FIRST OF ALL, I have witnessed firsthand the benefits of the Gates Foundation. I attended college with a few people who received full academic scholarships for school via the organization. One of my friends, in particular, grew up in a rather low-income household and the Gates scholarship was the only reason they was able to attend college. They were interested in attending a particular out-of-state school due to its computer science program which they hoped would allow them to better opportunity for job recruitment upon graduation. You can imagine how expensive it would have been without monetary support. They now work for a large computer software and technology company. The scholarship does not target computer science majors and can be received by students intending to study in various disciplines.

SECONDLY, so what if these billionaires do not want their money to go towards taxes? Many Americans do not have faith in the system and we have seen firsthand where our hard-earned money goes. It makes more sense to put the money directly into a cause as opposed to feeding it to the government. And for those of you who claim that most of the money would be better off being invested into innovative markets to produce more jobs, then answer this….What happens when and if those markets and businesses fail? What if they barely make it past their first few years? You cannot rely on businesses; we've seen evidence of that over and over. It's easy for markets to fail and for people to lose jobs. And honestly, I cannot see how people can prefer putting money into markets more so than tackling health issues that are plaguing the world, or providing the opportunity for individuals to attend college and make lives for themselves. I think that the foundation has a good idea in that they are allowing members to put their money into whatever cause they hold near and dear. In the long run a good number of bases will be covered.

Think about it.

Phani,
Admin,
ms in us forums

If they want to benefit society more, they should create MORE wealth.

Charities are black holes of money consumption. They don't create wealth. They feed problems, rather than fixing them.

If those same billionaires were to take that money, instead, and invest it in thousands of high-risk or odd-sounding business plans and ideas, and even one percent of those were to become wildly successful, they would create far MORE wealth, and therefore really drive down poverty and other things "charities" perennially fail to fix.

http://pithypontifications.wordpress.com/2010/12/31/billionaires-shouldnt-give-their-wealth-to-charity/

If you actually read some of the letters on the giving pledge website, several of the participants also mention how generationally passing wealth does more harm then good. I think I've actually seen examples of what they mean like with Paris Hilton, Casey Johnson and more. Someone that is born into or inherits extreme wealth has no motivation or incentive to work in a society that is supposed to reward hard work with money- they already have it. So they become non-contributing members of society unless you count designer spending sprees as helping to stimulate the economy. But people are saying that charity supports non-contributing people?

Try doing a little research. The Gates foundation is already responsible for a lot of good. You see, what their foundation does a lot of is actually provide grants to start up non-profits and other charitable organizations to help them maintain many efforts. They don't just blindly give stuff or money in bulk to Africa. They carefully choose these organizations to partner with usually because there is a new idea or people are innovating new, more efficient ways to help or address an issue. This is the way for these companies who rarely serve the interests of many investors considering there would be no profit motive for them or return on investment in terms of money. So how can anyone say what their money should be spent on when you don't even know what they do spend it on, the impact it makes and their future plans? Of course you are going to think that money should go toward a cause that directly effects you but they have causes care about and want to focus on. If one of these billionaires puts all his money toward cancer research will you say he should put it toward the national debt or investing in corporations? What if a cure for cancer comes out of the research? You may never know how far the ripple effect will go. Perhaps that's why it's difficult for so many to grasp because you don't even know how to interpret the success of an effort if it's not measured in dollars. http://foundationcenter.org/findfunders/topfunders/top100assets.html The Gateses do a lot for education in the U.S. as well. That being said, billionaires do not always become billionaires by working the hardest, personally doing the best or being genious innovators. Several of the wealthy people that have made the giving pledge, attribute much of their success to dumb luck and other factors beyond their own control. I agree that much of the money could be wisely invested in innovative new companies that employ Americans and boost production though. They did not detail for us every effort they intend to make and in every field or area.

I don't know what some people falsely believe charity to be. A charity is not just about handouts. Charities are also regularly audited to ensure their legitimacy and that the funds are being handled appropriately. There are also plenty of rating systems and recommendation websites that evaluate the spending and effectiveness of charities. People who have money to donate to a good cause will do their research. Recognized 501(c)(3) charitable organizations come in all different models and address innumerable issues locally, nationally and globally. These include educating, training, promoting independence, proving resources for people to take their own initiative to improve their lives, and much more. Charities/ non-profit organizations also employ people- in the U.S. might I add. They employ passionate people who work hard for positive change as oppossed to financial reward. Is that a bad thing or what? Charitable organizations are tax exempt because they do not operate for profit! They cover costs and the rest goes to the cause and keeping the program going. (Also I think some people do not realize that most homeless shelters ARE charitable organizations.) Once again, do some research. You can find testomonials and success stories all over about programs that provide job training, transitional housing, donated professional attire etc and how they have changed lives not served as simply a crutch.

Perhaps it's not the perceived "norm" but many people actually do not have a desire or goal to be rich. The misconception among Americans is that everyone, the average Joe, is just inches from hitting the jackpot and becoming a millionaire, billionare, or they'll get there sometime in their life. This is not the case 99.99% of the time. So we should really just try to stop glorifying wealth. Such high expectations, in turn, lead to disappointment and bitterness. Are we so arogant to think we deserve a gold castle and 10 sports cars? So you have so much money that you don't have to ever worry about money again. Imagine it. Now- what do you do? What is stopping you from doing THAT now? Think about it.

Despite what you may view as your own personal financial struggle, the fact is, if you are commenting on this you A) are literate and B) you have access to the internet. Given that scenario, you are already more fortunate than the vast majority of the global population. Yes, we Americans were nice and comfy in our ranch houses, watching our flatscreen TVs and eating out at Olive Garden. But having to give up some of these luxuries does not compare to the struggles of countless others. It's about humanity which does not have borders because it's what we all have in common.

"Live simply that others might simply live."
- Elizabeth Seaton

Sorry, but he doesn't get any points for helping other countries where he has a long range "agenda". Americans made Microsoft what it is--we purchased all of the products through the many stages of development, only to have the products antiquated by the next day, forcing us to continue the outlays of cash for new product just to keep up. That is our money that he is sitting on and you are a fool to believe otherwise.

Specifically as they only give to organizations, it's interestingly known that the percentage of any dollar received by most organizations find it's way to the actual recipient in need is very low. IE the 'effected person' gets approx 5c on the dollar. With the rest being soaked up with admin fees, staff, office, etc etc.

Now i dont care if its Americans or who ever receive this, but it seems such a wasteful way of giving.

The only logical reason can be because of tax credits, it pain me so say this, but there can be no other reason.

And on that subject, I am always concerned by the motives of these people. One motivating factor is clearly ego, then the other big factor is guilt.

Seriously Mr Gates et al, can't hide from this, although they may try to do so. It's a fool who does not remember Gates illegal(ish) methodology in the no so long ago past. And specifically the number of business hurt, bloodied and dead along the side of the road.

I wonder if he ever 'gave' to those he bankrupted?