"that man still sickeningly pontificates about "not giving incredible head starts to certain people who were very selective about the womb from which they emerged".
I don't think either Buffett or Gates exactly came from impoverished backgrounds, either.
Gates lucked out by snaring IBM with his buggy, inferior OS, then copied Apple's Mac OS, and has coasted ever since. IBM has since wised up and run from Windows as fast as they can. Buffett has specialized in investing in cash cows created by someone else, and protected by government. He's probably closer to a Soros type than to a real entrepreneur.
Bill Gates' Dad was a regent at the University of Washington. Long-time law professor, I believe.
I don't trust that family, either, and "We" already eradicated malaria. Something called "DDT". Now Little Rich Bill wants all the glory of a Greener way of doing it, while thousands still die.
[Not blaming him, of course, but, like all other Global problems, the etiology is an unaccountable "public" sector]
I am going to predict that Buffett's forture will actually increase rather than decrease because of all this.
The fact that he is donating stock instead of cash and doing it over time rather than all at once makes me think this is a scheme to raise the value of the BH stock he keeps. Why even keep 15%? Unless that 15% at the end of all this will be worth more than 100% now.
I think we are seeing the birth of one of the biggest scams in history.
I see Buffet, Soros and a certain select number of their so-called "super-rich" peers both present and past, as being contemporaneous implementations of the Cecil Rhodes/JP Morgan et al. template that the international left has used so effectively for the last century or so to influence or control public political policy through the indirect manipulation of wealth.
Granted, as individuals these people are usually intelligent, ambitious, hard-working and capable of earning great wealth, but there are limits to what they can achieve and maintain solely by their own efforts. There are plenty of wealthy people around the world, most of whom have probably earned it themselves, but if they aspire to enter the rarified realm of the so-called "super-rich" like Gates and Buffet, they quickly discover that there is an entrenched world-wide network of these "super-rich" whose connections, power and influence is so pervasive that they can either help the new prospective member of the "super-rich" club to succeed, or they can prevent it or even destroy them. In order to be admitted to the club the newcomer has to meet certain conditions, and sometimes perform certain duties which serve the collective in maintaining and extending its wealth and power.
While these people may have earned their initial fortunes through their own efforts, at some point the continued growth of their fortunes, or even their preservation in the face of the permutations and pitfalls of government laws and regulations requires the cooperation of that "super-rich" network. Whether the need is for financing for a new venture, or a compliant Senator or Congressman to introduce legislation removing an obstacle and smoothing the way, or maybe even a favorable ruling from a judge, the network has the necessary connections and clout.
The current news about Warren Buffet and the Gates seems to have surprised many, but I remember reading an article almost a decade ago describing how Warren Buffet had invited his new friend the "young" Bill Gates to travel with him on his private train through China, where they could enjoy a wonderful opportunity to sight-see and discuss "common interests". Thus, this week's announcements were not a surprise. On that China trip Gates was simply being admitted to the club and Buffet was conducting the orientation.
In a sense, there is a certain Faustian quality to the lives of people like Buffet and Gates, et al. where beyond a certain point they seem to abdicate/lose control of their fortunes in the service of "noble causes", and curiously, the overwhelming majority of these noble causes are leftist/socialist. Isn't that special?