Gates charity can not be measured by the moral sta

Gates charity can not be measured by the moral standards of Chinese entrepreneurs


in late June, one thing impressed the whole world, that is, once the world's richest man, Bill • Gates, all 58 billion U.S. dollars of his fortune donated to the charitable foundation of its name and announced the retirement focus on helping the poor around the world charities. Gates's charity caused a strong reaction in China, not only he won the admiration the people worship, but also triggered a large number of people in China re-thinking entrepreneurs wealth. Gates praised them apart in admiration, it was filled with indignation, because statistics show that 70% of China Charity Donations from overseas, the number of Chinese entrepreneurs have donated less than 15%, which shows a group of Chinese entrepreneurs are stingy stingy; was very melancholy, dignified Chinese ceremonies, there's no one like Bill Gates has a great mind like entrepreneurs, can not hesitate to donate all his net worth wealth; more people are looking forward to, they called Gates, Chinese entrepreneurs should learn a good example, should believe in Our country can not emerge continuously Gates Bill Gates is worth a great man.

to face the public censure, most Chinese entrepreneurs can only face with shame, as they did in the small number of charitable donations is not enough, they failed to do so to contribute generously to the poor charity, has occurred required to donate or for the image or for such circumstances, and most of the time they seemed weighed about careful planning; to face the public's expectations, they say nothing,tory burch online shop, because they do not intend to, as Bill Gates plans to retire before or hundred years later, all free of wealth to the society, but ready to leave their children or their successors continue to become bigger and stronger Italian companies, but they are not forthright and above-board to declare the idea, because it would lead to More blame and infamy.

contrast media plausibly, they look so dumbfounded Liquciqiong; contrast Gates righteous spirit, they appear to be so selfish and petty small dark! They really are a group of villains lack of morality, it?

This involves a moral evaluation standards. Moral evaluation is of course a more complicated issue, but a multitude of things but also there are two key indicators: one is than to die, that is who will pay more than others; one is the ratio of contribution, that is, who the greatest effect on others? For example, children are unfortunately falling into the water, struggling to rescue two people, the result of a poorly water-based methods were inappropriate, but unfortunately did not rescue the child drowned himself; a skilled person the right way water and rescued the children themselves safe. At this moment, how are we to save the moral evaluation of the level of the two? On the sacrifice, who died naturally more moral, because he contributed to other people their lives; of contribution shall not sacrifice more, because he rescued a drowning. Faced with this result, we say who seem to have a higher moral pale, the prevalent social assessment is that they are moral people, are our mortal beings to learn from!
(www.boraid.org) 93991 | 24
since the sacrifice and contribution can not determine the level of morality, then, some people choose to make sacrifices for others, some people choose to contribute to others, they all belong to a moral person. Gates himself has donated tens of billions of wealth, charity funds, he chose self-sacrifice; China's most entrepreneurial option is to accumulate profits for expanded reproduction, is this what is to contribute to others? If so, they and the Gates of the moral standard is not high and low points; If not, then they are a group of people of low moral standards. Need to affirm that we are to compare the treatment of wealth (that is, for charitable or for the reproduction of wealth), rather than the absolute value of wealth. If you want to measure the absolute value of wealth, then even if all of China's entrepreneurs are to donate money, and no one can match the Gates!

from an economic point of view, the wealth to charity and to expand production are two distinct levels, the former belongs to the transfer of wealth, one less divided, rather sit am Mountain Air taste; the latter are the creation of wealth, but also to sell to sell an unlimited number of, can continue to multiply value. From a personal point of view, the latter method is more favorable, then it is society and more beneficial to others it? We assume that the huge Gates 58 billion wealth to help others heal, but there are two options: one is used to free aid to the poor medical treatment, while the other is used to treat cancer or poultry development influenza drugs and the sale, disposition of the two, what kind of society? A way in front of Gates with their own money to buy drugs already on the market of finished medical treatment to the poor, the poor save a strangers life, he is great; the back way, Gates used his the money to develop a new drug sold to the rich, save money for the rich to pay a voluntary life, is he despicable? Life is not superior to the rich over the poor, but the lives of the poor than the rich may not be higher than a chip! In fact, the situation of the poor and the rich are dangerous, they need the help of others, respect for life from the perspective of money and not money is different on the surface, essentially two ways to save a life are they contribution is the same. Gaibo Ci sharp give good management can not control the amount of value for China to become entrepreneurs in line moral standards.

be noted that, although the two ways in the midst of these difficulties can be another solution, but they continued ability to help others is a big difference. The former way to save a group of people, the wealth will face the danger of depletion; then a way to keep a profit, he has sufficient funds to develop other new drugs to treat human complex diseases, can continue to save more many lives. Of course, the Gates money goes to charity, would not necessarily be used to develop new drugs, but no matter what is used, in order to achieve sustained profits to be in an existing product or service to be innovative, which is human community will no doubt be useful.

fact, the whole development of human society is the constant pursuit of more wealth in the enterprise rather than give up the wealth in the process moving forward. Today ordinary people to lead the last emperor who has no life to enjoy the innovation of modern technology, which is not business as the result of the pursuit of more wealth? Marx never used a telephone, Lenin used the phone but no watch television, read the TV is not played Mao Zedong, cell phones, cell phone never even seen Deng Xiaoping called MP4, which originally did not dare Shexiang great things, it has long been unusual plaything in the hands of the people. Entrepreneurs would help if all the world to learn Gates, or further than the will of each point of the profits each year are donated and not for the purse to expand production, then the world will have the technology today, fruitful results? There will be the constant human civilization?

