Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I’m really not sure whether that’s an incentive. It’s just all you can do if you have more money than you can spend.


You'll be remembered far longer. That is an incentive. Think Andrew Carnegie.


Think Andrew Carnegie.

I know I directly benefited from a Carnegie library as a kid. With philanthropy at this scale there is potential to benefit humanity in a way that may otherwise not happen. Compare this to other paths that wealthy people have taken, such as creating trusts that mostly benefit the family and still exist today (e.g. Rockefellers).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_libraries


My personal view is that chasing a legacy is a losing battle. I know some very well-known people who agree with me on that.

As for philanthropy, I'm reminded of a billionaire friend who said his fortune was more of an administrative burden than his business ever was.


Wow, seriously, guys? Is there nobody around anymore who cares about helping the downtrodden of their own good will? Maybe it's naive, but I seriously think there are still some rich people out there who care to use their wealth for purposes other than selfish gratification, and without ulterior motives.


No, no – I didn't mean to suggest that altruism isn't alive and well! My point was that giving is an end unto itself – not a means to establishing a legacy. Also, I just wanted to point out that it takes a LOT of work to manage a big fortune. It's a huge responsibility.


You'll be remembered far longer. That is an incentive.

An incentive to the egocentric. I don't think that is ever the primary motivator though. I'd like to believe most people just like helping others.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: