Thirty US billionaires pledge to give away half their fortunes to charity

[Turborama]

Source: The Guardian

The world of philanthropy got a huge financial boost today as more than 30 American billionaires pledged to give away at least half of their fortunes to charitable causes, signing up to a campaign launched by Warren Buffett and Bill Gates.

In an unprecedented mass commitment, top figures including New York's mayor Michael Bloomberg, the hotel heir Barron Hilton, CNN media mogul Ted Turner, and the Star Wars director George Lucas lent their names to the "giving pledge", an initiative founded last month to encourage America's richest families to commit money to "society's most pressing problems".

The pledge is not a legally binding contract but is described as a moral commitment. Buffett, the legendary Nebraska-based financier known as the "sage of Omaha", welcomed the influx of support: "At its core, the giving pledge is about asking wealthy families to have important conversations about their wealth and how it will be used. We're delighted that so many people are doing that."

He added that many of those involved were committing sums far greater than the 50% minimum. Buffett himself is handing the vast bulk of his $47bn fortune to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which is largely orientated towards tackling disease in developing countries.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/aug/04/us-billionaires-half-fortune-gates

---

More names and numbers at the link.

[JuniperLea]

1. Jesus said to give it all away...

But half is a good start.

[Ikonoklast]

14. I wish I had Billions.

For purely selfish reasons...I think giving it away to those in real need would bring *me* untold happiness.

So I keep, say, fifty million. Plenty for my families needs, the rest would go to feed, clothe, and shelter the neediest people, maybe job training or schooling for those desirous but broke.


You can renovate, insulate, pay utilities, and help a lot of needy seniors stay in their homes with that kind of coin.


It would be fun.

[Stumbler]

29. I've known since 8th grade

if I had *only* $3 million I could invest it in CDs at a credit union and live modestly off the interest for the rest of my life without ever having to work again. Granted, I'm one of those "un-American" types who values spending my free time with my family, or traveling or having the option to be a perpetual college student over owning 15 luxury houses and 30 sports cars a new designer wardrobe every 6 weeks.

But instead I get to watch people with more money than God telling us that we've got too much and they need more ... in order to help us, of course.

[JuniperLea]

36. Hear, hear!

It would be greatly satisfying, and so much fun. Imagine the faces turning from despair, to appreciation, to calm, and to pure joy!

I'd figure out how much it would cost to keep me in Winnebago's (or alternative fuel transportation) for the rest of my life, keep a small home base that also served as a home office to manage the philanthropy (keep family employed doing that), start trust funds to keep it all going, and spend time traveling and giving the rest of it away. I'd visit local, small construction companies and pay them to update, upgrade, and generally fix up slums... give the people in those slums an account at local small businesses where they can get food and clothing... this gives the local businesses a boost as well. This idea of "trickle-up" economy would be an awesome legacy! But it would be far more fun to be the "Mystery Woman" who wanders the US, and the world, doing good for all she encounters... and never getting her name printed anywhere... completely anonymous. What a great dream.

[skoalyman]

64. If I had billions Id put it to a good cause like

making the other billionaires miserable :evilgrin: :toast:

[golfguru]

92. I am not jealous of others

who are rich.

[Hosnon]

53. What he said isn't that determinative.

Unless, of course, all these people profess to be Christians (or followers of Christ's philosophy).

I for one won't piss all over this. It should be applauded and not sneered at as a half-measure.

[JuniperLea]

56. Who is sneering?

I've worked for many billionaires in my life, including one on this list. :eyes:

I'm one of the first to point out that not all are greedy... I've had many an argument here about this... most recently when I noted that one of my bosses spent more on her wedding dress than Chelsea spent on her entire wedding, and that I thought (and still do) that she was actually quite frugal.

[fasttense]

84. I'll sneer.

How did they get their wealth? How much of America did they destroy in the process? How many people were exploited? How much of our commons did they exploit in order for them to amass their fortunes? How many more people could have been lifted from poverty if they had NOT grabbed up all the wealth?

Without the rest of us Americans they could not have made such huge sums. In fact many would have been in the unemployment lines beside us if they had NOT used our government for a bailout, if they had not gotten their tax cuts during a time of war, if they had not been able to avoid fighting in their ill conceived wars, if they had NOT avoided paying their fair share of taxes.

