zlacker

This is completely misleading.

Even a cursory google search will give a rather long list:

- Giving Pledge: Ellison signed the Giving Pledge, committing to donate the majority of his wealth to philanthropy. Recently, he announced plans to donate 95% of his $373 billion fortune, focusing on science, healthcare, climate change, and AI research.

- Ellison Medical Foundation: Invested nearly $1 billion in biomedical research on aging and disease prevention before closing in 2013

- Lawrence Ellison Foundation: Supports research on aging, health, education, sustainable agriculture, and wildlife conservation.

- Ellison Institute for Transformative Medicine (USC): Established with a $200 million donation to advance cancer research and personalized therapies

- Ellison Institute of Technology (Oxford): A for-profit philanthropic initiative tackling global challenges like healthcare, food insecurity, climate change, and AI. A new campus worth $1.3 billion is planned for 2027

- Significant funding for Oxford University through EIT partnerships, including scholarships and research programs.

- Lion Country Safari Acquisition: Purchased the 254-acre wildlife sanctuary in Florida for $30 million through his foundation, ensuring continued conservation efforts.

- Larry Ellison Conservation Center: Opened in California to rehabilitate and breed endangered species

I'm not a huge fan of his or how Oracle has conducted business, but his giving represents billions to charity, not exactly fitting for the "dung beetle" label people are so quick to apply to him.

>>burnin+(OP)
So he has pledged to give away 95%. But so far it seems like he has given very little, maybe 1%?

>>burnin+(OP)
Yeah I don't know why people shame dung beetles with association to him

>>burnin+(OP)
Pledging and giving are not the same thing.

>>hamand+93
So according to you there's some magical formula for when he has to give it all away? If you were him, wouldn't you want a lasting legacy? Something that your wealth effects generations over decades or even a century?

Also, keep in mind he's already given away over $2B in charity, but even at 1%, that's still not very much for you?

>>burnin+Hd
Yeah I would say 1% is not very much, even if it is $2bn. In fact, it's less because it's $2bn. Him giving 95% of his wealth away would affect his lifestyle about as much as most people giving 1% of their wealth away. Probably less. Him giving 1% away is completely insignificant.

I guess you could argue he can't give away 95% now because he wants to maintain control of Oracle... which is fair enough I guess. But still, 1% is not very much.

>>burnin+Hd
I don't understand how people can defend extremely wealthy sociopaths. He's a CIA contractor and a genocide supporter, and he's trying to consolidate media to censor certain narratives. The guy is a piece of work. And there's no way he contributed that much more than everyone else to capture most of the wealth generated by the work of his employees. Being more of an aggressive sociopath doesn't mean you did more or better work than everyone else in his orgs.

>>burnin+Hd
My only point is that the parent post wasn't being misleading. No, 1% isn't much.

>>colord+pz
Boo hoo.

Misinformation is misinformation and it does no one good.

>>inemes+xL
You must be talking about yourself, everything I said is easily verifiable with 30 seconds of research. Do some introspection - you are projecting.

>>hamand+93
Most of that is clearly going to his own charities for tax benefits.