...not sure what Apple's stock has to do with the donations of its CEO.
I am guessing you didn’t really read the article.
Look at the last sentence of the last para.
Elijahg said:
...
But it puts into perspective to a certain extent how vast the sum is that Cook has amassed, and how little he donated. Not quite on the same level of Bill Gates for example. Obviously, it's entirely up to him what he donates to and to whom, and I am respectful of the fact that he has pledged to give the majority of his wealth to charity, but actions speak louder than words.
Quite galling that someone worth $1bn donated just 0.5% of his wealth to charity. The average American is worth $70k, so the equivalent of them donating $3,500 of their wealth. What can one person do with $1bn? I guess as a bean counter he is absolutely thrilled to see the value in his bank account grow. And people say Apple isn't greedy.
We don't know how much Mr. Cook donated in 2019. It could have been $10 million or $100 million. We only know about the charitable donations which were in the form of Apple shares - $7 million worth in 2019 and $5 million worth in 2018 - because he's required to report those transactions. Even if it was only $7 million, that's a lot of money regardless of how much money he has.
Also, where do you get the $70k for what the average American is worth from? As of the last Z.1 reporting, U.S. household net worth was over $100 trillion. Even if we count every man, woman, and child, that averages out to over $300k per.
...not sure what Apple's stock has to do with the donations of its CEO.
I am guessing you didn’t really read the article.
Look at the last sentence of the last para.
Elijahg said:
...But it puts into perspective to a certain extent how vast the sum is that Cook has amassed, and how little he donated. Not quite on the same level of Bill Gates for example.
Obviously, it's entirely up to him what he donates to and to whom, and I am respectful of the fact that he has pledged to give the majority of his wealth to charity, but actions speak louder than words.
I respect a guy who doesn't flaunt how much money he donated as opposed to those who 'twittered' how much X money they gave to Y charity. In the later case, actions do speak louder the type of person they are.
He is the king of management , and deserves this money. Having said this, I would not like to live the kind of life he has ... irrespective of the financial gain .....
Quite galling that someone worth $1bn donated just 0.5% of his wealth to charity. The average American is worth $70k, so the equivalent of them donating $3,500 of their wealth. What can one person do with $1bn? I guess as a bean counter he is absolutely thrilled to see the value in his bank account grow. And people say Apple isn't greedy.
Also, where do you get the $70k for what the average American is worth from? As of the last Z.1 reporting, U.S. household net worth was over $100 trillion. Even if we count every man, woman, and child, that averages out to over $300k per.
Feigning confusion?
Carnegie, I'm sure you already understood he confused median and average. That's a pretty common mistake. His comments are simply an extension of the fact 1%'s account for the half the world's wealth, and 99% do with far less. Dive into details and the disparities are even far worse than that, 10 people alone are wealthier than the billions encompassing the bottom 50%.
The 1% tend to be hoarders and what use does hoarding economic resources serve (does anyone really need a $B dollars), but that's a separate discussion we shouldn't have in this thread. It's a discussion we should definitely be having someplace tho. It's causing rising discord in countries and regions across the globe and needs to be openly addressed.
So, uh, congratulations to Tim Cook, I guess? I mean... most of us can’t even find living wage jobs, let alone jobs that let us save money. I was there once, but that job was destroyed by sociopaths and I’ve been on disability since. It actually would financially *HURT* me to get “a job” in this horrible economy.
".......His comments are simply an extension of the fact 1%'s account for the half the world's wealth, and 99% do with far less. Dive into details and the disparities are even far worse than that, 10 people alone are wealthier than the billions encompassing the bottom 50%.
The 1% tend to be hoarders and what use does hoarding economic resources serve (does anyone really need a $B dollars), but that's a separate discussion we shouldn't have in this thread. It's a discussion we should definitely be having someplace tho. It's causing rising discord in countries and regions across the globe and needs to be openly addressed."
I like how people like you like to cite that 1% of the World population owns 50% of the Worlds wealth, without putting that fact into context. Because it sound so impressive when you include the 50% of the World population that has no wealth to speak of.