What right do they have to determine where their ill-gotten gains belong? Shouldn't that right be given to us who supported them and made their vast fortunes possible? They don't deserve such vast amounts of wealth, no one does. It is sickening to see them spend millions on minor objects while Americans are starving, homeless and unemployed. And now they can pass it all on to the lucky sperm club without paying any taxes on it. Maybe, if they had been paying their fair share all along America wouldn't be in the 2nd RepubliCON Great Depression.

We made their wealth possible, what right do they have to determine how to redistribute it?

[hedgehog]

94. Hear, hear!

:toast:

[lib_wit_it]

98. Believing this, as we do, is the main difference between us and the RepubliCONs. Considering how

much they are offended by the unfairness of the fact that a tiny percentage of Americans get Welfare, you'd think they believed in some sort of economic fairness, but they don't when it comes to those few who hold the great majority of our nation's wealth. Hypocrites. (Newsflash, right? :sarcasm:)

[SammyWinstonJack]

105. +1

:applause:

[Igel]

74. He also said not to judge.

Could a billionaire meet with God's approval? Sure. "With God, all things are possible."

[hedgehog]

95. It's not judging to take notice when someone is picking your pocket.

[Newest Reality]

2. I am very skeptical

because philanthropy has been a Trojan Horse, historically.

What looks like altruistic charity from these wealthy elites often proves to be an extension of their influence and power in drag.

[Enrique]

4. especially when tax cuts are being discussed right now n/t

[roxiejules]

20. Exactly...

the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation seems to be such.

[hedgehog]

96. Prime example: The Heritage Foundation

Slogan" Using our tax write-off to write tax policy!"

[defendandprotect]

108. Interesting -- n/t

[defendandprotect]

107. Right -- look at GATES and his control now over public education . . .!!

[BumRushDaShow]

3. They should give it back to the treasury

and pay what they should have been paying for years.

[Oregone]

9. Agreed

[wordpix]

17. +1 the corporations are getting away with paying nothing some years including Exxon & GE

[NashVegas]

33. +10,000

[donheld]

80. Only if they could demand none of it could go to the

Department of Defense or any of the military industrial complex.

[Roland99]

5. MSNBC says it's 40

40 billionaires pledge to give away half of wealth
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38556042/ns/us_news-giving/

[Fearless]

6. How about they CREATE JOBS? You know... the gift that keeps giving?

[JerseygirlCT]

55. Depending on the charities they choose, they likely will

create jobs by donating.

[Fearless]

67. Now this I've got to see.

[JerseygirlCT]

70. Just a snippet

and the data is a bit older - but to give you an idea:
http://philanthropyjournal.blogspot.com/2010/02/nonprofit-sector-needs-to-be-better.html

Among data in the report:

• Over 1.5 million nonprofits are registered in the U.S., nearly 64 percent of them public charities, nearly 8 percent private foundations, and 29 percent other types of nonprofits.

• In 2005, the nonprofit sector overall employed 12.9 million people, or 10 percent of the workforce,

• From 1998 to 2005, nonprofit employment overall grew 16.4 percent, compared to 6.2 percent for overall employment in the U.S.

• In 2004, the charitable sector alone employed an estimated 9.4 million people, or over 7 percent of the U.S. workforce, plus the equivalent of 4.7 million full-time volunteer workers.

• Based on employment, the charitable sector is larger than the construction sector and larger than the finance, insurance and real-estate sectors combined, and it has nearly half as many employees as federal, state and local government combined.

• In 2009, public charities reported $1.4 trillion in total revenue and $2.6 trillion in assets, while private foundations reported $181 billion in revenue and $621 billion in assets, and other nonprofits reported $386 billion in revenue and over $1 trillion in assets.

• In 2008, a broad category of nonprofits known as “nonprofit institutions serving households,” a subset of the overall nonprofit sector, generated 5.2 percent of U.S. gross domestic product, or GDP, representing $751.2 billion worth of output.

• Nonprofits’ share of GDP grew 0.4 percentage points from 1998 to 2008, consisting of wages paid to nonprofit employees, the rental value of assets owned and used by nonprofits while providing services, and rental income from tenant-occupied housing nonprofits own.

