Legacy: Was Steve Jobs a selfish son of a bitch? [Reader Post]


Steve Jobs passed away earlier this month with an estimated fortune of $8 billion. I have yet to see a single report about one single dollar that he gave away to charity. How is it possible that a person who was lucky enough to be born and grow up in the United States and take advantage of our laws, schools, infrastructure and patent protections could be so selfish? Compare his lack of philanthropic giving with that of other similarly rich types, past and present. Andrew Carnegie gave away virtually his entire fortune, over $350 million dollars during his lifetime – $5 billion in today’s dollars. John D. Rockefeller gave away over half a billion dollars over his lifetime – $8 billion in today’s dollars. Bill Gates has given away over $30 billion dollars and promised to give away most of the rest of his fortune while his friend Warren Buffett has promised to donate 99% of his wealth. The pair has created The Giving Pledge where billionaires pledge to donate a significant amount of their fortunes to charity. If all of these people can give this amount away, what was wrong with Jobs?

Charity and private giving has been a great force in America since its founding. Through churches and local organizations for those of modest means to building libraries, museums, or foundations for the wealthy, America has been a country where the successful and struggling alike look to support their communities as well as support the less fortunate around the world.

Apparently not so for Steve Jobs however… and charity’s not the only place he was tight. When he was alive he did everything he could to reduce his taxes. He used tax shelters to lower his tax rate from 35% to around 15% on millions. He put his real estate and other assets in trusts so they would escape the death tax.

Everywhere you look Steve Jobs was doing what he could to keep his own money. Not giving it away. Avoiding paying taxes. All while he’s taking advantage of everything America has to offer.

What’s wrong with a person who sees the misery going on around the world, from hunger in Africa to millions of poor here and does nothing to lend a hand? What kind of legacy is that?

When the robber baron Andrew Carnegie died his legacy was obvious. He had built thousands of libraries around the world, founded a university and built Carnegie Hall. By the time he died, JD Rockefeller had remade the face of modern medicine and created what was for years the largest charitable foundation in the world. Bill Gates is still very much alive, and he is remaking the face of charity. What kind of legacy is Steve Jobs leaving?

In 1977 he and Steve Wozniak introduced the Apple II, the first fully assembled personal computer. At the time the notion of a personal computer was an utterly foreign concept to 99.9% of the people on the planet. Term papers were still being written on typewriters. Math was still being done on calculators. Research was still done at the library.

In 1984 Apple introduced the Mac, the first personal computer to feature a mouse and graphic user interface. At the time most others still used the C: prompt.

In 1986 when he purchased Pixar, it was primarily a high-end computer hardware company with graphics as a side note.

In 2001 when Apple introduced the iPod, digital music was just becoming popular but most digital players were “big and clunky or small and useless”.

In 2003 when Apple introduced the iTunes Store the music industry was imploding and college students were being sued in their dorms.

In 2007 when Apple introduced the iPhone few people were able to surf the Internet on their phone and most competitors’ products were poorly designed and performed similarly.

In 2010 when Apple introduced the iPad, it essentially created the market, selling 5 times more than the rest of the devices combined.

Looking at all of this, the question to ask is, is Steve Job’s legacy going to be that he didn’t care about other people because he didn’t give his money away or let the government take it? Or is it going to be the fact that he changed the world and gave people something that is far more precious than money… more of their own time.

If you didn’t have a computer, how many hours a day would you have to spend (or would you have spent) in front of a typewriter typing, retyping or whiting out errors as you wrote a paper for class? Or doing computations with paper, pencil and a TI calculator? How much less efficient would your job be? Steve Jobs began and led the march that made the personal computer such an integral part of our lives, both personally and professionally. The value of that contribution to the improvement in the human condition is measured in the tens of trillions of hours and dollars rather than millions or billions. Add to that the value of the entertainment provided by iTunes & Pixar and the efficiency provided by the combination of mobility & functionality embodied in the iPhone and iPad and there are hundreds of billions more hours and dollars.

I never met Steve Jobs and from what I read he could be both generous and an SOB to those who knew or worked for him. Regardless of his personality or lack of a philanthropic gene, the fact of the matter is that he did far more for the world by running his business – and keeping the money generated from doing so – than he ever could have if he had “given back” every penny he ever earned or let the government tax him at the highest possible rate.

