Reply
Respected Contributor
Posts: 2,653
Registered: ‎03-10-2010

That's very generous, but I think the bigger story is that they were able to amass that fortune by underpaying their employees. I'd get more warm fuzzies if they made less and their employees made more. Maybe some people wouldn't need all that charity if some didn't hoard it all to themselves.

If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. ~ Desmond Tutu
Honored Contributor
Posts: 31,038
Registered: ‎05-10-2010

Money like that is mind boggling, I can't get my head around it.  I've read about that pact but I don't know exactly what it means.  I don't think it means the pact members immediately gave half the fortunes away.  

Honored Contributor
Posts: 9,740
Registered: ‎06-10-2015

Dont be fooled ladies, the rich dont give it away out of the goodness of their hearts.   Its so they dont have to pay taxes on it.

BE THE PERSON YOUR DOG THINKS YOU ARE! (unknown)
Honored Contributor
Posts: 18,415
Registered: ‎11-25-2011

@Imaoldhippie wrote:

Dont be fooled ladies, the rich dont give it away out of the goodness of their hearts.   Its so they dont have to pay taxes on it.


I don’t care how the $$$$$$ gets to those who need it.

Why is the mental state of the donor a concern? 

The end result is the same.