The elite super wealthy and social justice

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bill_7154
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
its pretty hard to get the financial records of poor people also,as it should be.
But that surely was not the jist of my OP. The jist of it was what do people think the super elite should pay towards charity.

And another side topic that is quite interesting was also raised by another poster recently as well.
 
Yes, they have a moral responsibility to care for their less fortunate neighbours.

However, it is an incredibly dangerous precident to demand they pay.

I mean, on a global scale, if you’re sitting in front of a computer, with food in yoru fridge, a roof over your head, warm clothes et cetera, you’re richer than 90 odd % of the global population.

How comfortable would we feel in the west if those in 3rd world countries started demanding we assist them more?

We have free will. God will judge us for the choices we made with our own personal wealth, great or small.
 
The Church teaches the rule of subsidierity. While she may encourage a tithe or generous offering, The Church would respect the individual uber rich persons right to decide what to do with their own money. The Church would encourage that person to seek God’s leading in the matter of how to be a good steward of their wealth.👍
 
I will pass on speculating as to whether the OP was actually trying to be nosy about other people’s spending habits. I think he may have been focused on the theology of giving, which is a valid discussion point. I actually do think that Catholic moral theology compels sincere effort toward some kind of giving – yes, proportional to one’s ability to give, and without jeopardy to one’s primary responsibilites.

One should only give of one’s own abundance, i.m.o., not sacrificing needs (as opposed to inessential wants) of one’s dependents on account of the needs of strangers. I do not believe that masochism is holy; I never have. I think teaching proportionality to one’s children, teaching restraint (and practicing it oneself) is a Catholic moral value and a gospel value. So (for example), getting one’s children (and us parents!) involved in family discussions about what they think they (and we) could do without, so as to have something for some single charitable cause (or a known needy family) which means something to one’s family, is a good practice.

I agree that it is no one’s business what others do with their money (as long as it’s legal and is not violating anyone’s human rights), but I don’t think that discussion was the OP’s point.

I will just personally say that I have no admiration for Bill Gates or for Warren Buffet. Neither do I loathe them; I’m just not an idolizer of the rich for their wealth per se. I admire accomplishment, whether or not that results in wealth. I think the country as a whole way over-values the “mystique” of the wealthy, as if it’s virtuous to be wealthy. Neither is honest wealth to be condemned. It’s morally neutral to be wealthy. It’s one’s attitude toward wealth, and one’s use of it, that is the measure of whether one over-identifies with it, and whether it is merely a never-ending pursuit.

I do not think Bill Gates has a good grasp of how to use money charitably. (This has been observed by many others in the media.) I have never been impressed with him – which again, does not mean that I particularly dislike him. Very few wealthy people have impressed me as having solid or deep values (by what they say, and how they spend their time & money), especially not the Nouveaux Riches. OTOH, those who have either inherited their wealth or acquired it honestly and not out of exploitation of others, are fully entitled to it, i.m.o, without judgmentalism or resentment by others.

I do think (I think either the OP or someone else hinted at this) that it would make an excellent thread-starter to inquire about how one would use unexpectedly acquired personal wealth in a social justice way. (To relieve suffering and to provide opportunity.)
 
However, it is an incredibly dangerous precident to demand they pay.

.
Who is doing that? This is the 2nd time in this thread it has either been suggested or outright stated that this is somehow connected to my OP. When it is clearly NOT.
 
The Church teaches the rule of subsidierity. While she may encourage a tithe or generous offering, The Church would respect the individual uber rich persons right to decide what to do with their own money. The Church would encourage that person to seek God’s leading in the matter of how to be a good steward of their wealth.👍
Isn’t this different than one or more passages from the Bible?
 
I agree that it is no one’s business what others do with their money (as long as it’s legal and is not violating anyone’s human rights), but I don’t think that discussion was the OP’s point.
Of course it wasn’t. I challenge anyone to find any post where I take the position of usurping others money for whatever purpose.

I was simply opening up a discussion about charity and super wealthy people. No one seems to have a problem discussing super poor people and how they spend their time and money.

Again, in a Catholic forum, I find that quite odd.
 
Of course it wasn’t. I challenge anyone to find any post where I take the position of usurping others money for whatever purpose.
I’m not sure why you’re being pugnacious about this. You took my quote out of context, from my longer post in which I defended you. The comment I made was in response to others, not to you. Did you not notice that I referred to you in the 3rd person, not the 2nd?
I was simply opening up a discussion about charity and super wealthy people. No one seems to have a problem discussing super poor people and how they spend their time and money…I find that quite odd.
I find it odd that you chose to ignore my support for the idea of bringing up the responsibility of the rich toward the poor.

