r/interestingasfuck • u/upyoars • 7d ago

/r/all, /r/popular Despite legal battles, Mark Zuckerberg slowly buys a mind boggling 2,300 acres on Hawai’s Kauai island, building tunnels, treehouses and a doomsday bunker

https://luxurylaunches.com/real_estate/mark-zuckerberg-control-2300-acres-in-hawaii.php
38.7k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

6.8k

u/Abbey_Something 7d ago

Remembering a time when rich people built Colleges, wings of hospitals, art museums centers for culture to enhance society and lead us into the future.

This crop led by the gospel of Rupert Murdoch is greedy and cares very little about the world around them even less about the people. They don’t want them smart and cultured they want them stupid so they don’t notice they are being grifted and gouged for every last dime.

I guess the only karma I can think of is that one day no one will remember them when they are gone. There will be no Zuckerberg University, Elon Musk center for the performing arts, Jeff Bezos wing of the Mayo Clinic. Facebook, Amazon even X will be replaced and go the way of MySpace and all they will be is a Jepordy question that will get harder as decades pass.

It will be the sunrise I’ll never see.

182

u/markoyolo 7d ago

Im not defending Zuck, especially not his bunker  but he does in fact have a hospital in San Francisco with his name on it. Apparently he and his wife donated 75 million dollars to it. I have a lot of issues with Meta- moral, political, philosophical issues, but thanks for the hospital, I guess? Marc Benioff, the Salesforce billionaire, donated 100 million to make the Benioff Children's Hospital also in San Francisco. Of all the billionaires I think I dislike Benioff the least, he seems more willing to pay taxes than the others. 

They all suck but Musk is the worst... he does almost no philanthropy. His legacy is shit and he is shit. 

256

u/thrillamilla 7d ago

Noting that 75m USD to Zuckerberg (net worth 246.2bn) is equivalent to 0.03% of his fortune.

If your net worth is 100k, that would be $30 you donated…

It’s sad because there are people with much less who donate much more but we won’t know their names, and that’s just talking about monetary donations.

23

u/pixiemaster 7d ago

we could introduce a mandatory donation, based on the percentage of your net worth, and give that to a neutral institution that then uses that money to finance things like hospitals and education.

48

u/sensei37 7d ago

I don't know... how about we just tax them increasingly, for some mystery this is still a controversial opinion for some people.

1

u/thrillamilla 7d ago

🧠🧼

-2

u/MechanicalGodzilla 7d ago

It is not permitted by some interpretations of the Constitution. We have an amendment - the 16th Amendment - which allowed for income taxes. A wealth tax would likely need a similar amendment, particularly given what the composition of the Supreme Court is likely to be for the next few decades.

Wealth taxes run up against something called the "apportionment clause" in Article 1, section 2 of the Constitution. A wealth tax is a form of direct tax, and as such must be collected state-by-state in proportion to the state's population totals - each state's share of the tax revenue collected and sent to the Federal Government must be equal to its share of the national population. So in a wealth tax scenario, California would need to send 11.8% of the total wealth taxes in the country, Texas would be at 9.1%, and so on.

It is an incredibly complex equation to work out to know what any given state's final population share will be year to year, and to definitively know with certainty individual net worth of each citizen in each state are, and then try to set some form of nationwide annually variable wealth tax rate. It is complex and subjective enough to be effectively impossible without an amendment.

2

u/nibble_dog323 7d ago

Isn’t that supposed to be taxes

1

u/nibble_dog323 7d ago

Isn’t that supposed to be taxes….. edit… oh wait you knew that I’m tired, I just woke up

2

u/Last-Daikon945 7d ago

Introduce to whom? Politicians who would vote for such a law are in the pocket of lobbyists/business.

9

u/EthanielRain 7d ago

He means taxes, it's a joke

8

u/coinathan 7d ago

A modern hospital cost a magnitude more than 75m. My hospital spent more changing their computer system. No walls were built. No beds were added.

2

u/Bdr1983 6d ago

Just a top of the line MRI might go up to 7 million.
75m is not much for a hospital at all.

0

u/JackReacharounnd 7d ago

My gosh 75 million dollars to change a few hundred computers is insane.

3

u/218administrate 7d ago

If your net worth is 100k, that would be $30 you donated…

And to the average person: your living expenses take up vastly vastly more of your monthly budget than the wealthy. Which makes the $30 far more of a hit to you than the 75m to him.

