evidence that the foundation has been spending its monies on Gates' associates as opposed to doing the things its endowed to do.
Re: (Score:2)
The Gates Foundation has made a significant impact on problems like malaria and AIDS and other major diseases. https://www.bbc.com/news/world... [bbc.com] I don't have information about how efficient the foundation is, but it's certainly a lot more efficient and does more good than the foundations of Donald Trump and Elon Musk.
Re: (Score:2)
The limits of private charity and why it can only be relied upon so much, if at all. If we care about that then sounds like a good job for a specific agency [wikipedia.org] and if not them then something with the goal of improving health outcomes in other countries. I mean is this something we care about affecting or not is really the only question?
Re: (Score:3)
USAID is specifically *not* an NGO (it's part of the government) and it's already under the direct authority of the State Department.
Why should I believe your value judgement on it when you don't even know the basic facts?
Re: (Score:2)
No, but it was a clearing house for funneling money to NGOs.
Re: (Score:2)
That's easy to say but I haven't seen that much proof of malfeasance, most everything seems to be just disagreements on directive, which is fair, but that's not what the admin is doing.
Also just saying "NGOs" like they're spooky doesn't really mean anything. Which ones and you are implying they are bad. Another way to say that is just "USAID uses contractors".
I mean when you look at the cuts also it's clear "NGOs" aren't really the concern of the admin as the two largest sectors that likely employ NGOs go
Re: (Score:2)
Jesus may disagree though, ...
"Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God."
Re: (Score:2)
You might be right.
By the world's standards, you and I are rich. We might need to ask ourselves what good we are doing with our allotment of wealth.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, your mother would have told you it doesn't work that way, that you don't be good and give in order to get into heaven, but rather, be good and give because you are grateful for a God who gave you hope despite not measuring up. Still, whether or not you believe what your mother told you, we all have a part to play in helping our fellow man. Bill Gates's part, though large, is just a drop in the bucket.
Re: (Score:2)
CONTROL! Bill has control problems. He can't trust that his organization will run forever in the ways he wants it to and he can't enjoy the feeling it was carrying out his will like before when he was making his org richer and more powerful. His ex-wife is a reminder of his lack of control over beyond his time and also it seemed that he was caught blindsided by her exit.
The ONLY way to make sure what he wants happens is have it die off with him.
Re: (Score:2)
The OS/2 Community will happily accept a donation (Score:3)
Ha (Score:2)
He can give it to me & it will all be spent (Score:2)
Dammit slashdot's broke again (Score:1)
Wake me when he actually does it.
I guess at least he called out RFK Jr for shutting down food aid to starving children overseas. Although he also bought a shitload of farmland that sells to that program so...
I mean if it's one thing the last 10 years has taught me it's that everything is a grift.
We will all recieve ... (Score:2)
No Funny (Score:2)
Slashdot has not spoken. Again.