You don’t seem to recognize when or where others support you. So, since I don’t like being required to be on the other side of an argument (when I’m not), I’ll leave now.
🤷
 
MSNBC website today;

A new study from Spectrem Group, a Lake Forest, Ill.-based research group, shows that people with a net worth of $25 millionspend far more on vacations and home renovations than they do on clothing, cars, and jewelry.

The survey showed that nearly half ofthe respondents spent more than $25,000 a year on vacations or leisure travel. More than a third spent more than $25,000 on home improvements. Vacations and home improvement were among the top categories for the
 
MSNBC website today;

A new study from Spectrem Group, a Lake Forest, Ill.-based research group, shows that people with a net worth of $25 millionspend far more on vacations and home renovations than they do on clothing, cars, and jewelry.

The survey showed that nearly half ofthe respondents spent more than $25,000 a year on vacations or leisure travel. More than a third spent more than $25,000 on home improvements. Vacations and home improvement were among the top categories for the
Who benefits when the wealthy spend money on vacations?
 
Who benefits when the wealthy spend money on vacations?
People who have jobs at the hotels, restaurants, airlines, taxis, etc. Some poor countries really support themselves by tourism.
 
No matter what whether a rich man spends his money on charity or on a new yacht, that money will eventually wind up in the hands of poor man.

Take the case of the greedy atheist multi-billionaire. Who decides to dump 300 million on a new Yacht so he can selfishly sail the seven seas. Nowhere does that money wind up in the hands of the poor beggar on the street…however that yacht requires materials to build and builders to build it. The more resources and builders needed to build the yacht for Mr. Avarice will eventually cause the Shipwright, or the Lumber Mill man, or the Electronics maker, or the Carpet maker, or the Logging camp man or the miner to have to hire someone new to meet the demand.

So now the poor beggar has an opportunity to get a job and no longer be poor, but let’s assume the poor beggar is crippled and cannot do such work, once again Mr. Avarice’s dollar does not reach the poor man.

However a carpenter of the Shipwright, just one of the millions of employees who worked on the Yacht is a church-goer and on Sunday— after getting paid on Friday —gave 10% of her income to the church…still the poor beggar is without aid.

However the next day the poor beggar walks into a shelter operated by the church and because of Ms. Carpenter’s tithe from her income supplied by the Shipwright, that was funded by Mr. Avarice’s purchase…the church was able to purchase more food and supplies so the poor beggar can have a hot meal and a warm bed to sleep for tonight.

The point I make of this, is that yes regardless if Mr. Billionaire doesn’t give a dime to the poor, if he does business with someone who is a charitable person…they will give Mr. Billionaire’s money to the poor. I think that everyone should try and give whatever they can. I don’t see charity as a financial issue (ie if you are super doper rich you must give x-amount of dollars to A, B, and C) but more of an issue of conscience (ie Do not ignore giving aid to those crying out in need).
 
No matter what whether a rich man spends his money on charity or on a new yacht, that money will eventually wind up in the hands of poor man.

Take the case of the greedy atheist multi-billionaire. Who decides to dump 300 million on a new Yacht so he can selfishly sail the seven seas. Nowhere does that money wind up in the hands of the poor beggar on the street…however that yacht requires materials to build and builders to build it. The more resources and builders needed to build the yacht for Mr. Avarice will eventually cause the Shipwright, or the Lumber Mill man, or the Electronics maker, or the Carpet maker, or the Logging camp man or the miner to have to hire someone new to meet the demand.

So now the poor beggar has an opportunity to get a job and no longer be poor, but let’s assume the poor beggar is crippled and cannot do such work, once again Mr. Avarice’s dollar does not reach the poor man.

However a carpenter of the Shipwright, just one of the millions of employees who worked on the Yacht is a church-goer and on Sunday— after getting paid on Friday —gave 10% of her income to the church…still the poor beggar is without aid.

However the next day the poor beggar walks into a shelter operated by the church and because of Ms. Carpenter’s tithe from her income supplied by the Shipwright, that was funded by Mr. Avarice’s purchase…the church was able to purchase more food and supplies so the poor beggar can have a hot meal and a warm bed to sleep for tonight.

