digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

World's 2nd Richest Man Give Away Fortune: To Bill Gate's Foundation

money.cnn.com — Warren Buffett: The world's second richest man - who's now worth $44 billion - will start giving away 85% of his wealth in July - most of it to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Petrarch1603, on 10/12/2007, -9/+101something very pecuilar is happening...
    • p9s50W5k4GUD2c6, on 10/12/2007, -4/+98When I first read this story: I couldn't help but think this development ~might~ be connected to Gates' stepping down at Microsoft. Either way: a great deal of good will come from this.

      Not a bad way to spend the rest of one's life...

    • gcnaddict, on 10/12/2007, -5/+119Isn't Bill also planning to do something similar once he reaches old age? I love how people always bitch about bill being evil even though he donates so much cash to charity (even if it's his own charity)
    • strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -2/+88Gates' plan is to die with "only" $3 billion
    • Subcranium, on 10/12/2007, -0/+46Of course it is. Buffett is picky about how his money is spent on charity--it's easy to give too much and not get results.

      Buffett got Bill interested in charity in the first place.

      BRK has had charity for years. When you own a share of BRKa, you can designate where the gift goes.
    • cellis, on 10/12/2007, -75/+16I will be the benefactor of this. Yay. I'm in a country at war, run by ruthless dictators, I have std-infected friends, and....

      CNN > "The money, a spokesperson for the Buffet Family says, will go to help third world countries

      oh, I guess not
    • super_spyder, on 10/12/2007, -57/+6maybe he is worried since gates is only going to be working part time that gates might run into some financial hardship?
    • TheWorkz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+31http://www.gatesfoundation.org/AboutUs/Announcements/Announce-060625.htm
    • tehbear, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22Makes sense to me. I'm trying to start up a small endowment/charity to help fund high school arts and music programs. Before I decided to go the charity route, I just wanted to donate so much a year to a school but the catch was how difficult it was to control what my donation was spent on. After seeking legal advice, the pain in the butt is starting the endowment and having a board of directors but you have full control over what schools can spend it on. And that is just my small donation, I couldn't imagine billions of dollars being donated across the world.
    • Dayyve, on 10/12/2007, -17/+76I think it would be hard to be an American billionaire right now and sleep well at night...think about it...You just got huge tax breaks and more money since this administration has been in power and you have to see your country's poor people sent off to war to die to protect your interests. And those poor people and their families are getting more and more shafted by this society by the minute. How could you even watch the news anymore knowing that people's quality of life are spiraling downward with higher gas/insurance costs and you just got 170% of your normal tax return which is just going to sit in one of your accounts because you've run out of things to buy.

      Long live these guys - they should retire and then go into politics. They've got the rare gift of business brilliance and humanity.
    • TKDWILSON, on 10/12/2007, -111/+4"""""Isn't Bill also planning to do something similar once he reaches old age? I love how people always bitch about bill being evil even though he donates so much cash to charity (even if it's his own charity)"""""""

      I don't know this for sure, but I always assumed that Gates donated to charity because he gets every dime back in ride offs and such, maybe even more.

      Eric Wilson
    • flashboca, on 10/12/2007, -8/+67TDWilson...that is because you are a ***** IDIOT who has no idea what tax write offs are..
    • super_spyder, on 10/12/2007, -42/+6i just want to make sure people voted me down because they thought it was a stupid joke, not because they thought i was serious
    • lava, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26Looks like they're about to start the most influential international organization since the UN
    • dreamcore, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7http://abcnews.go.com/Business/FunMoney/story?id=2086124

      Interesting. Billionaire giving patterns around the world, in a story nine days old.
    • doubleYou, on 10/12/2007, -1/+31Tax deductions (writeoffs) and tax credits are not the same thing. In a deduction, you claim some amount of money as a "loss" and are given some consideration for that. In a tax credit, you get a 1:1 return for your expense. Purchasing a hybrid vehicle or installing certain kinds of energy saving equipment results in some amount of tax credit (though not the cost of the purchase).

      Tax deductions and credits are used by the government to reward "desirable" behaviors. Donating money to charity, buying a house (mortgage interest and points are deductible), getting married, having children, making certain kinds of purchases, etc. are all considered "desirable" because they put money into the economy or have other beneficial outcomes.

      Bill Gates has had his charity for quite a while, and I believe his dad actually got him on that bandwagon, not Warren Buffet. I don't think these billionaires donate the money because of US policy, but because they have toooooo much money for themselves. Bill Gates was donating money when Bill Clinton was president, and has been donating in the current administration too.

      Last year, US citizens donated 260 billion to charities, and I'm sure that only a few of those funds came from billionaires.

      Being "nice" and being "good" are basic human characteristics. Do not try to dilute the motivations of the people who want to give back to the world. When a rich men like these give money back, it's interesting to see how some people are quick to jump to negative conclusions.
    • otherland, on 10/12/2007, -33/+23"You just got huge tax breaks and more money since this administration has been in power and you have to see your country's poor people sent off to war to die to protect your interests"

      ***** idiot, like there weren't any billionares before the current administration was in office? Freeing the Iraqi people from that butcher Saddam was in the interest of all of humanity. You are just scum. Another libtard that just takes for granted all the sacrifices people made so he can run his mouth off.
    • knightblade2oo4, on 10/12/2007, -10/+31"Looks like they're about to start the most influential international organization since the UN"

      The UN is influential?
    • dh8r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+26If Bill's only keeping $3 bil for himself, that's more than 85% of his fortune that he's donating. No matter what people say, Bill Gates is a charitable person. Yes, it's easier for a rich person to give up a higher percentage of their wealth because they only need a small percentage for living. But instead of criticizing people for not donating enough money, praise people for donating the amount that they did, even if it's a small amount. It's just the way you look at the world, cynicism just breeds more cynicism.
    • EvilDr.X, on 10/12/2007, -6/+22@ otherland

      "like there weren't any billionares before the current administration was in office?" -- Doesn't change the fact that these billionaires got huge tax breaks and more money under the current administration, and that poor people are being sent off to war, again under the current administration.

