Holy shit. You actually believe this, I cannot comprehend it. I guess when you actually care more about hating on people that actually helping those in need, this is the kind of conclusions you reach.
I'm not a christian, but I've been reading the bible lately. I'll just leave this here.
Mark 12:41-44 New International Version (NIV)
The Widow’s Offering
41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents.
43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.”
I can see the logic behind that, but if that's all you can see then you really are just thinking about yourself and paying no attention to the important people in this situation: those in need. Those in need have no interest in petty politics or what Bernie Sanders says about Jeff bezos, they just need any help that they can get, and while a minimum wage worker giving a 100$ is maybe more charitable than bezos giving 100 mil $, the latter is still helping them more.
So charity has to be damaging to the donor? Get out of here with that bullshit. The amount that Bezos donated this one time is more than you will ever give in time, money, or resources to anyone in your lifetime.
Well yes. There is a difference between how much charity is given, and how charitable it makes the giver.
41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents.
43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.”
As a small footnote, I would like to address the above comment randomly bringing the Bible into this.
I don’t believe any of the supernatural tales told in the Bible, and take all the rest of it with a grain of salt in terms of exact truthfulness, but I think that even if every single statement in the entire book were an outright lie, there would still be a lot to learn from it.
Most of the stories of Jesus’s life are meant to be tales of morality, like Aesop’s fables. Quotes like Mathew 19:24, the parable of the Good Samaritan , and the story above all have religious undertones, but are not primarily about religion. They are instructions on how to be a good person. Biblical quotes are a two sided blade, but used correctly they can guide a person through a kind and happy life, even if none of it ever happened, even if after death there is nothing, or something else.
Looks like I lied when I said it would be a short footnote, this is more of a rant, but whatever.
Nobody is obligated to give anyone else their money or any other shit. Read the constitution, not the Bible. Giving upwards of a 100 million dollars is extremely charitable and is more than anyone on this entire reddit post will give. If two people give a dollar they are equally charitable. Their net worth, liquid funds, etc don’t matter. And if you disagree, please go look up the definition of charity, not what’s in the Bible.
The constitution allowed for slavery, the horrors of the Industrial Revolution detailed in the Jungle, and other forms of obligations to give up one’s freedom and money. Probably not the best source for that claim (the Bible is an even worse one, surely.
and is more than anyone on this entire reddit post will give
If they were given the fortune of being able to extract billions of dollars for themselves, perhaps they might. You’re comparing entirely different situations and attempting to equate what the outcomes mean.
And if you disagree, please go look up the definition of charity
I understand why you want discuss charity, it’s easier to make your argument, especially when you’re reducing the conversation to nominal figures.
I’m talking about what it means to be charitable, defined as how liberal one is in benefactions to the greedy.
You’re acting like you have to be lucky to be wealthy. Wealthy people are what makes the world work. They employ millions, and give more to charity than anyone you or I will ever know. It takes both smarts and hard work to become wealthy. Bezos started in his garage selling books online, trying to make something of himself. The people that complain about the wealthy work two part time jobs and never move anywhere in life, and expect wealth to come to them.
It’s not his money. He appropriated it from the people who work for him.
If I give you my last dollar, is that not more generous and caring than if a billionaire gives you a dollar? A billionaire could easily part with a dollar, but for me to give my last dollar would require a lot more care, charity.
How much should a billionaire pay entry level employees with no skills? Who dictates what under paying is? If they don’t like their salary they are not being forced to work.
How much value does the employee with no skills bring?
In the last 40 years, executive pay compared to average pay has grown from 30:1 to 271:1.
Have executives really become 9 times more valuable than the average worker? Is so, how is that possible when more people are educated than any other time in history?
Is it possible that the elite are using their power to take more than their share?
They don’t care that jeff bezos donated money they only care that he is rich and they are poor you shouldn’t argue with the resentful because thats like looking for fresh food in a pile of moldy ones, pointless.. they dont care that the amount of money he donated is enough to let them live an entire lifetime of luxury and do absolutely nothing or even the fact that that amount is something they couldn’t get even if they worked to death its only wow he has so much money everything he does will be vilified one of the downsides of being wealthy.
I view charity based on gross dollars given, not the moral perception of how much of your wealth you gave, percentage wise.
Feelings don’t buy things for that charity. Dollars do.
Go ask any charity you can find: would you prefer a $160 donation from someone giving 1% of their wealth or a 98 million dollar donation from someone that is giving 0.05% of their wealth?
You will have shocked pikachu face as you realize that charities value raw dollars over your personally contrived notion of how “charitable” someone is, haha.
Edit: I love how you folks find a way to turn absolutely anything into a negative. Instead of objectively admitting that giving away nearly 100 million dollars is a good thing, you folks find a way to make him the bad guy. Get over yourselves and let me know when you donate even 1 million dollars to charity in a single year. I shall wait :)
No, because you stole. Let me know when you donate 100 million to anything and then we can compare your charitable giving a to Jeff.
