Why don't rich people benefit to society?

[Deleted]

EDIT:

It´s a shame this thread gets hijacked too the "Should rich people give more" or "Should the rich be forced to give money". Its their money, so they are free to do whatever.

The only question i'm asking is WHY do the rich rather go on investing, buying stocks, etc. to make even more money while they allready have more than they could spend in 10 lifetimes, instead of investing it in something lifesaving? If you have more than you could ever spend, then why would you need more money? How can so many rich people think of retarded ways to blow and spoil money while so much good could be done with it.

If you had 10 billion dollars, and you had to blow 9 billion dollars on something, why not pick cancer research or wildlife preservation instead of an investment in Marlboro? It's not like you need more money, so why is there such an urge to make more? Instead of using ur wealth to be another random rich guy with 5 yachts and 30 cars (which u can still provide a lifetime for with that mere leftover 1 billion), why not do something huge for society, wildlife, sickness, poverty, etc. That is what leaves a legacy.

[Deleted]

Your post would make a lot more sense if you'd chose someone other than Gates as an example.

The last time I remember hearing a total of his donations and contributions to Charity the number was around 27 billion dollars, and that was a fair few years ago.

As for why they don't do it? Why should they. What would 10,000 schools built in Africa do? Whose going to staff them, whose going to force those kids to go to school?

As for giving them each a 100 bucks? Do you honestly think that would do anything? Do you seriously think there's just food sitting there and they don't have the money to buy it? The problems in Africa go a lot, a hell of a lot deeper than a lack of wealth. Seriously do some research before you make posts like this.

[nightfalls]

They don't need the money, they don't use it, it just sits in a bank account being useless.

It... actually doesn't.

[onemanaleft]

people who have money to benefit society, otherwise they woudltn have money

they dont invent things to make profit because they cant force you do buy anything, any inventor with money has money because people thought their product was a good deal

same goes with any buisness owner, others are simply price takers who think their prices are fair and thus the owners get money.

[Pachycrocuta]

They don't see the benefit to themselves. Although, I do enjoy watching Secret Millionaire, and Undercover Boss (though that one probably isn't all millionaires; not sure).

I kinda see this thread degrading into bashing poor people and bitching about welfare.

As for me: What would I do if I had Bill Gates's level of money? I would open no-kill shelters in every city and town that has animal shelters and get rid of the ones already in place that kill the animals left and right. I would then find some way to rid the world of the festering ass boil that is Peta. I would also roam the country, walk up to some stranger, and just give them $1 million.

[Deleted]

Because they don't have to, and also throwing money at problems don't magically solve them

Also corruption would be more rampant when money is in excess compared to expenses.

[Purlina]

people who have money to benefit society, otherwise they woudltn have money

they dont invent things to make profit because they cant force you do buy anything, any inventor with money has money because people thought their product was a good deal

same goes with any buisness owner, others are simply price takers who think their prices are fair and thus the owners get money.

Unless they are a Madoff, or simply inherit their wealth.

[Bloodmayj]

I thought I read he was barely leaving an estate (relative to his worth) to his children in favor of donating a la Warren Buffet as well.

I believe he's leaving ~$1 million to his children and donating the rest of it to various charities. He actually convinced Warren Buffet to do the same, and started a group attempting to do the same to most of the billionaires out there. The rich do provide to society; unfortunately you rarely hear about it in the news, as bad news gets more views than "Today Bill Gates donated $100 million to blahblah."

[Sole-Warrior]

Check out Bill Gates and Warrent
They both donate massively to charity.

[Belloc]

Rich people, generally speaking, are the ones providing jobs. That's one of the biggest benefits to society you can get.

[Deleted]

people who have money to benefit society, otherwise they woudltn have money

they dont invent things to make profit because they cant force you do buy anything, any inventor with money has money because people thought their product was a good deal. same goes with any buisness owner, others are simply price takers who think their prices are fair and thus the owners get money.

There are a rare few that invented something without the "this will make me rich" mindset. The ones that did it without are usually bought off by snakes that see potential. (someone creates pompe and fabris medicine, production cost is 2k. Pharma company buys the patent, production cost is 200k)

[Thetruth1400]

Why are you sitting there typing on your computer? That $500+ dollars you paid for your computer could have gone a long way to someone else.
Why do you buy an internet connection? That price of that could go to helping someone else.

