horrific logic given the circumstances of what you were asked for proof of.
Posted this earlier:
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.