Bill Gates: China's wealthy should be more charitable

[Raphael]

http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2014-04/28/nw.D110000renmrb_20140428_4-03.htm

I can't be bothered to translate. But in brief, China has the world's 2nd largest number of billionaires, but give to charity only a fraction of what American billionaires do. Gates says investing in the poor can in fact be exciting, meaningful, rewarding, etc.

 

[iajj]

tell this angloamerican that charity giving that diverts from the revenue that government rightfully collects, while a fundamnental fact of evil, decadent, american politics, shall never be in chinese politics. gates' cheap ploy to subvert chinese government and the state's traditional role in chinese life will never suceed.

 

[Götterdämmerung]

为穷人投资更有意义(国际论坛)

I can't be bothered to translate. But in brief, China has the world's 2nd largest number of billionaires, but give to charity only a fraction of what American billionaires do. Gates says investing in the poor can in fact be exciting, meaningful, rewarding, etc.

It's always nice to hear filthy rich people bragging of their charity works that wouldn't have been necessary if they pay more to the people. Secondly, education, health care, job security and livelyhood are the responsibilities of the state and not the goodwill of certain induviduals. Only the state has the power and obligation to redistribute the wealth to create a fair playing field for all citizens.

 

[StarCraft_ZT]

Sometimes it's not rich people fault that they don't do anything, it's government do nothing.

Last time when Lanzhou water polluted, Xu Jia Yin, the boss of Evergrande Real Estate Group, made a contribution of 12 million bottle water, each one worth 4 yuan.

 

[bolo]

为穷人投资更有意义(国际论坛)

I can't be bothered to translate. But in brief, China has the world's 2nd largest number of billionaires, but give to charity only a fraction of what American billionaires do. Gates says investing in the poor can in fact be exciting, meaningful, rewarding, etc.

But Asians who make large donations tend to want to remain anonymous unlike Yankees who love to announce self promotion. "Hey look at me, I'm stinking rich. I killed, fucked, and hurt many people along my path to being rich. I am old and feel guilty, I want to go to heaven when I die so I am giving a lot of money to charity to make up for my crimes!"

 

[That Guy]

tell this angloamerican that charity giving that diverts from the revenue that government rightfully collects, while a fundamnental fact of evil, decadent, american politics, shall never be in chinese politics. gates' cheap ploy to subvert chinese government and the state's traditional role in chinese life will never suceed.

First of all, charity giving has little to do with tax collection, because tax collection is based on personal income. Now (in some countries like the US and Canada) you can get tax credits if you give to charity, but most don't bother using it. You still would have to pay taxes, but you can use the tax credits you gained to lessen the amount you have to give to the revenue agency. This is a government run scheme, which means that the government is encouraging you to give to charity. If the government is giving the okay, what gives you the right to speak on your government's behalf and suggest otherwise?

Next, charity drives can ease the burden from the government's shoulders, and can help the government help reach remote areas where the authorities have a hard time reaching.

Finally, Bill gates has given tens of billions of dollars to eradicate polio and has helped millions of people with his charitable donations, I think he's earned the right to say whatever he wants.

 

[iajj]

First of all, charity giving has little to do with tax collection, because tax collection is based on personal income. Now (in some countries like the US and Canada) you can get tax credits if you give to charity, but most don't bother using it. You still would have to pay taxes, but you can use the tax credits you gained to lessen the amount you have to give to the revenue agency. This is a government run scheme, which means that the government is encouraging you to give to charity. If the government is giving the okay, what gives you the right to speak on your government's behalf and suggest otherwise?

Next, charity drives can ease the burden from the government's shoulders, and can help the government help reach remote areas where the authorities have a hard time reaching.

Finally, Bill gates has given tens of billions of dollars to eradicate polio and has helped millions of people with his charitable donations, I think he's earned the right to say whatever he wants.

first, US and canadian governments are of a perverted form that any other government, but especially chinese government, should be ashamed of emulating. and only small potatos fail to claim tax credits - "philanthropists" of all people will do everything in their power to cheat the government of every penny that is its due.

second, any government should be ashamed if its arms and its services fail to reach even the remotest corner of its realm. it should expand and it should expand by levying more taxes. it should go down ever harder on tax cheating "philanthropists"

third, chinese subjects will only ever fall under the protection of chinese government and not bill gates. he may have helped those in "failed states" felled and failed by the very ideology of shrinking government and giving more power to charity organizations. his ideology hasn't fooled chinese government yet, which is why no chinese subject need his help and no chinese rich people need heed his opinion about charity. what he does in africa and south(east) asia gives him no right to subvert the chinese government, just like a catholic or muslim woman who raised dozens of kids has no say on how a chinese mother raises hers.

 

[That Guy]

first, US and canadian governments are of a perverted form that any other government, but especially chinese government, should be ashamed of emulating. and only small potatos fail to claim tax credits - "philanthropists" of all people will do everything in their power to cheat the government of every penny that is its due.

second, any government should be ashamed if its arms and its services fail to reach even the remotest corner of its realm. it should expand and it should expand by levying more taxes. it should go down ever harder on tax cheating "philanthropists"

third, chinese subjects will only ever fall under the protection of chinese government and not bill gates. he may have helped those in "failed states" felled and failed by the very ideology of shrinking government and giving more power to charity organizations. his ideology hasn't fooled chinese government yet, which is why no chinese subject need his help and no chinese rich people need heed his opinion about charity. what he does in africa and south(east) asia gives him no right to subvert the chinese government, just like a catholic or muslim woman who raised dozens of kids has no say on how a chinese mother raises hers.

Oh, you're an ultra-nationalist. Never mind, I don't talk to crazy people, because they generally have no idea what they're talking about.

