Tax cheat? He is just doing what the rest of the American people would have done had they the capability. Who wouldn't want to get away with fewer taxes payable if it was legit.
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
Tax cheat? He is just doing what the rest of the American people would have done had they the capability. Who wouldn't want to get away with fewer taxes payable if it was legit.
Tax cheat? He is just doing what the rest of the American people would have done had they the capability. Who wouldn't want to get away with fewer taxes payable if it was legit.
Get back to me after you google CEO and 1 dollar salary....
Yeah, and I understand science usually asks you to prove something is, not isn't. So therefore the burden of proof should be on those who think SJ is a douchebag
.Yeah, and I understand science usually asks you to prove something is, not isn't. So therefore the burden of proof should be on those who think SJ is a douchebag
It's already been proven. He's greedy and doesnt contribute to charity.
The bottom line is that you want Steve to publicly donate to charity, and, Steve clearly doesn't want to. Reliable sources have indicated that he has given a lot to charity, but, compared to his wealth, probably not nearly as large a fraction as Gates or Buffett. OK, difference of opinion.
Since we are all telling Steve what to do with his money, I have a different agenda for Steve. Rather than giving to charity, I would like him to invest more, putting more people to work that way. Apple has a lot of cash in the bank -- and, I don't necessarily think that is a bad thing. Apple pays cash for inventory, doesn't borrow, and that is great. But, I think Apple has plenty beyond that, and, should invest more.
Yeah, and I understand science usually asks you to prove something is, not isn't. So therefore the burden of proof should be on those who think SJ is a douchebag
Lol. Can't tell if you're serious...
Tax cheat? He is just doing what the rest of the American people would have done had they the capability. Who wouldn't want to get away with fewer taxes payable if it was legit.
Well seeing as taxes are what make our country, um, work, I think anyone with any brains would want to.
You do realize that if there were fewer men like Jobs, our country wouldn't be in nearly as bad a debt crisis as we're in.. right?
----------
No, I just want him to donate. I don't care if it's with more fanfare than a gay pride parade, or buried so deep earthworms can't find it, I'd like like for him to help people.
Well this much we know.
Sources please? If that man wanted something to stay buried, it would stay buried. Anonymous donations wouldn't get leaked without his say-so.
I don't disagree in any way that creating more jobs would be a plus. However, it's likely he'd outsource. Not that the rest of the world needs jobs less than we do... but still.
Of course, creating jobs that only certain people qualify for is helping a different section of society than is donating to charity. Just something to think about. You're helping people, but you're likely helping people who need it less. (I'd prefer you didn't mention the "trickle-down" effect, btw; wealth tends to accumulate, pooling rather than flowing.)
Last edited:
Sounds like your issue is your countries tax system more than an individual operating within that system. Well unless you have reason to believe some of these individuals are stretching the rules beyond the word not just the intent.
Taxes don't make the country work, people do. Taxes are really there to channel the energies in the right direction.
If the most tax effective wealth generation is pooling assets instead of growing them, then that's what your going to get. Taxes should be as much about carrots as they are about sticks.
When the claim is [something] doesnt exist, the proof is the lack of any evidence of its existence.
For you to challenge the claim that [something] doesn't exist, you would have to provide some evidence of its existence.
I don't believe you actually believe anything you're saying. You specifically said it has been proven Steve Jobs does not donate to charity; you lied. You have zero evidence to prove that he does or does not donate to charity, therefore you cannot make a statement either way.
The lack of evidence supporting one theory does not prove another. All that has been proven is that Jobs, like myself, does not PUBLICLY engage in many philanthropic endeavors. This has absolutely no bearing on what either of us does in private. And personally, I have a great deal more respect for those who give in private than those who make a public spectacle of their generosity.
Edit: I can't prove that you have any idea what you are talking about, so I guess it must be true that you don't, at least according to your logic. The lack of evidence to prove something only proves that the evidence is lacking, nothing more.
well if you want to talk about burden of proof. We can go by preponderance of evidence - more likely than not.
When SJ took over apple he stopped all charitable corporate donations. He stopped that because apple was in trouble financially. Now that apple is one of the richest and most profitable corporations in the world, why havent any charitable programs been reinstated? both google and MS contributed to Haiti and Japan. Why hasnt apple? Because SJ didnt allow it.
Now tell me, what evidence do you have that Jobs has made charitable contributions? Oh thats right you have none.
So based on the available evidence, it's more likely than not that jobs doesnt contribute to charity which makes him a greedy dbag.
Steve is obviously much better at thinking of investment possibilities than I am, but, here is one: Windows 7 supports 35 languages; Lion supports 22. I haven't checked the list, but, I would guess mostly overlap. Why doesn't Apple invest in supporting 13 more languages? No doubt the ROI, and, demand for the additional languages would be lower than for the most popular 22-- no doubt it would take longer to get a return on such an investment than for the more popular languages, but, rather than give money away, why not try investing it in something that will put people to work in 13 smaller countries?
Disagree
If someone in this thread was to say I am a paedophile who likes gay orgies with boy scouts it would be up to them to prove that I do engage in such activities not for me to prove that I don't, same with Jobs are charitable donations, Jobs likes a low personal profile almost to the point of paranoia so it would be in character of him to want to keep anything he does in private strictly private, he has a high profile job but he shuns the limelight and personal publicity.
Getting any reliable information on Jobs' health this last year has been like trying to squeeze blood out of a stone so Jobs hates personal publicity
You missed the logic.
I can accuse you of never giving to charity.
I can praise you for giving a ton to charity anonymously
Depending on which statement is made - the burden of proof relies on the statement being made.
This is why in a formal debate there's such a thing as a counter proposition which then makes the "pro" team have to then argue against (becoming the con) vs stating that the status quo is ok.
The world is flat. The world isn't flat
The world is round. The world isn't round.
Either way - a case would need to be made.
First of all your analogy is disturbing, I think you have serious issues and in need of professional help for even coming up with that stuff.
Second, your analogy is completely off-base. Here's a better example.
John Doe, another "superhero" is noted for lack of public life saving versus Superman. Everyone can search online, the papers or what not to find out whether John Doe was involved with saving lives however there's no record or anything to support that JD saved anyone's lives before. At this point the facts would appear to support the claim that JD has not saved anyone's life.
However your argument is just because there's no record, doesn't mean he's not saving as many lives as Superman has.
As you can see it's not my burden to prove that he hasn't been saving lives, it's up to you that he has since there's no record of him doing so.
Also interesting is that this particular poster thinks it's great that a company provides jobs, money and living arrangements, etc for people who would otherwise be scrambling for a bowl of rice (his words not mine) in China but yet he believes it's better for a bulk of the African population to die without any help.
CWT1965's comments about the Chinese are abhorrent.
CWT1965's comments about Africa are abhorrent.
CWT1965's plucked-out-of-the-air example above is abhorrent.
As the poster above me said - CWT1965 seems to have serious issues...
CWT1965's comments about the Chinese are abhorrent.
CWT1965's comments about Africa are abhorrent.
CWT1965's plucked-out-of-the-air example above is abhorrent.
As the poster above me said - CWT1965 seems to have serious issues...
With regards to the Chinese
I made my "bowl of rice" comment because China does not have a welfare/unemployment benefit system, in China you have 2 options - work or starve, if they were not employed/fed/housed by Foxconn there is a very good chance they would not have food at all given there is no benefits system so Foxconn are doing them a favour employing them, giving them food to eat and a roof over their head even if the working conditions are not to western standards, companies dump Foxconn then the lives of their employees would get a whole load worse with no income coming in.
With regards to the paedophilia/boy scouts, I was reading an article about such an incident at the time so it was the first one in my head at the particular time I made my post
Quit while you are leagues behind. You have dug yourself so deep with your analogies and "point of view" that there's no coming out on this thread. Don't bother.
Maybe my comments about Foxconn workers and Africans could have been a little more politically correct but I am simply not a politically correct person, I am too old and long in the tooth to educate myself in left wing/liberal/pinko speak I would far rather be true to myself and tell it how I see it
It took me a while to parse this, but I think I understand what you were trying to say >_>
Yes, people like jobs exploit loopholes in the tax system that were never intended when our country was founded.
I don't have an issue with the tax system per se, at least not in theory; my issue is merely how it's being executed. But that's not really what we're talking about ..
Semantics. Without taxes, the country wouldn't work. Naturally people are required to keep the country running as well. The two aren't mutually exclusive.
That isn't what I meant. Wealth tends to accumulate, and stay with the wealthiest individuals; there is little "trickle down" effect; the rich getting richer doesn't help the poor, or the middle class. It doesn't really even help the rich, actually, since they don't really even use the money, much less need it.
*Pats head* Don't sell yourself short.
I have to admit I'm a bit perplexed... looking through the Tiger (and Leopard) install, there are probably over a hundred languages to choose from (I stopped counting at around 30, not even halfway).