| Trillionaire 02:17 - May 23 with 2598 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
Jeff Bezos is set to become the world’s first TRILLIONAIRE in 2026.
Even if you believe the mantra that he deserves that wealth because he works hard and started from scratch (he didn’t) can you understand how much good that kind of wealth could do for the planet but is instead just languishing? What can a single Human being do with $1,000,000,000,000?
https://nypost.com/2020/05/14/ [Post edited 23 May 2020 3:27]
|  | | |  |
| Trillionaire on 12:55 - May 23 with 584 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Trillionaire on 12:47 - May 23 by stevec |
True, I was being partly flippant, just making the point that equality of distribution isn’t the answer.
Unless handouts/redistribution, call it what you will, is rigidly organised it invariably goes to waste. African countries regularly make the point that our charitable approach to that continent was quite often counter productive.
Humanitarian charities are invariably the go to, feel good, easy option for the wealthy. In essence, a trillion pounds of wealth could provide investment of £200,000 for 5 million actual businesses. Surely a far better way forward for the poorest countries, would be investment in business, providing jobs and tax income, rather than giveaways via charitable contributions.
Of course that’s the capitalists answer, not sure what sustainable answers are coming from the left other than the usual ‘take the bastard down’ option. |
There is a difference between a equitable share and a equal share. | | | |
| Trillionaire on 12:58 - May 23 with 580 views | Konk |
| Trillionaire on 12:47 - May 23 by stevec |
True, I was being partly flippant, just making the point that equality of distribution isn’t the answer.
Unless handouts/redistribution, call it what you will, is rigidly organised it invariably goes to waste. African countries regularly make the point that our charitable approach to that continent was quite often counter productive.
Humanitarian charities are invariably the go to, feel good, easy option for the wealthy. In essence, a trillion pounds of wealth could provide investment of £200,000 for 5 million actual businesses. Surely a far better way forward for the poorest countries, would be investment in business, providing jobs and tax income, rather than giveaways via charitable contributions.
Of course that’s the capitalists answer, not sure what sustainable answers are coming from the left other than the usual ‘take the bastard down’ option. |
I agree about overseas investment in small businesses, but sometimes you genuinely have to deliver food/water as it’s a matter of life and death. Things like clean drinking water mean kids get to go to school rather than spend the day searching for and collecting clean water. And all countries need basic infrastructure investment if you’re to produce and transport goods. Lots of micro-financing Non-profits that allow investors in the west to finance small loans to individuals in developing countries. That seems a brilliant system to me. My issues with Bezos, Philip Green, Branson etc is that they still do everything they can to minimise their contributions despite having an insane amount of wealth. |  |
| Fulham FC: It's the taking part that counts |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
