The New York Times: Jobs ' philanthropic mysteries

Lead: Andrew Ross Sorkin, author of the New York Times network contributor, wrote today that although Apple co-founder Steve Jobs has revolutionized technology and created huge personal wealth, Andrew Ross Solkin　　But his achievements in the field of philanthropy are unremarkable. The following is the full article: the absence of charity jobs is a genius, an innovator, a dreamer, and perhaps the world's most beloved billionaire.　　But surprisingly, he is not an outstanding philanthropist, at least for the time being. Although he has amassed about 8.3 billion dollars in personal wealth by holding Apple shares and 7.4% per cent of Disney shares, there is no public information to show that jobs made charitable donations. He is neither a member of the Giving Pledge organization, nor has he donated to a hospital or academic institution a building named after him. The former is a charitable group organised by Warren Buffett and Bill Gates, whose members are the wealthiest families in the United States, who have pledged to donate at least half their personal wealth to the Warren.　　Mr. Jobs refused to join the group, according to people familiar with the matter. It's not about "trying" jobs. I have always been very respectful of Steve Jobs and I think he is the da Vinci of our time.　　Before writing this column, I have reservations about this issue during his illness, after all, his products have had a very positive impact on the world and improved the lives of millions of of people through technology. Of course, since Mr. Jobs has always attached great importance to secrecy, he is entirely likely to donate anonymously, or has drafted a plan to give away his wealth before he dies. It has been suspected that 150 million of dollars of anonymous donations from the University of California, San Francisco's Helen-Diller family Complex Cancer Center (Helen Diller Accessibility Comprehensive center) have come from jobs. His wife, Laurene (Laurene Powell Jobs), also served on the boards of "American Aid" (Teach for America) and the "New School Risk Fund" (Schools Venture).　　It may therefore be assumed that they have contributed funds to these institutions, although their names do not appear on the donor list of any large donation.　　But Mr Jobs's "omission" in philanthropy-which people have been whispering about-and few have said-raises important questions about why jobs is still highly prized when "millionaires or billionaires" are criticized for not giving enough money back to society.　　An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment. Another priority, jobs, apparently never made money to make money., and never dazzle the rich. Before retiring as CEO last week, he received only 1 dollars a year from Apple, even though his stock options had left him with a billions of dollar worth. In an interview with Playboy magazine in 1985, Jobs talked about his wealth, and he said, "You know, the biggest feeling I get from this money is ridiculous." Everyone is looking at wealth because it seems to be the most interesting or valuable thing to me. "It also makes the outside world more curious about his lack of public donations," he said. In fact, Jobs had spent some time seriously thinking about philanthropy. He set up Steven in 1986 after leaving Apple and setting up next. P. Jobs Foundation (Steven p. Jobs Foundation). But more than a year later, he closed the foundation. Jobs then dug up Mark Vomilin (Mark Vermilion) to manage the foundation. "He obviously doesn't have time," Vomilin said in a media interview. He said Mr. Jobs was interested in funding for nutrition and vegetarianism, while Vomilin hoped he would focus more on areas related to social issues. "I don't know if it's because of my incompetence that he's not interested. "I can't criticize jobs," he said. "Two of Mr. Jobs, who asked to be anonymous, told me he had said in recent years that as his wealth soared he would be better focused on Apple's expansion than philanthropy, especially after he was ill." "His focus is on two things-the Apple team and his family. This is his focus, other things will distract.　　Another friend said.　　However, as most of America's billionaires are openly engaged in philanthropy and want to inspire future generations to continue philanthropy, the rich who have not yet started philanthropy often face outside criticism. The other rich are often seen as a greedy monopolist before Gates decides to devote himself to the Bill and Melinda Melinda Foundation (Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation) and donate all his wealth. Similarly, he faced a lot of criticism before he announced that he had donated a lot of personal wealth and assigned his best friend, Gates, to distribute the money.　　