Pages

Showing posts with label charitable giving. Show all posts
Showing posts with label charitable giving. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Actions vs. Intentions

This conversation grew out of a story writing and editing session I had. I was trying (politely, of course) explain that the ending this person had selected for her character was boring because his salvation/resolution came from outside--the ever-dreaded deus ex machina. What I was trying to explain, as patiently as possible, was that her character had to earn his salvation. Finally, I tried another example. I said, "Look, let's say you had a million dollars in your estate, and you wanted to give it to your kid."

Horrified, she said, "I wouldn't do that!"

I asked, "Would you just give it to them when they turned 18, or would you make them earn it?"

"Earn it!" she said firmly. Then she added, "I don't think I'd even tell them I had it. I wouldn't want them to be spoiled."

"Great," I said, and then related the example back to her character and why an unearned reward did nothing for him. The discussion of earning vs. rewards continued, and we meandered into politics, partly because she had a utopia she wanted to include in her story.

"I'm very concerned about social justice lately," she said. "I just saw the Michael Moore movie, Capitalism: A Love Story." Rolling my eyes, I let her continue. "I don't think capitalism works."

There after followed a five-minute explanation of her feelings regarding the homeless, how they needed "dignity" and shouldn't be thrown out on the street. "They should have the basics: food, shelter, dignity." Dignity was a big thing with her. But she didn't want to talk or think about "rich or poor" or where the money would come from--you know: the actual cost of feeding the welfare state. She just wanted people to have enough money or possessions at the end of life to have dignity. This was the same person who didn't want to tell her own child that she had a million bucks, but she was willing to do whatever it took for social justice to prevail. I didn't have time to ask her these questions, but I couldn't help wondering afterward:

  • If fictional characters or your own kids learn and value something earned more than something given to them, why wouldn't the total strangers you want to supply with "dignity?"
  • If you wouldn't give your own kid $1M without them earning it (if then), why would you expect rich strangers in this country to give other total strangers enough money to have "dignity" at the end of their lives?
  • How much should "dignity" cost, anyway?
  • If you're so protective of your theoretical million dollars, why are "the rich" or "big businesses" greedy and evil for being the same way?
  • Has it occurred to you that religion--which is increasingly being driven out of the public sphere--once drove the rich and poor alike to engage in private charitable giving before the government started taking more and more for the welfare and doing the giving for them?

I did ask her this: "If people get more satisfaction from earning and earning comes mostly from (private-sector) jobs, why shouldn't entrepreneurs and businesses be allowed to keep more of their money so they can hire more people?"

"They need to pay more taxes to pay for the social safety net."

I said, "They are, and so am I. The president thinks the way you do, and is raising taxes. As a result, businesses don't have as much money to hire more people. That's why unemployment is nearly 10 percent."

She shook her head in disbelief. "I don't think so. They're just cutting jobs to raise profits."

Great googily moogily! How do you argue with someone who has swallowed anti-economic thinking whole? Does she not understand that money that could have been spent on creating more goods and services (and thus jobs) is now diverted to unproductive activities like taxes and lawyers to cover their butts in the face of new regulations? Obviously not.

This is not just a gap in philosophy, it's a gap in fundamental knowledge, possibly willful, possibly not, but it illustrates dramatically why the political classes and the people they purport to represent are increasingly talking past each other. Wow. There's some real food for thought.

Saturday, May 16, 2009

New Links of Interest

I decided to include some links for organizations and causes that are important to me. The space exploration stuff is a given, but other causes have come my way through the work I do or the people I meet or, alas, the experiences I've had.

Far be it for me to force a cause on somebody (I'm not a very good activist, even for the space cause), but I would ask that if you can afford to surf the internet and read this site, you consider giving money to a cause that does good for the world, however you define the good. Every donation does count, and helps you take some sort of direct action that you might not otherwise be able to do. Not being a doctor, for instance, it's quite beyond my bounds to help with my various medical causes; but I can at least send my financial support.

And on a purely political note, I believe more gets done more effectively and virtuously if compassionate individuals are allowed to select where their personal treasure is given than if the government does it. Doing things on an individual basis gives you more "ownership" of a cause and ensures that your personal choices are better reflected in what things are done. In 2006, despite massive welfare and other government programs that were paid directly by our taxes, individuals still gave $295 billion in charitable donations. Imagine how much more could be given to specific causes if we had more say about where our money went!