Oracle Corp. CEO Larry Ellison to buy most of Hawaiian island of Lanai
Larry Ellison, inset, and the Sweetheart Rock as seen from Manele Bay Resort golf clubhouse on Lanai, Hawaii / CBS/AP/Wikimedia Commons
(CBS/AP) HONOLULU - Oracle Corp. CEO Larry Ellison has reached a deal to buy 98 percent of the island of Lanai from its current owner, Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie said Wednesday.
The land's owner, Castle & Cooke Inc., has filed a transfer application with the state's public utilities commission, Abercrombie said.
The sale price for the property -- the vast majority of the island's 141 square miles -- was not immediately clear. The Maui News previously reported the asking price was between $500 million and $600 million.
Representatives for Castle & Cooke, owned by self-made billionaire David Murdock, did not immediately return a call seeking comment from The Associated Press.
Abercrombie said Ellison has had a longstanding interest in the island.
"We look forward to welcoming Mr. Ellison in the near future," Abercrombie said. "His passion for nature, particularly the ocean is well known specifically in the realm of America's Cup sailing," he said.
Abercrombie and Maui County Mayor Alan Arakawa met with Castle & Cook last week to go over the prospective deal between the company and Ellison, whose software company is based in Redwood City, Calif.
Murdock bought out fellow Castle & Cooke shareholders for nearly $700 million in 2000 and took the company private.
The major Hawaiian islands, with Lanai highlighted
/ AP Photo"It is a major trophy for billionaires to say I own one of the eight major Hawaiian Islands," English told KGMB.
Lanai is Hawaii's smallest publicly accessible inhabited island. It is known as the "pineapple island" even though Murdock has closed its pineapple operations to make way for luxury resort and home development.
The island boasts unspoiled charm with 30 miles of paved roads, 400 miles of unpaved roads and no traffic lights. Other people own the 2 percent of the land that Ellison isn't buying.
According to the Hawaii Tourism Authority, more than 26,000 people visited the island from January to April of this year, a 6 percent decline from the same period last year.
Niihau is Hawaii's smallest inhabited island, but permission is required to visit.
Popular on CBSNews.com
- TWA Flight 800 gets another look 17 years later 112 Comments
- America's endangered historic places 11 Photos
- Serena Williams sorry for "what I supposedly said" on rape
- FBI: No sign of Jimmy Hoffa's body in Detroit suburb
- TWA Flight 800 disaster - a look back 19 Photos
- Reporter Michael Hastings dies at 33
- 3 football players charged in Naval Academy rape case
- Scientists say shipwreck timber in Lake Michigan centuries old
----------------
I've often said that I wish there were some humane way to get rid of the rich. If you asked why, I'd answer that getting rid of the rich would save us from distraction by leftist hustlers promoting the politics of envy. Not having the rich to fret over might enable us to better focus our energies on what's in the best interest of the 99.99 percent of the rest of us. Let's look at some facts about the rich laid out by Bill Whittle citing statistics on his RealClearPolitics video "Eat the Rich."
This year, Congress will spend $3.7 trillion dollars. That turns out to be about $10 billion per day. Can we prey upon the rich to cough up the money? According to IRS statistics, roughly 2 percent of U.S. households have an income of $250,000 and above. By the way, $250,000 per year hardly qualifies one as being rich. It's not even yacht and Learjet money. All told, households earning $250,000 and above account for 25 percent, or $1.97 trillion, of the nearly $8 trillion of total household income. If Congress imposed a 100 percent tax, taking all earnings above $250,000 per year, it would yield the princely sum of $1.4 trillion. That would keep the government running for 141 days, but there's a problem because there are 224 more days left in the year.
How about corporate profits to fill the gap? Fortune 500 companies earn nearly $400 billion in profits. Since leftists think profits are little less than theft and greed, Congress might confiscate these ill-gotten gains so that they can be returned to their rightful owners. Taking corporate profits would keep the government running for another 40 days, but that along with confiscating all income above $250,000 would only get us to the end of June. Congress must search elsewhere.
According to Forbes 400, America has 400 billionaires with a combined net worth of $1.3 trillion. Congress could confiscate their stocks and bonds, and force them to sell their businesses, yachts, airplanes, mansions and jewelry.
The problem is that after fleecing the rich of their income and net worth, and the Fortune 500 corporations of their profits, it would only get us to mid-August. The fact of the matter is there are not enough rich people to come anywhere close to satisfying Congress' voracious spending appetite. They're going to have to go after the non-rich.
But let's stick with the rich and ask a few questions. Politicians, news media people and leftists in general entertain what economists call a zero elasticity view of the world. That's just fancy economic jargon for a view that government can impose a tax and people will behave after the tax just as they behaved before the tax, and the only change is more government revenue. One example of that vision, at the state and local levels of government, is the disappointing results of confiscatory tobacco taxes. Confiscatory tobacco taxes have often led to less state and local revenue because those taxes encouraged smuggling.
Similarly, when government taxes profits, corporations report fewer profits and greater costs. When individuals face higher income taxes, they report less income, buy tax shelters and hide their money. It's not just rich people who try to avoid taxes, but all of us — liberals, conservatives and libertarians.
What's the evidence? Federal tax collections have been between 15 and 20 percent of the nation's Gross Domestic Product every year since 1960. However, between 1960 and today, the top marginal tax rate has varied between 91 percent and 35 percent. That means whether taxes are high or low, people make adjustments in their economic behavior so as to keep the government tax take at 15 to 20 percent of the GDP. Differences in tax rates have a far greater impact on economic growth than federal revenues.
So far as Congress' ability to prey on the rich, we must keep in mind that rich people didn't become rich by being stupid.
Last I checked...I owned those things.
Actually, the poor own me. Why? Because I am forced to work for them. The government forces me to work a part of my day and give that part to someone who has done nothing to earn it.
That is the very definition of slavery.
There is not a single county in America that in the zoning code include a "P" for private property. They have "R","A" or "C"
Recidence which means you are a Renter, Agriculture or Commercial.
Another thing...That realestate property tax make a renter of everyone and the city/county your landlord. These entities will in fact sell the property against your will and evict you just like a landlord evicts a tenant.
The concept of Allodial title has been rendered null & void.
Why not just pass a law that prevents him from doing anything with it?
It's easy.
What happens if you want to buy your house but the bulk of its residents are against it?
If you thought that comedy movie from 1987 with Danny Devito about hostile takeovers was a hoot, just wait and see...
The nonsense in Washington has NOTHING to do with this man buying real estate. Just like it has nothing to do with you buying your home or other real estate.
Mind your own business.
Freedom does not revolve around depriving others of theirs.
There is a line.
I'm worried Ellison might be wanting to cross it.
You may mind your own business, since those of us conscious of society are busy talking.
Since when is it American to use one freedom to usurp others of theirs?
If nobody lives on this island, then I don't care.
If lots of people live on the island and more than 50.01% object, then problems might begin. And those people, contrary to your belief, are Americans too.
Or in this case, 2%'r.
Just like if he showed up trying to tell you what to do with your property. In that case, it would be none of his business.
See my multiple responses to you above. Think through the process and understand, then get back to us.