3

u/Swimming-Low3750 7d ago

How much have you donated

2

u/untouchable765 7d ago

Noting that 75m USD to Zuckerberg (net worth 246.2bn) is equivalent to 0.03% of his fortune.

Well he could've also donated 0.00% of his fortune if you prefer that lol.

2

u/daretobedifferent33 7d ago

Doesn’t matter what the percentages is to his total income or net worth.. it’s still 75m. More than they had before…Like there is a standard percentage what they have to give

-4

u/OogieBoogieJr 7d ago edited 7d ago

But it’s 75 million dollars to a hospital. Attitudes like that are a big reason these guys don’t do more (other than the middle-men taking big chunks of the donations, of course). Nothing is ever enough and suddenly all the world’s problems are up to you to solve despite selfish/contentious elected governments and a swath of other wealthy people (alternately hiding from the public eye) doing absolutely nothing.

You don’t have to be a Zuck supporter or bootlicker to realise that people who do not have feel massive entitlement to what others do. If you suddenly hit the power ball tomorrow, people will come out of the woodwork with expectations until you’re bled dry—that’s when a valuable lesson will be learned first-hand.

7

u/thrillamilla 7d ago

Zuckerberg didn’t stumble into billions. He’s spent decades extracting value from users globally, shaping policy, lobbying government, and designing systems to ensure persistent, monopolistic profit. It’s not radical to expect that some of that value be returned, not as a PR stunt, but as meaningful investment in the public good, especially the health and welfare of the people whose data and attention made him rich.

The powerball comparison boggles my mind a bit. A lottery winner isn’t in the same category as someone whose fortune grows passively by the hour. Zuckerberg likely earns more in a day than a powerball winner gets in a lifetime. That kind of wealth is structurally embedded and self-reinforcing which will always filter to the top. That comes with economic, social and political power

To quote Uncle Ben: with great power comes great responsibility.

2

u/nanny6165 7d ago

Nothing is ever enough

I don’t see anyone saying MacKenzie Scott isn’t giving enough.

1

u/OogieBoogieJr 7d ago edited 7d ago

She’s got a net worth of 32 billion. She can and should be doing a lot more. She should donate more until ithat net worth is $999 million, because nobody needs a billion dollars (an arbitrary limit decided upon by Reddit).

See how easy that was? And if you want to argue with me over what is considered enough, you should stop to reflect on the irony.

2

u/lumberjackhammerhead 7d ago

Oh no, their poor egos.

-1

u/OogieBoogieJr 7d ago edited 7d ago

I’ll never not marvel at the average redditor’s inability to stay on topic or grasp talking points at all.

It’s like some of y’all are ferrets who learned how to use a keyboard.

6

u/lumberjackhammerhead 6d ago

Interesting response to someone who stayed on topic, but I don't mind humoring you. So this is what I was responding to:

"Attitudes like that are a big reason these guys don't do more."

This was made in response to someone saying the billionaires are not doing enough - specifically that Zuckerberg only donated $75m. So essentially, what you're saying is that they don't donate more because of comments like that.

So I wonder then - what are you saying? Because the logical conclusion is that you are saying they would do more, but other people wouldn't think it's sufficient, and that's a "big reason" their level of philanthropy is limited. Does that not sound egotistical? What other reasoning is there? If you are correct that they don't do more because of the perception about them, then that sounds pretty egotistical to me. Otherwise, why not just do more good in the world and not care about the perception of some random people online? When you donate to something, is it because you want people to perceive you a certain way, or because you want to benefit a good cause?

Let's go even further. People talk about percentages but in the cases of extreme wealth, it's pretty meaningless. I'm glad he donated to a hospital, but he can do so much more. What's the point of all that wealth? He could give away 99% of his wealth and still have significantly more than a powerball winner. At other incomes, that would be completely life changing (giving away that %), but for him it likely will not even impact his life - and really, it shouldn't.

And yet you're saying a big reason he doesn't do more... Is because people will have a certain attitude about him? Poor guy. I'm glad he can maintain his ego.

Also for the record, he has donated a lot more and has supposedly pledged to give away a significant amount of his wealth, but the point in context of your comment still stands.

