Agreed, I'm reminded of another SV billionaire, who emphatically chose not to donate to any causes until shortly before his death...and even then, only to causes which would have personally benefited him.

Not just that, he also ordered his company to kill all contributions to charity as soon as he was in power.

This trend has now been reversed since his passing.

You know nothing of which you speak.

Steve Jobs believed that Apple products were better for people than charitable giving like food, clothing, shelter, or medical care. http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-10-11/news...

"Despite accumulating an estimated $8.3 billion fortune...there is no public record of Mr. Jobs giving money to charity..." "in 1997, when Mr. Jobs returned to Apple, he closed the company’s philanthropic programs." http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/08/29/the-mystery-of-steve-...

"And it wasn’t until after an unflattering media report about Jobs on the subject over the summer, that Apple in September initiated a “matching gifts” program, under which donations to philanthropies made by employees are matched by the company." http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2011-10-06/business/35277...

This was just the first 3 results of the google search. There are hundreds of more sources to choose from.

Can you cite some evidence to the contrary? I'm tempted to say it's you who may be mis-informed.

I only pointed out that the poster has no idea of truth of the matter. I did not claim that anyone else, other than Laurene, and maybe the IRS, does.

Take note of the poster's wording, and leap of accusation. He has zero basis for his position, but he's not letting that stop him from passing judgement.

There's a word for that sort of behaviour. It isn't complimentary.

Are you implying that a museum dedicated to Jimi and owning the majority of the Northwests' sports franchises doesn't directly benefit all of humanity? Because that sir is something we will simply have to disagree on.