Summary

Warren Buffett gave $1.1 billion in Berkshire Hathaway stock to family foundations and detailed plans for distributing his $147 billion fortune after his death.

His three children will oversee giving the remainder within 10 years, with designated successors in case they predecease him.

Buffett, 94, reaffirmed his belief in avoiding dynastic wealth, favoring philanthropy instead.

Over the years, he has donated $55 billion to the Gates Foundation but plans to shift focus to his family’s foundations.

Buffett continues leading Berkshire Hathaway while preparing Greg Abel as his successor.

  • halfeatenpotato
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Everyone hates billionaires for hoarding their money, but then it’s also a problem when they’re giving it away to charity.

    Billionaires suck and shouldn’t exist, but they do. I know this is going to get downvoted to hell because it seems a majority of the users here can’t stand anything remotely positive being said about billionaires. But guys - it’s an isolated good thing when billionaires give away large sums of their money to charitable causes. Doesn’t mean that they shouldnt pay more in taxes, or that they’re wonderful people, or that they accumulated their wealth in moral ways. All of these things can be true at the same time.

    • tektite@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      The question for me is what charities and how they are chosen. What demographics are the charities intending to assist, and who are they potentially intending to exclude? Even through charity, billionaires can push agendas and affect who receives privileges and who doesn’t.

      • elucubra@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Governments are also often guilty of favoring funding towards their favorite causes. Not defending billionaires here, but pouring money into mediatic causes, while ignoring or underfunding less visible causes is definitely a thing.

    • antiykns@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      “Charities” have been part of the rich’s soft power forever. Go against the rich’s interest and they will not give it to you.

      • halfeatenpotato
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I completely agree. I’m not saying it makes them good people or negates any of the insurmountable negative they bring to our society and world.

    • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      The trouble is that billionaires who remain sympathetic to Carnegie’s “gospel of wealth” are vanishing, while narcissists who see themselves as American oligarchs are proliferating. It isn’t hard to see how dynasties could be more politically powerful on a long timescale.

      Many would call this a natural progression, and for my part I don’t envy whoever ends up on the other side of that debate - money being the root of all evil.