Through the above analysis, we found that Gates is ready to sacrifice the initiative, and this great self-sacrifice, so he is moral; but for Chinese entrepreneurs to expand production of wealth, is ready to contribute (Gates also has the courage to contribute), but also a great contribution, they are also moral. We have said, in assessing whether a person is moral society, the key is to see whether his sacrifice for others or contribute to behavior and the way these two there is no gap between morality. Therefore, those profits to expand production to Chinese entrepreneurs did not need to face with a look of shame, they do not lose at the Gates of morality!

In fact, we treat people in the mindset of entrepreneurs is very contradictory. When the Global 100 companies in the list of missing people in China, we strongly urge the entrepreneurs to expand production scale and efficiency as soon as possible to do the business up, wait for them to step into the night 100; when the United States join together out of a Gates When do charity, we strongly urge the entrepreneurs to follow Gates's charity, we should put all of its assets used to fund the poor, and then wait for a night out of hundreds of Gates. However, these two requirements are contradictory, requiring companies to put too much money or energy to do charity, the firm's scale and efficiency will be affected. If Gates had earned when he first donated millions out there across the world today, the Microsoft empire? Those tens of thousands of jobs, those convenient and practical operating system, a substantial amount of public revenue that will probably come to naught! The reason why the media and public opinion

chatter to ask entrepreneurs to do more charity, simply because most people still stubbornly believe that all wealth owned by individuals far less value to society to go all the public, as if owned by the public All that is helping the others, must be privately owned for self-squandering. In fact, this is the public's understanding of wealth into a fuzzy classification result. All the wealth owned by the public, not necessarily private, many state-owned enterprises (the property of the entire Chinese people, the most typical of the public all) of the CEOs spending billions of dollars in high-end consumer sites, the daily life of all food and drink Lazard claims that when these companies because poor management of the collapse, and ultimately for the huge losses still pay for all the citizens; wealth privately owned, may not be common, as many owners of private enterprises, although the wealth of tens of millions of its name, but the wealth is not owner of personal life information presented in the form of their land, plant, machinery, raw materials and other production factors, which the wealth generated by factors of production had become the wages, benefits, taxes and other forms for the entire staff and the community to share . Profits for entrepreneurs, even unique to one person, but these profits snowball, the entrepreneur or the generations of his family life can not exhaust, will eventually become a factor of production was put into a new round of the process of re-creation of wealth. As the economist Zhongpeng Rong said, the wealth, we should not ask who owns, but asked who should use. When private property has become common for the public when the owner of the shoulders is more of a management responsibility, or even this responsibility will be for generations. Of course, the transfer of wealth, entrepreneurs may be wrong horse, inherited cause of ignorant people may, may not make progress, they failed to stir up the company grew and grew more and more wealth, create more burden, but this is by no means Inheritance of wealth entrepreneurs intent.

In fact, the Chinese entrepreneurs to learn even if Bill Gates in good faith, I am afraid not, such as media and public opinion is wishful thinking to imagine. First, China's tax policy entrepreneurs are wary of charitable enterprises each donated a fortune, it is necessary for the state turned over the same time 25% of their total income, that is to do charity in China is to pay tax; Second, if you do not turn in income tax, it can only donate to the government-run Charity or the Red Cross, and not be like Bill Gates give to charity in their own name and personally in charge of However, the official charity of funds has been invested with the use of donors and the general public within the meaning of sense of shame; Third, if income tax was maintained rather have hands-handed charity, then please go to the web search the most famous Yu Pang-charitable entrepreneurs to crush the last ten years experience of charity, the ups and downs during the numerous difficulties and obstacles, you will understand the Chinese entrepreneurs to charity is not a simple thing!

need to repeatedly emphasize that the purpose of this paper is not against the entrepreneurs in the business enterprise had any energy left when it comes to their ability to help more poor people, but against the media and public opinion in Gates standards of conduct as to threaten the moral entrepreneurs do what they do not want them to do, or even force them to surrender disguised hard hard hard-won wealth (of course, is legitimate wealth.) Media and public opinion to help the poor, should be more concerned about the poor are poor due to their lazy habits or social system dictates? When more and more deterioration of the situation of the poor, when accountability should be accountable government or entrepreneurs? If the whole society should entrepreneurs take more responsibility for the poor while, then the government should have the inherent responsibility to help the poor will be increasingly ignored by the officials just help things along and enjoy the music into.

hope people will understand that, even excluding the compensation money and lose money to help people, this is mind philanthropist; by workers paid or according to quality to help the people most willing to pay This is the responsibility of entrepreneurs! Between different occupations, and their form of morality is not the same, as defense counsel for the heinous crime of murder, we can not as a lawyer as there is no moral reason. Gates has completed the transition from entrepreneur to philanthropist, but this does not mean that every entrepreneur should unconditionally follow, but does not mean that every entrepreneur this is the inevitable end of life!

If someone looked at the text above Buyiburao stood his ground, then I start to donate all of your savings out of the few, words and deeds come back their own experiences, how?