See where it goes? Sure, it's easy to point a finger at the super rich and go, "You're not doing enough!" while still living in luxury compared to billions of people in the world.

I agree to a point that there should be a financial cutoff at which point you can no longer make any money yearly as it's just exorbitant, but where do you draw that line? Should people only be able to have $1 million a year before it's too much? $10 million? $100 million? Should those that earn millions and billions have no say in where their money goes?

The majority of the job creators in America are those same rich. Sure, they're hiring more people because it will benefit them more, but how is that wrong? Should every place of business only set out to make so many of an item for sale, then no more after that even if there is demand because to do so would net them more money? I don't think so. It would be like them saying, "I know this drug could potentially save millions of lives, which is why I'm offering it at just above cost so I can make a living too. Sadly, I've reached my quota of $1 million dollars, so I won't make any more of the drug. Sorry for those that will now die because I'm not making more, but I didn't want to be greedy so I stopped."

[Deleted]

I'm talking about total selfless acts that benefit society, nature, etc. focused on the sole purpose of helping mankind or earth.
I'm talking about Bill Gates building a 50 billion dollar solar panel park in the desert somewhere to provide for millions of household while cutting back on fossil fuels. The guy has 70 BILLION. 20 million is enough to live happily ever, so why not use your wealth to do great things?
Why hasnt any billionaire stood up and go: "Fuck u all, im gonna build 10,000 schools in Africa".

you realize that Bill and Melinda Gates with Warren Buffet run proberbly the biggest philanthropic organization on the planet ?

as for the other rich people.
They earned / inherited it. As long as they pay their tax's I could not give a shit if they donate money or not.

[Vongimi]

In goes into producing more wealth. When someone produces something, and a consumer buys the product, BOTH parties benefit. Each got more wealth than they came into the deal with. If only the producer got the benefit like you say ("using society to gain profits"), then the consumer would not have bought the product in the first place, because their money is worth more to them than the product. So someone who as billions of dollars that produces billions of products that all get bought up, making them far richer, is doing an IMMENSE service for the world, and making everyone richer for it. Not to mention all the jobs they are supplying.

I would far rather have someone with 50 billion dollars start a company than donate it to the poor. It does far better for mankind as a whole.

[Rucati]

The better question is why do you expect them to? They're the ones that earned their money, they put in the work and effort to get their billions. Why would you, or anyone, expect them to waste their money on something like 10000 schools in Africa? Why is it a waste, you ask? Well because they won't gain anything from it, in fact I'd say almost nobody would benefit because nobody would even attend the schools most likely.

At the end of the day, they earned their money and shouldn't be expected to then donate everything they worked for just because they happen to have a lot.

[Knarg]

The wealthy are not labor generators. They are the primary beneficiaries of the collective labor of everyone beneath them.

And no, donating to charity does not change that.

[nightfalls]

There are a rare few that invented something without the "this will make me rich" mindset. The ones that did it without are usually bought off by snakes that see potential. (someone creates pompe and fabris medicine, production cost is 2k. Pharma company buys the patent, production cost is 200k)

That's absolute bullcrap, because there's no way that person who actually singlehandedly invented the medicine would even be able to get it to market without spending tons of money beforehand.

... learn your facts?

Infracted: Please post respectfully

[Deleted]

Why are you sitting there typing on your computer? That $500+ dollars you paid for your computer could have gone a long way to someone else.
Why do you buy an internet connection? That price of that could go to helping someone else.

See where it goes? Sure, it's easy to point a finger at the super rich and go, "You're not doing enough!" while still living in luxury compared to billions of people in the world.

I agree to a point that there should be a financial cutoff at which point you can no longer make any money yearly as it's just exorbitant, but where do you draw that line? Should people only be able to have $1 million a year before it's too much? $10 million? $100 million? Should those that earn millions and billions have no say in where their money goes?

Meh, that's a lame fingerpointing move. I'm talking about people with more money then they could ever spend. (IMO that mark is around the million dollar interest income since you would have to spend around 3k a day). Dont go pointing at my 400$ computer when they have 50 10k computers just for looks.

[MMKing]

Cloth money cannot save the world from starvation or poverty.

[Deleted]

That's absolute bullcrap, because there's no way that person who actually singlehandedly invented the medicine would even be able to get it to market without spending tons of money beforehand.

... learn your facts?

Google Pompe and Fabris medicine. Come back to me when you learned the facts.