when the rich say 'ill give 95% of my billion away over my lifetime' explained

[DeathAngel]

It’s most likely to avoid paying taxes, to protect their children from obscene inheritance taxes. Nobody gives away money of that multitude without an agenda. Look at Bill Gates, he’s one of the least trustworthy people around.

[1714923270]

1714923270

[1714923270]

1714923270

[dunfida]

when the rich say 'ill give 95% of my billion away over my lifetime' they do not mean if they have $1b today they will be at $50m at death. what they actually mean is:

they have $1b in a bank account at 6% interest
meaning it earns $60m a year.
they give just $50m yearly interest away for the next 19 years ... (totalling the $950m pledge)
yet keeping the $1b lump plus earning $10m of personal spending per year

also the % interest is usually more than 6% but they only give 5% to meet their humanitarian/altruistic hustle pledge

enjoy that thought next time the rich try to make it sound like they are going to give up their wealth for humanity.. because reality is they are not.

They are all doing this just for them to get that kind of good image and to those people who doesnt know on how they do play out then they would really be able to believe that those billionaires
are really that indeed generous or really that minding about the humanity but to those who do know the truth then they would really just say "meh". Good thing that you did
make out some explanation on which it is really that something that really good to look at that people at least aware on what are those kind of claims and whatever charitable works that
they've been doing. 

It is really just that a good thing to imagine if you are into those billionaires shoes if you would really be considering on doing such thing or not.
For me then it wont really be that bad since you are really just sharing with the interest that you are getting.

[Zlantann]

enjoy that thought next time the rich try to make it sound like they are going to give up their wealth for humanity.. because reality is they are not.

I usually compare these super-rich individuals in the US with some wealthy businessmen in my country. I see some indigenous billionaires are greedy because of the Giving Pledge founded by Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, and his ex-wife Melinda. I thought these men had pledged to give away a majority of their wealth to help society. But this is an eye opener that what they are giving back to the people are profits that were earned from the people. This has proved the fact that there is no free lunch even in Freetown.

Many other billionaires are so greedy that they don't consider society. They keep on profiting from the community without helping. They will always flaunt their wealth by showcasing luxurious cars, private jets, and yachts. So this set of billionaires has done well for even considering giving back to society. It is their wealth, hence they have the right to handle it the way they want.

[moneystery]

that's what people say that "the rich will remain rich, and the poor will remain poor". even in donating they do not intend to donate completely. they still think about how rich they are and don't really care about how other people feel.

the donations they actually make are like "tricking" other people into pity and sympathy for what they do, but behind it all they only do it to increase their exposure and to make people think that they are like angels from heaven. everything rich people do is only for their own interests, it is not true for humanitarian action and concern for others.

[tiCeR]

when the rich say 'ill give 95% of my billion away over my lifetime' they do not mean if they have $1b today they will be at $50m at death. what they actually mean is:

they have $1b in a bank account at 6% interest
meaning it earns $60m a year.
they give just $50m yearly interest away for the next 19 years ... (totalling the $950m pledge)
yet keeping the $1b lump plus earning $10m of personal spending per year

also the % interest is usually more than 6% but they only give 5% to meet their humanitarian/altruistic hustle pledge

enjoy that thought next time the rich try to make it sound like they are going to give up their wealth for humanity.. because reality is they are not.

That's fine! What's the problem in that? At least they are giving out towards philanthropy. Definitely some people do it as a publicity stunt to increase their reputation and to make their brand more visible. But there are some billionaires who does all this philanthropic works without letting the media know.

It's impossible to find things which are straight as arrow. At the end of the day everything boils down to the business.

I think franky1 mentioned something that is important to note when making up our minds about someone claiming to be most philanthropic philanthrop in the world. When Bill Gates says that, everyone should know that he is building an entire corporate empire around agriculture, pharmaceutics, gene-editing businesses and many others.

Please note that this is no criticism Bill Gates is supporting these industries. It's great, someone should do it and someone has to do it for the sake of enabling people around the world to live a better and longer life.

But it is often portrayed as being an act of altruism and this is where franky1 now chimed in with some important info. There is nothing bad with bringing this up because I am sure that most people read headlines about billionaires giving away their fortune exactly as franky1 implied they would read it. 