• Charities raised $1.2 trillion in revenue in 2005, with fees or private payments for service accounting for 49 percent of overall revenue and government grants and contracts accounting for 29 percent; private contributions, return on investments, and other sources accounted for the remainder.

• Total revenue for charitable institutions grew 68.6 percent from 1995 to 2005.

• During the recession, from 2007 to 2008, charitable giving fell 2 percent in nominal terms, and 5.7 percent adjusted for inflation.


Now, that's just the immediate impact on non-profit jobs. Then there's what happens moving out - non-profits use printers, designers, office supplies, and all sorts of other for-profit businesses, depending on the scope of the non-profit's mission.

Plus, those in the social service area are helping people get back on their feet and allowing them to contribute more to society.

There's nothing wrong with donating to charity. It allows the donor to make some choices about priorities, yes. And we might not agree with the priorities selected by these billionaires. But the non-profits of this country do an awful lot of good across a really broad spectrum of interests and issues. Charity is a good thing.

[snot]

7. WHICH "charity"?

"Arguments that charities can do the job better than government are naive . . . . About 90 percent of charity funds are both collected and spent locally, which means that rich communities tend to have well-funded charities, and poor communities tend to have poorly funded ones. For this reason, only 10 percent of all charitable donations are directed to the poor. Re-allocating charity donations to the communities that need them most will incur intense political opposition from the communities that fund them."

More at http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-welfarecharity.htm

Also,

"In recent years there has been a disturbing trend in the number of people who have "donated" their money to support organizations. Wealthy businessmen donate the necessary sums to these support organizations in order to get their tax breaks. The assumption is these organizations will dispense the money to legitimate charitable organizations.

However, the system is inherently flawed. The members of each organization's respective board control the funds that come into the hands of these supporting organizations. The "donors" directly appoint these members and frequently place themselves at the head of the board. Once money is put into a supporting organization, they deploy a team of lawyers to conjure a legal melee that lasts until the closing of the fiscal year and be forced to actually pay as little as 5 percent of that money to charity. It would seem that wealthy businessmen can not only get their tax breaks, but also they can keep 95 percent of the money they were supposed to donate in the process."

More at http://www.ncrp.org/news-room/news-2005/343-charity-loopholes-benefit-rich

[Oregone]

10. Pet charities that they are on the boards of

[Ignis]

68. Bingo!

Giving to the Gates Foundation is not the same as giving to Oxfam.

Still, this is better than nothing. Maybe. Hopefully. :shrug:

[Matariki]

8. That's a positive thing. Good on them.

[aquart]

31. They're going to fund conservative think tanks.

They're going to give money to preserve the Bush legacy.

To combat evil socialism and unionism.

To continue privatizing education.

To endow right wing historical distortion chairs in our universities.

[Matariki]

66. Where are you getting your information?

I would expect that each individual will give to their preferred charity and those will be diverse.

What a knee-jerk reaction. Why does everything have to be so negative?

[aquart]

73. Where are you getting your altruism?

They will put the money in places that agree with their ideas. They're funding CHARITIES. (Once they've taken every dime, we will be allowed to beg for help from their CHARITIES.) Non-profits. Where are the Microsoft billions going today, right now? They are funding projects designed to speed the privatization of public schools. Damn, that's generous!

[liberal N proud]

11. The will still be filthy rich

And have more money than they could possibly spend.

[Xenotime]

13. Agreed. It's sad that they can never be humbled.

[mainer]

104. So it's only good if they grovel and kowtow to you?

I really have nothing against George Lucas and Warren Buffett. And I don't see why so many people want them face-down in the mud so they can be stomped on, which is what's necessary to make some people here happy.

[glitch]

87. They'll still be billionaires.

Even if they return another half to the economies they took them from in the first place.

Still, it's a start. Possibly their webcrawlers have been picking up a markedly increased used of the word "guillotine", which they find strange for a New American Century.

[bloomington-lib]

12. Although I'm happy they're giving so much money to charity but

it seems investing it in renewable energy would do more good. Help the environment, create jobs, advance technology, etc. It's a long term solution compared to "tackling disease in developing countries", which is a very limited short term solution.

[Ticonderoga]

15. Now seriously,

How can we possibly expect a man to try to live on a measly $500,000,000.00 bucks?