I shall now ignore you.

But Asians who make large donations tend to want to remain anonymous unlike Yankees who love to announce self promotion. "Hey look at me, I'm stinking rich. I killed, fucked, and hurt many people along my path to being rich. I am old and feel guilty, I want to go to heaven when I die so I am giving a lot of money to charity to make up for my crimes!"

That's generalizing things. As we don't have proof of your claims, I think it's safe to say that you're wrong.

 

[TaiShang]

Smells like a neo-liberal effort to weaken the central role of the state and re-allocate some sovereign right of the state to the business elite. That should not happen. China is a collectivist nation; so, individual heroism and rags-to-rich stories are essentially non-Chinese.

China is a state-society complex; whatever has been achieved so far, it has been achieved through the joint effort by the government and the people. Things may have gone wrong at times, not worked out; but, at the end of the day, we have an historical (and not to be repeated) record of national development -- not seen in human history.

State must remain its central position; no weakening of it. We do not want to relegate our mandate to some neo-liberal business elite or to international organizations. We cherish our sovereignty.

 

[Beast]

Finally, Bill gates has given tens of billions of dollars to eradicate polio and has helped millions of people with his charitable donations, I think he's earned the right to say whatever he wants.

Giving away billions of dollars does not give you the right to say whatever you want.

 

[That Guy]

Giving away billions of dollars does not give you the right to say whatever you want.

I believe everyone has the right to say whatever they want, as long as it's not speech that incites violence or hatred. Even if he didn't have the right before, Bill Gates has done a lot for humanity, don't you think he's at least earned that right through being a good person alone?

How many billionaires have dedicated their entire lives to making the world a better place? Not many, but bill is one of the few who has.

I have a lot of respect for this man, and what he's asking of his fellow billionaires is reasonable. He's not talking to them as Chinese or inferior, he's talking to them as people whom he considers as equal to him, and is asking for something that he would ask any other rich billionaire, regardless of nationality or belief, to do.

He's also not forcing them to do so, it's a request, and the message can just as easily be ignored.

 

[Beast]

I believe everyone has the right to say whatever they want, as long as it's not speech that incites violence or hatred. Bill Gates has done a lot for humanity, do you think he's at least earned that right through being a good person alone?

How many billionaires have dedicated their entire lives to making the world a better place? Not many, but bill is one of the few who has.

A true good person who loves real charity will not telling others what to do to show and brag his own example. Do not use western standard to judge others. We are not west.

 

[That Guy]

A true good person who loves real charity will not telling others what to do to show and brag his own example. Do not use western standard to judge others. We are not west.

He's not bragging, he's never bragged. In fact, he's never been the one to admit to giving charity, unless asked, and even then he's never given a figure. The figures generally appear from investigative journalism, or from the organizations that he's given the donation to.

Asking me to not judge others with my standards (which aren't just western) is kind of hypocritical, considering you're making your own judgement based on your own standards; You can't have it one way or the other.

Besides, what is wrong with what he's asked? No one has been able to point out the flaw in what he's asked? He's simply asking others to be a bit more charitable, and to help the poor. What is wrong with that?

 

[kalu_miah]

Oh, you're an ultra-nationalist. Never mind, I don't talk to crazy people, because they generally have no idea what they're talking about.

I shall now ignore you.


That's generalizing things. As we don't have proof of your claims, I think it's safe to say that you're wrong.

What @iajj said is spot on. Charity is the biggest hoax pulled by oligarch's like him and others in an oligarchy like the US. People and their welfare should be the responsibility of the govt., not whims of billionaires and rich people like him, whose priorities are screwed up to begin with. The reason there are rich billionaires is because in a capitalist system, the rich always gets to control the system to their advantage. Most of them became rich by conning others and taking advantage of the system they are in, getting rich by hard work is a myth, so most of them are the biggest crooks around. Western democracies are already failing in this respect. Liberals are doing their best to go towards a more social democratic type govt. like in Scandinavia, but they are failing in the US:
Nordic model - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This has nothing to do with nationalism, but rather about efficiency of governance. The system that allows con men and crooks to become billionaires and depends on their whims for welfare of people is screwed up. Chinese system is still evolving, so hard to say how it will turn out eventually.

The system that provides best welfare for the maximum number of people among a population and thus maximizes their creative potential and at the same time creates a space for enterprises who can channel these creative individuals will best others and rule the world. The West is still best at it, even with all its flaws, others like China can definitely beat it if they can be more efficient in creating opportunities for people and maximizing their productivity. And I am glad that the Chinese people do not have to depend on rich people's charity for their welfare.

The idea that the US and the West has figured out the best system of governance and no one can have a better system than them is the typical supremacy complex you will find among people from these countries. I would like to see China prove them wrong and it will be good for the rest of the world to break their supremacy complex.

 

[That Guy]

Smells like a neo-liberal effort to weaken the central role of the state and re-allocate some sovereign right of the state to the business elite. That should not happen. China is a collectivist nation; so, individual heroism and rags-to-rich stories are essentially non-Chinese.

China is a state-society complex; whatever has been achieved so far, it has been achieved through the joint effort by the government and the people. Things may have gone wrong at times, not worked out; but, at the end of the day, we have an historical (and not to be repeated) record of national development -- not seen in human history.

State must remain its central position; no weakening of it. We do not want to relegate our mandate to some neo-liberal business elite or to international organizations. We cherish our sovereignty.

Where did you get all this from? He just asked for the rich to help the poor.

Why are people who upset about this? What if he was a Chinese ultra-nationalist? Nothing about his message of helping the poor would change.

I don't understand where this anger is coming from.