LogFAQs > #974369225

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, Database 12 ( 11.2023-? ), Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	A lot of people talking about the missing submarine
adjl 06/23/23 4:40:56 PM #30:	AltOmega2 posted... even Bill Gates? Bill Gates didn't become a billionaire by being a good person. He's now making a quasi-earnest effort to use his billions to do good things, which is good (how that balances out with his previous misdeeds is a complicated moral judgement, but there isn't a ton of point in trying to judge people overall like that), but what he's doing is still a drop in the bucket compared to what he could do. 100 billion dollars is really an absolutely staggering amount of money, far more than any one person will ever be able to spend on themselves without making a genuine effort to piss it away on nothing (like buying Twitter for $45 billion to shitpost without consequence or taking joyrides to space). Meanwhile, paying $1500/month in rent for every single one of the ~585,000 homeless people in the US (which is a very generous estimate for what housing them would cost, given the potential to house families together and find further savings by operating on a large scale) would cost about 10.5 billion per year. Even with no other income, Gates could fund that for 10 years continuously and still have more money left than he could ever spend on himself. The fact of the matter is that reducing any billionaire's fortune by 99% - an unfathomable loss for any one of us - would still leave them with a minimum of $10 million to their name, more than enough to live the rest of their lives without wanting for anything. Everyone in the $100 billion plus club could have that happen twice and still be in that position. That they give away a couple billion a year is nothing compared to what they're actually capable of, a potential which they resist realizing solely because they like the big number. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:974369225] in A lot of p... [t:80485775]...</cite> <quote>AltOmega2 posted... </cite><quote>even Bill Gates?</quote>Bill Gates didn't become a billionaire by being a good person. He's now making a quasi-earnest effort to use his billions to do good things, which is good (how that balances out with his previous misdeeds is a complicated moral judgement, but there isn't a ton of point in trying to judge people overall like that), but what he's doing is still a drop in the bucket compared to what he could do. 100 billion dollars is really an absolutely staggering amount of money, far more than any one person will ever be able to spend on themselves without making a genuine effort to piss it away on nothing (like buying Twitter for $45 billion to shitpost without consequence or taking joyrides to space). Meanwhile, paying $1500/month in rent for every single one of the ~585,000 homeless people in the US (which is a very generous estimate for what housing them would cost, given the potential to house families together and find further savings by operating on a large scale) would cost about 10.5 billion per year. Even with no other income, Gates could fund that for 10 years continuously and still have more money left than he could ever spend on himself.The fact of the matter is that reducing any billionaire's fortune by 99% - an unfathomable loss for any one of us - would still leave them with a minimum of $10 million to their name, more than enough to live the rest of their lives without wanting for anything. Everyone in the $100 billion plus club could have that happen twice and still be in that position. That they give away a couple billion a year is nothing compared to what they're actually capable of, a potential which they resist realizing solely because they like the big number. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1