[wordpix]

16. Good! Thank you Bill and Melinda Gates

:applause:

[onehandle]

18. How many Wal-Mart Billionaires are on that list?

Let me guess.

[CLANG]

32. The answer is zero:

[Hawkeye-X]

48. Thomas S. Monaghan - of Domino fame and Ave Maria fame

I am very, very suspicious.

As well as T. Boone Pickens.

[wordpix]

19. I find it ironic that on this page is the ad "Keep the Bush Tax Cuts"

Rachel did a piece on this group last night, "League of American Voters," who are a "non-profit" of profiteering corporate whore masters.

[w4rma]

21. Isn't the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation trying to tear down public education and replace it with

charters?

[Vincardog]

23. YES The Gates foundation IS trying to tear down public education and replace it with CHARTERS

And Complete the destruction of American Public Education in the process

[Lightning Count]

25. Gates is in a no-win situation.

The Gates Foundation does a lot of good for a lot of people. Supplying vaccines to the peoples of Africa is just one example. I'm always amazed that people feel the need to denigrate Gates. When compared to other billionaires such as Steve Jobs, Oprah, etc., he should serve as a shining example.

[w4rma]

34. Well if he didn't use his charity to push an anti-public education agenda it wouldn't be attacked.nt

[Lightning Count]

35. Yes, trying to get good schools in low-income areas is hard to support

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/11/note-embargoed-until-1015.html

We definitely need a major change in education in this country. Maybe something more akin to Japan's system.

[w4rma]

41. No. Trying to make money for his billionaire friends by diverting public funding to them is hard to

support. Especially at the expense of very good public schools and very good public school teachers and very good teacher unions.

[Lightning Count]

42. How is he diverting public money?

He is giving money to these low-income charter schools. This does not take away funding to the LA school system.

[w4rma]

43. Charter schools are built to make a profit for somebody. Usually the loophole is through paying

exorbitant rates to a for-profit real estate company.

[Lightning Count]

45. This still does not explain how it diverts funds from the public schools.

Unfortunately, in many places with decaying school districts, there are not many options. Alternative schools are therefore sought after.

[w4rma]

49. Intentionally decayed for an excuse for "alternatives"? (nt)

[Lightning Count]

50. No, places like the L.A. school system spends an incredible amount per student.

The results are just not there. The reasons are likely plethora.

[JuniperLea]

57. This is pure Eli Broad bashing at its best...

Amazing, isn't it? A billionaire giving his money away is a bad thing now? He's always been about accountability... I do believe this is where the rub resides. The point is to create a self-propelled system... yes, these schools make money, of course they do. And the money goes back into the schools... they become self-supporting and will eventually rely less and less on taxes.

[Lightning Count]

59. He could cure cancer with massive investment and only ask 1$ for each dose of cure.

And people would be seething. Not sure what accounts for the phenomena.

[JuniperLea]

61. I don't have a clue either...

But it's ugly. And it speaks more of then than it does of Broad.

[w4rma]

71. How do these schools become "less and less" reliant on taxes unless the plan is to do away with

education for the poor and the middle class? Is your plan to suck less than upper-class Americans for all of our money through fees?

[JuniperLea]

89. I'm not sure how you can extrapolate this fertilizer from what I said...

When a school system generates profit, and that profit is returned to the system to allow expansion and continuation, it's for all people. I'm not sure how you arrived at that classist fertilizer. And I fail to see how you can ignore the logic in a self sustained system.

[w4rma]

90. And the PROFIT comes from our tax dollars. So what BS are you making up with being able to do away

with taxes just because the school has been handed over to a private billionaire?

[JuniperLea]

91. Please try to stay with me...

All education right now is funded by our tax dollars; unless something drastic changes, it will always be so, and the cost will increase exponentially every year.

Schools that are run AT PROFIT, and have THAT PROFIT put back into the system, will either REDUCE the tax burden on WE THE PEOPLE, or in a perfect world, ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR TAXES FOR EDUCATION.

Really, it's that simple. Even the most simple minded of us should be able to grasp this.

We're talking FISCAL and ACADEMIC responsibility here. Another uber simple concept.

Another simple concept you should wrap your mind around is the fact that it's illegal to make a PERSONAL PROFIT off philanthropic work. So to say that a billionaire is going to profit is beyond disingenuous, it's a bold faced lie.