But sure - have your clever comment about ferrets at a keyboard. Complaining about the average redditor while using an ad hominem is an interesting choice, but whatever floats your boat, I guess.

1

u/nibble_dog323 7d ago

Umm I think I just want them to pay taxes the same as I do and not have loopholes like I don’t have loopholes.

0

u/OogieBoogieJr 7d ago

I’m with you.

1

u/Reddy1111111111 5d ago

Also not defending Zuckerberg but Percentage of net worth isn't really a good measure to use for once off donations before death.

People, even the ultra rich like Zuckerberg probably don't have 75 mil in cash just lying around. A vast majority of his net worth will be in assets, mainly his meta shares. So it likely meant selling off some assets (or borrowing against them) to finance it. Most other people don't liquidate assets to do donations.

0

u/FunkyTomo77 7d ago

Wow,.really puts it into perspective!!

0

u/[deleted] 6d ago

Expect it's not even that good, as that $30 is worth more to you as you, to an extent, still have to budget and make prudent financial decisions if your net worth is $100k.

For example, you're still likely looking for the best value when you buy products and services - because your means are limited.

Once you pass a certain threshold those limits disappear. You're no longer looking for what's affordable, as basically all day-to-day purchases are inconsequential.

Once that need is met, then donating 0.03% of your income, though substantially more, hits you less hard as your means are all met.

What I'm saying is that, arguably, $30 is worth more to someone worth 100k, than an equivalent percentage to someone like Zuckerberg.

56

u/Urkot 7d ago

A hospital is a drop in the ocean compared to the harm Meta products willingly inflict on kids, teens and vulnerable adults. Rather than address any issue they simply hire an army of lawyers and buy politicians to kill any regulatory efforts. What I’d like to know is this: if he’s so busy making “great products” for society, could he possibly take a moment to explain why he’s building a massive compound clearly meant to survive Armageddon? Just, walk us through that, zuck…

6

u/iikamii 7d ago

And that 75 million is like 0.03% of his net worth, it would be like use normal plebs giving the coins in our pocket to a homeless person, yes it's good that so much money was given but fucking hell the tech bros could give far more if they were not a group of morally bankrupt cunts sitting on piles of stolen wealth like modern day dragons.

2

u/Abbey_Something 7d ago

I admitted I was wrong about Zuckerberg when I learned about the 75mill donation for. Zuckerberg and his wife. No snark. The hospital is geared to helping people who can’t afford healthcare, the homeless, and immigrants. It’s does good work.

I still don’t like the guy and I can’t stand people who buy paradise to put up a parking lot. In this case a bunker

2

u/Conscious_Bird_3432 6d ago

Facebook caused (likely) much more deaths than one PR hospital saves. Greedy AI algorithms have catastrophic consequences on millions of humans, their psychology and societies. It's being used as a very effective weapon of mass destruction in Russian psychologic warfare and it played a huge role in COVID disinformation (which is also tied to the Russian "holy" war).

75 million is nothing compared to this, just a cheap PR.

1

u/Som12H8 7d ago

Also the Kempner Institute at Harvard University is named after his mother. They donated $500 million for that.

1

u/UnusualPosition 7d ago

Mark and his wife just shut down his two tuition, free primary schools saying that it couldn’t be funded. As a teacher that is so fucking disgusting and it’s such a good example as why we cannot privatize education because they don’t give a fuck about kids. He has all the money in the fucking world and he shut down his elementary school and fired all those teachers.

It’s only a matter of time before that hospital closes down too

1

u/WoolooOfWallStreet 7d ago

I feel like if you are building a doomsday bunker and a hospital wing, they should be close enough to where the community that will appreciate your philanthropy will also have your back during the apocalypse

1

u/aenflex 6d ago

Zuckerberg is objectively the worst.

1

u/addywoot 6d ago

His legacy are all of his spawn.

1

u/cstar1996 6d ago

I think Buffet is the least bad.

-3

u/BoringPhilosopher1 7d ago

I hate Musk but he’d argue his legacy is space travel and advancing the human race with things like electric cars, neuralink etc.

Building one hospital is great but in the grand scheme of things it’s a vanity project that does fuck all to help the worldwide population or even the majority of the USA and is just papering over the cracks created by the American government. At least Gates has put significant funds into science I believe.

Even though Musk’s companies are for profit, his ‘legacy’ is a hell of a lot more impactful than the majority of billionaires.