[_BlackStar]

-snip-

They are all doing this just for them to get that kind of good image and to those people who doesnt know on how they do play out then they would really be able to believe that those billionaires
are really that indeed generous or really that minding about the humanity but to those who do know the truth then they would really just say "meh". Good thing that you did
make out some explanation on which it is really that something that really good to look at that people at least aware on what are those kind of claims and whatever charitable works that
they've been doing. 

It is really just that a good thing to imagine if you are into those billionaires shoes if you would really be considering on doing such thing or not.
For me then it wont really be that bad since you are really just sharing with the interest that you are getting.

Oh wow - you sniff out the motive well, mate.
The main motive is because people like that just really want their image as rich people to improve. It doesn't matter to me at all regardless of how charitable they want to be and how they make money for charity - but when they claim to be the best among other charitable people, then that is the problem.

Rich people will keep getting richer because of the system and the way they maintain and build their wealth. They can do charity without reducing their wealth - in fact the value will continue to increase as they do charity, that is the power of money from the wealth they have.

[KingsDen]

when the rich say 'ill give 95% of my billion away over my lifetime' they do not mean if they have $1b today they will be at $50m at death. what they actually mean is:

they have $1b in a bank account at 6% interest
meaning it earns $60m a year.
they give just $50m yearly interest away for the next 19 years ... (totalling the $950m pledge)
yet keeping the $1b lump plus earning $10m of personal spending per year

also the % interest is usually more than 6% but they only give 5% to meet their humanitarian/altruistic hustle pledge

enjoy that thought next time the rich try to make it sound like they are going to give up their wealth for humanity.. because reality is they are not.

Good to know this, I haven't really thought about this and when I read that rich men give 95% of their wealth, I would think it is their whole net worth value.
But I would still be confused while such rich men don't go bankrupt. Now I know what happens, thanks.
That will also mean they might not be able to pay taxes because of the charity they do with their interest.

[franky1]

the funniest part is
these small "4% contributions to society" dont actually draw down someones wealth by 4% a year
dont go to independent foodbanks/shelters. but instead fund go to some foundation where the donator is a trustee or on the board. and its used to generate new business.. and the original 4% becomes a tax writeoff meaning they pay 4% less on the other 96%

its all business tricks to generate business but to make their employees and customers feel empathy for the rich rather then think he is greedy for accumulating.. and when they do these pledges. where they say "more people should join my pledge" its a call of.. "dont feel guilt or regret, now gimme your money"

where these other donations and circulating of donations between each others trust and all the business creations put these guys wealth not at a 4% draw down per year but a wealth increase per year.. and we still see 'starvation', 'displacement', 'civil unrest' in news headlines

i have more money then i need. and for a while i was pondering all the ways to best utilise my btc when i finally decide to exit because it will be way more than my lifetime would handle. so when looking into all these pledges. i started to see all the holes in it

[Alpha Marine]

 It's rare that I see billionaires who always help those in need, especially during times of calamity. Only a few people know whether it is the rich who really care about the poor or the so-called philanthropists.

This is not true. A lot of billionaires help out. You can say that they just do very little, but it's their money and they can use it for charity however they want. It's their money.
The problem is most of the money they donate doesn't get to the people who really need it. 
A lot of billionaires and millionaires are funding charity projects around the globe and it's their money. They can decide to do no charity at all and they will not be wrong in any way because it's their money.

[Upgrade00]

I don't admire those people, nor would I ever want to be in their shoes, because I'm pretty sure that most of them are not happy people who wake up in the morning without a twinge of conscience that with their way of life make the world the way it is today. People who consider it a success in my opinion have a big problem in distinguishing the good from the bad.

We can have different perspectives on things and I am open to contrary views, but I do not think the rich are villains simply for owning more wealth, or that they would have a sad life cause they are richer than majority of the world population.
I do not also think they have a responsibility to the world due to how much wealth they have amassed.

Anyone who thinks they need billions of dollars to be happy and successful while at the same time half of humanity is literally starving and has no basic medical care is to me personally someone to be despised not admired.