Even after announcing the charity plan, Buffett was criticized for not donating money earlier or devoting more effort to philanthropy. Michael Steinhardt, a hedge fund manager and philanthropist, Michael Stanhart Mr. Buffett in an interview earlier this year: "He donated 2 and a half dollars in the first 70 years of his life, nothing else, Until one day it suddenly made a hasty decision to give almost all the money to a guy.　　For some reason, Steinhardt has been at odds with Mr. Buffett. Another billionaire, Wal-Mart founder Walton Sam Walton, founded the Walton Family Foundation by the age of 69 (Walton accessibility Foundation). and 5 years later, he died. In his autobiography, Walton expressed concern about a formal charity project: "I never wanted to give anyone who doesn't deserve a donation a chance for nothing." "He wouldn't want Wal-Mart to donate money to charity," he said. "I firmly believe that Wal-Mart should not be involved in charitable business.　　"he wrote.　　Of course, some of the wealthy are donating money in part to promote a personal image that Mr Jobs does not need to resort to. Last year, Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg donated 100 million of dollars to the struggling Newark education system (Zuckerberg). The money happened to have been donated a week before the movie "Social Network" was released. Many believe the move is aimed at reversing the negative effects of the film on Zuckerberg's image, although this may be biased.　　Projects like the "Donation oath" were criticized by some philanthropists as "heavy form and light content". The 56-Year-old is not the only billionaire who is obsessed with his work and ignores philanthropy. Buffett didn't start paying attention to charity until he was 75 years old.　　He says more energy will be spent on Berkshire Hathaway's Berkshire Hathawa to earn more money to donate to society. Carlos Slim Helu, the Mexican telecoms giant, defended his "Hencaros Slim Eloux" in the charity industry last year and refused to sign a "donation pledge". "As a businessman, I should help solve problems, including social problems," he said in an interview with CNBC. Poverty should be fought, but not through handouts. "The legislative contribution to Mr. Jobs's view of philanthropy is not yet clear, because he rarely talks about it openly," he said. But when he returned to Apple in 1997, he closed many of the company's charitable programs. He said at the time that the aim was to restore the company's profitability.　　Despite Apple's $14 billion trillion profit last year and a $76 billion cash reserve, previous charitable projects have not been restarted. Many of the fast-growing technology companies have charitable businesses, but Apple has no such sector. Unlike some of the Fortune 500 companies, Apple has not set up a charitable project funded by its employees. The company did in 2008 donate $100,000 to a group that wanted to veto "proposition 8th" (Proposition 8), which aims to ban same-sex marriages in California.　　But 2007, the Stanford Social Innovation Review (Stanford Social innovation Review), which specializes in the public interest, called Apple one of the "most unkind businesses in America". But it is noteworthy and commendable that, driven by jobs, California has become the first state in the United States to create a system of registration of live donors to kidney transplants. Jobs had had pancreatic cancer, and in 2009 Memphis acceptedLiver transplant surgery. Memphis was chosen for surgery, in part because there were no available liver sources in California.　　Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (Arnold Schwarzenegger) decided to help push the project after Mr. Jobs communicated with Maria Schleifer, the governor of California, Shriver. Jobs and Schwarzenegger enacted the legislation at the Lucy-Packard Children's Hospital (Lucile Packard Children's Shetty), but it appears to be the last time he openly fought for the interests of cancer patients.　　Unlike Lance Armstrong (Lance Armstrong) and other prominent cancer survivors, jobs did not use his reputation to push charitable donations. In 2006, the author of "Pry Open apple" (Inside Steve Brain), Liander Cani (Leander Kahney), published a scathing critique in the Wired magazine column. He wrote: "Indeed, he has great charisma, and his speech is fascinating." But his absence in the public discourse space was puzzling. People will project their values onto him, but he is not fulfilling the responsibilities of sitting in huge amounts of wealth and power. "But Mr Jobs has always chosen blushes for himself. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal in 1993, he said: "When you lie in bed at night, you can tell yourself that we did something wonderful ... That's what I care about. "Hopefully Steve Jobs will be able to prolong his life so that he can spend more time doing wonderful things – and perhaps he will encourage his legions of followers to join in philanthropy," he said. (Si yuan)