Carlos Slim Disses Gates’ And Buffett Billion Dollar Donations

[Maxjohan]

I have to respectfully disagree with the guys here that are putting down Gates and Buffet. You guys are taking for granted being born in the richest country with the best opportunities for survival and success. Put yourselves in the shoes of those people in need.

Well, I do respect Buffett and Gates but I see Carlos Slims ideology as the longterm winner. While Gates and Buffett provide temporary solutions to the poor. They still look at poor people, like they are "poor" and "helpless". Carlos Slim, he likes to give them poor people a job and roof over their heads. If they get a job, they can probably buy food and medicine and the rest will come with time. To develop poor countries into healthier countries, like the west are today.

Somehow this reminds me of the quote: "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."-Chinese proverb

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Graves]

Peter Thiel = best philanthropist imo.

 

[365]

Peter Thiel = best philanthropist imo.

Why is that?

 

[GlobalWealth]

How exactly is giving your money to your heirs better for society than giving it to science, healthcare, education etc.? You gotta be kidding.

The big problem with giving it to science, healthcare and education charities is that the majority of them are woefully inefficient at delivering their promised returns.

I believe Gates and Buffett should be free to do with their wealth as they chose. But I think its wrong for them to go on a PR campaign around the country promoting their own 'goodness' and attempting to get other billionaire's to donate their fortunes as well.

It was a big political stunt for them and it seems to have worked wonders.

Carlos Slim, you or I should have the choice to determine if our heirs can and should receive our fortunes upon our demise. Certainly many of the wealthy 2nd generation kids cannot handle the responsibility of a fortune of this magnitude.

However there are many 2nd generation 'silver spooners' who have taken the family torch and ran with it and went on to do even greater things with the family fortune.

Who is to say that the 2nd generation doesn't create businesses that improve the standard of living for millions? Entrepreneurs are the gears that drive the engine of the world, not hired guns that run huge non profits funded by billionaire benefactors looking for absolution of guilt.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[365]

The big problem with giving it to science, healthcare and education charities is that the majority of them are woefully inefficient at delivering their promised returns.

I would look at it more as a redistribution of the wealth to broader society. Not saying that non-profits are generally an efficient vehicle to achieve goals but they certainly don't lead to further accumulation of wealth in the hands of those who inherited through compounding of returns on capital.

Carlos Slim, you or I should have the choice to determine if our heirs can and should receive our fortunes upon our demise.

I agree.

Who is to say that the 2nd generation doesn't create businesses that improve the standard of living for millions? Entrepreneurs are the gears that drive the engine of the world, not hired guns that run huge non profits funded by billionaire benefactors looking for absolution of guilt.

Not sure if I would call the 2nd generation of Forbes 500 families entrepreneurial. If you have a billion dollars you're managing capital, be it as a portfolio of assets/securities or a single company. You're usually not "creating businesses". Do you have an example of a Forbes 500 2nd generation individual that actually 'created" (as opposed to just growing the original wealth at the rate of industry average returns on capital).

 

[michael]

The best foundation I've seen from a billionaire is by Ingvar Kamprad of IKEA fortune.

Bobby you might like to read about it for some ideas. In short it involves Netherlands registered trusts and a Liechestein registered company that allows him to escape the destructive tax system of Sweden and plow billions back into creating new jobs and innovations rather than subsidising the nations police state and welfare class:
IKEA - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gloablist NGOs like the Berne Declaration hate seeing this happen but it ensures that IKEA will live on for generations and contiunue to employ and enrichen millions of employees and customers, it's brilliant.

Not sure if I would call the 2nd generation of Forbes 500 families entrepreneurial. If you have a billion dollars you're managing capital, be it as a portfolio of assets/securities or a single company. You're usually not "creating businesses". Do you have an example of a Forbes 500 2nd generation individual that actually 'created" (as opposed to just growing the original wealth at the rate of industry average returns on capital).

I am not too familiar with US companies but look at Krupp one of the longest standing and most succesful companies to be built over multi generations of family.
Look at Aldi which also has remained a family affair since foundation and has grown to be one of Europe and Asia most competitive retailers. BMW is another.
Most of the biggest and most innovative Japanese companies are still in some extent family controlled.
Contrary to what you may think most inheritence recipients studiously work to build their affairs and do not end up like Paris Hilton, but really even if they do it does not matter because at the end of the day it is their money to do what they want not yours.


