Facts have proved that eating the same pot "on average" will hinder the outbreak of personal ability and the improvement of efficiency.
"Get more for more work" has been proved to be an effective measure to improve efficiency. The income gap will naturally exist. People's abilities are different, their social contributions are different, and their incomes should be different. Just like our nature, if there is no difference in topography, there will be no vibrant waterfalls.
However, the excessive gap is also a problem that must be solved. The natural law is that the higher the mountain, the easier it is to be eroded, and the lower the valley bottom, the easier it is to be filled. In short, although the internal force of nature makes the surface increasingly rugged, the external force keeps cutting mountains and filling valleys.
Therefore, our society should really have a mechanism to narrow the income gap.
For example, the sound donation and tax system in the United States has made the total amount of charitable donations in the United States reach $260.28 billion, and donations exceeding $654.38 billion are becoming more and more common. Of course, enriching the country and strengthening the people is one of the reasons for the increase in total donations, but the importance of the system can never be ignored.
Although we can't copy the American measures, there are still many places to learn from. Specific measures are:
Donations are tax-deductible.
Americans are so enthusiastic about charity. On the one hand, it is related to their cultural tradition based on Christianity. Many rich people agree with Carnegie's famous saying: "It is a shame to die among the super rich." They all regard giving back to society and helping the poor as one of their obligations and moral requirements. On the other hand, it is also because the United States has a very favorable legal environment for the development of philanthropy. The establishment of charitable funds by wealthy families in the United States not only fulfilled the social responsibility of caring for the disadvantaged groups, but also brought huge benefits to the rich.
Tax incentives are very attractive to the rich. The inheritance tax and gift tax in the United States are famous for their high and progressive amounts. When the estate is more than 3 million dollars, the tax rate is as high as 55%, and the beneficiaries of the estate must pay the inheritance tax before inheriting the estate, so the descendants of the rich will encounter many obstacles when inheriting the estate. The establishment of a foundation or donation can get tax relief, and the amount of donation can be deducted from the income tax accordingly. Charitable donation can not only reduce losses, but also help to establish a public image and produce a demonstration effect. In addition, the state also has a large number of tax exemption and tax reduction concessions for the operation of foundations, so that charitable foundations can get high returns that other enterprises can't match.
At the same time, charitable donations can also enable family members to continue to master the right to use wealth. Like Buffett, many American families involve their children in their charitable projects. They teach children how to manage wealth through charitable activities and instill values such as generosity in them. For example, some families will let their adult children sit on the board of directors of family charitable funds, or set aside funds to set up separate funds for them, so that they can allocate the money in the funds to different fields themselves. In terms of wealth, Buffett and Gates would rather donate money to society than let their children squander it. Buffett also shrugged off the concept of hereditary wealth, comparing those who grew up in rich environment to "members of the lucky sperm club". Gates once said: "When you have 1 100 million dollars, you will understand that money is just a symbol and it is meaningless." At the same time, he announced that he would not leave too much money to his heirs.
Donate it yourself and manage it yourself.
In America, donating money is just the beginning of charity. Donors can participate in the management of donations through a series of means to ensure their maximum role. Since 10, the rapid growth of wealth has given birth to the desire of donors to directly participate in donation management, and donors (many of whom are young scientific and technological elites) have begun to put forward higher and higher requirements for the reliability and operational efficiency of charitable funds. A few years ago, Wilcott, a professor of microbiology at new york University, made a fortune by inventing an effective anti-inflammatory drug. However, he donated most of his wealth. He established a family foundation, and the current donation amount is about $6,543,800+0.5 million. Last year, he also donated part of the future royalties from drug sales to the Medical College of new york University. It is estimated that the final value of this donation is150,000 USD. The 73-year-old Wilcott said that in addition to enjoying tax incentives, another reason why he chose to donate money during his lifetime was that he could supervise the use of funds when he donated money to large institutions and formulated some basic principles for the use of funds.
In the United States, setting up a charity fund is equivalent to setting up a business company. Generally speaking, they are non-profit organizations. Charitable funds, like companies, can also do business, and part of the operating income is used as fund appreciation and part is used for various expenses. American law classifies these funds and requires them to disclose their financial revenues and expenditures and operating conditions in accordance with regulations. Donors have the right to obtain such statements. Some charitable funds work well and get donations more easily. On the other hand, it will be difficult or even impossible to raise donations.
Like all commercial companies, there are a group of consulting companies around the fund, who give various suggestions to help the fund develop healthily. Some American charitable funds have a new "donor management investment account" project, and savvy donors can manage their donations so that their money will continue to increase after donation. In addition, a large number of management tools have appeared on the Internet, which can help donors effectively investigate and track charitable funds to ensure that their donations are properly used.
These donors are often closely related to the non-profit funds they participate in, and sometimes they help these institutions in business advice, external relations and planning. Kelvin Edwards, a charity consultant in Atlanta, said that this is quite different from the situation that people just said "Here is a check for you, good luck" in the past. At present, a new generation of philanthropists understand that traditional public welfare undertakings lack business-oriented management, so they begin to introduce their familiar business models into public welfare undertakings. They know that government policies and mercenary shopping malls may limit their use of funds. Therefore, they need to take risks and try new ways to adapt to the whole environment.
Buffett's old friends Bill Gates and his wife run a huge and efficient fund, which is mainly devoted to global disease prevention and the improvement of American school education and library facilities. The business operation is quite successful. Buffett originally intended to continue to operate these funds in his lifetime to increase their value, while leaving a large part of them to charitable funds in his will. He thought he would die before his wife, so after his death, his wife can still take care of the donation. But when his wife died in 2004, he realized that he needed to come up with a better plan. Buffett injected capital into the Gates Foundation because he thought that the Bill Gates and his wife were more capable of doing charity work than he was, and investing money in the Bill Gates Foundation could better serve the society.
Charles Simonyi, a software developer who worked in Microsoft and participated in Word and Excel software projects, said that the Gates family had a great influence on his charity concept. He donated about $85 million, a large part of which was donated to a fund he founded to support scientific and artistic undertakings, including the Institute for Advanced Studies in Princeton. Like Gates, he also took the form of personal participation. Charles Simonyi, 57, said that charity needs a lot of thinking and concrete work, and people need to actually participate in specific projects.
Philanthropists have no worries.
However, more donors are not as rich as Buffett, and they must make plans for their lives. Even so, they don't have to worry that they will be penniless one day after making a large donation, or their fortunes will turn sharply, and they may not be able to fulfill their donation promises. At present, with the gradual improvement of human life expectancy, the wealth needed for the rest of life also increases, which is particularly important.
If donors are worried about income instability, which will affect their lives, American charities have many ways to make donors feel at ease, and these methods are becoming more and more popular, including so-called charitable annuities, charitable surplus trust funds and income funds formed by partnerships, so that donors can still get stable cash income after donating wealth. Although these methods vary widely, on the whole, if donors donate to charities or charitable funds, donors can get regular returns in their lifetime.