      "Freeing the Iraqi people from that butcher Saddam was in the interest of all of humanity." -- Really? Is humanity really that much better off now? Really?

    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -7/+15I'd donate a $1 if Steve Ballmer would step down too.
    • nonsequiturmine, on 10/12/2007, -13/+3@EvilDr.X
      Yes, actually, yes it is.
    • Jakelshark, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14It is stunning to see the number of people who claim Gates and Buffet do this for tax deductions. Do you people not know the difference between yearly income and networth? Gates for example makes roughly $1 million in salary, his networth is in the billions due to his stock. The government taxes income, not stocks. And the current administration only takes ~35% of that salary.

      Also Gates is a strong advocate for raising the top level tax brackets if you didnt know, you know the ones Reagan, Bush, and Bush drastically cut from the original ~80% pre-1980s.
    • Spybot, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1i agree. something is fishy in a big bad version of fishy
    • ssanders, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1For all you saying "I dont know why people rag on gates... he donates so much money!" So what?

      If hitler donated millions, would you forgive his other crimes? I'm not saying Bill Gates is anywhere as bad as hitler, but as long as he's pushing Palladium DRM (google it... its pretty much big brother) then he will be dirt in my eyes.
    • jackhandey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@ Jakelshark -
      Gates is obviously not doing this for tax benefits but it is misleading to say that he does not get taxed on stock. Every time he sells a share of his stock that he made a profit on, he gets taxed.
    • millixaw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Bill Gates leaves Microsoft, devotes 100% of his time to charaity work. The world's richest man AND NOW the world's second richest man, together in the same foundation, give away the largest amount of charity money ever. Buffet probably feels Gates is the most qualified man in the world when it comes to giving away that much money, which is true.

      Wow I dunno about you guys but if distributed right, that much charaity would actually cause a major, noticable difference in the world. I wonder if Gates would be considered for saint-hood...
    • theone3, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Well, he's already been knighted, I think that's enough right there. Sure, he's doing a lot, but he's not actually making many sacrifices.
    • Muddle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yeah, Scientologists are DDOS'ing this site.
    • aeroplanedigger, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Firstly, it bugs me when people get buried becuase you disagree with them. Unless what they say is worthless, dont mod them down. In fact, I mod people up as long as they make their point well, even if I disagree with them, if their opinion effects what I write in my comment in any thought provoking way, they did well.

      Secondly, no matter what Gates has doen that you disagree with, he has been a positive impact on our country. He was vocally in favor of maintaining the inheritance tax at its current rate, a tax that has ensured that big bussiness men are not allowed to become aristocracy, a tax that Buffet supports as well. Gates has doen amazing things in terms of education as well. I think solely because of this charity, his name will go down as one of the great americans in out history books. All bussinessmen like all politicians do bad things, they have power, but can we nto still respect them? The Carnegies and Rockefellers of our time cannot be disregarded because they do things that powerfull men do, so did Carnegie and Rockefeller. When powerfull men do things, someone will always consider it bad. Always.

      This is really awesome, that Buffet is doing this, Buffet is a reall amazing man.
    • TKDWILSON, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I know what ride offs are, but there are a ton of loopholes and tax shelters out there. Do you really think you understand how Gates taxes work? Have ANY of us actually researched that enough to be sure?

      Eric Wilson
  • Rojahon, on 10/12/2007, -5/+59The gates foundation is going to be ginormous!
  • Bdog2g2, on 10/12/2007, -52/+3Microsoft was just a front...Bill's real plan of world domination is with the Bill and Melinda Foundation.

    THE INVASION IS BEGINING!!!!!!
  • TheFoundry, on 10/12/2007, -14/+21"The gates foundation is going to be ginormous!"

    You cannot escape the Gates Foundation... The bullet is enormous. Jumping is useless!
    • LabRat777, on 10/12/2007, -7/+53THE GOGGLES! THEY DO NOTHING!
    • waltdz, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2The Mooninites RULE over all the primitive earth dwellers. Our intellect surpasses even that of your highest ranking scientists and scholars.
  • scottevans, on 10/12/2007, -12/+40Buffett is a very smart man, and I respect his business IQ, as well as his philanthropy. BUT!!!....how would you like to be one of his children? He has said that he doesn't believe in passing wealth from generation to generation. Bummer for his children.
    • M2Ys4U, on 10/12/2007, -0/+50They're not exactly going to be poor though, are they? They just won't inherit huge sums of money.
    • fitzfan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+23And all the people were complaing in the CEO story that everyone thats rich gets it from their parents, obviously like Buffet not all families believe in handing it over to their kids, there are people that create it on their own through hard work and a little luck
    • Bdog2g2, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4444 billion minus 85% still leaves u with around 7 billion or so.....

      If anyone cries about that...they should visit a few countries south of our own for a week or two.
    • strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -1/+27"And all the people were complaing in the CEO story that everyone thats rich gets it from their parents"

      Roughly 80% of millionaires are first generation millionaires. More people need to read The Millionaire Next Door. It's an excellent book.

      http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/product-description/0671015206/102-8986987-3127313
      http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/s/stanley-millionaire.html

      It really exposes the myths about millionaires, the major one being that they are not the people you expect they are (hint: they're not the people living in the big houses with the fancy import cars, they, many times, have little to no net worth).
    • Xyntar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Well, it says the rest of the money is going to foundations headed up by his children, so I imagine they'll get a healthy stipend as the executors of those foundations.
    • scan2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19He is doing them a favour, letting them create their own wealth and success and not having to be responsible for billions of $.
    • yllabianbitpipe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15If you are truly logical think about it this way. Is it better for the future of humanity to take your billions and spread it out over the earth over millions of people, or give it all to your kids, who in the larger scheme of things, have probably done nothing to deserve all that money except be born into your family?

      Also, the odds are pretty great that a kid who never has to work his whole life because he has several billion in the bank from his dad is going to amount to nothing, never produce anything of value, and probably resent his parents for giving him all this money. The kid's sense of self worth will be in the toilet.
    • jwoelich, on 10/12/2007, -0/+37Yeah, having access to bags of cash has done wonders for the likes of Paris Hilton.

      When you have everything handed to you, you appreciate nothing. Might be a "bummer" for their kids, but maybe their parents don't want them to grow up to be rich irrelevant douchebags.
    • scottevans, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I totally agree with his philosophy in not leaving his wealth to his children. I think people should make their own way in life, if they are able to (and not mentally challenged or physically unable to). I just meant that it must be a real bummer to see all that cash sitting in your dad's coffers all those years, and know that it will never be yours.
    • aquax, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17Bill Gates has also stated that he isn't going to pass much wealth to his children. I believe they each will receive $10M.

      ("much" of course, being completely relative. $10M would sure be a hell of a lot to me).
    • brandizzle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Good.

      His kids will learn something about life that way, they'll be able to say whatever they earned they earned on their own. I think there's more pride in that than there is in getting it all from daddy.
    • SuperFarStucker, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8A plumber could easily die a millionaire. Owning a moderately sized plot and house in many parts of the country puts your net worth at excess of a million. Being a millionaire isn't exactly an exclusive club. Having a lavish excess of money is what people traditionally consider 'rich'. At 70k/yr it is almost impossible to avoid it and a good portion of america makes this kind of money. Bad investing and excessive spending are the only things that will stop it. In fact, having a million to retire is considered being in rather poor shape if you're a boomer.
    • Tebixan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I wouldn't say having a million to retire on is "poor shape", unless you're including in that all the money they will get from pensions, social security, medicare, and whatnot.

      My Dad is retired military, and is getting ready for retirement with a second job as a teacher. He doesn't have much money in the bank, and what he does have he's using to help me pay for college. His total assets may be up to a million, I'm not really sure, but he sure doesn't have that much in cash.
    • canyonblue, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4both Gates and Buffett will leave 100's of millions or even more than a billion to their children. they just don't see the need to give the children ALL of their TEN'S or HUNDRED's of billions...

      and you know what?

      they are 100% right. they can ensure their children are rich beyond their wildest dreams and make a meaningful impact in the needs of society at the same time.
    • otherland, on 10/12/2007, -15/+5"If you are truly logical think about it this way. Is it better for the future of humanity to take your billions and spread it out over the earth over millions of people, or give it all to your kids, who in the larger scheme of things, have probably done nothing to deserve all that money except be born into your family?"

      Let's see, rewarding 1 person, your own kid, for being a lazy slob, or rewarding millions of people for being lazy, unproductive slobs? I can't think of a bigger waste of money then Africa. All the billions invested and they still can't feed themselves.
    • saska, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10"I wouldn't say having a million to retire on is "poor shape", unless you're including in that all the money they will get from pensions, social security, medicare, and whatnot."

      I don't know how old you are, but I sure as hell don't expect to see anything from Social Security or Medicare by the time I retire, and I hope nobody else is counting on it either.
    • ASoggyWaffle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2i wonder how many people can live their entire lives (without working) with 7 billion (living middle class, like a prius instead of a ferrari)
    • tilapiaking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@otherland

      "Let's see, rewarding 1 person, your own kid, for being a lazy slob, or rewarding millions of people for being lazy, unproductive slobs? I can't think of a bigger waste of money then Africa. All the billions invested and they still can't feed themselves."

      Africa does feed itself and I'm SURE Africans work harder than you do. Only a handful of countries who have civil strife consume food aid. Once malaria is under control Africa will be much more productive.

      I'd also add that growing food in the Tropics is a lot harder than it is in temperate areas.
    • santaclaws, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ASoffyWaffle: i wonder how many people can live their entire lives (without working) with 7 billion (living middle class, like a prius instead of a ferrari)

      3500. You need approx 2,000,000 to be sure of never needing to work again. Figure 5% investment returns per year on average, and that's 100k per year.
    • Drealoth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This is a good thing! Bill Gates has a similar philosophy - give them enough money so that they are at a competitive advantage (such as being able to get into good schools), but not enough that they can just sit back and be lazy..

      The class system has a solid philosophy behind it - the smart people are supposed to be the wealthy and powerful ones. The unfortunate thing is that it passes through generations - if you are smart, your kids won't necissarily be smart, but they get the power anyway.
    • millixaw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"BUT!!!....how would you like to be one of his children? He has said that he doesn't believe in passing wealth from generation to generation. Bummer for his children."

      What you wind up with is a bunch of Paris Hilton clones. No thanks. They're the type of people giving the entire country a bad name.
  • xXShadowstormXx, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24Well. It's going to a good cause. To fight Malaria, and possibly AIDS.

    I hope the Foundation finds a cure to these.
  • culbeda, on 10/12/2007, -0/+27This isn't exactly the first philanthropic thing Buffet has done.

    His stance on tax giveaways to the wealthy: http://money.cnn.com/2003/05/20/news/buffett_tax/

    Honestly, he's one of the few billionaires that I give a rats ass about or for which I have any respect. Now all we need are a couple hundred more just like him and this country will be fine. ;-)
    • strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -0/+23The Oracle from Omaha.

      I heard a story about him when I worked at Gateway. One day he shows up at a Gateway store in a beat up old car wearing old ragged clothes. He goes in asks for help with a computer. The salesman helps him and sells him the cheapest computer without ever asking him what he wanted. He only realises that it's Warren Buffett when he starts to ask him for his information and payment. Buffett could buy Gateway and liquidate it and barely even blink.
    • ojonesjr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9He doesn't own a nice car. He drives a old piece of crap. Very Cool... (better man than me and most)
    • ylocav, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15actually, he recently bought a 2006 Cadillac DTS. it was in the news, because he specifically bought a GM vehicle because he was impressed with how GM's Chairman handled himself on Face the Nation or something like that.

      not exactly a crap car, but certainly no bentley either. and it's nice to see he's supporting american workers (the DTS IS actually built in america, unlike a lot of 'american' cars)

      I'm very impressed with what he's doing here. nice to know not all old rich guys are greedy and use their money and power for the greater good.
    • t1c52002, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Actually it was 60 minutes. Get this, the CEO of GM offered to give him a free car for his kind words. But being Buffet he DECLINED it and went out and bought it himself from a local dealer. Truly amazing man. My point is obviously he can affored it, but the fact that he does not use his celebrity to get free stuff is really remarkable.
  • Pseudorious, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19Hero.
  • srocker, on 10/12/2007, -12/+2My opinion for the diseases/conditions that should be at the top of the list for curing:

    1. Cancer
    2. AIDS
    3. HPV
    • sembetu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Yes, I agree. Humanity is a disease that needs curing.
  • MrDiaz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Man that's incredible, I totally support the idea, this foundation has helped a lot of people in third world countries (mostly in Africa) now with this impulse, their charity will increase and accelerate up to twice the current speed. Incredible eh?

    Hopefully, our world could be a better place...

  • gamekid, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Words like "daaaaaaayyum" don't describe this well.

    (For those wondering, his company owns such household names as GEICO. http://www.geico.com/about/background/investorRelations.htm )
  • jpt62089, on 10/12/2007, -37/+5Am I the only one that's scared by the fact that Bill Gates will have controll over even more money?
    • blakyce, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18Ya that is scary. A person who gives billions to helping victims of Aids and malaria making these decisions. Maybe the money would be better off going to the government for billions more in arms spending or big corporations to continue to exploit the third world
    • brandizzle, on 10/12/2007, -3/+25STFU.

      Even if you don't like Microsoft's products Bill is an AMAZING man.
    • jpt62089, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1Guys, haven't you ever heard of a joke?
    • Trixrox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Yeah we have all heard of a joke, but yours was not clear or laid out properly, even if it was, it certainly isn't a great joke. I'm glad it was a joke though, and not a serious comment.
  • aweblogs, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7That's a good thing to do with ones wealth.
  • dusingaz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15What no 300+ comments talking about how people shouldn't be so rich? like on the 40k a day CEO story?
    • rollergoof, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13have you heard of the foundation? do you know what it does?
    • Artifez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10After a certain level of wealth you can live like a king for the rest of your life and your children will be provided for. What is the point of amassing more wealth? I don't have a problem with people being wealthy but after a certain point it is just vanity or lust for power that drives these people and then I have a problem with it.
    • Tebixan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12People are outraged to learn the average CEO ears 42k a day because we know that most of that is going to sit in a bank somewhere, or be spent on frivolous ***** like yachts and personal jets.

      This man makes an insane amount of money, but he understand that he doesn't need 42k a day to live, and since the government isn't trying to more fairly distribute the wealth, he's taken it upon himself to do the right thing. The world should take a cue from Buffet and Gates.

      The super rich who horde all their money should be ashamed of themselves when they see actions like this.

      "All this is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing" - Edmund Burke

      "With great power (wealth) comes great responsibility" - Uncle Ben :)
    • otherland, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2"After a certain level of wealth you can live like a king for the rest of your life and your children will be provided for. What is the point of amassing more wealth? I don't have a problem with people being wealthy but after a certain point it is just vanity or lust for power that drives these people and then I have a problem with it."

      So you get to arbitrarily decide when a person can no longer benefit from their hard work?
    • Bensch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2otherland, if you want to start paying people based on how hard they work, I'm all for it. Until then, there are amounts of money that are vastly beyond what actual work produces, and they should be taxed at a high rate (pre-Reagan this was around 80%) because it is bad for the economy to take that much money out of circulation.

      Gates, for instance, agrees with this stance. So does Buffett. And if you believe that they've worked so much harder than you that they're the two richest people in the world, maybe you should listen to them?
    • otherland, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2"otherland, if you want to start paying people based on how hard they work, I'm all for it. Until then, there are amounts of money that are vastly beyond what actual work produces, and they should be taxed at a high rate (pre-Reagan this was around 80%) because it is bad for the economy to take that much money out of circulation."

      As long as they didn't steal the money every dime they have was earned from their hard work. Investing properly is hard work. It's also very rewarding work when done right. You have no right to punish these people for being successful. 80% my god why don't you give 80% of your salary to people that have less then you. To a homeless slob you likely have it pretty well off... And going back to your pre-Reagan era is never going to happen. Reagan didn't just bring down socialism in the Soviet Union, he started wiping out your socialism here too.

      "
      Gates, for instance, agrees with this stance. So does Buffett. And if you believe that they've worked so much harder than you that they're the two richest people in the world, maybe you should listen to them?"

      They have the right to do whatevery they want with their money, but they can keep their hands off mine. Just like they choose how much to give to charity, I deserve to have the same financial freedom.
    • Bensch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wiping out socialism here? You mean wiping out our money?
  • friend18, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17Maybe the ghost of Christmas past has been visiting all of these billionaires.
    • ImperatorTerrae, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I wouldn't be calling Bill Gates a Scrooge. When he first became the head of the up and coming Microsoft, he was giving his workers plenty of stock options and helping them all out a lot. I don't think there are any Tiny Tim's in this situation..
  • yllabianbitpipe, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11My take on this is straightforward. Both of these guys made their fortunes by their own talents. Now have more money than they could ever spend on themselves. They have passed the point where they just want to buy crap, crap, and more crap for their houses and their familes (which is what most Americans spend their whole lives doing). The stages of life ought to be, first you care about yourself, then one other person, then your family, lastly you realize humanity is more important than your own selfish desires. And above it all is the Buddhist idea that all the material crap you own is ultimately worthless when you die. These guys are starting to think hard about what's really important for the human race and want to give back to the system that allowed them to get wealthy. Ultimately do you admire people who did something positive for humanity (Ghandi, Martin Luther King) or just accumilated lots of stuff for themselves (William Hearst, Michael Jackson)? I mean, the latter two have cheesy theme parks in California.
    • AndrewLZ, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2"The stages of life ought to be, first you care about yourself, then one other person, then your family, lastly you realize humanity is more important than your own selfish desires."

