NavyBillsFan Posted April 9, 2006 Posted April 9, 2006 Well I was told Id never strike it rich in the Navy. So I ask this question, how much friggin money does one man need? Bill Gates is worth 56 billion dollars and wakes up every morning 17.5 million dollars richer. Why is he still doing what he is doing? I would of sold the company or gave it to my children and spent the rest of my life fishing and helping others. Is it that when you buy your dreams you have nothing to do but be more greedy? If I had billions, I would walk right into Ralph's office, take his asking price, and made sure the Bills would stay in Buffalo no matter what. I dont understand these big money owners like Kraft, Jones, and the moron up in D.C. HOW MUCH MONEY DO YOU NEED? When your dead, your not taking it with you, you are going to be as equal as I am! 6 feet in a hole. I dont understand that kind of life? I figure most of it has to brew from the big country clubs at the poker table where these guys brag and pick on the "poor low class millionares" Go Bills, Go Sabres
Tortured Soul Posted April 9, 2006 Posted April 9, 2006 First, Bill Gates was named Time's Man of the Year for his charity work. he has created the largest foundation in history. Second, you have no idea what you would do. It's totally different when you worked to earn that money yourself than in some hypothetical in which you wake up a billionaire. Greedy is relative. If they weren't greedy, they probably wouldn't have gotten where they are now.
BEAST MODE BABY! Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 Honestly, it has nothing to do with greed and shows your basic misunderstanding of how wealth works. Do you think Bill Gates is still motivated by money? It's a game. Repeat. It's a game. You don't just stop playing because you're worth billions. It's about many things besides money. And it has nothing to do with greed, usually, although there are certainly rich people who are greedy. Let's just say this. Until you start thinking in terms of your net worth instead of how much you make a year, you aren't on the road to being rich.
Just Jack Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 It's totally different when you worked to earn that money yourself than in some hypothetical in which you wake up a billionaire. 657272[/snapback] Perfect example is this show on the WB, Survival Of The Richest. Watch it and see what I mean.
gmac17 Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 I dont understand these big money owners like Kraft, Jones, and the moron up in D.C. HOW MUCH MONEY DO YOU NEED? Navy - Kraft put up $350 million of his own money to build a stadium. I don't like a lot of the things these guys are doing, but I don't fault them for trying to make money.
bbb Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 Gates sold the company a long time ago - when they went public...........His charitable work is second to none.
ExiledInIllinois Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 Gates sold the company a long time ago - when they went public...........His charitable work is second to none. 657356[/snapback] Second to none? Hmmmm... Might be so... But as I said before... Those computers he "gives" libraries are basically subsidized by larger more affluent libraries... In other words, your community might get "free" technology if it isn't so well off. If your community is a little "better off" and you want to take part in the program, you pay a premium for the devices... Why even take part in it when you can get it cheaper somewhere else?... What exactly is Gates "giving" away? While I applaud what they are doing... And agree with the priority to low-income and rural communities... Why should it come at a premium from others? Shouldn't it be about pure giving? The last few lines below (red) is also troubling... ***Note: The figures are a few years old... The Bill and Melinda Gates Library Foundation has installed computers with internet access in 2,671 library buildings, with priority given to low-income and rural communities. A number of states have provided one-time grants for new technology. Last year, the federal government chipped in $156 million through the Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA). Unfortunately, a single injection of funds for technology will not cut it. Computers may seem like capital equipment at first blush, but they’re not. Unlike Carnegie’s buildings, computers have a limited lifespan. How libraries will manage to fund regular upgrades is a source of much concern.
ExiledInIllinois Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 Navy - Kraft put up $350 million of his own money to build a stadium. I don't like a lot of the things these guys are doing, but I don't fault them for trying to make money. 657344[/snapback] He used to squeeze 6 people in on 4 season tickets back in the day when his family would attend NE games at Sullivan Stadium... Think he allows that now? That kinda theft of service is probably what put NE under back then... Probably how he got rich... He actually stated this fact in Forbes... This fact will always gall me. What an arrogant phuck...
crackur Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 Gate's only helps people who can help him........thats what all rich people do I live in a really rural area.......that is actually trying to expand.....or has being trying to expand for years..... I never once seen anyone help this area, whether it was schools, government or just medical facilities......everyone is a rip off ..
Dan Gross Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 Second to none? Hmmmm... Might be so... But as I said before... Those computers he "gives" libraries are basically subsidized by larger more affluent libraries... In other words, your community might get "free" technology if it isn't so well off. If your community is a little "better off" and you want to take part in the program, you pay a premium for the devices... Why even take part in it when you can get it cheaper somewhere else?... What exactly is Gates "giving" away? While I applaud what they are doing... And agree with the priority to low-income and rural communities... Why should it come at a premium from others? Shouldn't it be about pure giving? The last few lines below (red) is also troubling... ***Note: The figures are a few years old... The Bill and Melinda Gates Library Foundation has installed computers with internet access in 2,671 library buildings, with priority given to low-income and rural communities. A number of states have provided one-time grants for new technology. Last year, the federal government chipped in $156 million through the Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA). Unfortunately, a single injection of funds for technology will not cut it. Computers may seem like capital equipment at first blush, but they’re not. Unlike Carnegie’s buildings, computers have a limited lifespan. How libraries will manage to fund regular upgrades is a source of much concern. 657415[/snapback] Maybe that's what his library foundation does, but that's not the crux of the primary charitable organization (the one he jumpstarted with a $5B donation in 1999). According to this article, much of what is donated is spent preventing/curing diseases that effect children...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 Maybe that's what his library foundation does, but that's not the crux of the primary charitable organization (the one he jumpstarted with a $5B donation in 1999). According to this article, much of what is donated is spent preventing/curing diseases that effect children... 657580[/snapback] But...but...but...you mean, NBF's original premise that Bill Gates sits around counting his billions and doesn't use to help others is wrong??? Considering the source...what a surprise...
