RoR: Forum

Two of his close friends, both of whom declined to be quoted by name, told me that Mr. Jobs had said to them in recent years, as his wealth ballooned, that he could do more good focusing his energy on continuing to expand Apple than on philanthropy

This reminds me of when John Stossel interviewed Ted Turner for the episode called "Greed." John asked Ted if Ted could do more good by using his own money in ways that he was good at, rather than giving his money away to a charity for someone else to manage and utilize.

Ted Turner turned red, got up, and said the interview was over. Ted knew the answer (and John knew that Ted knew), but Ted couldn't say it out loud, not in front of a camera.

Ed

Post 1

Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - 1:14am

I know why Ted got angry. Just after he donated a billion dollars of his money, he went out on the talk show rounds and he attempted to shame a couple of other extremely wealthy individuals into donating as much as he had.

But instead of being shamed they came out publicly, and with big smiles on their faces, told him it was stupid to give that money to the United Nations and that had it been spent in the areas he wanted to lift up out of poverty or sickness, the way a business man invests money, it could have done some real good - maybe even become a self-sustaining development instead of pocket money for dictators and their cronies. He looked foolish... like that Ted Turner that on occasion suffer foot-in-mouth disease.

Post 2

Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - 7:28am

I don't understand this need for a giving. Is the man suddenly immoral for not giving to charity.

Post 3

Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - 8:08am

some of the comments are very telling:

"And it�s hard to understand why, even now, the entrepreneur whom our youth admire far more than Bill Gates is someone who has had great commercial success but little interest in the world around him."

"On the one hand, yes, it is sad that Steve Jobs is sick. Howerver, that has absolutely nothing to do with the very little he has done for charity, and saying that that it's okay that he doesn't because he gives his time to Apple, does not mean he isn't also able to donate money to a good cause. You can donate money without taking very much time at all."

" Shame on Mr. Jobs -- not for being a single-minded, driven genius, but -- among other things -- for foreclosing avenues that would have allowed his corporate network to make matching charitable gifts. Nor is any consolation in learning that two of the three known recipients of his largess were in areas related to his own health."

"I would rather that he had used his position to provide manufacturing jobs for Americans than that he simply set up yet another foundation for the employment of the sons and daughters of the well to do."

With regard to Steve Jobs in particular, it does seem strange indeed to praise his work in industry as if he has created some great social good. Given that the specific "innovations" Apple has introduced almost entirely depend on snob appeal, and given that they are really targeted at the upper middle class as gadgets whose "coolness" will entertain and distinguish them, how, exactly, does Steve Jobs add to the social good of this or any other country?"

"Steve Jobs is a total egocentric.

Look at his treatment of Woz. His treatment of the woman who bore his child. Talk to some of the Apple insiders who share stories like this: ("If you get on the elevator with him, don't look at him and don't start a conversation. You could get fired on the spot".

(IF) he put his money into cancer research he did it because he got cancer. He put his money and time into Apple because Apple is himself.

Jobs gets an A+ in entrepreneurship.
So far he's got an F- in human being.

Post 4

Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - 10:22am

Post 3 reminded me of my article Making a Contribution.

Post 5

Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - 12:21pm

Perhaps he should publicly announce that his estate plan includes large contributions to the Ayn Rand Institute, the Institute for Justice, and other defenders of individual rights to life, liberty, and property just to enrage more people from the grave.

Post 6

Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - 4:31pm

Those comments on the article are very telling, as Michael pointed out, some of them even made me cringe. It is, interesting, albeit sometimes painful, to view the opinions of others about articles such as these. Their opinions give too much away about the ideas they hold, but I doubt they are ashamed for harboring them. In general such ideas are viewed as admirable which I don't find surprising given the current culture.

Yet, I did find some comments which were like a breath of fresh air in the miasma. One in particular struck me as simple yet powerful.

"Just because he's rich doesn't mean that he has to give his money away."

Many would find this comment shocking. I, too, at one time, would have been surprised by this statement. HOW DARE SOMEONE WITH THAT MUCH MONEY NOT GIVE SOME AWAY!

I'm surprised (well not really) that only a few appealed to the principle of private ownership in defense of Jobs' lack of philanthropy. Only a couple asserted that it was HIS money.

A few other commentators implied that reinvesting the money would do more good than giving it away, which is true, but those commentator's tones seemed timid as if they were afraid to defend Jobs' right to his property.

Post 7

Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - 7:22pm

RE: Jobs and his lack of philanthropy, I'm reminded of Jeff Riggenbach's thesis from IN PRAISE OF DECADENCE, that the sixties' radicals weren't uniformly the "New Left," but spawned the libertarians, and Jobs, being one of those hippie-cum-techies, certainly fits the bill...add, to that, the suggestion that he was moved by ATLAS SHRUGGED...

(Edited by Joe Maurone on 8/31, 7:27pm)

Post 8

Thursday, September 1, 2011 - 4:45am

At OCON 2011, I attended a presentation on "planned giving" as it relates to estate planning. There are actually some nice tax benefits and other incentives for doing this. Some of the notable ARI "old head" speakers, such as Edwin Locke and John Ridpath, said that they have included in their estate plans the organizations I named in Post 5 of this thread.

I have no idea what I would do with billions of dollars upon my death. I am sure a man as smart as Jobs has something special in mind. I do not look forward to his demise but I do look forward to seeing what creativity springs from his posthumous plans.

Wealthy people have no obligation to dispose of their wealth in ways opposed to their values. I personally prefer the "living donation" methods of Carnegie and Gates since that allows the donors to witness and enjoy the fruits of their efforts. Moreover, leaving that much money to offspring who never earned it can actually doom them to failure and destroy value. We see stories of this all the time.