1% of the World population is 76,000,000 people.
50% of the World population makes less than $5 a day.
70% of the World population makes less then $10 a day.
It only takes about $900,000 worth of wealth, to be in the World's 1%.
If you have $5,000 of wealth, you are richer than 50% of the World's population.
There are only about 2,200 billionaires in the World.
There are only about 48,000,000 millionaire in the World.
That leaves 25,000,000 people in the 1%, that do not have a least $1,000,000 in wealth.
I bet you are in the World's 1%, that owns 50% of the World's wealth. I surely am. Been in the 1% for over 15 years now. And many here are 1%ers. .
Are you a hoarder?
The other fact that people like you like to cite is that all the Worlds billionaires owns more wealth that 4.6 billion people. But if you put that into context, none of those 4.6 billion people earn more that $10 a day. If you were homeless and panhandling on the streets, you would make too much to be one of those 4.6B people. You would probably be able to panhandle more than $10 a day. Plus there are free social services that are available to you.
If you were to take the $10,000,000,000,000 (That's $10T) worth of wealth of all the World's billionaires and divided up evenly among those 4,600,000,000 people, they would each get $2200. Just one time. $2200 is still about 4x below the poverty level in the US. A panhandler makes more than $2200 a year. That's just about $6 a day.
".......His comments are simply an extension of the fact 1%'s account for the half the world's wealth, and 99% do with far less. Dive into details and the disparities are even far worse than that, 10 people alone are wealthier than the billions encompassing the bottom 50%.
The 1% tend to be hoarders and what use does hoarding economic resources serve (does anyone really need a $B dollars), but that's a separate discussion we shouldn't have in this thread. It's a discussion we should definitely be having someplace tho. It's causing rising discord in countries and regions across the globe and needs to be openly addressed."
I like how people like you like to cite that 1% of the World population owns 50% of the Worlds wealth, without putting that fact into context. Because it sound so impressive when you include the 50% of the World population that has no wealth to speak of.
1% of the World population is 76,000,000 people.
50% of the World population makes less than $5 a day.
70% of the World population makes less then $10 a day.
It only takes about $900,000 worth of wealth, to be in the World's 1%.
If you have $5,000 of wealth, you are richer than 50% of the World's population.
There are only about 2,200 billionaires in the World.
There are only about 48,000,000 millionaire in the World.
That leaves 25,000,000 people in the 1%, that do not have a least $1,000,000 in wealth.
I bet you are in the World's 1%, that owns 50% of the World's wealth. I surely am. Been in the 1% for over 15 years now. And many here are 1%ers. .
Are you a hoarder?
The other fact that people like you like to cite is that all the Worlds billionaires owns more wealth that 4.6 billion people. But if you put that into context, none of those 4.6 billion people earn more that $10 a day. If you were homeless and panhandling on the streets, you would make too much to be one of those 4.6B people. You would probably be able to panhandle more than $10 a day. Plus there are free social services that are available to you.
If you were to take the $10,000,000,000,000 (That's $10T) worth of wealth of all the World's billionaires and divided up evenly among those 4,600,000,000 people, they would each get $2200. Just one time. $2200 is still about 4x below the poverty level in the US. A panhandler makes more than $2200 a year. That's just about $6 a day.
That does not make the disparity sound any more acceptable. Sorry. I'd be shocked if you yourself didn't see it.
There will always be those who squander what they have, and there will also be those who, if given the opportunity and the resources, will better their situation immensely. Take a chance on them. Even a paltry $2200 in the right hands can make a few villages healthy and self-sustaining. If you have far more than you could ever need then share and save the ones you can is my opinion.
BTW it takes an income of over $400,000/yr to be one of the 1% here in the US. I don't qualify, far from it.
To be clear I'm not factually stating that's where' Mr. Cook's $5M went, but it does seem a sensical guess.
Right, so basically, you don’t have a clue what he does with his money. Got it.
Obviously you don't "got it" but you are correct I'm not his accountant and wouldn't factually know, just as I said to begin with. I was making guess based on circumstances.
Not knowing for sure hasn't ever stopped you from making various comments has it.