What might have become of Steve Jobs if today’s kleptocracy and regulatory straitjacket had kept him from starting his business in his parent’s garage with $1,200? Given that his return to Apple was driven by stock options and performance incentives, would he have returned if the “Occupy Wall Street” types had been setting tax policy? Or would he have decided to retire and travel the world?

We can’t know the answer, but we do know is that Steve Jobs created far more value for the world than he received in return. If he wanted to keep every single penny of it the world was still far better off. That’s how private enterprise works. It’s an exchange of ideas or products or services that others are willing to pay money for. In the end, although successful entrepreneurs and businessmen may indeed earn millions or billions, in almost all cases they do so by having provided customers or clients many times that in value. If you think Jobs was the only one, think about how much YouTube and Facebook have changed your life over the last five years. The founders of both are billionaires but the value of the benefits to the millions of ordinary citizens is many times that.

If the people at OWS or in the kleptomaniac ridden Democratic Party really wanted to jumpstart the economy and drive prosperity all they need to do is look at Steve Job’s life and give as many people as possible the opportunity to follow his path. Reduce taxes and regulations and just watch and see how many would-be Steve Jobs types come out of the woodwork.

Selfish son of a bitch? Don’t know. Doesn’t matter. A model for prosperity and improving the human condition… now that’s a legacy worth leaving.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

We aren’t to judge, time, and legacy will tell.

Full disclosure, I am not an Apple fan. I like open systems and Apple is not one of them. That being said, Jobs was a genius. Not only was he a genius, the rest of the tech world will be running for years just to catch him.
The iphone pushed the wireless world to implement their 4G networks way ahead of schedule. The ipad…brilliant. In another few years, if that long, every electrical control device in a house will be controlled by an ipad type device. It will be just like the Star Trek comm devices. If you think I’m kidding, Google Moore’s Law. I know it was originally formulated with processing in mind, but it has since become a standard for all of technology.
As for the closed system I hate so much, I can’t say I blame Steve Jobs. He believed nothing would work as well with his products as his hand-picked software. And there is no denying that opening up his systems would have produced much more theft of knowledge than already exists. The man was ripped off more than any inventor in the history of the world.

I do know that he didn’t give a squirt about the Chinese workers his company exploited.

I was around in the early days of the personal computer. I can remember seeing an Apple 1 board at the first computer store to open in Michigan… Anyway, I can tell you that there were a lot of counter-culture types involved in the early home computer market. Folks that would be part of the #occupy cesspool today. 😉 They’re history, and folks like Jobs, and Gates (yuck) are still around.

Charles E. “Ed” Haldeman Jr.
Does that name ring a bell?
He made $3,903,534.00 in 2009
The same in 2010.
And will in 2011, also.
What does he do for $12 mil over three years?
Chief Executive Officer of Freddie Mac.
But he is resigning at the end of this year.
Three years = $12 million.
And what did he do?
Preside over the ruination of the housing market.
No listing of his name as a contributor to any major charities.

At least Steve Jobs was productive in the most real sense a man can be.

>>Looking at all of this, the question to ask is, is Steve Job’s legacy going to be that he didn’t care about other people because he didn’t give his money away or let the government take it? Or is it going to be the fact that he changed the world and gave people something that is far more precious than money… more of their own time.

I don’t think that *is* quite the right question. How you use your money is indeed one important way of measuring your concern for other people. But it’s not the only one, by any means. See http://crybelovedcountry.com/2011/10/was-steve-jobs-a-fool/

Not long after his death, I was speaking with an investor friend out of the Cupertino area who had just finished reading Walter Isaacson’s just released book, “Steve Jobs”. FORTUNE runs some excerpts in this article, which were already summarized for me by my friend… as well as Steve Job’s lack of charitable nature.

When Jobs died, I generally felt nothing. Didn’t know the man. Too realistic to assume he “changed my life”. I don’t believe that only a single individual is capable of innovation. If one doesn’t think of something, another will.

Both Gates and Jobs know that the graphic interface both computer systems were founded on came from Xerox .. not Apple. When Jobs, furious with Gates for releasing the MS graphics interface within a contracted time (Jobs version was delayed by their own problems, so he lost out…), he demanded Gates head down to a Cupertino/Apple offices meeting so he could rip his head off on his own turf. Gates complied… solo. I believe the book referred to it as a “command performance”.