Wealthy people do not actually own billions of liquid cash. For the most part their wealth is stored up in stocks of businesses they own and have built from the ground up. I will not expect them to crumble their businesses and give it up to charity while surviving on what they have left (which is enough to survive on). Weirdly, if we took out a couple of billionaires along with their networths, the life of the majority of the population will remain the same.

The politicians are 100% to blame for the half of humanity that are starving; they make stupid policies, start silly wars and only exist for more control, but somehow entrepreneurs he laddened with the blame.

[franky1]

It's rare that I see billionaires who always help those in need, especially during times of calamity. Only a few people know whether it is the rich who really care about the poor or the so-called philanthropists.

This is not true. A lot of billionaires help out. You can say that they just do very little, but it's their money and they can use it for charity however they want. It's their money.
The problem is most of the money they donate doesn't get to the people who really need it.  
A lot of billionaires and millionaires are funding charity projects around the globe and it's their money. They can decide to do no charity at all and they will not be wrong in any way because it's their money.

we all get that. but as you say..
when they make a pledge to donate 95% of wealth.. but their wealth increases
when they say donate it to help others.. but it doesnt get to the people who really need it.
when they say altruism.. but it turns out to be a tax dodge or wealth creation

then what was the point of the pledge

i understand its their money, their choice and shoudnt have to pander to the masses.. but why pledge then(rhetorical)

lets take FTX ex-ceo scam bankman fraud...
his altruistic pledge.. but how many tins of baked beans did he donate to foodbanks vs buy houses for his parents

[harapan]

I remember a very long time ago while I was still in high school, I read an article that said Bill Gates as Warren Buffett give out 90% of their earnings away. A part of me couldn't understand how a human being can give out 90% of his net worth to charity because to be frank I can't do it and I'm pretty generous with the little I have. Then I get confused even further when a year later, I still see these same people among the richest people in the world. So to me it was like either the article I read was false or these men make so much money that subtracting 90% of their net worth won't take them away from the top. I use to assume so many things then.
I also assume the money given away to charity was also calculated as their current net worth.
Now it all makes sense to me.
Well, giving up 5% of $1b for 19 years is no small task though.

[franky1]

I remember a very long time ago while I was still in high school, I read an article that said Bill Gates as Warren Buffett give out 90% of their earnings away. A part of me couldn't understand how a human being can give out 90% of his net worth to charity because to be frank I can't do it and I'm pretty generous with the little I have. Then I get confused even further when a year later, I still see these same people among the richest people in the world. So to me it was like either the article I read was false or these men make so much money that subtracting 90% of their net worth won't take them away from the top. I use to assume so many things then.
I also assume the money given away to charity was also calculated as their current net worth.
Now it all makes sense to me.
Well, giving up 5% of $1b for 19 years is no small task though.

these days putting 4% a year into a foundation/trust you manage is charity
these days using foundation funds to buy up agricultural land, displacing farmers is charity
these days displacing hundreds of farmers family, to then put one manager inplace to tend the land is charity
these days mass production harvests and selling it to impoverished countries government at higher rate than local farmers is charity
these days governments then distributing that harvest to the poor, thus not allowing the poor the need to farm/sell own produce is charity

when 'big-agri' displaced african farmers and big agri harvested rice was sold to african gov and NGO's who then gave it "for free" to the displaced as charity. it then caused other local farmers not handing land to big-agri to go out of business.. after all how can they sell their local rice if the big-agri is giving it away to everyone

[Alpha Marine]

lets take FTX ex-ceo scam bankman fraud...
his altruistic pledge.. but how many tins of baked beans did he donate to foodbanks vs buy houses for his parents

Yea, I get it, a lot of them pledge all that for their selfish reasons, be it to avoid taxes, to make more money, or to seem good in the eyes of the public. A good number of them are frauds in this regard, I know. I didn't know about the interest they pay instead of the actual amount you talked about till today, but I always knew there was no way they would be giving 95% of their net worth away.

My reply was to the post that said "It's rare to see a billionaire helping those in need". I don't think that's true. Generalizing like that isn't fair on the ones that actually help don't you think? Because there are millionaires and billionaires actually helping instead of just acting like they're helping.

