what makes you think that?
Blue Origin
- Thread starter schuylaar
- Start date
that's right and the small portion afforded his ex-wife is donated to charity..people need to get right which Bezos does which.
xtsho
Well-Known Member
Either one is free to do what they want with their money. Bezos built a huge company and earned his money. It's his money. If he wants to share it that's his choice. If he doesn't that's his choice as well.
You can't penalize people for being successful and expect them to just give away the fruits of their labor. If you did that there would be no incentive for people to excel and do amazing things. Look what happened in China after WWII and the Chairman Mao took power. They rounded up all of the people that worked hard to become successful. China floundered in famine and poverty. It wasn't until they started letting capitalism seep back into their economy in the 70's that they started to become a global power and their population started to climb out of the gutter.
And for the record Jeff Bezos has donated more to charity than his ex-wife who received $38 billion dollars in the divorce settlement. She's only donated a small portion to charity and is keeping the rest for herself.
"Jeff Bezos topped the list by donating $10 billion to launch the Bezos Earth Fund. Bezos, who last week announced he was stepping down as Amazon CEO to devote more time to philanthropy and other projects, also contributed $100 million to Feeding America, the organization that supplies more than 200 food banks."
"No. 2 on the list was Bezos’s ex-wife, MacKenzie Scott, who gave $5.7 billion in 2020 by asking community leaders to help identify 512 organizations for seven- and eight-figure gifts, including food banks, human-service organizations, and racial-justice charities."
In any thriving society there are winners and losers. Rich and poor. The alternative is some form of communism where everyone gets the same and has failed everywhere and anytime that form of governance has been adopted. If you take away the rewards for hard work there is no incentive to do anything extra and you end up with a failed society. Karl Marx was an idiot and his philosophy is why many countries are 100 years behind the rest.
USSR - gone
Cuba - failed
Venezuela - failed
Just to name a few. China came to their senses and if it hadn't been for their embrace of capitalism they would not be the economic juggernaut they are today and millions of their people would still be living in poverty wondering where they were going to get a bowl of rice to fill their empty bellies.
perhaps some taxes for infrastructure that his company uses just to name one?
i would also like for him to stop timing his people for every task- he even times their bathroom.
he's a sick control freak fvcker.
Last edited:
xtsho
Well-Known Member
I agree that these companies should be paying more in taxes. Unfortunately our government is too focused on giving out tax breaks for campaign donations. It happens on both sides of the aisle. The Republicans are up front with it while the Democrats hide exceptions hidden as amendments to bills working their way through Congress. It may not be as blatant but the Democrats are deep into the quid pro quo just like the rest.
I think that when these multibillion dollar global companies want to set up shop they shouldn't be getting tax breaks or incentives. They should have to build out the infrastructure they're going to use and pay for it.
I'm so sick of all these giveaways because of all these so called jobs they're bringing. That's been proven to be a load of crap. I live very close to Nike, Intel, and many other large companies that got these great deals and tax abatements that have them paying less in property taxes than someone owning a 3 bedroom home. They clog the roads with employees going to work but pay nothing to improve those roads.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
We've cut, cut and cut again the NASA budget in an effort to cut spending while reducing taxes and ran up a huge deficit in order to give Bezos a favorable tax-status. He pays none.
This is another example of just how broad the wealth gap has become. Governments can't afford to explore space but billionaires can.
the IRS recently sent Trump $7M refund erroneously and Trump won't send it back.
55 major companies paid $0 in federal taxes on their 2020 profits: report
A new report found that dozens of major U.S. companies paid no taxes on their profits in 2020.
they sent me a bill for $3k for 2012 on $12K
welcome to the Matrix..our bodies' little batteries lined up and attached to the Machine.
Last edited:
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
I agree on the taxes, but technology has lowered the bar for space to the point where private enterprise can take over basic launch services more economically. In an upcoming interplanetary mission contract they just won, Space X will save NASA over 2 billion bucks! Musk is using cheap materials, new tech, welded construction and has an aggressive test and development program, his space X management and engineering teams appear to be top notch. Musk at least has made a contribution by dramatically lowering costs with innovation and reusability.
A recent example:
SpaceX lands NASA launch contract for mission to Jupiter's moon Europa
Elon Musk's private rocket company SpaceX was awarded a $178 million launch services contract for NASA's first mission focusing on Jupiter's icy moon Europa and whether it may host conditions suitable for life, the space agency said on Friday.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Not many economists think Marx was an idiot, he was a theorist and the first one to look at economies as a whole, his economic system was what he figured would happen if technology advanced far enough in a then distant future. Others took his ideas and theories and tried to apply them to a world not yet ready for them, they were used as a mere instrument to gain and retain power. Communism was an unworkable economic system then and it still is, but perhaps not one day in the future.
Technology causes rapid social and economic change and when harnessed to a well managed capitalist system can produce rapid and phenomenal results, one only needs to look to China for an example. However technology in the future will require far fewer people to work and we've seen this trend over the decades and at some point in the not too distant future working will be a privilege, not a necessity. When work becomes more of a privilege than a burden, then you will see a gradual shift to a more communist like society. Capitalism both fuels and needs economic growth and there are physical limits on that, even if they are only choking on our own trash.
Last edited:
NASA was discontinued because of lack of funds but I can't help to notice the Space Force flag behind Biden now.I agree on the taxes, but technology has lowered the bar for space to the point where private enterprise can take over basic launch services more economically. In an upcoming interplanetary mission contract they just won, Space X will save NASA over 2 billion bucks! Musk is using cheap materials, new tech, welded construction and has an aggressive test and development program, his space X management and engineering teams appear to be top notch. Musk at least has made a contribution by dramatically lowering costs with innovation and reusability.
A recent example:
SpaceX lands NASA launch contract for mission to Jupiter's moon Europa
Elon Musk's private rocket company SpaceX was awarded a $178 million launch services contract for NASA's first mission focusing on Jupiter's icy moon Europa and whether it may host conditions suitable for life, the space agency said on Friday.www.reuters.com
topcat
Well-Known Member
Some guys buy a Corvette for their mid-life crisis. He bought a space penis.
" 'scuse me while I fuck the sky."
xtsho
Well-Known Member
Idiot was the wrong word. He was definitely a smart man.
I was looking for something in your post that I disagree with but I couldn't find anything.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
The roll of NASA is changing because of technical advances and becoming focused on supporting science and private space enterprises with promise. Instead of paying over 2 billion to launch on SLS, they are gonna save over 2 billion by letting space x launch the thing. Private enterprise will provide the brawn and NASA will provide the brains, research and support. Now NASA can spend that 2 billion on science instead of heavy lifting, on the payload and not the launch.
NASA will still be pioneering Mars, the moon and human space flight for a while and will move into certifying vehicles and crews while taking on a regulatory and enforcement function too.
Budley Doright
Well-Known Member
Well for one you seem angry he hasn’t fixed up your trailer park yet ...... SMH LOL.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
It's safe to say that Musk and other billionaires aren't in this to save the government money.I agree on the taxes, but technology has lowered the bar for space to the point where private enterprise can take over basic launch services more economically. In an upcoming interplanetary mission contract they just won, Space X will save NASA over 2 billion bucks! Musk is using cheap materials, new tech, welded construction and has an aggressive test and development program, his space X management and engineering teams appear to be top notch. Musk at least has made a contribution by dramatically lowering costs with innovation and reusability.
A recent example:
SpaceX lands NASA launch contract for mission to Jupiter's moon Europa
Elon Musk's private rocket company SpaceX was awarded a $178 million launch services contract for NASA's first mission focusing on Jupiter's icy moon Europa and whether it may host conditions suitable for life, the space agency said on Friday.
I'm not cynical about it. I'm simply being realistic. If this trend continues, rich people will own space while keeping billions of people working for them on earth. Aren't you a bit uncomfortable handing the job of colonizing our solar system to a handful of the wealthiest on this planet.?
Not to mention that money is speech but also power. The unequal distribution of wealth in this society threatens democracy. The wealth disparity will only grow. Eventually, our free speech will be drowned out.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
I think capitalism is the best engine for growth and growth in space is what we will need eventually, not so much on earth though. NASA is moving into a regulatory roll for these folks and using them to support missions because it makes a lot of economic sense to do so, especially Space X. They have a proven track record and the most crashes, in the finest tradition of rocket engineering too! In away space is a bit like the sea and maritime adventures waiting to plunder it's riches vs some state sponsored enterprise with dubious goals. If NASA wants to focus on research, support and science while letting Musk do the heavy lifting for a fraction of the cost, that's fine, more money for science.
These guys didn't make the rules or structure the economy to their advantage, others like them did though, they used technology to concentrate great wealth, Musk with PayPal and Bezos with Amazon. Policy as you well know is a hotly debated topic and the GOP just killed tax enforcement on the rich as a way to pay for infrastructure. They will oppose Biden's international efforts on taxes treaties too and on taxing the wealthy. Get the republicans out of power with a big enough majority and America can easily solve it's problems, including this one. Fortunately the republicans and Trump appear to be trying to make this happen by coming apart at the seams and circling the drain.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Actually, with their wealth comes the ability to make the rules and structure the economy to their advantage. They will do that unless we oppose them.
They aren't capitalists. They are the elite wealthy class and their objective is monopoly, not a free market.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Their wealth comes mainly from communications technology concentrating and increasing wealth, like the railroad robber barons of old, works for Zuck and the founders of Google too. Compared to the old companies like GE and GM that made shit, these communications technology based companies became many times more wealthy in the blink of an eye. This truism has been around for awhile that the software is that runs on the hardware is much more valuable than the hardware, copyrights last longer than patents.
Over generations the wealthy and connected have warped the economic, regulatory and tax systems to their advantage, thousands of lobbyist over decades eroded fairness away. It seems to happen this way in all societies though, to greater or lesser extents, the lesser the better for everybody.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
All these communications technology companies have one thing in common, they are all almost completely software based, it is the algorithms that are the foundations of PayPal, Google and Facebook, that and the ability to reach billions of eyeballs with content and advertising. They have miniscule staffs, huge profit margins with fast growth and are almost money making robots, though Amazon does deliver shit, using a lot of robots and more to come.