Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Bono Defends Steve Jobs Against Criticism Over Lack of Public Philanthropy
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
He is the one responsible for proving that SJ is a D'Bag for not giving to charity.
I've also provided more proof than you he's responsible for for proving his statement, so start coughing up or I may have to TROLL HARDER.
You're the one responsible for proving that he does give to charity deny that implication.
The magic unicorn is still the act of charity, as defined by the thread topic, LTD, and then Dbrown. You just got knee jerked as soon as someone insulted your false idol.
You know, I'm staying out of whether SJ is a douchebag or not but I have to comment on this logic cause your logic fails.
Not having proof of something does not make the opposite true. If there is no proof on either side all that says is that simply there is not enough evidence to go by for anyone to say one way or the other.
Or simply put, none of you know if he gives to charity (unless you know him personally or have a way of looking through his finances) and if we are labeling him a douchebag on whether he gives to charity or not none of you can know either way.
And honestly, there's far worse things people can do other than not give to charity... Some of those things SJ has done in the past and he may well regret it now, people change. Once again, since none of you know but only know what he's done in the past, all we can say is that he was a douchebag. He could have changed, people do that. People mature and can realize that what they did was wrong (I saw a program talking to some one who once was a member of a hate group who had "seen the light" so to speak).
So unless you know the guy or have talked to him recently, the whole point is moot cause there is not enough info to go by.
By that logic, vampires and werewolves might exist since no one can prove they dont exist.
Last edited:
Equating a debate about Steve jobs philanthropy (or lack thereof) with a debate as to the existence of vampires show this conversation has become more than a little ludicrous.
My godfather is a wealthy guy (8 figure net worth) and goes to great lengths to ensure his name isn't connected to his charity work and has set up an anonymous trust to give out money. He was invited to go on a tv program called the secret millionaire (rich peope go undercover and donate to charity) and was horrified at the idea. He's a private guy who'd doesnt want the world to know how he handles his personal finances, which is his right.
I doubt he's alone in that.
Originally Posted by PlipPlop View Post
Bono is a prick.
http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/fame...-why-he-flirts-with-teenagers-in-bikinis.aspx
----------
Educate yourself.
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/home.aspx
Bono is a prick.
Why is that?
http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/fame...-why-he-flirts-with-teenagers-in-bikinis.aspx
----------
Educate yourself.
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/home.aspx
Formerly married to a BLACK Jamaican, my current partner is half Iranian, I do not wear a pointed white hood in my spare time
Where have I blamed the AFRICANS ? (their fault, wtf ? ) I have blamed the catholic church for sending missionaries out to Africa to lecture these people on the supposed evils of contraception, the crisis in Africa I lay blame very heavily on the pope and the catholic church NOT the africans themselves, with poor or non existent education they are susceptible to missionaries telling them to not use contraception and the end result is millions of kids that are born into a life of non stop suffering and a likely death before reaching school age.
Publicly or privately donating are both great. I am sure anyone with a conscience would do it. Not for us to comment on individuals approach when we have no idea.
Whilst publicly donating may seem crass or massaging one's ego it can actually raise more money. In fact privately giving can be done rarely anonymously in the sums that these guys have.
The Gates Foundation is in my opinion a more sacrificial approach. You get criticized for your 'ego' but you raise more money as a result.
Whilst publicly donating may seem crass or massaging one's ego it can actually raise more money. In fact privately giving can be done rarely anonymously in the sums that these guys have.
The Gates Foundation is in my opinion a more sacrificial approach. You get criticized for your 'ego' but you raise more money as a result.
With all due respect - we all are deathly sick. We will die sooner or later. But what he does with his money is his business only! We didn't spent the hundreds of dollars we used to buy Apple products on charity either, didn't we.
And they very well may.
I personally don't think they do, but hey, what do I know.
I just think this thread is getting tiresome and repetitive, simply because I stand by my original assertion that none of us has any right to dictate how SJ ought to spend his money, much less criticise what he does with it.
What's next? Am I going to start scolding one of you for eating at a classy restaurant when you could be eating a cheaper meal at some roadside stall, and donating the savings to some charity of my choice? Those of you planning on traveling overseas for a holiday, better watch out and repent. How can you possibly enjoy yourself in good faith knowing fully well there are people starving out there?
This is where you're wrong. Nobody is dictating how he should be spending his money, we're just expressing our opinions about him being a dbag about it and opinions are the right of everyone. Just because the world doesn't agree with your opinion doesn't mean we can't criticize who we choose.
Well, the way some people are expressing their "opinions", it doesn't seem any different from dictating at any rate. It's just this "holier than thou" attitude that irks me, that's all.
