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
See this is what I really have a problem with in today's society.
How can anyone be "more valuable" than anyone else? Come on. Sure, there are some scum that deserves to be wiped off the face of the earth (dictators, rapists, murderers, etc.). But for someone with money, to jump in line, is something that if someday we're judged by some higher power (aliens, a "god", whatever), will come back to haunt us.
Money should not be the key to maintaining life. One day we'll all figure this out.
So what? People expects him to sell Apple stock and Disney stock to donate $? You expect him to whip up complicated schemes to pledge shares and ownership when he's near death? He does make $1 cash a year afterall...
I agree he should spend his time on Apple and his family. Opinion of fools is their own problem.
I agree he should spend his time on Apple and his family. Opinion of fools is their own problem.
The answer is simple: what Steve Jobs does with his money is no one's business but Steve Jobs'. Not the NYT (especially the NYT) or anyone else on the planet.
I find it amazing - and insulting - that any publication would have the gonads to "report" on the giving/non-giving of any person, public figure or not.
I find it amazing - and insulting - that any publication would have the gonads to "report" on the giving/non-giving of any person, public figure or not.
WHAT?!
I... I don't even know where to begin. That's not right at all. It might be "right" if the drunk truck driver lost to Steve on a fair playing field... but not if Steve had any influence on the matter. How is it ever right when the rich and powerful get to choose who lives and who dies?
You're misunderstanding the original poster and furthermore they are merely speculating not distributing holy nuggets of truth.
Obviously questions were asked at the time. As I recall it was never proven that Steve "bought" himself a liver. The donor system is not set up that way.
People can speculate all they want.
Jobs makes himself a lightning rod for this kind of thing. He only has himself to blame, and it makes me chuckle when his fan base comes to his rescue... he has you wrapped around his finger just like he wants.
When they do something that's actually worth meaningful criticism, you'll hear from me.
Maybe one of us actually has a reasonable perspective on this particular matter (or we both do.)
Most of what a few people who clog these boards think is absolutely horrendous on Apple's part, really aint that big of a deal in reality and doesn't necessarily register on the average person's priority list. Much ado about nothing.
Perspective, hoss!
The man doesn't walk around giving everyone his extended bio all the time. He keeps to himself most of the time when it concerns his private life, and to the media that is absolutely irresistible (and sometimes utterly infuriating) when it concerns someone of Jobs' stature.
Of course he didn't buy it. That would be illegal.
He just used his unlimited resources to make sure he got the liver. Totally not the same, since of course everyone on the donor lists can do that, right?
Listen folks, when you are dying you think very differently. For Bill Gates, he started giving because he had many decades more to live and he wants to make a difference in the world. For Steve, he has very limited amount of time to live. Trust me when I say this, it's difficult to be greedy, or care about money when you are about to die, and already have more money than you can spend for 1000 years. I am not defending him because he is Steve. I would be defending/giving benefits of doubt for anyone who is dying. They can't take their money away when they die, and Steve is surely dying, so where do you think the money will go? If he is going to give, he could easily give the money away after he dies thru a will. Like his friends said, he doesn't have the time or energy to divest his attention. He wants to use every minute of his remaining life on his family and company, because he surely knows that the end is near, and all his fortune could be given away after that.
WHAT?!
I... I don't even know where to begin. That's not right at all. It might be "right" if the drunk truck driver lost to Steve on a fair playing field... but not if Steve had any influence on the matter. How is it ever right when the rich and powerful get to choose who lives and who dies?
Keeping Steve alive is/was an essential thing for the world and I have a "**** happens" feeling towards Steve queue jumping with regards to liver, I hope no one died as a result but keeping Steve alive was of higher importance to me.
When the family of the person who died and Steve got his liver see all these beautiful shiny new Apple products bringing such joy to the world they can beam with pride that they helped change the world too.
You say this, yet if this happened to you or your loved one, you would be the first to make a big PR stunt out of it.
You can't go around ranking people by how much more important they are. That kind of callousness has gotten this world where it is today. No wonder why people think "to big to fail" is the golden ticket.