".......His comments are simply an extension of the fact 1%'s account for the half the world's wealth, and 99% do with far less. Dive into details and the disparities are even far worse than that, 10 people alone are wealthier than the billions encompassing the bottom 50%.
The 1% tend to be hoarders and what use does hoarding economic resources serve (does anyone really need a $B dollars), but that's a separate discussion we shouldn't have in this thread. It's a discussion we should definitely be having someplace tho. It's causing rising discord in countries and regions across the globe and needs to be openly addressed."
I like how people like you like to cite that 1% of the World population owns 50% of the Worlds wealth, without putting that fact into context. Because it sound so impressive when you include the 50% of the World population that has no wealth to speak of.
1% of the World population is 76,000,000 people.
50% of the World population makes less than $5 a day.
70% of the World population makes less then $10 a day.
It only takes about $900,000 worth of wealth, to be in the World's 1%.
If you have $5,000 of wealth, you are richer than 50% of the World's population.
There are only about 2,200 billionaires in the World.
There are only about 48,000,000 millionaire in the World.
That leaves 25,000,000 people in the 1%, that do not have a least $1,000,000 in wealth.
I bet you are in the World's 1%, that owns 50% of the World's wealth. I surely am. Been in the 1% for over 15 years now. And many here are 1%ers. .
Are you a hoarder?
The other fact that people like you like to cite is that all the Worlds billionaires owns more wealth that 4.6 billion people. But if you put that into context, none of those 4.6 billion people earn more that $10 a day. If you were homeless and panhandling on the streets, you would make too much to be one of those 4.6B people. You would probably be able to panhandle more than $10 a day. Plus there are free social services that are available to you.
If you were to take the $10,000,000,000,000 (That's $10T) worth of wealth of all the World's billionaires and divided up evenly among those 4,600,000,000 people, they would each get $2200. Just one time. $2200 is still about 4x below the poverty level in the US. A panhandler makes more than $2200 a year. That's just about $6 a day.
That does not make the disparity sound any more acceptable. Sorry. I'd be shocked if you yourself didn't see it.
There will always be those who squander what they have, and there will also be those who, if given the opportunity and the resources, will better their situation immensely. Take a chance on them. Even a paltry $2200 in the right hands can make a few villages healthy and self-sustaining. If you have far more than you could ever need then share and save the ones you can is my opinion.
BTW it takes an income of over $400,000/yr to be one of the 1% here in the US. I don't qualify, far from it.
What should come as a shock is not that 80M people in the world own so much wealth but that 5B people in the World own so little. And I have no delusion that transferring most of the wealth of the 80M to the 5B, is going to make a bit difference. Most of it will be pilfered by the corrupt government of those 5B people. How is helping even ten thousand villages, going to change that disparity. If each village consist of 10K villagers, that's just 10M people out of 5.6B. It's more or less a rounding error. It's just wishful thinking of those that can't stand to see people with "too much" wealth and want to justify their stance. To make even a hint of difference in the disparity, if that's your main concern, it would also take making you, me and everyone here, poor.
The total wealth in the World is $360T. That's including what wealth you, me and everyone here and in the US have. Divide that up evenly with 7.5B people and everyone gets $48K. Just a one time payment. When and where will the next $48K come from, if the bulk of the wealth most people have, was earned over a period of over 30 years? But the disparity problem will be solved. Everyone will be poor, by US standards at least.
The US has by far the most billionaires and millionaires of any country. There are 700 billionaires and 18M millionaires in the US. China is second with 350 billionaires and 4.5M millionaires. It's no wonder that the bar is set so much higher here.
Most people are actually shocked that it only takes an annual income of just $400,000, to be in the top 1% of all wage earners in the US. Most think that it would require an annual income of at least a million. And this is to be in the top 1% of all wage earners, not the top 1% in term of wealth. (you, probably unintentionally, moved the goal post here.) To be in the top 1% in the US in term of wealth, it takes having $10M in investable assets. Far more than the $900K it takes to be in the 1% Worldwide because 70% of the US are not extremely poor.