There is still no evidence in 20 pages that he does not donate to charity, you guys all know what Steve is like, if he is donating (I suspect he is) and wants to do so anonymously then he probably gets everyone to sign NDA's so that it doesn't get out and when you sign an NDA and then **** on Steve is tends to be very costly so that is probably why there is no public knowledge of Steve donating.
I've said this to you before but let me make this very clear. Your argument is because there's no public evidence of his involvement with charities means that he is donating silently? Where's your evidence of this? You said you suspect he is, where do you get your information from?
Trying to "troubleshoot" this topic has a lot to deal with both knowns and unknowns. If you can't say what something is, perhaps it's better that you approach it from what something isn't for example.
I'd like to believe that SJ is involved with some philanthropism but there's no evidence of any involvement, period. Nothing to support the idea that he's proactively involved with any charities at all. So in that sense looking at what's available to be researched, which version does it currently appear to support, that he is involved with charities or not? You can search online until you reach the end of the internet, at the time of this writing, it would seem to support his lack of involvement more than anything... until proven otherwise.
Last edited:
He is ALLEGED to have given $150m to some educational project, whoever made the donation wanted it kept secret but it is very widely believed that it is Jobs, we will not know till the very least his book comes out but if it is Jobs that gave $150m then it is not unreasonable to believe that he gives to other causes too
It is up to people to provide hard evidence he doesn't give to charity it is not up to people to provide evidence that he does, "innocent till proven guilty" not that not giving to charity is a crime.
I agree. But Steve Jobs isn't your godfather in that he's not the founder and former CEO of Apple and probably the most "visible" corporate representative there is in at least this decade. Now I am sure your godfather is important - but does he have the same media "cache?" - Has be been featured in articles? Was he on the cover of magazines. Yadda yadda.
Steve Jobs is getting this kind of thread and reaction not just because of the money he has - but all of the above...
I have no idea why anyone would believe that a huge tax cheat like Jobs would donate anything what so ever to charity (unless it helped him recieve more organs to live longer).
Lol.
Yes, absence of proof is not proof of absence, but burden of proof is still burden of proof.
Steve Jobs was inspired by Ayn Rand
According to this text (and Steve Woz),
http://www.theatlasphere.com/metablog/1325.php
Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged was an inspiring lecture for Jobs in the earlier Apple days. So, being Rand's fan and buddhist are mutually exclusive approaches (or maybe not too much). However he may have changed after that time.
According to this text (and Steve Woz),
http://www.theatlasphere.com/metablog/1325.php
Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged was an inspiring lecture for Jobs in the earlier Apple days. So, being Rand's fan and buddhist are mutually exclusive approaches (or maybe not too much). However he may have changed after that time.
And I'm sure if people actually tried to find out if he donated to charities, they could easily find a trail leading back to your godfather. If Jobs is donating millions of dollars, someone would find something. Let's see if its in his authorized biography....
But you don't even need to search for personal donations to know that Jobs is a greedy dbag that doesnt give to charities. What has apple contributed to since Jobs was CEO? How about the last two natural disasters in Haiti and Japan? Both Google and MSFT contributed $1m to Haiti and $100k to Japan as well as set up logistical software support to help find people. What has apple contributed to the relief efforts there?
Something he might have a bit of a vested interest in given that he himself has cancer. Funding a cure for what ails you doesn't make you a philanthropist.
Actually that's not how it works. The burden of proof lies with whomever wishes to prove the existence of a phenomenon, being, or object.
Thank Zeus for genetic engineering and transgenics, then, right? Luckily tweaking a few genes to lower myostatin levels in fish could make it so that you get a ton more "meat" per fish... which could lower prices, increase availability and increase food supplies
Right, and I've actually supported what I said with evidence.
----------
Formerly married to a BLACK Jamaican, my current partner is half Iranian, I do not wear a pointed white hood in my spare time
I said you were racist.. not a militant racist, that was someone else's comment. Racism comes in many shapes and forms... most of it's more subtle than hate speech and KKK logos.
As for not blaming them... you certainly feel willing to leave them in their own mess (that, as you mentioned, was not their doing).
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually it's the opposite. The majority evidence shows that he isn't involved in any philanthropy. This is searchable online, like I've said many times that you won't find a single case of any charitable involvement by SJ. This is the common norm. Lack of his involvement in itself is evidence.
You on the other hand disputes this and claims that he does, there's zero evidence of this online to prove this, thus the burden to prove that he does indeed participate in philanthropy is upon you.
Bono riding on the back of those suffering from AIDS with his 'Product RED' bullshiz, should understand that Apple make things to make money. Steve Jobs makes money, and he chooses how to spend it - maybe not on charity. That's capitalism, something which Bono with all his wealth should know everything about.
I don't think anyone needs to hear it moralised by someone as amoral as Bono.
I don't think anyone needs to hear it moralised by someone as amoral as Bono.
Last edited: