Signe Wilkinson by Signe Wilkinson

Signe WilkinsonNo Zoom

Comments (19) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. myming

    myming said, over 4 years ago

    he donated $100million to newark, new jersey schools (and they DO need it) right about when the somewhat negative movie, “the social network”, was premiering…

  2. MrJimCos

    MrJimCos said, over 4 years ago

    Wanna bet that shirt wasn’t made in the USA either.

  3. patticake

    patticake GoComics PRO Member said, over 4 years ago

    And do you believe that it is coincidental for a reclusive billionaire to suddenly come out of the woodwork and donate a couple of million dollars to the Newark city school system just as a this movie was about to come out and paint him in a negative light? What has he done since then??

  4. person918

    person918 said, over 4 years ago

    guess which helps people more: reducing overpopulation or sending a dollar a day to feed each kid one at a time/explain to them how they’re going to burn in hell if they don’t embrace jesus (and that condoms cause aids, if you’re catholic)

  5. Libertarian1

    Libertarian1 said, over 4 years ago

    patticake “What has he done since then??”

    Please do me a favor and tell me when you are about to buy or sell a stock. i will do the exact opposite. Your timing could not possibly have been worse.

    Yesterday, Zuckerberg announced he was joining Buffet and Gates and - giving- away more than 50% of all his wealth to their common charity. 11 other billionaires have also just signed on.

  6. W(ar).Crime

    W(ar).Crime said, over 4 years ago

    ^Mark Zuckerberg is worth 6.9 billion (not million). A billion is $1,000,000,000. He donated $100,000,000. Now do the math $1m/6.9b. That’s .00144927536 of his fortune. That’s about 1.4% of his wealth, not 50% that you claim it to be. And you know what? That amount is Tax Deuctable.

    http://tinyurl.com/2a7224g

    So tell me LOONEY 1 why do you want us to throw ourselves to the mercy of the rich? What you are advocating for is Charles Dickens all over again.

    “Oh please Mr.Scrooge. I want a lump of coal to keep myself warm.”

  7. Libertarian1

    Libertarian1 said, over 4 years ago

    ^ Normally I ignore your ignorance but I will comment this time. His previous $100 Million to Newark has absolutely nothing to do with his latest contribution. It is 50%+ of his billions of dollars. Read the papers. 16 billionaires have joined Buffet and Gates and are giving their billions away.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703493504576007982500939482.html?mod=djemITP_h

  8. W(ar).Crime

    W(ar).Crime said, over 4 years ago

    Since LOONEY 1 can’t read I’ll tell you what your article says to ya.

    “The 26-year-old is one of 16 billionaires new to the pledge, which now totals more than 50 donors.”

    I don’t read ANYTHING in there that talks about 50% of their wealth. In other words you lie or are stupid.

  9. Cynthia

    Cynthia GoComics PRO Member said, over 4 years ago

    Charlie;

    “How would we feel if, say, Iran came over here and started opening up Planned Parenthoods in all our neighborhoods.”

    There are abortion clinics everywhere already, does that answer your question?

  10. Jade

    Jade GoComics PRO Member said, over 4 years ago

    “AND IT IS NOT A TAX CUT! The Republicans want to PREVENT another big democrat INCREASE in taxes, at the time when the country can LEAST afford another tax”

    • It is a Tax cut. I’m sorry, but in the world we call “reality” your buddy Bush and the Republicans wrote a bill and passed it through reconciliation (“shoved down our throats,” in Republican lingo) that would EXPIRE at the END of THIS YEAR, returning tax rates to those that existed before 2001. These are not tax cut extensions, these are NEW tax cuts. Care to try another round at the spin zone?

  11. mdavis4183

    mdavis4183 GoComics PRO Member said, over 4 years ago

    Did moron Wikkinson miss that Mark Zuckerberg just gave $100 MILLION to schools? He’s also signed on to give millions more away to charities. Bad choice of examples, MORON.

  12. 4uk4ata

    4uk4ata said, over 4 years ago

    “The worst thing they can do is support already bloated social programs that already soak the average taxpayer - like public schools. Propping these up simply prevents their reform.”

    Oh, those eeeeivuuul public schools! How dare they compete with our precious private schools, don’t they know competition is only good when it means more money for us? We should teach our children only what we want, so they’ll know all those hippies, commies, different religions etc are the scions of Evul and not 101% perfect Americans like us. Only we are right, those 90% others are not!

  13. W(ar).Crime

    W(ar).Crime said, over 4 years ago

    “How stupid and insulting can one person be?”

    I don’t know GEEZER 1, you tell me. You’re also an idiot as well. You know what your article says about the 50%?

    The title.

    Your story also does not prove that billionaires are giving 50% of their wealth to charities. So before you go posting another piece of garbage that does not prove anything you might want to read it.

    Better yet have one of the nurses that changes your diaper in the nursing home you live in do it for you.

  14. Cynthia

    Cynthia GoComics PRO Member said, over 4 years ago

    I’m not a proponent of zero growth, but last time I checked, the number of births declined, but people still choose to have children, even though they have contraception.

    Contraception and abortion have been around forever, or nobody would have written against something that didn’t exist in thee past centuries Egyptian women used crocodile dung as a contraceptive.

    Nature made women the ones able to be pregnant. Therefore, man can make laws against the control of their fertility, but they still have the last word in private. You can’t watch a woman for every minute of her life to make sure she doesn’t take herbs or a pill.

    Some men really have womb envy. Patriarchy was invented to give adult men a voice in reproduction because bioogically speaking (I’m just talking about biology, here, not psychology or sociology and certainly not religion), men are simple sperm donors. A way to take genetic material from a bloodline of mothers (his mom) to another. It’s cold and cruel and hard to face, but it’s real. A woman can have sex with a man, have a child and raise it on her own, without any help from a man. It’s not the best and easiest way to do it, but it can be done. It happens more often than you think. It enrages males to see women raise children without them! That’s why single mothers have such a bad reputation.

    Meanwhile, the genitor of the child may never know he has a child in the first place (not that it’s right to treat him like that, though).

    It sucks for men, but nature is made that way. Few men can accept that.

  15. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, over 4 years ago

    charlie, are you aware that the vast majority of school textbooks, especially civics and history texts, are actually selling the most positive form of American history? Only very recently have there even been alternative views! Most textbooks are approved by the American Legion. If you don’t believe this, try reading Lies My Teacher Told Me, by James Loewen. Also, there is an undue influence from Texas, which is hardly known for its liberal views.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (4).