IF money is a medium of exchange, it changed hands last week in exchange for nothing. There was no business deal cut. There was no back payment settled. The second richest man gave away a vast endowment to the first richest man in the world over a simple reason. Both agreed that what they earned should go back to society.
So Warren Buffett pledged $31 billion at a ceremony at the New York Public Library. He will give this money to Bill Gates on one condition. Bill has to disburse $4 million a day, 7 days a week, on philanthropic causes in addition to what he is already spending through the Gates Foundation. The money will come in installments, a lump-sum of $1.5 billion annually. Buffett said in his speech that Bill Gates and his wife would do a better job dispensing this money. It was "a simple decision" for him.
Fair game for a man who started 50 years ago with $105,000 and turned it into $44 billion. Buffett considered he was just a man who was lucky enough to be born in the right place at the right time, with the "right kind of wiring" to be successful in the American system. He has finally resolved his inner conflict. Buffett, who spent his life amassing unimaginable wealth, felt "all the way along" that what he earned
belonged to the society. Earlier he had announced that he was not going to bequeath his fortune to his three children for their personal use. Each of them will get roughly $1 billion to run a charitable foundation. That is it.
Bill Gates, who is worth $46.5 billion had sorted out his wealth long before Buffett. He will only leave a small fraction for his children and then donate the rest to health research, libraries, and education. Bill now operates small
high schools in the US, supports worldwide health initiatives against HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis, and sponsors rural development in sub-Saharan Africa. With the donation from Buffett, he is going to expand the scope of his foundation, and surrender some of his duties at Microsoft in order to spend more time on philanthropic activities.
That brings a new twist to the game of money. Why make money mostly by uncharitable means if
one must give away in charity? May be, money-making is an addiction, which, once acquired, is hard to quit. It is possible that people under the excessive influence of affluence often feel guilty. That is when they give up their money to seek rehabilitation and recovery.
What about the rich kids, those who are raised on the nutrition of their fathers' wealth? Why have Bill and Warren decided not to leave everything for their children? They
are going to give enough so that the children can live comfortably. But they are giving back most of it to where it came from. They believe that they heavily owe it to society, not their children.
It upsets the traditional sense of getting rich, which is an acquisitive habit to amass fortune and hand it over to the next generation. Most rich people use their money to satisfy their carnal needs, and pass it to their children so that they can enjoy their lives without hardship. One of the most intriguing thoughts of all time is how birth becomes destiny. Inheritance is no more accidental than earthquake or tsunami.
The reason why Warren Buffett or Bill Gates has drawn our attention is not that they have their phenomenal wealth. It is the quirky reflex with which they have denied the gravity of being wealthy men. They have agreed to give back what they have taken. Right or wrong is not the important question. Nobody would have blamed them if they had clung to their wealth for many more years and to their titles as the top two richest men.
Instead, they have turned our attention to something more important. Is it right to keep the fortune that is gained at social expense? This is not to say that the fortunes of Warren Buffett and Bill Gates are ill-gotten. But most property is theft, as the French philosopher named Prodhoun once said. In one way or another, one man's gain is another man's loss. Accumulation of wealth is a function of ripping others off!
It reminds us of the Roman empire where affluent people used to eat and then throw up in the vomitorium so that they could eat again. It is a kind of sickness, a compulsive habit to acquire more