Forum

“Je paye un plus bas taux d’imposition que la femme de ménage et ce n’est pas comme cela que le système devrait fonctionner” M. Buffett, pdg de la holding d’investissement Berkshire Hathaway. 2010/10/06

2010/08/09 The billionaire boys: Beware of geeks bearing gifts, William Langley http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/businesslatestnews/7932127/The-billionaire-boys-Beware-of-geeks-bearing-gifts.html

Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and the world’s richest men are giving half their fortunes to charity – but there is a downside.
By last week, Warren, having diligently worked his way through the annual Forbes magazine list of the richest Americans, had signed up at least 40 fellow plutocrats, with a combined worth of close to £150 billion. (...)

How will it be spent? Will it do any good? And might something other than pure-hearted philanthropy explain the apparent ease with which it was amassed? (...)

It was early in the last century that David’s grandfather, John D Rockefeller, the world’s first billionaire, received a now famous letter from his retiring financial eminence grise, one Frederick Gates. “I have lived with this great fortune of yours daily for 25 years,” wrote Gates. “To it, its increase and its uses I have given every thought, until it has become a part of myself, almost as if it were my own. Unless you give most of your money away, it will crush you, and your children, and your children’s children.”

The mechanics of modern philanthropy have been fashioned along more or less these cautionary lines ever since. Passing great wealth on to what Buffett calls “the lucky sperm club” is generally considered a bad thing – not only for society as a whole, but for those who inherit the money. Far better, went the post-Rockefeller reasoning, to see the kids all right, and give the rest away.

Today, though, even this enlightened idea is being shouldered aside by the new phenomenon of “philanthrocapitalism” – a high-concept form of charity that Gates, Buffett and their all-star cast of super-rich supporters predict will reshape the 21st century. (...) an emerging trend towards blending charitable giving with market disciplines. (...) They talk in modish business-speak about “community entrepreneurship”, “social returns” and “for-profit philanthropy”, and specialise in turning up at exclusive global gatherings like the Davos Economic Forum to tell politicians and bankers what they are doing wrong.
The impact of its size and rigorously business-inspired approach is still being assessed, but while there is no doubt that Gates’s work is saving lives, there are serious doubts about its long-term effectiveness. A common complaint is that the foundation’s fund-raising arm – operating independently of the charitable side – invests its assets in companies that allegedly pollute the environment, exploit poor workers and distort the global financial system. Another is that its wealth and starry image lures health workers and medical resources away from less glamorous areas of need. (...)

In other words, as a long critique in the American magazine Foreign Affairs puts it, the foundation gives with one hand and takes away with the other. (...)
“Why should the rich and famous decide how schools are going to be reformed, or what drugs will be supplied at prices affordable to the poor, or which civil society groups will get funding for their work?”  (...)
“If the rich really wish to create a better world,” complained a contributor to the Guardian last week, “they can sign another pledge: to pay their taxes on time and in full… to give their employees better wages, pensions, job protection and working conditions…”

Celui la même qui déclarait il y a quelques années appartenir à la classe qui a gagné la lutte des classes…Il doit vraiment être aux abois pour accepter recommander d’augmenter ses impôts au profit des perdants de la lutte des classe !