Comme quoi le “problème/tabou” avec les riches n’est pas une spécificité FR.

      • SloppyPuppy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        Its true but that is unrelated. Its because his money makes so much money while time passes he cannot literally spend it all:

        • psycho_driver@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          he cannot literally spend it all:

          Challenged accepted! I just need him to give me access to his accounts and I’ll put that to the test.

          • bob_wiley@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            It could be spent recklessly, sure, but spending it for charity in a way that makes an impact takes a lot of work. Without any thought or care, someone could unload $100b and not make any positive impact at all. You could say you’d give it all to poor people, give 20,000 people $5m each, set them up for life and put them in a financial position to help even more people. But then you run into the lotto winner statistics, where over the course of 5 years most people end up broke or in debt, even worse off than when they started. Then the money is gone with nothing to show for it, but a bunch of people who’s lives were fucked up.

            He’d be significantly more rich had he not been giving it away.

            His charity is also setup to be dissolved sometime after his death (20 years I think), with the idea that it’s up to the next generation to do stuff.