[w4rma]

93. That is complete BS. The PROFIT from a public system goes back into the school system. The PROFIT

from a private system WILL be re-diverted to make someone rich and will NOT be put back into the system. (period)

Yes, I know these things are classified as non-profits, but with clever accounting (like redirecting real estate rent to a for-profit corporation) is IS re diverted. And because these are privately owned systems, the public has to fight to get at the books just to prove there is a problem and when there is a problem the ONLY choice is to de-commission the school which will also be a long drawn out fight wasting public resources.

[JuniperLea]

97. Talk about BS... you've just shown your ignorance card...

Non-profit companies, and philanthropic companies, are watched like hawks. I've worked for both in an accounting capacity. Clearly you've pulled this entire screed right out of your ass. Show me one instance where "the public has to fight to get at the books just to prove there is a problem...."

[roxiejules]

44. Dark cloud over good works of Gates Foundation

from 2007 - LA Times investigation

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-na-gatesx7jan07-sg,0,2046572.storygallery

[MilesColtrane]

22. See? The underclass really doesn't NEED Social Security.

It can just sponge off of the largesse of our noble billionaires.

All the more reason to slash entitlements to the bone!

[roxiejules]

24. How about donate the money to Elizabeth Warren and ....

let her decide the definition of charitable organizations!

[aquart]

26. Oh, goody. Conservative think tanks forever endowed.

While Americans starve.

These people are insufficiently taxed.

[LostinVA]

27. Oprah gives away a huge amount of money every year

Most od it into the community in some direct way, including college scholarships, where the students HAVE to work the summers in some type of disadvantaged area 9inner city, Appalachia, Indian Reservations, etc.).

Oprah drives me bonkers, but she remembers what it's like to be a poor girl.

[Lightning Count]

30. She's also made some incredibly callous comments

"I became so frustrated with visiting inner-city schools that I just stopped going. The sense that you need to learn just isn't there. If you ask the kids what they want or need, they will say an iPod or some sneakers. In South Africa, they don't ask for money or toys. They ask for uniforms so they can go to school."

[LostinVA]

37. But I think she is right and that that isn't callous

And, it isn't the kids' fault, it's a society that doesn't really honor education like it should, and by society, I mean the US.

[Lightning Count]

38. Sounded callous to me.

But inflection is important. I was just posting somewhere else that we should explore a system more like Japan's.

[LostinVA]

40. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt on this one

This time, since I've read about things she does.

[LanternWaste]

46. I would imagine that if one believes inflection...

I would imagine that if one believes inflection is important to any statement, then it would be disingenuous to call a statement callous unless having heard the inflection...

[LostinVA]

54. Whatever, LW

teehee

:pals:

[global1]

28. The Predictions Of 2012 Must Be Right And These Billionaires Want To Make Peace With Their God......

to assure them a place in heaven. They are feeling guilty and they probably think that if they give half their fortunes away to charity - this will buy them their place in heaven.

[JuniperLea]

58. Some are actually Democrats...

With life-long philanthropic ideals. It's wrong to paint with such a broad brush.

[Spazito]

39. I wish they would take half of that half, pool it and start a network...

that actually reports the news without punditry, slants, defense industry ownership.

Wishful thinking on my part, I know.

[glinda]

47. If they corrected their behavior there wouldn't be such a huge need for charity.

[Javaman]

51. Let's check the score card in a year. nt

[russspeakeasy]

52. I hope like hell they hurry. I have a car payment due.

[Jefferson23]

60. Gates is a God damn liar.

Gates was barely called out when he told the Congressional hearing how he needed H-1B visa's increased....I can't stand that man.

American's are too stupid by comparison according to him and where were our guys telling him he is full of shit?

Feeling the Elephant

By Beryl Lieff Benderly

January 04, 2008

"All the people who put the reports together have one or another of their personal needs fulfilled … but it doesn’t help the nation." - Vivek Wadhwa
A persistent anomaly, the mythology of science tells us, makes scientists curious and, on occasion, leads them to major discoveries. But one conspicuous anomaly has inspired notably little curiosity from the scientific community: the striking discrepancy between the glutted market for early-career scientists and the numerous prestigious reports calling for training and importing ever more scientists to head off a looming shortage. Numerous labor-market experts have found no such shortage, but the highly publicized perception of a dearth, often linked to inadequate K-12 education, persists.