The average annual income of those in the 1% in term of wealth is $1.3M. (So you're even farther from being a 1%er, than you thought.) But that doesn't mean you have to earn $1.3M a year to be in the 1% in term of wealth. One could earn an annual income of $200K and still have over $10M in wealth. Wealth and income are not the same, though there's a strong correlation. This is a reflection of how many rich people there are in the US. And even if earning an annual income of of $400K might seem impossible for most, accumulating $10M worth of wealth is not as hard it seems when considering that the average age of the 1%ers in term of wealth in the US, is over 60 years old. 80% of the 1%ers started from scratch and earned their fortune over most of their lifetime, even if they never earned more than $400K a year. Only about 20% of them inherit their fortune, without having to earn it for themselves.
So even if I never came close to earning $400K a year and I can never see myself earning $400K a year from here on, (unless I divest the wealth I have now, at a rate of $500,000 per year (got to pay taxes). Which would only last a handful of years), I can easily see myself eventually being in the 1% with $10M in assets. After 30 years of working, saving and investing, with 10 years of retirement, $10M in wealth is not an impossibility for me. (Specially with a stock portfolio heavily invested in AAPL since 1998.) Though it's not a goal that I have set for myself nor care if I never reach it. If it happens, it happens. I have enough wealth to be comfortable for the rest of my retirement and yet some would still say I have too much wealth.
And lets not gloss over the fact the uber rich people like Musk, Bezo, Gates, Page, Brin, Buffet, The Waltons and even Cook, have created a lot of wealth for tens, if not hundreds of millions of small investors like me and large investors. Their present wealth that total in the hundreds of billions, pales compared to the wealth they helped create for their share holders, without having to give away their own wealth to do so.
I have no problem with rich people having "too much" wealth, when they have created 10x, 100x or even a 1000x more wealth for others, than they have for themselves. Even if their wealth is over 10,000x the wealth I have, telling people they have "too much" money and how they should spend it, is not in my DNA.
"The evil of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the wealth. The virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of the misery."
Comments
Also, where do you get the $70k for what the average American is worth from? As of the last Z.1 reporting, U.S. household net worth was over $100 trillion. Even if we count every man, woman, and child, that averages out to over $300k per.
1 billion is nothing.
And then some.
Carnegie, I'm sure you already understood he confused median and average. That's a pretty common mistake. His comments are simply an extension of the fact 1%'s account for the half the world's wealth, and 99% do with far less. Dive into details and the disparities are even far worse than that, 10 people alone are wealthier than the billions encompassing the bottom 50%.
The 1% tend to be hoarders and what use does hoarding economic resources serve (does anyone really need a $B dollars), but that's a separate discussion we shouldn't have in this thread. It's a discussion we should definitely be having someplace tho. It's causing rising discord in countries and regions across the globe and needs to be openly addressed.
The 1% tend to be hoarders and what use does hoarding economic resources serve (does anyone really need a $B dollars), but that's a separate discussion we shouldn't have in this thread. It's a discussion we should definitely be having someplace tho. It's causing rising discord in countries and regions across the globe and needs to be openly addressed."
I like how people like you like to cite that 1% of the World population owns 50% of the Worlds wealth, without putting that fact into context. Because it sound so impressive when you include the 50% of the World population that has no wealth to speak of.
1% of the World population is 76,000,000 people.
50% of the World population makes less than $5 a day.
70% of the World population makes less then $10 a day.
It only takes about $900,000 worth of wealth, to be in the World's 1%.
If you have $5,000 of wealth, you are richer than 50% of the World's population.
There are only about 2,200 billionaires in the World.
There are only about 48,000,000 millionaire in the World.
That leaves 25,000,000 people in the 1%, that do not have a least $1,000,000 in wealth.
I bet you are in the World's 1%, that owns 50% of the World's wealth. I surely am. Been in the 1% for over 15 years now. And many here are 1%ers. .
Are you a hoarder?
The other fact that people like you like to cite is that all the Worlds billionaires owns more wealth that 4.6 billion people. But if you put that into context, none of those 4.6 billion people earn more that $10 a day. If you were homeless and panhandling on the streets, you would make too much to be one of those 4.6B people. You would probably be able to panhandle more than $10 a day. Plus there are free social services that are available to you.
If you were to take the $10,000,000,000,000 (That's $10T) worth of wealth of all the World's billionaires and divided up evenly among those 4,600,000,000 people, they would each get $2200. Just one time. $2200 is still about 4x below the poverty level in the US. A panhandler makes more than $2200 a year. That's just about $6 a day.
BTW, those figured are very outdated. Even the following tweet probably makes it above $250k per day.
There will always be those who squander what they have, and there will also be those who, if given the opportunity and the resources, will better their situation immensely. Take a chance on them. Even a paltry $2200 in the right hands can make a few villages healthy and self-sustaining. If you have far more than you could ever need then share and save the ones you can is my opinion.
BTW it takes an income of over $400,000/yr to be one of the 1% here in the US. I don't qualify, far from it.
Not knowing for sure hasn't ever stopped you from making various comments has it.
The total wealth in the World is $360T. That's including what wealth you, me and everyone here and in the US have. Divide that up evenly with 7.5B people and everyone gets $48K. Just a one time payment. When and where will the next $48K come from, if the bulk of the wealth most people have, was earned over a period of over 30 years? But the disparity problem will be solved. Everyone will be poor, by US standards at least.
The US has by far the most billionaires and millionaires of any country. There are 700 billionaires and 18M millionaires in the US. China is second with 350 billionaires and 4.5M millionaires. It's no wonder that the bar is set so much higher here.
Most people are actually shocked that it only takes an annual income of just $400,000, to be in the top 1% of all wage earners in the US. Most think that it would require an annual income of at least a million. And this is to be in the top 1% of all wage earners, not the top 1% in term of wealth. (you, probably unintentionally, moved the goal post here.) To be in the top 1% in the US in term of wealth, it takes having $10M in investable assets. Far more than the $900K it takes to be in the 1% Worldwide because 70% of the US are not extremely poor.
The average annual income of those in the 1% in term of wealth is $1.3M. (So you're even farther from being a 1%er, than you thought.) But that doesn't mean you have to earn $1.3M a year to be in the 1% in term of wealth. One could earn an annual income of $200K and still have over $10M in wealth. Wealth and income are not the same, though there's a strong correlation. This is a reflection of how many rich people there are in the US. And even if earning an annual income of of $400K might seem impossible for most, accumulating $10M worth of wealth is not as hard it seems when considering that the average age of the 1%ers in term of wealth in the US, is over 60 years old. 80% of the 1%ers started from scratch and earned their fortune over most of their lifetime, even if they never earned more than $400K a year. Only about 20% of them inherit their fortune, without having to earn it for themselves.
So even if I never came close to earning $400K a year and I can never see myself earning $400K a year from here on, (unless I divest the wealth I have now, at a rate of $500,000 per year (got to pay taxes). Which would only last a handful of years), I can easily see myself eventually being in the 1% with $10M in assets. After 30 years of working, saving and investing, with 10 years of retirement, $10M in wealth is not an impossibility for me. (Specially with a stock portfolio heavily invested in AAPL since 1998.) Though it's not a goal that I have set for myself nor care if I never reach it. If it happens, it happens. I have enough wealth to be comfortable for the rest of my retirement and yet some would still say I have too much wealth.
And lets not gloss over the fact the uber rich people like Musk, Bezo, Gates, Page, Brin, Buffet, The Waltons and even Cook, have created a lot of wealth for tens, if not hundreds of millions of small investors like me and large investors. Their present wealth that total in the hundreds of billions, pales compared to the wealth they helped create for their share holders, without having to give away their own wealth to do so.
I have no problem with rich people having "too much" wealth, when they have created 10x, 100x or even a 1000x more wealth for others, than they have for themselves. Even if their wealth is over 10,000x the wealth I have, telling people they have "too much" money and how they should spend it, is not in my DNA.
"The evil of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the wealth.
The virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of the misery."
Winston Churchill