After a tirade about how Gates was ripping him off, Bill just said to Jobs:

“Well, Steve, I think there’s more than one way of looking at it. I think it’s more like we both had this rich neighbor named Xerox and I broke into his house to steal the TV set and found out that you had already stolen it.”

Priceless… and astute as well.

Thirteen years after that, it was Bill Gates… the same man who he demeaned at the office, as well as in the documentary just a year before “Triumph of the Nerds”… who bailed Apple out by agreeing to invest “$150 million in Apple and to develop and ship future versions of its Microsoft Office, Internet Explorer, and development tools for the Macintosh.”

Fact is that both men have benefited from work done by others, on which they improved and built new platforms and products. That’s the usual way of technology. i.e. today’s vehicles would be nothing without the original invention of the wheel. They also benefited from each other.

Their personalities and backgrounds were quite different, as well as the way they approached work. Gates went from Ivy League drop out (Harvard) to the garage as an entrepreneur. Perhaps it is this driven work ethic by Gates that produced more stable results from MS than Jobs had from Apple’s turbulent fiscal history.

Jobs was also a drop out – leaving artsy-fartsy Reed College in Portland’s upscale Eastmoreland district to search for “spiritual enlightenment” in India before heading to his own garage to work on Apple. Maybe it’s this mystical “finding one’s self” persona that make the OWS so tolerant of an evil capitalist they would normally despise in other circumstances. Jobs being more of the undisciplined dreamer and Gates the efficient worker bee and money maker. But their worship of Jobs is something I find quite amusing, if not amazingly hypocritical.

As for his estate? Haven’t seen much. One blog notes that Jobs had created at least two trusts, and transferred three pieces of real estate. Trusts are created to avoid probate. Likely, since he knew of his condition, he’s protected other assets via privately created (out of public site and records) trust accounts as well. Who the trustee is, who knows. He was a private guy, and most certainly kept his finances under lock and key. But he was married at the time of his death, so it would be logical to assume that the family is taken care of.

In the long run, I sure didn’t jump in to canonize Steve Jobs. Nor do I feel the need to diss him. He lived as he chose, and he died the same way.

This may come as a surprise, but I care more about what Chucky Johnson or whatserface Dullivan thinks.

He made a mint, sold some stuff, had some salable ideas. Been a lot before him, there will be a lot after him–including some that will get rich undoing what he did.

Yeah, he was a prick. So were most of the creative people who ever lived. Your point…?

Great post Mata; love the Bill Gates quote!

From what I knew, I certainly liked Jobs, despite all the horror stories of how mean and stingy he was. There is always more to the story. I suspect even the biographer didn’t get the real Steve Jobs, at least not all of him. I wouldn’ t be surprised if someday, when we least expect, the “Jobs money” will surface big time and blow us all away, and mostly likely to or at a place/person of which none us ever gave a 2nd thought.

I personally am a fan of Apple products, especially my iphone that I only bought kicking and screaming owing to the fact I dropped my “dump phone” into my coffee while driving, and was locked into ATT at the time. It was my “best option” and despite swearing I would never go “smart phone”, I did. The problem is, I love it too much, and use it from everything to GPS, home stereo, to talk radio, to my alarm clock. Even if it were to be ripped away from me, despite the fact that it would not be without a fight, I know I would be better for it. It consumes me. I used to enjoy my down times as opportunities to read and often meet new people when I’m out and about. Now, I find myself checking emails and using much of my once free time to keep working and communicating with things that could easily wait until the next work day.

But it’s not just me, it’s most of us. I watch families at restaurants all “wired in” in 4 different directions. It’s like we are here but no one is home, and we communicate less and less as people. I don’t think it’s good, for any of us. And I would certainly aruge that we have LESS time. I believe it’s the opposite, as it’s all consuming, all the time.

Common sense says to just shut it off, but easier said than done, at least until “iannonymous” get’s into swing, which I expect has to be in the making.

Honestly, despite how cool the i stuff is, I honestly thing we would all be better of communicating the old fashinoned way. Someday we are going to be telling the next generation what books used to smell like. I also think that “smart electronics” make us dumb, especially with text language. We already had an education crisis, now the “i language” has debased it more. I also never use maps anymore, and got a taste of reality when my battery went out sans charger and I had to find my own way home last week, 300 miles away!

As for the human condidtion, I have to weigh in that is has and continues to make us less human, more self absorbed, and more dumb. Factor in the loss of social skills from “never having to be social” and all I can say is, I’m glad I was lucky enough to live in the time when pica and elite were as cool as apps, white out was a staple, and getting a letter by mail, written in cursive no less, was the norm. There was something about the delayed gratification that just made it so much more real, I think.

RIP Steve!


The best philanthropy you can ever engage in, in my opinion, is the creation of jobs – pride of work, pride of results, pride of earning and supporting yourself and your family, pride of learning, pride of paying your taxes as a result, pride of supporting your country – are a powerful contribution to any society. It could therefore be argued that Steve is one of the greatest philanthropists of the past century.

On the other hand, . . . . . typical philanthropy gives away money to salve repentant souls and North American society politically-correctly applauds those who send money to starving Africa and elsewhere, and yet generation after generation we see the same faces, requiring food, the same needs arising again and again, because the money is misspent – it feeds but doesn’t educate. It feels good but accomplishes nothing.

Some of the whining about Steve Jobs’ limited philanthropy which I’ve read in the media is misdirected.

If I may point out, . . . in his defence . . . .

“Given that his return to Apple was driven by stock options and performance incentives, would he have returned if the “Occupy Wall Street” types had been setting tax policy? Or would he have decided to retire and travel the world?”

Steve didn’t come back to Apple for ‘stock options’ or ‘incentives’. He came back, replacing Gilbert Amelio, to salvage his image, and to show the world and the Apple Board of Directors which had fired him, that he could succeed where it had failed. Yes, they handed him a Gulfstream executive jet, and options came later, but his incentive was to feed and satisfy his own ego. And he did that in spades, with product after product that changed industries, and left competition in the dust wondering, “what just happened to us?” . . . . “oh yeah, Steve Jobs happened.”

I got to know him really well in the early 80s and one of the things I appreciated was that in fact, he couldn’t be bought by Wall Street brokers. He was a workaholic and was single-mindedly focused on great products, great execution, great presentation, great marketing, great PR, and great design. I watched too many other CEOs get bought and get controlled by their brokerages. Steve wasn’t one of them.

Patricia: Honestly, despite how cool the i stuff is, I honestly thing we would all be better of communicating the old fashinoned way….

…. she says on an old fashioned blog. LOL

Patricia! Always good to see you actually post instead of lurk.

I sure get the drift of all you say. Not much of a social media person, myself. Tried the Twitters and FBs, only to abandon them after a year as not my cup of tea. Still cling to the old fashioned tech ways of email and blogs, tho both pale to phone conversations and face to face meetings. ’tisn’t my generation. I’ll get thru it by combining what I need to learn with what I want to utilized. But it is getting harder and hard to get people to call me instead of these dang text messages…. LOL

Of course, one can’t attribute personal discipline.. or lack of discipline.. to the technology creators. I wouldn’t go there.

But INRE accolades to Jobs for the iPhone technology. We should probably examine that sans the cult overlay of Jobs “changing the world”. For what is an iPhone but a new interface for a hand held, mini computer that uses cell phone lines for internet connection? If Jobs didn’t combine these tools and abilities, don’t you think someone else would have?

I certainly do. Remember that the Palms and Blackberries preceded the iPhone by five or six years.

Much of this charitable giving of the super wealthy has been co-opted by socialist Fabians and closet Marxists by their presents and participation on the boards that award endowments: Ford, Tides, Woods, Andrew Carnegie, John D. Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, etc. Hopefully the funds will be invested in business organizations with management that has been successful, profitable, that will create new methods, technologies and career opportunities. Most charities are fronts for the regressive “Progressive Agenda.”

I really appreciated what James Raider said:

The best philanthropy you can ever engage in, in my opinion, is the creation of jobs – pride of work, pride of results, pride of earning and supporting yourself and your family, pride of learning, pride of paying your taxes as a result, pride of supporting your country – are a powerful contribution to any society. It could therefore be argued that Steve is one of the greatest philanthropists of the past century.

Pete also makes a great point:

Much of this charitable giving of the super wealthy has been co-opted by socialist Fabians and closet Marxists…

Hubby has – over all the years – hired over 150 people (not all at the same time.)
We have looked into charities deeply.
There are two I really love and another I also help.
The Salvation Army is never going to be co-opted.
The Wounded Warriors Project is doing wonderful work.
And Locks of Love always welcomes our haircuts.
There are places on the web to read about the percent a charity passes on to its work VS its administrative costs.
85%-15% is my upper limit (15% administrative costs, that is.)
Be wary and do your due diligence.

@James Raider, I don’t know how long you knew and stayed in touch with Jobs. Certainly I wouldn’t argue your first hand interface with the man. As I said, I don’t much care either way, but if he was a friend of yours, I certainly extend my condolences.

The only observation I wanted to make was that you insist Jobs couldn’t be bought… You state Wall Street brokers, but is that a courtesan attitude of personal pride? Or is it that you’re not attractive enough to either get offers, or to market yourself?

I really have to point out that in the time you said you knew him, he wasn’t much in the financial position to wield clout as a buyable type entity. Could you definitively portray this as a personal and moral principle when the same man, in 2009, and far better equipped to do lobbying, spent $390K in support of the ARRA and it’s benefits to Apple?

@MataHarley: #15,

He and I were acquaintances, and had what I’d consider a unique business relationship, and he provided my company and myself an unusual relationship with Apple, but Steve, IMHO, had NO friends. I know many thought they were his friends, but that was more wishful thinking. His personality didn’t allow for friendship. I think that you would have great difficulty finding one human being who could honestly tell you that Steve honestly and profoundly wished them well.

Steve seemed to be at war. You’ve no doubt by now read his wife’s statement about Ive being the only indispensable person in Steve’s life – that is very telling. She’s not saying, in his ‘business’ life, she says, in his life – which includes his kids.

You’ll also hear from his Vice President of Industrial Design Jonathan Ive, that Ive kept notes on his own ideas, etc., because Steve would take credit for what wasn’t his, . . . I had first hand experience with that, and since I also knew many of those around Steve, I can further attest to that being a ‘constant’ – which speaks to his insecurities.

Here’s a further clarification on my statement that “Steve couldn’t be bought by Wall Street” – Brokerages, particularly the more powerful ones like GS can put the CEO in a box by doing things like providing exclusive access to certain financings, like IPOs of other companies, then making sure the CEO makes money on those shares, which then makes the CEO ‘beholden’ to the brokerage. You then wonder why that CEO announces a financing, or an acquisition which makes no sense. However, when you look further, you see that the brokerage was in on both side of the acquisition, and had placed itself in the target with offshore stock, etc.

I also did not communicate something quite clearly enough, . . . . I certainly did NOT make a statement about Steve’s morals or principals. That might be for another long discussion, and I am quite clear on this: It wasn’t because of his morals that he couldn’t be bought. His focus wasn’t on money, but it was on ‘Independence’.

I’m not saying Steve didn’t care about money, but he cared much more about doing what HE was convinced was right to deliver great products and for those products to succeed in the market, – and money would naturally follow.

His politics? They made no sense. At least not objectively. His politics weren’t consistent, . . . not even with his own actions in business, and his business was his life.

I am also quite aware that Steve could ‘present’ and be a very different person, to different people.

Thanks for the clarification, and added insight, James. I think my point about being “bought” still remains. At the point in time you mention, Apple and jobs would not have been much interest to the big players on Wall Street. As I said, he lost out on the graphics interface release in the early 80s. Struggled along and was finally bailed out by Gates in the middle 90s. Of what interest could he have been to Wall Street?

Excellent piece minus the contention that YouTube and Facebook are life changing technologies. Luddites are alive and well in this age and do surprisingly well without kneeling at the altar of the social network.

I have an objection. The Luddites were opposed to technology that improved things which they saw as a threat to their livelihoods.

I get called a Luddite for being opposed to technology that does NOT improve anything, it just different and an unwarranted expense.

But he mouthed meaningless left wing platitudes, that’s all you have to do

@MataHarley: #20,

Brokerages get leverage wherever and whenever they can get it particularly with those companies which have large market caps. The larger the cap the greater the potential to make deals that fill their coffers, subsequent to the IPO. Mergers, acquisitions, re-financings, have built way too many monster mansions in the Hamptons and in Woodside. Once the CEO is owned, the broker just calls and give him/her marching orders. We’ve witnessed, and all paid for in one way or the other, the sad results of that part of the game. Although we have been numbed by the size of the multi-billion dollar deals of the last 10-15 years, the larger brokers were satisfied with 50-100 million dollars deals prior to that.