The point I make of this, is that yes regardless if Mr. Billionaire doesn’t give a dime to the poor, if he does business with someone who is a charitable person…they will give Mr. Billionaire’s money to the poor. I think that everyone should try and give whatever they can. I don’t see charity as a financial issue (ie if you are super doper rich you must give x-amount of dollars to A, B, and C) but more of an issue of conscience (ie Do not ignore giving aid to those crying out in need).
Now all you have to do is prove that the billionaires do business with charitible people and not selfish people or your post is worthless hypotheticals.
 
you have a lot of time on your hands.
You know, another way to look at that example would be when say 10 billionaires each buy a 50 million dollar painting off of 10 other billionaires… and the guy who builds the wooden crates that the paintings are shipped in donates to charity… so that he gives 10% of his income to charity…and all is well in the world… such a charming way to characterize charitible giving when speaking about billionaires, isn’t it?
 
whatever anyone else does or does not donate is not my concern. No one should be made to donate any amount. Jesus neither forced, nor advocated the use of force or any other type of coercion, including by any government or religious group or institution, for anyone to donate any amount. As far as the “super rich” are concerned, the standards are the same for them as anyone else.
 
I find this whole thread rather disturbing and somewhat voyeuristic (for lack of a better word)
Of course it wasn’t. I challenge anyone to find any post where I take the position of usurping others money for whatever purpose.

I was simply opening up a discussion about charity and super wealthy people. No one seems to have a problem discussing super poor people and how they spend their time and money.

Again, in a Catholic forum, I find that quite odd.
Actually, you did more than this.

You made claims about the super-wealthy that are typically false:
Let’s face it, people with this kind of money don’t get it through income that is taxable via federal income tax. Their wealth, and increases in such, are obtained through ownership (land, companies).
Wealth obtained through ownership is certainly taxable via federal income tax.

You seem to be making assumptions the super wealthy do not give to charitable causes:
I suppose it’s nice to hear that someone donated 10 million to such and such a cause, but if the person is worth 2 billion dollars 10 million is possibly a very small percentage of what their overall increase in wealth was on that given year.
or this
If someone is worth 500 million, increases their wealth by 50 million that year, but only takes an ‘income’ subject to ‘income tax’ of 250,000 in the year, is this person doing their duty by donating 25-50K to their church?
You seem to be rather stingy yourself:
The reason I ask is that most of us, should we own houses, etc would (I think) typically not consider a 10% increse in the assessment of the value of the house as ‘income’.
I am sorry, but captical gains is always consider income for many of us non super wealthy. Both for taxes and for determining charitable giving. It might not be for you, but it is for many of us who care about sharing our blessings with others.

Finally you ask for information that is none of your damn business:
Does anyone know if there is a way to determine if any of the extremely wealthy are in fact Catholic and if what they do with their money is made available to the public? I’m curious to know what % of the super wealthy of the world give to the church or to other charities in proportion to what Catholics are told to give to their Church based on their incomes.
But in an effort to satisfy you, I will give you a real life anedoct. I am blessed enough to have been good friends with 3 different individuals who you would qualify as “elite super wealthy”. I say blessed because all three of them are some of the best people I have ever known in my life. They are honest to a fault. They treat employees very fairly. And they are very generous. For example, one of them, who is worth at least 100 million dollars, committed to give over 20% of his money to a third world country in order to build an engineering and science research center (in the hope they could keep talent at home and build their economy) years before he had access to liquid funds even approaching the amount he pledged. Another one of them made a large donation to a large Catholic project, but refused the Bishops direct request to put his name on the project because he wanted to be anonymous. I could give you other anedoctal stories.

I am also fortunate enough to know several other people who would not qualify as your “elite super rich” but are quite well off, none-the-less. These people also tend to fall along the generous side of the spectrum.

My general experience: the generosity of someone has absolutly nothing to do with their net worth. I know people who are poor who are exceeding stingy and who are poor and are exceeding generous. I can say the same about middle class and the same about rich people.

Encourage generosity, but mind your own business and don’t be jealous.
 
You know, another way to look at that example would be when say 10 billionaires each buy a 50 million dollar painting off of 10 other billionaires… and the guy who builds the wooden crates that the paintings are shipped in donates to charity… so that he gives 10% of his income to charity…and all is well in the world… such a charming way to characterize charitible giving when speaking about billionaires, isn’t it?
a whole lotta time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top