Well, he's actually right. Seriously, let's say there's a guy starving on the street. Now let's say we have the choice of to give him either food (a product) or money.
If we give him...
A)...food, he gets to eat.
B)...money, and he uses it to go buy food, he gets to eat.
C)...money, and he doesn't use it to go buy food, he's still hungry.
So, in any scenario which the man eats, it was the product which was most important. Money, at best, serves as a *proxy* for the important piece, and at worst does nothing. (Far too common with even respectable charities because of overhead and inefficiencies.)
Magnify the above scenario to any level you want, and money is *less* important than the product when it comes to actually solving a problem. (Yes, in some cases, like education, the so-called 'product' is actually a *service*, but again money is, at best, a proxy.)
Don't you ever get tired of being duped?
The guy takes $1 salary because he makes millions in stock and other gifts. I'm tired of people looking at that and going "Oh he's such a good CEO!"
Do you really think he's living in a van down by the river and working for Apple for nothing? Wake up.
I know he was speculating and I know there's no proof of such (or even of the possibility of it happening) but I'm definitely not misunderstanding. And I don't want to live in a world where people think like he suggests.
Are you implying they did it for the money? Good will is more important than *either* products or money, but that has exactly *nothing* to do with whether or not products are more important than money when it comes to benefiting mankind.
So what? The way he acts in public and how he treats some of his employees just show what kind of person he is.
He has no respect for anyone but himself. Period. He thinks he's a God, and has duped millions into believing the same thing. CULT.
You say this, yet if this happened to you or your loved one, you would be the first to make a big PR stunt out of it.
You can't go around ranking people by how much more important they are. That kind of callousness has gotten this world where it is today. No wonder why people think "to big to fail" is the golden ticket.
Steve changes the world and brings joy to millions.
Every time someone turns on an Apple gadget it is due to Steve
Every time a kid goes to Disneyworld and smiles it is due to Steve as he is the biggest owner of Disney
Every time a kid around the world watches Toy Story or Finding Nemo and his day has been made happy it is down to Steve owned/owns Pixar
Steve changes lives, keeping him alive means more to me than keeping anyone outside of my family alive
As of last year, Apple had ~46k employees. Also, If his contributions to consumer electronics are prerequisites for entry to heaven: Were all f*$#@d
Of course he didn't buy it. That would be illegal.
He just used his unlimited resources to make sure he got the liver. Totally not the same, since of course everyone on the donor lists can do that, right?
Again, you don't know that. Speculation.
I definitely don't have the financial resources at my disposal to exhaust all options. I'd likely be dead right now. If I did, I would have likely used them and I'm betting that you would to.
Manipulating the system with financial clout would be wrong. No question. This whole topic was under the microscope years ago and nothing came of it.
You can't fault someone for fighting for their life can you?
I sure wouldn't want to eat anything Apple has made. I imagine it hurts just as much going in as it would coming back out.
Seriously though, did you just liken Apple, a commodity item, with food, a necessary item? Really? Seriously?
Mathew 6
Nowhere in the article does it state that Jobs doesn't provide charity. It clearly states that there are no records of it. Pick up the Good Book and read Mathew 6 to get some insight.
Anyone that brags about their giving aren't really giving anything. They're getting notoriety and publicity in exchange.
I think about all the times Jerry Lewis bragged about how he did the telethons without pay. What he didn't state is that he got enough tax writeoffs for it to zero out his tax bill. When I learned of this, I no longer saw him as donating anything.
One can't truely give unless it is without getting something in exchange.
Nowhere in the article does it state that Jobs doesn't provide charity. It clearly states that there are no records of it. Pick up the Good Book and read Mathew 6 to get some insight.
Anyone that brags about their giving aren't really giving anything. They're getting notoriety and publicity in exchange.
I think about all the times Jerry Lewis bragged about how he did the telethons without pay. What he didn't state is that he got enough tax writeoffs for it to zero out his tax bill. When I learned of this, I no longer saw him as donating anything.
One can't truely give unless it is without getting something in exchange.