If you’ll recall, the Apple IPO (by Morgan, and Hambrecht) was the largest since the Ford IPO 24 years earlier, and it created the largest instant pool of wealth ever. And this was 1980. At the time, Steve was the star in the high tech firmament. After his return in the late nineties, there was no ‘lever’ that could be used to buy/leverage him. He had weaknesses, but allowing a brokerage an upper hand on him, wasn’t one of them. He was CEO until 1985. Gates, who wasn’t susceptible to Wall Street leveraging either, didn’t go public until 1986. At the other end of that spectrum, you can look at someone like Meg Whitman.

He may has given the world riches in technology, but it did not save him from cancer, and dying fairly young; naked he entered the world, and empty handed he left this world, he could not take his money with him.
It appears his heart was cold; he exploided poor chinese people (many of them permanently ill, many committing suicide due to conditions, ccaused environment damages due to toxic waste) to become rich – not a noble deed at all whether he provided the newest technology or not.
So, was he generous? No, the cold calculation of making tons of money by taking advantage of poor people is pure ‘greed’, and greedy he surely was.
He too will have to answer for his deeds, as we are all one day – judgement is reserved for all of us, including the super rich people – it is NOT money, but the LOVE of money, which is the root of all evil!

@Nan G: #5- Don’t forget about Franklin Raines, Obama’s buddy, who was CEO of Fannie Mae before, and during the 2007-2008 meltdown there, and when HE left, he was 60 million dollars richer– now that’s a kick in the pants.

@Wayne in Michigan: #17- you call us luddites, but facebook, twitter and many of the so- called advances are but exercises in nihilism, a sort of public masturbatory experience that is full of sound and fury, signifying nothing , really.
Also, there is the flip side of these things, in that your government can and will use them against you, as well as some others who just want to rob you.
You, as a single person, have to decide if that is worth the risk you have everytime you log on.

5 #23 Let’s not leave out the brilliant Jamie Gorelick so called mistress of disaster.
As for Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, I see a hatred they allow to feasted in their souls. Gates hated IBM and was critical of Watson’s dominance and cut-throat business tactics and yet he does the same now. In a recent interview with Forbes he let out a nasty zinger against IBM. This after all the years of his first encounter with IBM execs and the PC. It just might be that Bill and Steve’s egos prevent them from acknowledging the accomplishments of their rivals. It is a sad commentary to ones life, that allows such diametrically apposed observations.

I don’t laud capitalists/entrepreneurs for working hard and having good business skills. The reward for that is the paycheck/dividend they rightfully receive. It’s the same as any person who works. Capitalism produces cool stuff from our baser instincts, and that is why it is successful.

Carnegie or Rockefeller also earned money and also created jobs. From this, they justly (except for any monopolistic/exploitative stuff) earned a fortune. The fact that they used their money charitably of their own free will is worth celebrating. If you donate money to charity, it is the same thing on a different scale. It is an act of altruism, not mere self-service or compliance with a government mandate.

I am brain struck by this POST and ALL the COMMENTS, I read, one is like looking into a brain activity of a genius, IT IS A WONDERFULL GIFT for me, because I love to figure how this or that work, how those genius humans creators followed the path from day one, keeping their thoughts focus to one end of the tunnel is wonder, and even if that is the only lesson left by STEVE NOW GONE, IT’S WORTH MORE
OF MANY COLORS WARMING A PERSON who is silent looking inside itself at the light of knowledge to expand it to the limit of creation, becoming GOD in a miniature pocket of GOD THE CREATOR ILLIMITED OF ETERNITY.

I think the main point to consider is what good does your giving do? For example, if you give your coat to a poor person in a tropical and warm climate then your giving may make you feel good but it did little good for the person that was actually starving. Thus, when you give the giving should be targeted for what the actual need of the person has a need, not simply because you call the giving charity. A wealthy person can receive charity from another, even when the person giving is of lesser means or poor. All can be poor in spirit from time-to-time. To be ‘charitable giving’ and sharing of material wealth then it should go to the truly poor that are in need and not to organizations that falsely hold themselves out and are actually to be enablers of the greedy. Those that are employed or become creators of enterprise are involved in effort to create their own daily bread. Those who receive their daily bread without effort will not have the skill to earn or create and will likely resort to stealing, dishonesty, and murder when charity is not available. Though the poor should be given the opportunity to progress and recover. If their refusal to contribute thins the available charity and wealth disappears, then it is better for those who refuse action to make or earn their own bread to face the natural consequences. A ‘fool’ is quickly separated from his money by the souls of the clever and dishonest.

that is a good point to keep in mind, I think many of us make that error of judgment at time,
and we get to find it most of the time, it come to hit in the face, and we say, DARN,

who said that?
give them a fish, they will eat and stay hungry,
show them how to go fishing, they will never go hungry,
I think the knowledge is more precious than gold when the need come.

@ilovebeeswarzone: #27,

MsBees, you would probably really enjoy reading the Steve Jobs biography.

It’s a great story, easy reading, and a good insight into how one outstanding business leader sought to ‘do things abundantly right,’ in my opinion. He wasn’t always right, but he sure nailed it more than not.

It should also be read by every CEO or budding CEO in the world.

James Raider,
yes it must be fascinating to read that biography,
thank you for this,
like keeping it as a keepsake as they grow themselves in the market to succeed,
in today’s WORLD, it has become so hard to focus on a whatever choice we are aiming for,

@ilovebeeswarzone: The Lord even now says this because he still is alive. He now speaks and he is yet ‘living’ and he dwells in all. One is conscience of the “code of life” through the acceptance of the lord’s spirit, his brothers’ and sisters’ gold is stored in heaven and not the Earthly vault. Though was it not Joseph, the apple of his Earthly and heavenly Fathers’ eyes, through the jealousy and hatred of his own brothers of the fatherly love did plot to murder Joseph. Then in the faith of their crime they did “bear false witness” to blame a beast in the wilderness to hide their deed. The wicked brothers and the mournful father lived lives separate from the favored. He who was dishonored by his own brothers became high in the court of a wise earthly king who was called Pharaoh.
The dishonored became honored within a wise king’s court for Pharaoh reaped the abundance of the heavenly Father’s world by treating well those that labored productively. Thus, the wise king prepared the way for his people by heeding the revelation from a slave abandoned by his own brothers. Certainly, the king was wise and he must have shown his care to his people for they reaped the abundant harvest for seven years. Who could labor for so long and produce so well, if person or land are mistreated and deprived? So the king must have been wise for he had faith in the dream and ordered extended planting of grain and built storage for a seven-year fallow.
When the long bitter like winter came, Joseph wept in private with relief and joy at the survival of his father and brothers. The wicked brothers came to receive a share for the family from the great harvest shaped by the very hand of the favored brother they sold into slavery. In order to be in position to save his family, Joseph rose in rank from the state of slavery and became one of tender reputation to Pharaoh and acted justly in the wise king’s name. The just and favored Joseph was not recognized by his brothers and he deceived them by accusation to hold some among them as hostage and require others return to their devoted father to demand his presence to stand for justice before Pharaoh. This act by the most favor son, motivated an elderly man, who was his father, to undertake a difficult journey to bear witness to Pharaoh that he knew was a wise king. Once his father and the rest of his family were in the land of abundance Joseph revealed himself and they all lived in comfort during the seven year drought.
We know that we live a time of turmoil because what is evil is called good and what is good is called evil. Our own fellow brothers and sisters deny us justice under “the law” by false accusation that the “doers” have stolen and the “takers” are deprived victims. Steve Jobs was a “doer” and has been falsely accused by fellow brothers and sisters when in fact he has created tens of thousands of jobs for the benefit of people that gave to causes, even some unwisely, and even paid taxes and purchased goods that expanded the economic pie or bountiful harvest, if you wish. Yet you must surely know that one who creates, builds, and is industrious, while treating others well will be like the great Pharaoh that provided for his people.
Since we are in a time of democracy we are each often a decision maker, people of means and persons who meet out justice. We do this as judges from the community (many are elected by us) or serve on juries. We also vote and make daily decisions for our own and others well being. Should we not know a famine will come eventually and that we should live in a productive and frugal manner to preserve our communities, ourselves and our families? Is perhaps the famine very near? History will repeat itself and there is nothing new under the sun, including great deceptions by those who say give us your power and “we will wipe every” tear from you and your brothers’ and sisters’ cheeks.
Yet we know who these deceivers are… for they cry for more “just laws” and “justice under current law,” while yet declaring that there is not a basis for a foundation for law due to past wrongs under the law and existence of the poor. Especially, they speak to everyone generally, by declaring what is true justice but they create poverty through actions and laws that are unjust, yet they call this action and law justice for the poor. But through their further unjust action and creation of more unjust law they yet again have aided creation of the production of even more that are poor and they still blame others for what they have done. When it is actually they themselves, that by their actions, that have greatly expanded the ranks of the poor and then blame others that oppose them for what they have intentionally and consciously done. Those that tolerate this evil have also committed a crime!