      As individuals, it is in our nature to further our own survival. Hence you only care about family and humanity because it is good for you. You're much better off materially and socially if you consider other people, but it should still be out of pure selfishness.

      So I care about my family because it is of value to ME, I care about the planet and humanity in general because it is of value to ME. If I live in a crap society I'm gonna be worse off; likewise without family I won't have that support system.

      So i reject your dichotomy, those things are important because of our own selfish desires.
    • yllabianbitpipe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I hope you can see why people are capable of doing things for the good of humanity that don't benefit themselves directly. A cynical person might say, "That guy is just donating to charity so he gets a tax break and looks cool so chicks will bang him". I think that far too many people only do things insofar as they benefit from it which I why I probably exaggerated that point. You have to admit there are far too many selfish people in this world, who are just playing out human nature, but I still hope humanity will someday get over this "What's in it for me?" attitude.
    • YossarianDent, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@AndrewLZ:

      That may be your view, but it's not the only plausible angle, and I'd urge you to reconsider. Living life with the "realization" that we only care about ourselves gets depressing when you notice that any given individual, in the long run - no matter how temporarily important - has very little impact on the world as a whole.

      Read some Hume. I think he's frequently misunderstood, but there's some good stuff in there about humanity's need to form a society and care for each other. It's not a selfish desire, one that we fulfill because it's good for us; it's a desire that we fulfill because it's good for -all- of us.
    • doubleYou, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@Andrew.. your idea is theoretically plausible, however students are quite often really busy worrying about meeting their tuition and life expenses, and have very little time and money left over to help find a cure for cancer or AIDS. Students can help by volunteering in many ways, there are many ways to do this without compromising the rest of one's life situation.

      Married people need to attend to their spousal relationship and pay attention to their children. As a family, it might be nice for all of them to be aware of others in the world who suffer, but it's also very, very important for them to function as a healthy family unit. When you raise your kids in such a unit, they're going to grow up to become one of these "good" people in the world

      And maybe if you did a good job of being a student, as well as a householder, perhaps you'll be in a position where you can fund your kids' student lives and enable them to do the great things that youth are capable of.
    • Tebixan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've heard this line of thinking before, and those who truely hold it much be very depressed people.

      It may be true that we are all selfish in that we do things to make ourselves happier, but is this such a bad thing? The choice is how we go about making ourselves happier. You can choose to focus on material wealth, and try to find happyness by owning tons of *****. Or you can focus on any number of other aspects of life: health, family, spirituality, environment, social ties, etc.

      The super rich have an oppotunity most of us do not: the chance to find that money really doesn't buy happyness. Once they discover this, they will probably try to find it some other way.

      By your reasoning AndrewLZ, the only way to NOT be selfish, is to intentionally do things that make you unhappy. Thats just stupid, a good person finds ways to be selfish while helping others.
  • Willis, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10This is good news. Buffett and Gates have long been setting a good example for the rest of the world's rich and powerful, and it's nice to see their fortunes now combined to further that cause.
  • AndrewLZ, on 10/12/2007, -37/+3this is too bad. all of this money could be used to PRODUCE more wealth which would really help everyone more than anything else (invisible hand).

    it's such a shame to see that hard-earned money go to waste like this.

    and it's not that bill gates is good because he gives to charity, he's good because he's very wealthy the honest way, by producing something(s) of great value. I respect the man because he's rich, not because he gives away his hard-earned money.

    it's too bad these guys are giving up in a sense and not producing more wealth.
    • Vapid, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21Lol, you're retarded man. Dont post comments please.
    • Artifez, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Yeah, I don't often insult people but you are a moron.

      /(invisible hand) lol
    • tacom8, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9go to waste??

      Nice man, glad you see cure for aids and helping poor folk as a waste... by your logic wouldn't them helping others reduce your burden as a tax payer? and hell who is to say a cures for diseases won't be profitable and spawn new industry??

      /Good to see you got your priorities straight in life, wealth over charity...
      //wow that got dug down quicker then i could reply to it, bravo digg
    • captainahab, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6I hear what you're saying, Andrew, but I would much rather see the world's best business minds allocating funds to third-world countries rather than members of Congress or the United Nations.

      When private donors give money for these causes, they are more careful about how the funds are allocated. When governments contribute the resources end up in the hands of dictators or corrupt officials. Private philanthropy should be the exclusive means by which Americans support change in other countries. Government aid is a waste of money.
    • acrophoric, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4What the ***** are you talking about? Your previous comment about selfishness makes you seem as if you're two steps behind. They won't spend their money on making sure Mars remains red, they are humans after all. What is extraordinary about what they are doing is the fact that their actions are not beneficial only to them but to the entire godamn earth, in a very tangible and direct way.

      p.s. look into Gate's history if you think he got rich the honest way...
    • RazorElite, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Holy crap dude, you must pretty damn retarded huh! Really, gain more wealth and do what with it? What can you really do with over $40 billion?? Yeah, it's just soo dumb of these billionaires to give a portion of their money to people who don't even get food everyday.
    • dreamcore, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2AndrewLZ:
      Buffett and Gates are pretty smart guys, and I think they understand that.

      Microsoft and Berkshire will continue to create a great deal more wealth.
      Just as governments shouldn't confiscate or demand how these fortunes are used, neither should others. Besides, as bizarre as the idea is to some, you can have too much cash, more than your current operation may put to good use. So the Gates have created another operation that they feel can.

      And if you can't make that sort of decision with your wealth, what's the point really?
    • AndrewLZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@Vapid: saying I'm retarted isn't a productive post and really doesn't say anything at all. You should take your own advice.

      @ Artifez: same to you, I'd love for you to explain why i'm a moron.

      @tacom8: Yes I stand by my statement that it's going to waste. As Dr. Yaron Brook said:

      “While Gates and Buffett are brilliant businessmen, they and other philanthropists ignore the fundamental cause of poverty, including poor health care, around the world: lack of capitalism. Wherever and to whatever extent capitalism exists, the productive ability of individuals is unleashed, enabling them to make their lives progressively better. The West used to be as poor as Africa today; it is capitalism that made us rich.”
      “Anyone who is truly committed to helping the world’s poor should first and foremost use their charitable dollars and their public platforms for the promotion of capitalism.”
      “If the tribalist or religious dictatorships of Africa and the Middle East do not renounce their destructive political systems and adopt capitalism, even $100 billion in charitable handouts will make little difference in their lives.”

      That pretty much sums up where I think the money would be better spent if they really want to cure poverty. Agreed that curing disease could spawn a huge industry; the question is why not make it a business? The efficiency of giving people profit motives to research these diseases would greatly increase the speed with which cures are found.

      Finally, like I vaguely alluded to earlier, wealth is representative of value. So yes, I do value wealth over charity (Wealth of course is not limited only to money, but also other values in my life).

      @captainahab: agreed. I would only add that the money should be spent to first abolish the systems of government. That would create a huge boom in the wealth of those nations and would also potentially create great trading partners (this is why i think it's good, it's more of an investment). Africa, after all, has a wealth of natural resources.

      @acrophoric: I think I've cleared myself up in the above responses.

      @RazorElite: oh I don't know, maybe create a huge boom in the space industry which could have application in so many other areas of life by providing a really good research environment and creating more efficient propulsion. hmmm. There are plenty of things to do with $40 billion dollars. Again, the best way to eliminate poverty is to eliminate the cause of poverty, dictatorial government systems, not buying them food.

      @dreamcore: I agree. I'm against charity that is selfless. Like my previous comments about selfishness, I think charity is great as long as it's good for you.

      I hope I've made my beliefs more clear in this post, If not please comment and don't just mod me down for nothing.
      -Andrew
  • omgtheyrecoming, on 10/12/2007, -2/+27bill gates haters will start complaining about how he's monopolizing the charity business.
  • savgpncl, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Can't take it with you...
  • andrebrown, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2Why would the second richest man, give to the richest mans foundation. It seems spreading the wealth more evenly would be better.
    • fitzfan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Well considering Bill is going to give up his day job to focus on the foundation, I think he will know where the money is needed rather than just picking random founcations to give it to.
    • saska, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I know the article was all long and stuff, but good grief. Buffett is joining the foundation's leadership. Buffett and Gates both share the strong belief they should decide how their money is spent. Why hand it to somebody else to make decisions with?
    • axiomata, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4saska gets it

      It's about being able to personally decide what to do with your money. Surprise surprise, when people are given control over their money they put it to good use.
  • ilitirit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9A great man. People should learn from him.
  • squarebing, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0not that matters, but wealth seldom last three generations anyway.
  • mayurpatil, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3hats OFF 2 dis man..........
  • jpesicka2, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1good man. he will only be the richest man in california.
  • Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -18/+2It's too bad that the Gates Foundation is mostly used to manipulate third world countries into using Microsoft products. Do you think it was coincidence when Gates offered $100 million for AIDS in India (over many years) at the same time the government was considering a quarter billion Microsoft product purchase? It's a shame that Buffet, who is usually pretty sensible, is buying into the sham.
    • fitzfan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Do you have a soul?
    • slimemonster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Well, perhaps the Gates Foundation is the only sufficiently large charity that actually does something about AIDS? Besides, the foundation won't be able to take its offer back even if the Indian government chose Linux or something. If it did take its offer back, it would start a PR nightmare for Gates and Microsoft.
    • saska, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6It must be dark all day with your head up your ass like that.
    • someirishguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4So I guess cures for Malaria, TB, Aids are all new software packages? Educate yourself before you speak dumbass.
  • Dropscience, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2wow...
  • Chiisuchianu, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2this sux ass, all these rich people are morons. put the money into research and technology for some advancements. sending the money to third world countries is a waste as we all know 99% of it goes to employees, taxes, shipping, etc
    • fitzfan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9"this sux ass, all these rich people are morons."
      and you are a genius? if they are such morons you should easily be able to make atleast $100 billion in the next 10 years right? maybe even a trillion since you are so much smarter? Once you become one one of the richest people in the world you can criticize their donating, untill then take your $30,000 salary and STFU.
  • mck9235, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6You people look to far into it. Can't you just see it as someone doing something good for society?
  • jtown, on 10/12/2007, -8/+0Did anyone bother to READ the article? The submitter obviously didn't read past the headline before posting. Buffett isn't giving 85% of his fortune to the Gates Foundation in the next month. He's giving away 85% of his Berkshire stock to FIVE foundations. About 83% of what he's giving away in the immediate future is going to the Gates Foundation. The approximate amount going to the Gates Foundation is 1.5 billion which means he's handing out about 1.8 billion in all. Which is about 4% of his wealth.

    Yes, 1.8 billion dollars is an amazing amount of money to give away but it's a far cry from the 37.4 billion implied in the headline. FWIW, this sounds like a good plan. This lets him ease his wealth into various foundations slowly while he's still around to help them manage much larger amounts of money than they're used to and he can have a lot of input regarding the programs the money supports. Better all the way around than just dumping $40,000,000,000 in a short period of time into a foundations that aren't experienced with such large sums.
    • fitzfan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4It said he is STARTING to give it a way, implying that it is a long process, we all read it fine so calm down psycho.
  • Chiisuchianu, on 10/12/2007, -11/+2stupid rich people. what a waste of money. they should put that money towards research and development, not waste it on stupid foundations that, in the end, only 99% of the funds make it to the people that need it. and when those people that need it receive it the stronger of the bunch use it for themselves... most of the time.

    absolute waste of time.
    • CrashKC, on 08/25/2008, -1/+5@Chiisuchianu

      I'm sorry, but I can't help thinking that Warren Buffett is just a tad smarter than you are...
    • showgun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5You fool, what do you think happens with a foundation. They spend it on various things including research and development donations to certain organizations.
      Think about it, how do you donate to "Research and Development"? I don't know of any organization by that name.

