When I began this blog in 2001, I was appalled by President Bush's headlong rush to an illegal war (we were not in fact under attack). As time wore on and Bush began his assault on the Constitution and any people bold enough to criticize, I believed that "the republic is endangered more by actions of our own government than by those of any terrorist." With the election of a high-minded, compassionate, intelligent man like Barack Obama, my fears have ceased.
"Honor them with peace, not war"
United for Peace
Saturday, April 27, 2002
In the U.S. it is being defined more and more by the wealthy. No, not by buying votes in Congress. The wealthy circumvent the tools of democracy and put their money where they like in the form of charitable giving. Charity may be good for the soul, but in a large way it is bad for society. Those who deliberately give money away to avoid paying taxes leave a smaller public pie to be used for purposes determined to be in the public interest through a public process.
Today's New York Times reports on the new wave of family foundations.
Isn't it a nice thing that wealthy people are giving their money away? No. It takes us back to the bad old days of charity, which may be good for the giver (though I doubt it) but rarely for the receiver. If Republicans think dependence on government programs is a bad thing, they ought to see dependence on personal charity. That gives well-meaning busybodies the ability, if not the right, to oversee the lives of the unfortunate. This is no advantage to society or to the poor. It's undemocratic. It's an abuse of power.
Copyright © 2001-03 Pam Shorey
(except the specific sources credited in quotes)
Who Defines the Public Good?
In the U.S. it is being defined more and more by the wealthy. No, not by buying votes in Congress. The wealthy circumvent the tools of democracy and put their money where they like in the form of charitable giving. Charity may be good for the soul, but in a large way it is bad for society. Those who deliberately give money away to avoid paying taxes leave a smaller public pie to be used for purposes determined to be in the public interest through a public process.
Today's New York Times reports on the new wave of family foundations.
Like thousands of other newly wealthy individuals, she is establishing a family foundation. In 2000, the latest year for which figures are available, the Foundation Center counted 24,434 family foundations, up 19.2 percent from 1999. The figures do not include foundations that may be affiliates of a family business.
Isn't it a nice thing that wealthy people are giving their money away? No. It takes us back to the bad old days of charity, which may be good for the giver (though I doubt it) but rarely for the receiver. If Republicans think dependence on government programs is a bad thing, they ought to see dependence on personal charity. That gives well-meaning busybodies the ability, if not the right, to oversee the lives of the unfortunate. This is no advantage to society or to the poor. It's undemocratic. It's an abuse of power.
Palema
8:05 AM
Comments:
Post a Comment
Copyright © 2001-03 Pam Shorey
(except the specific sources credited in quotes)
|
|