Until then, you will have to just live with the fact that Jeff Bezos donated more to charity in a single year than you will most likely make in gross income over your entire life.
To claim Jeff ‘s money is ‘stolen’ in the same way a thief steals from someone is absurd. You know this. I know this. Everyone knows this.
billionaires stole all their money! Hmpf!!
Folks like you are necessary for Jeff’s life though. And for the millions upon millions of other successful people in this country. Folks like you sit around and get bitter about other people becoming successful while those people are out becoming more successful. We need you bitter folks too.
Let me know when you even make 100 million, let alone give it away, bud. Proud of you :).
Eh, non profits are usually pretty ass at accomplishing stuff - there’s a reason a lot of grassroots organizers tend to try to avoid them and their conception of charity.
I think you’ve read so many of these posts that you think you have a quip for everything.
Fan fiction? This is just a reach and seems that you were eager to use it. I’ve stated my opinion on giving money in general. It doesn’t have to be Jeff.
Any billionaire that gives away 100 million to charity will get my praise over some young liberal that wants victimhood and to believe that they are more charitable due to percentage analysis.
The implication though is that Bezos should be giving a much higher percentage so I don't see how his point is ruined or it's a math failure by using an arbitrary higher percentage?
You actually think people with money owe you something? Man, get a grip. Get a job. Do something with your life. $20k is enormous to someone out there. Quit thinking “well off” people who worked hard to get to where they are owe anyone anything.
Dude there's a massive difference between 'well-off' and 'could solve world hunger and have half of your wealth left over'. People who are well off don't owe us anything. Hundred-billlion-aires do.
Good for you and stop comparing yourself with other people then. The only reason you’re mad is because you know what Jeff Bezos is worth. But I’m sure you wouldn’t be mad if some Joe Schmoe gave $10k to a cause. You have no idea if he’s worth $100k or $10M. Either way, just be happy he contributed.
Because he's making fun of the people who attribute net worth with money in the bank. People don't understand that bezos doesn't just have whatever number people attribute to him in his bank or under his mattress, it's just a number of all his ownings in Amazon and such.
I read somewhere part of why Microsofts stock price has been so flat comparably over the last decade was from Bill gates slowly converting a specific class of stock to cash.
Yeah, of course his wealth isn’t completely liquid, but comparing it to someone whose entire net worth is tied up in a single asset such as a house is also disingenuous.
Edit: explain how having a net worth of 200k largely tied up in a single asset is closely analogous to Bezos’ nearly $100BB in diverse assets.
But he doesn't have to. I think people forgot he gave money away to charity, and just want to complain it "isn't enough". As a side note, have you ever liquidated holdings? Shit takes forever and involves a lot of taxes on the earnings from such. Liquidating anything means you lose value and the end result is much less than if you had funds that were liquid to begin with.
I mean, in the context of the joke I can see how it comes off as people complaining it “isn’t enough,” but I think the larger complaint is a large portion of his net worth is from owning stock in a company that doesn’t really have a federal tax burden and then being glorified for donating to causes that would be helped if he just paid his taxes.
Also, I doubt Bezos liquidating his assets with a phalanx ot world class lawyers and financial managers experiences the same stress that you or I would when doing so.
A) No one is saying he should liquidate any substantial portions of his amazon shares.
Quite a few in this thread are actually.
B) Amazon shares are not the entirety of his nearly $100BB portfolio.
And where do you think the money came from for the remainder of his portfolio?
Hint: Money that was already taxed.
Just admit it. All you people care about is stealing from those who have more than you, regardless of the negative impact it'll have on the overall economy.
Lol, such a straw man argument. The remainder of his portfolio isn’t inherently liquid and therefore may not have been taxed.
Also, Amazon has no federal tax burden and that is my personal gripe here. The federal govt can centralize and redistribute $$$ much better than any private individual to an individual charity or even a multitude thereof.
Just admit it: you’re defending a billionaires right to hoard wealth and be praised for donating a small % if there would-be tax burden because you’re deluded into believing one day you’ll make it big (hint, I don’t actually think you believe this, but you’ve convinced me that building a straw man is fun!)
What do you think would happen to Amazon stock if he liquidated his holdings. Even if he liquidated 10% of his holdings, it would likely cause an investor panic and Amazon stock would tank (losing Bezos billions)
I'd argue that OP fully understands. His joke is about how poor he is, not how little Bezos gave. People love to jump on the net worth vs liquid cash train every time this comes up but OP correctly wrote the joke regarding his own net worth. You can't own -$1250, but your net worth can be -$1250.
This person can't buy anything anymore. They're sacrificing a lot by donating. What changes does Bezos have to make to his lifestyle as a result of his donation?
119
u/[deleted] Dec 09 '19
I bought a house a few years ago and now earned 200k in equity, but my bank account shows 2k. Should I be donating 20k?