Here's a good one, this guy came to inherit a Nigerian trading firm and built it into a giant employing 11000+ people. If his father had listened to the Bill Gates of his era a group that produces nearly 10% of Nigerian GDP would not exist:
Aliko Dangote - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Brander]

If his father had listened to the Bill Gates of his era a group that produces nearly 10% of Nigerian GDP would not exist:
Aliko Dangote - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not to mention that gates actually "gives" a very large part of his fortune to the Bill and Melinda gates charity trust. Who do you think will inherit that trust, LOL. Gates is much smarter than you all think - his offspring will get it all and tax free too

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[RichD]

It seems to me that the "charity" should be geared towards providing grants to those who want to start or grow small businesses.

It is amazing to me how these people think(Slim, Gates, Buffet, etc)

Giving money to someone who does not have a wealth/entrepreneurial mindset is pretty much wasting it.

How much could they help by giving unconditional grants and making it easy for someone with a good idea or proven business by giving them the money without having to waste time and energy begging banks/vulture..I mean "venture" capitalists to loan them money.

The money could help startups and small businesses obtain the needed inventory, staffing, training or other ancillary goods and services (money to lease office space, buy computers, pay utilities, office supplies, etc) that a business needs capital for in order to get started and keep running)

I think that all three are misdirected in their thinking. Two want to "give it away" and the other wants to make everyone into a consumer/employee.

But hey, that's just me.

 

[esphil]

It seems to me that the "charity" should be geared towards providing grants to those who want to start or grow small businesses.

It is amazing to me how these people think(Slim, Gates, Buffet, etc)

Giving money to someone who does not have a wealth/entrepreneurial mindset is pretty much wasting it.

How much could they help by giving unconditional grants and making it easy for someone with a good idea or proven business by giving them the money without having to waste time and energy begging banks/vulture..I mean "venture" capitalists to loan them money.

The money could help startups and small businesses obtain the needed inventory, staffing, training or other ancillary goods and services (money to lease office space, buy computers, pay utilities, office supplies, etc) that a business needs capital for in order to get started and keep running)

I think that all three are misdirected in their thinking. Two want to "give it away" and the other wants to make everyone into a consumer/employee.

But hey, that's just me.

Or they could split it both ways? One part of the billions for charity and the other for startups?

 

[Anon3587x]

I don't believe in charity's unless they support children who have no control over their lives.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[GlobalWealth]

I would look at it more as a redistribution of the wealth to broader society.

One of the (maybe the) most disgusting tenets of socialism and communism.

Redistribution of wealth is equivalent to destruction of wealth. The standard of living around the world only improves through productive use of resources.

Redistribution guarantees that this productive capital is placed in the hands of the least productive.

Karl Marx promoted redistribution of wealth as one of the core principles of communism. How has that worked out?

 

[911Carrera]

I agree with Carlos. Give a man a fish, he will eat for a day. Show a man how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime. Giving money away to poor countries actually makes them poorer in my opinion. They should use that money to build infrastructures and businesses in those countries that will help the people develop.

 

[Jon Bard]

Responding to a couple of things here....

1. I do think there's somewhat of a "cult of capitalism" that says, in effect, free markets and entrepreneurship can solve everything. I accept that teaching people to create their own opportunities is a wonderful idea, but giving a grant to some starving kid in Somalia and saying "go become a producer" isn't especially realistic. Right now, he needs food and medicine. And, if Bill Gates wants to give them to him, then bless his soul.

2. A number of people have criticized Gates & Buffet's urging other billionaires to give their money to charity (I think someone even called it "disgusting"). Yet, there's widespread approval here of Carlos Slim telling billionaires "You need to invest in factories and laboratories". Why is it wrong for one billionaire to advocate his position, but OK for another?

My take? We need both. We need billionaires who help address immediate problems like famine, disease and homelessness, and we need billionaires who invest in others' dreams. Good for all of them.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.