To continue from the third paragraph… We know that Joseph is falsely accused again and he and his family become slaves in Egypt though later generations return to Israel as G_d’s chosen and they build the temple. The Jews are taken and enslaved in Babylon and then return under Alexander and rebuild the temple again. Then the Jewish homeland is destroyed, Israel enslaved and dispersed under the Romans. The Romans rename Israel’s land Palestine after their ancient enemy and meaning, “The Land of the Philistines.” The Israelis have yet again returned to Israel after partial extermination and slavery under NAZI Germany, including other Jewish pogroms throughout the planet and the story yet continues. You see… “History Repeats!” Will you prepare?

hi, that is a best way to tell this ANCIENT story, that make me remember being so puzzle as a child to try to understand fully the message which JOSEPH JUDGEMENT OF HOW TO DEAL WITH HIS BROTHER WITH KINDNESS BUT JUSTICE FOR THEIR MEAN BEHAVIORS OVER HIM,
YES very wise actions which stood time itself with generation after generation had the opportunity to learn from it.
I believe like you said the perils we can now almost see coming like never before in AMERICA,
it will destroy many good people, those braves always in front taking a stand for what is the right thing to do, this NATION OWE THEM SO MUCH SINCE THE BIRTH OF AMERICA, BUILT ONTHEIR BLOODSHED
ALL OVER THIS LAND, and the rally of thE OWES expose the forgotten lives and deaths of so great humans
fill with the passion of giving their children the best and,the freedom, the tools of knowledge to
it took only one beast to destroy all those owes mind only one to twist them like playing a game of empowering those young into the evil intent of the BEAST, WE WHERE WARN OF HIS COMING.
yes we must prepare, and we are preparing,

Your Ayn Rand bullshit is just that – bullshit. If taxes and regulations were so high as to make Jobs, Gates, or Wozniak walk away from the personal computer, then someone else would have invented it and cashed in on the reward (albeit, potentially less money). Let’s not forget, as well, that Wozniak, who was the real brain behind the Apple 2 wanted to give it away for free. It was Jobs who convinced Wozniak that a profit being made wasn’t a horrible thing.

Here’s what it comes down to – There are no unique and special genius’s. There are only those who got to the finish line first. Jobs got there first (though he had to share it with Gates). If he hadn’t, then Gates would have, or one of thousands of other computer nerds in the 70’s doing the exact same thing they did. High taxes or not, regulations or not, progress is INEVITABLE. Those things may slow it down, but you can never stop it.

And what was the point spending time bitching about Jobs not giving anything away when this was just a propaganda piece on Rand economics anyway? You point out how much the world has benefitted through large contributions from highly paid individuals, complain about Jobs not following suit, and then turn around and say that it’s perfectly okay that he didn’t.

Figure out what it is you’re trying to say, and say it, because, if you’re trying to play both sides of the fence, you’re doing it INCREDIBLY POORLY.

Jobs was an artist and not inventor. He didn’t invent home computers and come-on how many people used mac as compared to windows? Gates ripped of Steve who ripped off Xerox. So notion is totally bogus that he introduced PC to the world. Neither he invented music players,mobiles or tablets they all existed – he made it pretty and elegant. Steve was an brilliant artist and genius in marketing but did save “hours” of my time?
Nada!!!!!! Not for me at-least!
My first pc was an ibm home 286 machine, DOS-ed my way later to windows. My first walkman was a Sony, For phones it was Nokia/Motorola all the way. Even with the old symbian os, one could surf the net, read mails and talk over the phone.

I would say yes in more ways then one as he as with Bill Gates and several other well known very rich tech people are all for higher taxes while paying as little as they can in taxes for themselves and in salary to their workers and they fire thousands at once when they can to employ lower paid people elsewhere. They currently are trying to bring in illegals so they can lower wages even more while employing fewer Americans. I recently read an article that showed how few Americans are employed by the tech sector compared to other industries in Silicon Valley. Sure they employ many Americans but they employ many more people overseas. Higher taxes keep the rif raff from climbing the ladder of success don’t you know.

Read anything on Steve Jobs the human being and he comes off as a jerk.