[slang800]

Sure, but why does he need to wait for everyone else to support it? He should set a positive example by dumping his own money into the treasury first. After all, he really does believe in this and it's not just virtue-signaling.

[komali2]

What is your take on the reasoning he put in the article on why he doesn't "just" do that?

> Two decades ago I turned full-time to philanthropy and threw myself into supporting public education, scientific and medical research, and visual and performing arts, believing it was my responsibility to give back some of what had so generously been given to me. But I’ve come to realize that no amount of philanthropic commitment will compensate for the deep inequities preventing most Americans — the factory workers and farmers, entrepreneurs and electricians, teachers, nurses and small-business owners — from the basic prosperity we call the American dream.

[slang800]

That's not a reason why he can't do it, he's just saying that other people will need to do it too. I completely agree with him on that, he certainly can't do it alone. However, I think that he should set an example without waiting for others to join him.

[komali2]

What more can he do that would be considered "setting an example?"

He devotes himself full-time to philanthropy.

[slang800]

> What more can he do that would be considered "setting an example?"

Eli can take his money and send it as a gift directly to the US government.

> He devotes himself full-time to philanthropy.

Giving money to private charity is very different from giving money to the government.

[komali2]

Ok, fine, so how much money does Eli have to give to the US government for his opinion to count, by your measure?

Because I give literally no money to the US government voluntarily, and I think the hyper-rich should be taxed more.

Why are we attacking the individual with ad hominem? His argument is sound. Philanthropy alone is not enough.

This whole time I've basically been arguing around the fact that lots of people are participating in the rhetorical fallacy known as Ad Hominem.

[tylerhou]

I don't understand why you assume that he isn't doing both. Pushing for higher tax rates, and donating money to the treasury.

[atonse]

Errr you can’t just hand the government money randomly. You have to owe it to them. It all has to add up in some way and be accounted for.

[slang800]

That's not true. There's a system for sending gifts to the treasury right here: https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html

[NeedMoreTea]

It's a funny and forgotten relic. Many countries had similar schemes from around the same era.

There was a fashion to bequeath part of your estate to the government "to pay down the national debt". It was thought the patriotic thing to do. Obviously little impact was made on national debts. :)

[atonse]

Wow I truly learned something new, thanks :-)

[docdeek]

You can make a gift to the government to pay down the debt - they even take PayPal. https://www.pay.gov/public/form/start/23779454

[enraged_camel]

This is a dumb argument because it assumes that others would follow his example.