,
8 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
I haven't actually seen any of these folks "give away" all their money. More like a way to keep their offspring employed or do those nice virtue messaging speeches. Some folks like the Gates do get involved but it's hard to give away billions. vox.com/recode/2019/5/…
"Philanthrocapitalism" is a thing. "a commitment that over the course of their lives they would donate 99% of their shares in Facebook (at the time valued at $45bn) to the “mission” of “advancing human potential and promoting equality" theguardian.com/news/2018/may/…
"This giving was to be funnelled is not a not-for-profit charitable foundation, but a limited liability company." Again this is actually smarter than having a charity if you intend to not make money but choose strategic investments. investopedia.com/financial-edge…
Non profits can be quirky, fun and support wonderful charities. Like Paul Newman's "Newman's Own" mentalfloss.com/article/74248/…
Non Profits don't have the same scrutiny as charities but are an interesting and diverse bunch. slate.com/business/2018/…
There is almost nothing that prevents a charity from being a cash kitty for hucksters other than rating systems and media scrutiny. tampabay.com/news/nation/am…
With GoFundMe and other peer to peer sites there is little to no scrutiny but the veneer of charity still exists. thedailybeast.com/shocker-the-go…
Two good examples worth reading about are very high profile: The Clinton and Trump foundations. theconversation.com/the-trump-foun…