      You need a foundation to distribute the money to different organizations that research and develop different things. Pharmaceutical companies are no longer manufacturing polio vaccines because there is no profit in it, so guess which foundation is responsible for supplying the majority of the worlds polio vaccines (Polio may have been cured in the states, but that doesn't mean it has everywhere).
  • LegendarySock, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5Heres the deal:
    At first I was thinking "pfft like Bill Gates needs more money." But then I read up on the foundation and found it was for a good cause so hey, way to go Mr. and Mrs. Gates and Mr. Bufett
    • fitzfan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6So you thought the Bill Gates Foundations wasnt a good cause? he was the Time Magaziine person of the year because the Foundation was a BAD cause?
  • Maxington, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I commend the likes of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett to giving so much back. They will also get to witness what their money can change in the world.
  • wrinkles, on 10/12/2007, -8/+7Wow. 37 billion. That will pay for almost 7 months in Iraq!

    BBC report: http://urlci.com/4a7aa6
    • dreamcore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Whatever someone's views are on foreign elective wars... the cost of that is enough to make you think:

      What can happen when people spend their own money while caring passionately where it goes...

      ...versus what happens when governments spend the money, each administration unconcerned with the value of their "investments", as long as they can promise to the banks that the funds will be acquired by force throughout the future.
  • pcheaven2k, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1I wish some rich guy like Buffett would donate a couple measly million to me so I can develop the "All Electric - All Purpose" vehicle I have in my head. I only need about 1 million to develop and test the prototype and another million or two to start mass producing them.
  • nicolas9510, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1i think that Mr gates should give 85% of hist immense fortune to his foundation too
    • Avalontor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2read before typing. Maybe check your facts 1st also.
    • amphora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The foundation currently has an endowment of approximately $27 billion. I believe the majority of this was an infusion from Gates following the original founding of the foundation with 110 million donation. I can't find an article about it but I believe Gates donated somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 to 25 billion at one time and that it was approximately 50% of his net worth at the time. The man makes money hand over fist though so he is back up around a net worth of 50 billion again. Gates has publicly stated that he intends to give away his entire fortune (minus some comparatively small amount for his children) before his death.
  • showgun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Buffet is a good man. I can't imagine someone giving 85% of their wealth away no matter how much they have.
    With society so focused on the acquisition of wealth, and keeping it as a power play for their children, imagine how rogue Buffet, and to an extent Gates are.
    So I commend Buffet, this is no small commitment.
  • Fizban119, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I live about 20 minutes away from Warren Buffet. You'd be surprised to know that he doesn't live in a huge mansion. He has a nice house in an old neighborhood, but it isn't any larger than other upper middle class homes. Every year, he gives out king size candybars on Halloween.
    • dreamcore, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Yeah, he's cool. You got a candybar?
      Aw, dude...I got a PSP :/
    • gregwbrooks, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I agree with this - the man's house is nice, but not a mansion by any means.

      Trivia: I used to work in the Omaha building where Berkshire Hathaway has its offices, and once in a while I'd stand behind Buffet in the lunch line of the building's cafeteria. It is *impossible* to watch the man pick up a piece of chocolate pie and not think "I gotta call my broker and short strawberry futures!" or something like that.

  • SgtBeavis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6The Gates / Buffet plan

    Step 1. Give it all away
    Step 2. ????????
    Step 3. PROFIT!

    Jokes aside, Warren Buffet and Bill Gates are STUDS in my book.
  • Action123, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3i want to quote Che Guevara here

    "The amount of poverty and suffering required for the emergence of a Rockefeller, and the amount of depravity that the accumulation of a fortune of such magnitude entails, are left out of the picture, and it is not always possible to make the people in general see this."
    • Jakelshark, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2commie!

      Che wasnt talking about rich people who give back to the poor but the rich of Cuba who crushed the poor. And keep in mind that while he did take alot of money (while not necessarily hurting anyone in the process) he is giving much of it back in an efficient way.
    • sansbury, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I want to paraphrase Che Guevara here:

      "The amount of poverty and suffering required for the emergence of a Che Guevara, and the amount of depravity that the accumulation of political power of such magnitude entails, are left out of the picture, and it is not always possible to make lefty college students in general see this."
    • amphora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Che wasnt (sic) talking about rich people who give back to the poor"

      Um, yes, yes he was. He was talking about John Davison Rockefeller, Sr., creator of Standard Oil, who spent the last 40 years of his life giving away half of his fortune. He is known as a great philanthropist and quite possible the richest American ever. It is indisputable that if you view an American's wealth as a proportion of the the wealth of the United States the John D. Rockefeller, Sr. dwarfs both Bill Gates and Warren Buffet.

      Did his philanthropy outweigh the effect his zealous pursuit of monopoly and "efficiency" had on the working poor of the Northeastern United States? I can't say but it is a valid argument worth examination. While I might not agree with much or most of Ernesto Guevara de la Serna's philosophy I would not discount any statement by him with the retort "commie." You only show your own ignorance in doing so.

      "What makes him (John D. Rockefeller, Sr.) problematic--and why he continues to inspire ambivalent reactions--is that his good side was every bit as good as his bad side was bad. Seldom has history produced such a contradictory figure."

      - Ron Chernow
    • amphora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2sansbury, you will need to expound further on your point if you want anyone to take it seriously. Linguistic hand waving (some might use the words "linguistic masturbation" in reference to your post) does not further the debate.
    • sansbury, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@amphora

      The only thing masturbatory here is for anyone to hold Che Guevara up as some sort of moral authority. He pursued political power as ruthlessly as Rockefeller pursued profit and killed a lot more people in the process. Put Rockefeller up against Gandhi or the Dalai Lama if you want, but Che? Gimme a break, gimme a break...
    • AndrewLZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1the wealth isn't accumulated, it's created. this is what communists/socialists, fascists, etc... don't understand. they believe there is a fixed amount of wealth that is redistributed. You can think of in terms of value. Someone produces more value, so they produce more wealth.
    • amphora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@sansbury

      OK. You go from litererary hand waving to argumentum ad hominem. Do you have anything that you can actually add to the conversation or do you just hate this man so much you can't form a logical thought in the presence of his quotation?
    • amphora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@AndrewLZ

      Is wealth creation infinite? Does it know no limit? At any point in the human experience (past or present) would it be possible for an individual to create more wealth. Are fortunes ever created not through the creation of wealth? Would you put a company like Enron in the category of a fortune not created through wealth creation? What about monopolies?