"I’ve puzzled," says Michael Teitelbaum of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, author of numerous labor market studies, in an interview with Science Careers. A number of the shortage proponents "are people I know well and think very highly of." It’s not "a point of view… put forward by hired guns…spouting whatever the client is telling them."

"I’ve been totally puzzled as well" by "all the misinformation out there," agrees former high-tech entrepreneur Vivek Wadhwa, now researching globalization at Duke and Harvard. His studies have revealed "myth after myth," he tells Science Careers. "Every data point I look at seems to be incorrect."

Myth bustersWadhwa found no general shortage, only "specific shortages in…specific areas of technology" such as the newly emerging field of biofuels, he says. Dozens of employers asked to compare American engineers to their much-vaunted colleagues from India and China agreed that "in education, training, quality of work, you name it, in every which way, Americans are better." Even the best schools in those countries "don’t hold a candle to our best schools," he continues. Newly hired American university graduates "become productive within 30 days or so. If you hire a graduate of an Indian university, it takes between 3 and 6 months for them to become productive." The image of shortage arises from "emotion versus fact" and "misinformation that feeds on itself," Wadhwa says.

remainder: http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_development/previous_issues/articles/2008_01_04/caredit_a0800002

[Lost4words]

77. Gates was a BIG Bush supporter and after SCOTUS gave W keys to the WH

Bushes Justice Department dismissed the MicroSoft case while similar cases around the world continued and found MS GUILTY!

I guess you Gates lovers were ok with 8 years of Bush.

[Jefferson23]

78. Are you suggesting I'm a Gates lover?? n/t

[Lost4words]

100. hell no, why would I do that???

sorry If you got that impression. :hi:

[Jefferson23]

103. No problem! I misunderstood.

I thought you were possibly suggesting I was from your statement: "I guess you Gates lovers were ok with 8 years of Bush."


:hi: back at ya Lost4words

[lakers4life24]

62. Waiting for Republiscum

to call this Socialism/Fascism/Marxism/Cummunism and that it is only feeding the lazy drug smoking stray animals that need to stop breeding.

[JDPriestly]

63. Giving away your money is not hard.

Giving away control over how your money is spent in the end is hard.

They need to give up control over how the money is spent. They need to simply let the people through their governments decide how to spend the money.

I used to write grants for a non-profit. I soon learned that foundations play games. They give to the friends of the wealthy donors of the foundation. They like to give to glitzy programs, but not to the grubby programs that work with really needy people.

How much money do you think is spent on feeding and clothing ex-cons when they leave prisons with nowhere to go, estranged from family and too old to work? Now wouldn't that be a really showy project for the Gates Foundation?

How much money goes toward educating American parents about what child abuse is and how to avoid doing it? That's also one that people just don't like to even think about.

How much money goes toward homeless shelters that primarily house and assist minority men? Very little I assure you.

Here in L.A. some years ago, a prominent foundation gave a large grant to one of the members of the family that had set up the foundation to plant corn in an area that was to be a part. In addition, the foundation agreed to fund some of the landscaping and other work on the park. But, why was the family member given so much money to plant a corn field? She claimed it was art. Ridiculous. I will leave it up to you to guess why the foundation gave her the money for planting corn. This is what rich people want when they give away their money -- continued control over the money.

In times of abundance, no one notices, but in these times, we need to share the control and decide as a community how these kinds of resources should be used.

[JDPriestly]

65. Eisenberg is right.

"These mega-foundations, which are effectively family enterprises with no accountability, are going to dictate public policy priorities for this country," said Eisenberg. "I'm not sure that tax receipts haven't done a better job, over time, of meeting the needs of our neediest people, than philanthropists."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/aug/04/us-billionaires-half-fortune-gates

I'm sure that government has done a much better job meeting the needs of the people of our country than have private foundations. My father worked (as a minister) for non-profits serving the poor. I worked for a non-profit serving the homeless. I'm very sure that government does the best job.

These foundations do not give large enough grants to make a real difference. Also, non-profit agencies that actually do the work cannot rely on money from the foundations. The foundations give this year and not next.

I remember when a non-profit I worked for received a generous grant from the foundation of a man who was running for mayor of our city. My boss gave this man a testimonial. I do not know whether there was a quid pro quo deal. But anyway, once the donor was elected mayor, his foundation gave our non-profit no money. So, I learned a lesson about how private philanthropy works. Once a big-businessman, always a big-businessman. It is always about what's in it for them, always.

[maxsolomon]

69. if you wish to eliminate 3rd world diseases, you must also promote

responsible birth rate policies. otherwise, the population explodes exponentially and exceeds the carrying capacity of the land.

guess where we are now?

[rug]

72. That's like a python returning a goat.

[unkachuck]

75. I don't know what it is....

....but there's a 'catch' someplace....these slimy bastards don't spend a lifetime wallowing in greed while chumping us to give it away in the end to benefit us....

....what's the buffer-gate up to? Putting a good face on the evils of capitalism? Heading off revolution?

[Lost4words]

76. after the damage they have collectively done, not nearly enough IMO!

and where do they plan to sent it? To each others organizations OUT of the GD depression reeling USA!

its just sickening, FUCK them!

[daleo]

79. If a rich man going to heaven is like a camel jumping through the eye of a needle

Does a billionaire giving half his fortune away turn it into a half grown camel jumping through the eye of a needle?

[Fool Count]

81. It would have been much better for the society if those "philanthropists"

were generous enough to not have amassed such obscene amounts of money in the first place, via, for instance, paying their employees better salaries
or charging their consumers less outrageous prices for their market-monopolizing products. Then maybe, just maybe, a lot of the problems their generous
charitable donations are supposed to address would not have even existed. Just saying.

[Jennicut]

88. Yup. If they hadn't amassed huge fortunes on the backs of the rest of us perhaps

they wouldn't have to give half away...I don't care if that is socialist thinking or not.

[mainer]

101. Yeah, damn that George Lucas!

If he'd never come up with Star Wars, how much better we all would be! It's all his fault that so many people are poor. He MADE us buy those movie tickets.

[leveymg]

82. Why would anyone want to to tax these nice billionaires? Why, they're giving it away! Actually,

that's the idea. But, not a new one. The Rockefellers, Fords, Carnegies, and other robber barons figured out a way decades ago to keep family money that would otherwise be taxed under the control of family-run foundations. A nice big PR advantage to it, as well. This is just the latest twist on that.

[DailyGrind51]

83. Maybe they could give it to Dems running in 2010 to offset what the GOP is getting?

[davidinalameda]

85. hope they remember that people in the US need help

just as much as people in other parts of the world

[Johnny1974]

86. Billionaires

Good for them! At least some billionaires have humanity left in them.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

99. Talk is cheap

and a pledge is meaningless.

I guess we'll find out how serious they are when they start to die off.

:hi:

[Lance_Boyle]

102. So a bunch of charities will now be headed by new millionaires or billionaires.

The Liddy Dole charity-fare queens and kings of the nonprofit world will milk the cash inflow for all they can, and the intended recipients will get the shaft. I'd hope the 30 people donating at least take the time to pick charities that don't lavish extravagant pay on their executives. But boardrooms at nonprofits now are just like boardrooms of any other companies. A small group of people sit on the boards of most of them and come up with schemes to enrich themselves at the expense of the company.

Why don't the 30 billionaires doing this give the $ to the feds and make 2010 a tax holiday for everyone else?

[defendandprotect]

106. How about the QUEEN/ROYAL FAMILY and THE VATICAN -- ????

Gates Foundation . . . hmmm...

Wasn't this something of the idea presented in Nader's latest book?


Jubilee years --

This is a long held tradition -- the idea of turning back profits --

every 50 years --

POTLATCH was the tradition among native Americans --

[ProgressOnTheMove]

109. Brilliant idea...

I think rather than give money to charity though, they should get more bang for the buck and do random acts of kindness. It's be wise to go to the hardest hit states and invest in green jobs and give donations to other businesses ready to hire. Then give lots to poverty organisations and food banks. Although as nice as the gesture is, it can't be a get clause for tax as a healthy balance sheet helps maintain a 'bailout' for ordinary folks in hard times. Maybe also investments for Greece and Spain would help restore good karma too.