Post 9

Thursday, September 1, 2011 - 5:56am

I think scholarships make good donations. Jobs might give some to Reed College. I'd guess that many Apple employees attended excellent private colleges in the area such as Santa Clara and Stanford. There is also the Harker school (K-12) in nearby San Jose. I know of it because a friend sent all his children there. "Harker has the #1 ranking in the world by The College Board for Advanced Placement test scores for AP Computer Science, AP Psychology, and AP Chemistry, as well as the #1 ranking in the world for Calculus."
(Edited by Merlin Jetton on 9/01, 6:00am)

Post 10

Thursday, September 1, 2011 - 12:25pm

How timely; to coincide with all the talk of the Randian influence on Jobs, I just saw this on the bookshelves, today: I Am John Galt: Today's Heroic Innovators Building the World and the Villainous Parasites Destroying It. Fitting, because the first person discussed is...Steve Jobs, who is favorably compared to Roark.

From the Inside Flap:

Who is John Galt?

It's been both a cry in the dark and a call to arms for generations of readers of Ayn Rand's great novels�which brilliantly portray a world like ours, a world of both great achievement and great crisis. This book answers that question. I Am John Galt introduces you to the real-life titans who've lived their lives like Rand's fictional heroes and the malefactors who've lived like her fictional villains.

Steve Jobs: he reinvented computers, movies, music, and telephones�just because it was cool

Paul Krugman: he corrupted economics and cheapened public discourse for the sake of partisan politics

John Allison: he built one of America's strongest banks�by having 30,000 employees read Atlas Shrugged

Angelo Mozilo: the predatory lender who used taxpayer money to inflate the subprime housing bubble

Bill Gates: he became the richest man in the world�and his government almost destroyed him

Barney Frank: the populist politician who turned Fannie Mae into a weapon of mass economic destruction

T. J. Rodgers: the bad-boy high-tech CEO�who speaks out against corporate welfare and political correctness

Alan Greenspan: Ayn Rand's lifelong friend who became an economic czar�the ultimate sellout or a double-agent for libertarianism?

Milton Friedman: he made economics into a science�and showed that capitalism and freedom are inseparable

Post 11

Thursday, September 1, 2011 - 2:21pm

It is indeed a most interesting book...

Post 12

Friday, September 2, 2011 - 6:40am

Seconded.

Sam

Friday, September 2, 2011 - 5:43pm

I have a few reservations about the jacket copy quoted in #10:

- Government hurt Gates and his company, but I don't see that it came anywhere close to destroying him. If it did this any time afterMicrosoft went public, the stock price would have told you when, by falling close to zero. And I think the Sultan of Brunei is richer.

- Alan Greenspan:...�the ultimate sellout or a double-agent for libertarianism? has been a settled question since at least as far back as the Clinton administration.

- Many would credit Adam Smith with having made economics a science, and at least some of us would have thought Von Mises, Rand or Hayek had done a pretty good job of showing the connection between freedom and capitalism before Friedman started his career as a popularizer. His disdain for bringing ethical questions into economics makes him an odd inclusion in a list of people Randians might admire.

Post 14

Friday, September 2, 2011 - 7:34pm

Peter, I get your quibbles; still, the very FACT of the book, with THAT title shining out amongst the competition, was enough to make my day...

Post 15

Saturday, September 3, 2011 - 8:01am

But just the same, you'd think that somebody enough into Rand to have versed himelf in the blurb from the old Signet paperback of Atlas Shrugged would know these things.

Post 16

Saturday, September 3, 2011 - 8:18am

Anyway, the salient point for this thread being that Steve Jobs, recently "outed" as inspired by ATLAS SHRUGGED, is prominently featured...

[I didn't read the book, beyond some skimming; just bringing it to attention, so I can't say if Peter's concerns are addressed inside (and Peter, I don't think the book is addressed to long-time O'ists, but to a general audience, who may not be familiar with the Greenspan answer, already)...But, to tie Peter's reservations about the depictions in the book back to the Steve Jobs thread...if those people are to be questioned, well, then, it's only fair to question the matter of Steve Jobs and the extent of his Objectivist inspirations...

Peter's reservations could extend to Jobs: is he a "Roarkian" character? When you consider his supposed "hippie" past, there is plenty of room for contradictions in his philosophy (again, addressed by Jeff Riggenbach)...

On the one hand, it may be "too much" to title a book I AM JOHN GALT, when the heroes inside fall short. On the other hand, Lloyd Wright is, in a limited way, the model for Roark...Anyway, if the book were to depict only dead-on real-life Randian heroes and villains, I suspect the book would only be full of villains.]

(Edited by Joe Maurone on 9/03, 10:07am)

Post 17

Saturday, September 3, 2011 - 6:23pm

Steve Jobs and the Beautification of Capitalism

Interesting companion piece to the "non-philanthropic" bit, claiming that the left gives Jobs a pass...

"Why is Walmart derided by the literati while Steve Jobs is made exempt from the anticapitalist stoning sessions that pervade the world of political commentary? After all, he is a billionaire and an unapologetic capitalist who is said to have been influenced by Ayn Rand and whose company has never given a dime to corporate philanthropic efforts. I'm happy about this. It is wonderful that he has been so celebrated. But it is still puzzling."

"One might say that Steve Jobs democratized beauty and thereby earned for himself and his company a kind of Teflon coating from the green-eyed monster."

Post 18

Sunday, September 4, 2011 - 4:40am

Link to 45 minute video about I Am John Galt: Today's Heroic Innovators Building the World and the Villainous Parasites Destroying It.

Post 19

Sunday, September 4, 2011 - 1:51pm