      I'm not sold on the idea of scarcity myself so don't think I am completely hostile to your viewpoint. I do believe the idea that fortunes are always created through the generation of wealth (as opposed to its redistribution) is ludicrous.
  • wrinkles, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Oh, sure that's nice and all, but it's not like they are sacrificing _anything_, for pete's sake. Any blue-collar, paycheck-to-paycheck working stiff who donates $100 is sacrificing a heck of a lot more than they did.

    Yes, it's nice, but they are no freaking saints. What's their alternative? Let their kids piss away the fortune on hookers and cocaine?
    • Jakelshark, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Considering that they are giving alot still matters, a 100 bucks from someone who can barely afford it is a nice gesture but it isnt going to make a difference. And remember, they have the option to sit on the money and squander it how ever they please.

      They are somewhat Saint like in the sense that they are working hard to solve problems, and Bill Gates and such arent going to throw all their money away at once. The need to know how to donate the money before they can...You cant just go about throwing wads of cash at a problem
    • amphora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3They might not be sacrificing much in relation to the working class person who donates $100 but it is an important precedent. The effect of the current $27 billion of the foundation + Warren's $46 billion + the remainder of Bill's fortune (currently $50 billion and sure to grow) will be immeasurable.

      These two men are providing an example of responsible living to the wealthy of America.

    • dreamcore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Interesting, this idea that someone must openly suffer for their good deeds before they are considered valid or worthy of note. What do suppose that is based on?
    • wrinkles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Those two understand very well that TIME is worth way more than money. And for the time they spend (ie SACRIFICE!) making sure their money is wisely spent, I applaud them.
  • nvzblity, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I wonder if buffet wants the name of the foundation to credit him as well, or whether it will remain just the gates foundation.

    with that said, gates foundation has really changed the landscape for those seeking organizational-level grants. From the sciences, health, education, etc. it has been the source of funding where govts fall short. It's money well spent, I'd say.
  • thepaul, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2i agree with nvzbility, it's great they're using their money for more then buying more toys
  • pedmond, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The good news they found ways to delay Alzheimer's. The bad news is they were too late...
  • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3None of this changes the fact that MS sucks. I'm glad that Bill is leaving and MS fanboys can no longer associate his philanthropy with Microsoft.

    Then the world will see what MS truly is. No more Bill Gates to hide behind.
    • Jakelshark, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You are so anti-Microsoft it is frightining. Also last time I checked alot of people didnt like Microsoft because of Gates....

      Also what does this comment have to do with the article other than it mentions Gates being the largest philanthropist of all time?
    • amphora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Your post is ridiculous. I have my own opinions about Microsoft software, Microsoft business tactics, etc. but this is a noble venture that should not be tarnished by ridiculous comments such as yours.
  • steve693, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1Damn those evil greedy capitalist pigs, all they care about is profit and what benefits them. . .I just wish a democrat were in office so we could tax the hell out of them.
  • returnofmalv, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1Just rich people trying to buy love from the general public.
    • gorndog, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Word on the street is that the Oracle from Omaha bet the farm on a bridge match against Bill G and lost, thus explaining this recent bit of generosity.
  • Chiisuchianu, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@ zoomx2 and shogun: both of you are morons. you dont need to fund research and development through a "foundation" or "organization" there are plenty of groups and scientists who you can personally talk or meet with YOURSELF and hand them your money directly, YOURSELF

    its hilarious how you morons think HUGE corporate deals, talks, and documentation are the only ways of getting anything done in this world. stop being such tools. its obvious your entire reality is shaped by what you see in the media. you dont need to pay all the people who organize the papers, make the calls, send the money, cash the money, manage it all, tally it all up. you people are mentally disabled if you think you need all that CLUTTER just to fund someone.

    its funny how no one seems to think you can do anything for YOURSELF these days. how it all has to be processed, be formal and commercial. do everyone a favor and STFU. if you care about where your money is going to and youre retiring it doesnt matter how much of an important person you are. you can take the time to take a 300 dollar round trip air plane ride and meet with these people or (Holy ***** i forgot about all these wonderful technologiez) EMAIL or INSTANT MESSENGER. oh no, wait, hes too big and too important to communicate with someone directly. he needs to pay a chain of morons thousands just to relay a message.

    excuse me, youre so intelligent.
    • dreamcore, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Ever notice how valid points become even more valid when you direct insults at your audience? No? Oh.
  • Dotnetsky, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5There was a young poster of Digg
    Who stated, "Bill Gates is a pig!"
    Though his goals were all lofty
    He was still Microsoftie
    Therefore, just another bigwig.
  • armour, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1there was a good write up in Time magazine on how his foundation got started. He runs it like a business and has mad the results more effective where the money goes. One of the greatest difficulties with giving to some charities is a varring percentage of donated money actually ends up going to work. With some going to advertising , salaries ect ect ect. the biggest thing that really stands out with Bill and Melinda's foundation is the large percentage of money that actually gets put to work. I commend him a Warren on what they are doing. there are many more Billionaires in this world that do very little for charities. Some spend more on trying to go around the world and get in to space Some are in the own little white pod world.

    Then end of it all is these people rich or not are doing something to make a change as much a people see and commend the front line workers of the aid world it must be remembered that it takes money to put them there.

    Do some research of what they do befor you deamonize them http://www.gatesfoundation.org/default.htm
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 73 of 73 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.