Zuckerbergs give away
Discussion
t anyway.
Plus as long as people have shelter and food, most people are all pretty much at a pre determined level of happiness. Even after tragic or awesome events, they return to that level after a few months.
As many very well off people have realised, the only way fabulous wealth can buy real happiness is to use it for charitable means. It's the act of helping other people that can make someone that is wealthy happy..
As many very well off people have realised, the only way fabulous wealth can buy real happiness is to use it for charitable means. It's the act of helping other people that can make someone that is wealthy happy..
BJG1 said:
allnighter said:
TBH I would do the same if I was only paying £4327 in corporate tax for a whole year.
His company pays a huge amount more corporation tax than that. allnighter said:
BJG1 said:
allnighter said:
TBH I would do the same if I was only paying £4327 in corporate tax for a whole year.
His company pays a huge amount more corporation tax than that. BJG1 said:
allnighter said:
BJG1 said:
allnighter said:
TBH I would do the same if I was only paying £4327 in corporate tax for a whole year.
His company pays a huge amount more corporation tax than that. It isn't evil, criminal or, I'd say, morally dubious. It is simply the efficient commercial use of idiots - either those who subscribe to the system, or those who write and implement the tax legislation in those regions not generally in receipt of large income from Facebook.
Look on the bright side. If we can't make the world's idiots cost-effective through something like Facebook, eventually we're going to have to grind them up and feed them to the pigs.
Classic PH logic:
Person who shares their baby pics on a social network, owned by a corporation and paid for via advertising, with their private group of friends = 'idiot'
Person who shares their every misanthropic thought and deed on a 100% public car forum, owned by a corporation and paid for via advertising = 'legend'
Honestly don't get this 'its cool to bash idiots who use social media' attitude on PH when the PH forum is basically social media on a massive scale!
Not a huge fan of Facebook or Zuck but good on him for this gesture.
Person who shares their baby pics on a social network, owned by a corporation and paid for via advertising, with their private group of friends = 'idiot'
Person who shares their every misanthropic thought and deed on a 100% public car forum, owned by a corporation and paid for via advertising = 'legend'
Honestly don't get this 'its cool to bash idiots who use social media' attitude on PH when the PH forum is basically social media on a massive scale!Not a huge fan of Facebook or Zuck but good on him for this gesture.
darth_pies said:
Classic PH logic:
Person who shares their baby pics on a social network, owned by a corporation and paid for via advertising, with their private group of friends = 'idiot'
Person who shares their every misanthropic thought and deed on a 100% public car forum, owned by a corporation and paid for via advertising = 'legend'
Honestly don't get this 'its cool to bash idiots who use social media' attitude on PH when the PH forum is basically social media on a massive scale!
Not a huge fan of Facebook or Zuck but good on him for this gesture.
Cue instant idiot who doesn't understand the difference between the intrinsic exploitation models of Facebook vs. PH. Person who shares their baby pics on a social network, owned by a corporation and paid for via advertising, with their private group of friends = 'idiot'
Person who shares their every misanthropic thought and deed on a 100% public car forum, owned by a corporation and paid for via advertising = 'legend'
Honestly don't get this 'its cool to bash idiots who use social media' attitude on PH when the PH forum is basically social media on a massive scale!Not a huge fan of Facebook or Zuck but good on him for this gesture.
eharding said:
Cue instant idiot who doesn't understand the difference between the intrinsic exploitation models of Facebook vs. PH.
Care to share?As far as I can see they're both social media platforms selling their product (the users) to their customers (the advertisers).
I use both platforms. One to pontificate about motoring (and other) matters, the other to share photos with friends and family only. On neither do I ever click an advert or interact with the targeted advertising in any way.
Welshbeef said:
Good for him - and with the wealth he has to give away you can make massive impacts.
You physically only need so much £
Can't argue with your second sentence. Unfortunately he's not the first to put billions into charities with the aim of making the world better, alleviating world poverty and hunger etc.You physically only need so much £
It's not worked yet, has it?
Frankly, I'd think more of him if he just stopped taking advertising revenue for facebook, and earned a reasonable living from it some other way. Might make it more of a better world by curbing the manufacturers and suppliers of the junk everyone wants but doesn't need, rather than have high principled but unachievable aims.
REALIST123 said:
Welshbeef said:
Good for him - and with the wealth he has to give away you can make massive impacts.
You physically only need so much £
Can't argue with your second sentence. Unfortunately he's not the first to put billions into charities with the aim of making the world better, alleviating world poverty and hunger etc.You physically only need so much £
It's not worked yet, has it?
Mr Gates has had a fair success at getting rid polio, for example.
darth_pies said:
Not a huge fan of Facebook or Zuck but good on him for this gesture.
The cynic in me feels that yes he's giving money away, awesome. But he's giving it to his own 'charity' that he runs. His previous efforts swallowed up the money in fees and expenses, the output of his philanthropic work seems to be in the creation of computer software. I'd be interested to see what the outcome of his give away is but suspect he's doing this as a tax avoidance/PR thing rather than genuinely giving the money away. Awesome to be proven wrong.Money doesn't fix everything, but it can give it a try!
I'd love to see the top x amount of billionaires that have already committed to giving away their money get together and really try and fix the worlds problems;
Hunger
Environment
Disease
Energy
If Gates, Zuckerberg, Bloomberg, Musk, Ellison, Icahn, Buffet, Blakely, Allen, Potanin, Bhargava, Motsepe, Branson, Premji etc.. got together, combined their wealth, and targetted what they wanted to 'fix' is there really anything they couldn't influence/fix?
I'd love to see the top x amount of billionaires that have already committed to giving away their money get together and really try and fix the worlds problems;
Hunger
Environment
Disease
Energy
If Gates, Zuckerberg, Bloomberg, Musk, Ellison, Icahn, Buffet, Blakely, Allen, Potanin, Bhargava, Motsepe, Branson, Premji etc.. got together, combined their wealth, and targetted what they wanted to 'fix' is there really anything they couldn't influence/fix?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff