West Seattle Blog...

WSB Forum » Politics

1. DP
   Member Profile

   

   Interesting piece in last week's Seattle Times on local robber baron and all-around good-guy Bill Gates:

   http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2012130944_apusgatesbuffettpledge.html

   DP's pithy response (dutifully ignored by the Times editor):

   Billionaire buddies Warren Buffett and Bill Gates are feeling pretty good about their souls these days. However, while they're kibitzing about what portion of their vast fortunes to give away, maybe the rest of us should be asking ourselves how these guys got so rich in the first place. And maybe we should also be asking why we have to depend on the largesse of a few self-appointed saints to fund programs that we all see as necessary.

   When you think about it, it's the billionaires themselves who are the biggest recipients of charity. Public charity, that is, in the form of tax breaks, bailouts, loopholes and other special treatment our government accords to corporations and wealthy individuals. Perhaps if this country had a fairer tax structure, we would already have the money we need to end homelessness, cure disease, and so on. Then we wouldn't have to go begging to the super-rich.

   Granted that government doesn't always spend our money wisely, but at least there is some public accountability there, and there could be even more. With billionaire-funded charities, though, there's none. Today, Gates could decide that he wants to cure malaria. Tomorrow, it might be baldness. And the day after that? Who knows? Whether he realizes it or not, Gates is a bull in the china shop of social programs—programs in which he has much influence but little expertise. Clearly, you can't run a drug research program the way Gates ran Microsoft.

   Or maybe you can. But you shouldn't.

   I know! —Let's pass a law declaring Gates and Buffett saints. Then let's pass another one requiring them to put a right and proper share of their wealth into the commonweal.

   Everybody wins.
    
   —DP

   Posted 1 year ago #         

2. JanS
   Member Profile

   

   oh, good grief...Bill and Melinda Gates do absolutely wonderful things for many worthwhile causes. Would you rather have it be that they are poor, and can't contribute like they do? What is it that you're trying to accomplish with this? Please enlighten me. These two people are who they are....what would you rather have them do with their money?

   Posted 1 year ago #         

3. Carson
   Member Profile

   

   DP, do you really wonder why the Times would ignore that? There are several Billionaires in Seattle (Think:Starbucks, Amazon, Nextel) that have NOT taken a public pledge to give away the majority of their fortune. Gates might be a lot of things, but you are slinging your arrows in the wrong place!

   Posted 1 year ago #         

4. JoB
   Member Profile

   i hate to say this.. but DP has a point...

   if our tax structure was more equitable and our govt expenditures more balanced towards services.. we wouldn't be so dependent upon the largess of the filthy rich..

   that said.. i am glad some of them are willing to do what they can to help

   Posted 1 year ago #         

5. anonyme
   Member Profile

   Wasn't one of Billy's worthy causes a new law building for UW? God knows we need more lawyers, and it's important that they study in posh surroundings as part of their training to be future billionaires.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

6. DP
   Member Profile

   

   Thank you JoB and anonyme. I've set aside a little something for both of you in my will.

   JanS, as to what it is I am trying to accomplish . . . was I somehow unclear about that?

   (Hint: Three letters. Starts with "T", ends with "X".)

   –DP

   Posted 1 year ago #         

7. Smitty
   Member Profile

   Tax the living crap out them!

   How dare they create tens of thousands of high paying jobs, increase the tax base and spur ingenuity and creativity while giving to charitable causes.

   Jerkoffs.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

8. JanS
   Member Profile

   

   from 10 years ago:

   http://www3.sympatico.ca/truegrowth/gates1.html

   from just a few years ago:

   http://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/21-bill-gates

   OK...I think we are all for more equitable taxes, there's no arguing that. But, I do have to give it to Bill Gates and his wife and their foundation for doing what they do. Stop and think how it would be if he decided to be selfish, and just keep it for himself, and not do what he does.

   If your taxes, my taxes, you know , us "common folk" (what BP calls the "small people"), if our taxes were more equitable, would we be so generous with our money? Or would we just be happy with the fact that now we have more money? I would be the first one to volunteer that I would have a difficult time not being somewhat selfish.

   We all see things through different eyes at times.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

9. DP
   Member Profile

   

   Agreed.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

10. MrJT
    Member Profile

    

    DP - You need a new avatar. It's quite contrary to any of your thoughts.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

11. JoB
    Member Profile

    Smitty..

    Bill Gates is unusual for the filthy rich in that he has actually created tens of thousands of high paying jobs... and in America too.

    mostly that stuff that was supposed to trickle down ... seems to be have been sucked up.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

12. HMC Rich
    Member Profile

    

    DP and JoB, what tax structure do you want?

    I would say that filthy rich jerk and Paul Allen helped out quite immensely

    40,000 in Puget Sound

    2010-135,000
    2009-95,000
    2008-89,809
    In 139 countries.

    And you two have created how many jobs?

    Posted 1 year ago #         

13. HMC Rich
    Member Profile

    

    Just so you know. I have not created any jobs yet, but hope to soon. I am leaning towards a national consumption tax.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

14. HolyKow
    Member Profile

    

    Here it is.

    Every one is in for 10% of total gross pay.

    5% federal sales tax on everything.

    States figure it our on their own, pay to play or X% income tax and all services are cheaper or free at time of service.

    there are no loopholes, there are no exceptions.

    EVERYONE PAYS.

    Tax code, simplified.

    If you do not like taxes and government, move to Somalia, they have a distinct lack of both.

    hk

    Posted 1 year ago #         

15. autumn
    Member Profile

    I just read that bill gates' net worth is
    $53 Billion dollars. $53 billion dollars.
    It's worth repeating.
    How can this seem right to anybody? He did something ingenuis, that's great but he also amassed his fortune with huge amounts of public resources and cheap labor in China. The question is:
    Should anybody be able to horde that much wealth?
    (Hording IS a sickness)
    Especially while the majority of the world population lives in dire poverty.

    See, 100's of millions of dollars seems like a lot to the average citizen because it is, but if you are worth over fifty billion dollars then 100's of millions is irrelevent.

    Nobody is so important that they get to hold vast amounts of the wealth and then deem which cause is worthy of their pittance.

    So, what shall be done?

    Posted 1 year ago #         

16. JanS
    Member Profile

    

    I do believe that we can't just take it away from him or anyone else. We can't pass a law that says you are only allowed to earn X amount of dollars in your lifetime. I don't believe it's up to me to tell him what he can and can't do with his money, just as he can't tell me.

    That question "what shall be done?" What would you do?

    Posted 1 year ago #         

17. JoB
    Member Profile

    JanS..

    We can tax them equitably...

    HMCRich...

    I do create jobs:)
    I have created large salary paying jobs in the past...
    currently i employ students :)
    i pay them too.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

18. autumn
    Member Profile

    We need a complet overhaul and revamping of our current capitalistic economic structure. I am not saying get rid of capitalism but restructure it so there is economic and social justice for all.

    We can start by changing the notion that hording billions of dollars is a virtue. We can also start to put more value on human labor. All workers should be paid a living wage. Would the exec's be able to work if they had to clean their own offices or if their offices became filthy from lack of cleaning? Would anybody be able to function if they had to grow and distribute their own food? Why is that we've deemed only certain jobs/careers worthy of a living wage while the rest of society must scramble just to get by, barely? Not everybody is a genius, not everybody can be a white collar worker but everybody can contribute something of value.That needs to be recognized. We need economic justice.

    How can we get to that point? I ask myself this constantly. I think we can start by really questioning our current system and the true consenquences of this system. Is it good for only me and mine or is it working for the whole of society? What are the true costs to society (and the environment) and who is paying these costs?
    Let's start asking the tough questions and get together and figure out how to get out of this mess we've gotten ourselves into so our kids and grandkids have a chance.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

19. Smitty
    Member Profile

    The pie can grow you know. Just because one guy has a huge amount doesn't mean we all get proportionally less. Just because your neighbor makes $100,000 doesn't mean your $75,000 sucks.

    We can probably safely assume that his money is not buried in his backyard but in some financial institution being lent to people tp buy homes or small businesses to grow or invested in the market allowing companies to have capital to build things and pay even more people.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

20. autumn
    Member Profile

    Smitty,
    "just because one guy has a huge amount doesn't mean we all get proportionally less..."
    Yes it does, because a lot of the labor used is cheap, sure the folks in this region working on microsoft campus make a decent wage but what about the rest of the workers who help with the production and distribution of the product, workers who make $10-$15 an hour or far less(those in the chinese factories).
    $15/an hour will never compute to $75,000 annually.
    I never said $75,000 a year would suck, quite the opposite, if all workers made $75,000 annually, life would be good for all. Of course we still need to factor in the cost of the damage to the environment.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

21. JoB
    Member Profile

    smitty,

    the pie has grown... it's just that the share of those who are filthy rich has grown so much bigger while the share the rest of us get to divvy up has grown so much smaller...

    minumum wage for a full time worker in this state is still under 18,000 /yr .. which doesn't doesn't purchase a roof over your head, clothing, food, medical care and public transportation in the Seattle area...

    Most single people on disability have less than 12,000 a year to feed, clothe and house themselves.

    Even those making a "good" wage have difficulty making it stretch to meet their expenses these days:(

    Posted 1 year ago #         

22. DP
    Member Profile

    

    Here's another example of some of the wonderful things we can expect from our sugar daddies . . .

    Do folks remember when public TV was still public? Ah . . . those were the days. It was the 1970s, when men were men and news was . . . well . . . News.

    Then along came that big bad Sheriff of the Free Market, Ronald Reagan (he of the big boots and white hat) and Sheriff Reagan could see that this here free public TV was . . .

    Well . . . it was downright un-American is what it was.

    Yup! Some kinda socialist plot er somethin'.

    So Sheriff Reagan warned them city clickers at PBS to just get their hides on outta town by sundown and don't come back until they had some spending silver in their pockets.

    And so they left town.
    And then they did come back.
    With silver in their pockets.

    Gee, thanks, Sheriff Reagan. —You jerk.

                 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

    Now public TV is anything but. Funding drives are pretty much continual, and between programs you have to sit through several minutes of icky corporate ads. It's getting to the point where it's almost as bad as commercial TV. (Not yet, but it's getting there.)

    The other night, right after doing the original post about Bill Gates, I saw that Bill and Melidna were official sponsors of the "News Hour with Jim Lehrer."

    Well, whoopee! I thought. Now he even owns the news!!

    I'll bet some of you charity enthusiasts will point to that and say: "See! What'd I tell you? That man is all about the public good."

    But I want to ask you something: With the one (formerly) public news show now being brought to us by Bill, what chance do you think we have of ever hearing anything objective about either him or Microsoft on that show?

    (I'd run the odds on that for you, but ever since I made my post about Gates, my computer doesn't seem to be working right.)

    D.P.
    Raconteur

    Posted 1 year ago #         

23. Carson
    Member Profile

    

    So Bill and Melinda Gates sponsor a PBS news hour....and you somehow find a way to slam them for it? Totally laughable. The more you rant, the less you make sense or make your point.

    Let me guess. You either applied for the job or asked for a grant and you were denied....

    Posted 1 year ago #         

24. DP
    Member Profile

    

    Carson, do you have any information to impart or arguments to make? I mean, do you actually stand for anything?

    If so, we're waiting to hear all about it . . .

    OK, well . . . um . . . maybe you could tell a joke or something. You know . . . something to pass the time.

    Just a thought.

     OK, never mind.

     

    Posted 1 year ago #         

25. Carson
    Member Profile

    

    DP, when you actually make a point, it can be refuted, but you sound like little more than a scorned lover. Get over it already, its not doing you any good.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

26. DP
    Member Profile

    

    Oh, Carson.

    Did you not get my point about charity being disguised as corporate influence? Was I being too subtle?

    You know, you can always say that you disagree with me. That's respectable, though not particulary valuable.

    However, if you say why you disagree (and maybe throw a fact or argument or two in there) that's even more respectable. And that way, you actually stand a chance of winning other people to your side.

    But if you just say "You're ranting. Nobody believes you," you're pretty much wasting your breath.

    Plus, you're kind of missing the point of a blog.

    (What!? Somebody ranting on a BLOG?! Say it ain't so!)

    I'm still waiting to hear what you stand for, Carson. I've said what I stand for (public TV) and I've said why I stand for for (it's more honest than billionaire TV).

    Now it's your turn . . .

     

    Posted 1 year ago #         

27. Carson
    Member Profile

    

    It wasn't my rant, on a blog, it was yours, I was pointing out that you sound more like a scorned lover than someone actually trying to make a point. If you want to know what I stand for, do a little research, its simple to find !!

    DP, did you bother to look at the list of Sponsors for the News Hour? The Dow 30 is pretty well covered in one way or another...duh.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.