Dan Gross Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 But...but...but...you mean, NBF's original premise that Bill Gates sits around counting his billions and doesn't use to help others is wrong??? Considering the source...what a surprise... 657604[/snapback] Donating half your net worth, and pledging to do more, yeah there's a good target. IT'S REAL TO ME!
Ramius Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 But...but...but...you mean, NBF's original premise that Bill Gates sits around counting his billions and doesn't use to help others is wrong??? Considering the source...what a surprise... 657604[/snapback] He's just pissed cuz gates outbid him on ebay for some vintage hulk hogan VHS tapes.
cromagnum Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 He used to squeeze 6 people in on 4 season tickets back in the day when his family would attend NE games at Sullivan Stadium... Think he allows that now? That kinda theft of service is probably what put NE under back then... Probably how he got rich... He actually stated this fact in Forbes... This fact will always gall me. What an arrogant phuck... 657417[/snapback] He kept the team in newengland, and built the stadium on his own coin, at a time when team owners were having the public taxed to finance new stadiums...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 He kept the team in newengland, and built the stadium on his own coin, at a time when team owners were having the public taxed to finance new stadiums... 657662[/snapback] You mean after he threatened to move them to Hartford, CT... http://www.sportslawnews.com/archive/artic.../Patriots1.html Amid great fanfare, Connecticut Governor John Rowland announced what he thought was an agreement with Robert Kraft last November. The state would pay for the stadium, and related facilities such as roads. The deal, called the "greatest financial deal any [NFL] owner has ever received" by three NFL franchise owners, according to a report in the Boston Globe, contained some extraordinary guarantees, including a promise to pay Kraft as much as $175 million in cash over the first ten years "if he failed to sell out premium seats." In addition to offering the stadium for no charge, the state agreed to pay as much as $200M or more over 30 years for stadium improvements and renovations, all the costs of buying and cleaning the stadium site and up to $15 million for a training facility. Mr. Kraft would have paid no rent for the land on which he would build a new $50 million hotel, no property taxes on the stadium, hotel or an entertainment pavilion. All these goodies came up to about $375 million and would be paid off via team payroll, sales and usage taxes, in addition to a 10% ticket tax. Mr. Kraft will receive 90% of all incoming revenue from Patriots-related events. He would earn all profits from concessions. Although most state politicians supported this deal, problems occurred . The facility would not be ready in 2001, but in 2002 at the earliest. Environmental concerns about the location were also voiced. At the same time, the NFL, concerned at the eroding market share of a team which would move from the 6th largest television market to the 27th, could be substantial. Massachusetts officials slowly pieced together a deal that could keep the team in Foxboro. Far less generous than Hartford, the Bay State leaders offered $70 million in public funds for infrastructure work as an enticement to keep the team in Foxboro. Just two days before a deadline, Mr. Kraft exercised escape clause in the November agreement, giving him the right to back out of the deal with no financial penalty. The bulk of the new stadium would be paid by Mr. Kraft. NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue made a trip to Massachusetts to speak with its Governor and legislative leaders. One of them, House Speaker Thomas Finneran, changed his previous opposition to any financial incentives, to back this deal. According to the Boston Herald, Mr. Kraft would then give the state an estimated $1.4 million in annual revenue from two sources: stadium user fees such as a ticket surcharge, and a license fee for satellite parking lots around the stadium." The funds are designed to offset an estimated $42 million worth of road, sewer and other improvements that would be made on land Kraft owns.
IDBillzFan Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 When your dead, your not taking it with you, you are going to be as equal as I am! 6 feet in a hole.657258[/snapback] I don't think life is about what you can take with you, but rather what you leave behind. Focus on the latter and the former won't mean jackschitt.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 I don't think life is about what you can take with you, but rather what you leave behind. Focus on the latter and the former won't mean jackschitt. 657704[/snapback] Ooooh...sophisticated philosophy. Makes one wonder why you wasted the observation on NBF...
billsfanone Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 Second to none? Hmmmm... Might be so... But as I said before... Those computers he "gives" libraries are basically subsidized by larger more affluent libraries... In other words, your community might get "free" technology if it isn't so well off. If your community is a little "better off" and you want to take part in the program, you pay a premium for the devices... Why even take part in it when you can get it cheaper somewhere else?... What exactly is Gates "giving" away? While I applaud what they are doing... And agree with the priority to low-income and rural communities... Why should it come at a premium from others? Shouldn't it be about pure giving? The last few lines below (red) is also troubling... ***Note: The figures are a few years old... The Bill and Melinda Gates Library Foundation has installed computers with internet access in 2,671 library buildings, with priority given to low-income and rural communities. A number of states have provided one-time grants for new technology. Last year, the federal government chipped in $156 million through the Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA). Unfortunately, a single injection of funds for technology will not cut it. Computers may seem like capital equipment at first blush, but they’re not. Unlike Carnegie’s buildings, computers have a limited lifespan. How libraries will manage to fund regular upgrades is a source of much concern. 657415[/snapback] Top US Foundations by giving: http://fdncenter.org/findfunders/topfunder...p100giving.html
IDBillzFan Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 Ooooh...sophisticated philosophy. Makes one wonder why you wasted the observation on NBF... 657706[/snapback] If I can reach just ONE wrestling fan...just ONE...it will all be worth it.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 Top US Foundations by giving:http://fdncenter.org/findfunders/topfunder...p100giving.html 657710[/snapback] I see a lot of "evil" corporate giants and even a few classic robber-barons in that list. Know who I don't see? Politicians that B word about the evils of corporate giants and robber-barons.
Recommended Posts