Chuck Feeney Is Now Officially Broke

Re:Chuck Feeney Is Now Officially Broke by sokoloff on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @07:07PM (#24487760)

If the wealth was accumulated legally and fairly, as a result of creating such vast value for society that society willingly parted with their money for the goods/services from the company/ies that the wealthy person invested in and retained an ownership stake in, I don't find it obvious that society should have a further claim on the proceeds from the result of those transactions just because the owner "has too much money".

That person/family has shown some evidence that they're capable of investing money to generate an outsized return on that investment. I would tend to think they might be able to repeat that effect with the way they choose to reinvest the money, be it for societal value or charitable endeavors. I don't see evidence in balance sheets that governments have that same track record.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Chuck Feeney Is Now Officially Broke by pavanky on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @07:27PM (#24487894)

Something being legal doesnt mean it was moral.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Chuck Feeney Is Now Officially Broke by sokoloff on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @07:56PM (#24488075)

True. They’re not entirely independent though.

Society has made murder, theft, and rape illegal largely because of a fairly broad-based agreement that those are immoral.

Where there isn’t broad agreement on morality, I would prefer to avoid passing laws to regulate behavior and allow choice. (Roe v Wade/abortion being just one crystal clear case of this tension which I believe is generally best resolved in favor of individual freedom. I am free to follow my own morals where they are stricter than the law; I do not force others to follow them.)

[ Parent | on HN ]