[Bananington]

Well, I for one would not really blame the rich for saying or making such a pledge because in all sincerity, any person willing to do such already has a secure financial aid anytime they want and even if they do not want it.
They know that money comes with value and even if they give out such amount, the value that got them such wealth will still shine on.
Afterall, what is it that they say about a good name. It is better than riches, because it is what brings riches, if it is from a truly genuine source.

[franky1]

My reply was to the post that said "It's rare to see a billionaire helping those in need". I don't think that's true. Generalizing like that isn't fair on the ones that actually help don't you think? Because there are millionaires and billionaires actually helping instead of just acting like they're helping.

there are people that do help.. but its more about of the billions shuffling around. how much of it actually gets to the intended frontline need to actually help those that need help

for instance where im from there is a foodbank "trust" registered charity, that asks for financial donations. aswell as food
but if i was to donate:
£100 to the "trust" charity
vs
40 tins of beans (£100) to the local front line foodbank

the monetary £100 of donation to a "charity" does not end up as 40 tins of beans

just checking out their annual reports shows
charity income: £34m
£28m goes to the "foodbanks" grants (82%)
but wait. that is not 82% going to buy food. its grants..
these grants end up paying for admin of referral services locally authorising vouchers. and advertising local campaigns.. training staff, offering other hardship advice(debt, financial advice, help to get social security payments, budgeting, downsizing), etc etc etc
of the £100 monetary donation less than £10 ends up as food

[barisbilgili]

that's what people say that "the rich will remain rich, and the poor will remain poor". even in donating they do not intend to donate completely. they still think about how rich they are and don't really care about how other people feel.

the donations they actually make are like "tricking" other people into pity and sympathy for what they do, but behind it all they only do it to increase their exposure and to make people think that they are like angels from heaven. everything rich people do is only for their own interests, it is not true for humanitarian action and concern for others.

It is true that some people who have a lot of wealth make donations just to get recognition from other people that they have a lot of wealth and will not care about the people they help, they have interests for themselves, they will still have quite a lot of wealth. what they have and what they give is only a little of what they have, you are right that the poor remain poor because it is very difficult to improve their financial condition.

[Razmirraz]

In general he has fulfilled his promise, but there are conditions. This condition is used by these people to fulfill their humanitarian promise by paying in installments for the next 19 years. It's a truly extraordinary mathematical calculation, they seem to be very generous in keeping their humanitarian promises. Even though they only use a certain percentage of the interest earned from their savings at the bank.

This method is very effective in attracting the sympathy of poor people. If they run for legislative office, they are certain to win the election. Usually people like this don't really care about the poor, in theory they don't donate their property, but rather their monthly income obtained from bank interest.

[inthelongrun]

It is true that rich people giving a lot of money doesn't mean they are giving up their wealth. But most if not all of these giving or donating stuff, are actually through their foundations. It means that rich people's tax gets minimized to the lowest levels. Having foundations and charities is the best way of avoiding tax legally. So they're paying very low taxes plus they're receiving a good image from communities and governments. It's like having free advertisements then.

And rich people have little cash in the banks. They're investing it from different types of assets, be it lands, bonds, stocks or even constructing huge projects that will grow the value of their money over time. Rich people are masters of avoiding inflation which is why they're rich.

[pinggoki]

  Most rich people make a lot of promises that, in the end, always fall short of the truth. There is also the saying "The rich get richer and the poor get poorer." This saying is also true.

  There are also many rich people who say that they will help with the events, but in reality, it is also true that those promises are not fulfilled. It's rare that I see billionaires who always help those in need, especially during times of calamity. Only a few people know whether it is the rich who really care about the poor or the so-called philanthropists.

Don't be too surprised most of them doing this humanitarian pledge don't do this out of the goodness of their hearts, charity money is a way for them to not pay their taxes hell there's probably even more evil billionaires or rich people out there that's using charity as a way to funnel themselves laundered money so they don't have to pay any taxes that could've helped the people of the country much more since taxes are useful in terms of social welfare programs. Can't really do anything about them doing this, unless the working class is fed up with all the suffering then right now, there's nothing that we can do about it.