Jeff Bezos stands amongst the rest of
billionaires by being the richest man of the world. He has net worth has
increased during COVID-19 despite it potentially being the worst economic
downfall since the Great Depression (https://finance.yahoo.com/news/jeff-bezos-net-worth-increased-220001911.html). He is not known for
his philanthropic contributions. He received criticism earlier this year for
his contribution to the aid the Australian Bush fires. Bezos is not as astute
at giving as other corporations and billionaires such as Bill Gates, Mark
Zuckerburg, Warren Buffet, etc. We have celebrated their contributions to
philanthropy. Zuckerburg started an initiative, Giving Pledge that billionaires
make a moral pledge to donate a large portion of their billions to charity. The
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation receives high praise. Despite, its origin is
a way to work around anti-trust laws. At one point, people wanted Zuckerburg
for president. In light of all of his bad press, no one can really share in
this sentiment. Are these individuals any better than Bezos or have they just
invested more into their public image?
In Aanad Giridharada’s book, Winners Take All:
The Elite Charade of Changing the World, he criticizes the work of the wealthy.
They are not “change-agents” at all they make change in only a certain way that
promotes the status quo. As they are the ones that have the most to gain from
it, the inherent inequality in society that is shrouded as the American Dream.
Are the rich really doing enough when it is so easy to contribute? Considering
the ideas of the New Gospel Wealth and Aanad’s teachings, I would say no. These
charitable donations don’t reach the heart of the systemic inequality that they
profit the most from.
Society as a whole has fallen for philanthrocapitolism, performing philanthropic acts that mirror the business environment. Make no mistake that CEOs and corporations themselves benefit the most from corporate social responsibility (CSR). There is a fine line between “extraordinary helping and extraordinary hoarding” (https://www.philanthropy.com/article/The-Rich-Might-Not-Be-Great-at/244378). Philanthropists utilize predatory business practices to amass their sums. Philanthropy serves as a way for CEOs to look good while not doing much good in reality. They do this without any sacrifice of profit, allow for corporate malpractice to be forgotten by the American public. Boardrooms maybe inclined to be extra ruthless, strategic donations for tax breaks, improved stock performance contributed to positive perception.(https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/may/24/the-trouble-with-charitable-billionaires-philanthrocapitalism).Overall, the benefit of being seen as a philanthropist rather than an Executive making billions on the average person’s suffering. Is there money doing the most good for our society?
Bridget Flynn
Given COVID-19 this was an extremely timely topic to pick—it seems impossible to go on any form of social media and not hear about the wealth divide and billionaires. Forbes magazine has even started a billionaire tracker to see what philanthropy the world’s richest are taking part in in response to the virus (https://www.forbes.com/sites/hayleycuccinello/2020/03/17/billionaire-tracker-covid-19/#469ec6f87e69).
ReplyDeleteHowever miraculous some of their donations appear to be—such as the money Lady Gaga raised, accepting donations only from her wealthy friends—there is a corrupt system that the billionaires are exploiting behind the scenes of the philanthropic actions they perform. American billionaires have profited from the pandemic, with their combined wealth totaling $282 billion more than it was entering March (https://www.fastcompany.com/90494347/american-billionaires-have-gotten-280-billion-richer-since-the-start-of-the-covid-19-pandemic?ref=hvper.com). Of course, people are praising the philanthropic donations they make which is barely a drop in the bucket while they amass wealth behind the scenes.
I agree with Bridget that philanthropy is a business decision rather than a moral one. Philanthropists become philanthropists to aid their public image mainly, even if they also care about the causes they advocate for. And, as Bridget said, society has fallen for the act. The wealth that they have is not being used for the betterment of society, and it is probably time for that to change.
Sabrina Reba
You make some interesting points here! I especially liked your question about whether billionaires with reputations as philanthropists are actually better people than billionaires with bad reputations as ruthless and greedy executives. I think the answer here is multi-layered. It is possible, even if it's uncommon, to become fabulously wealthy without engaging in shady or immoral acts. In theory, it's possible to beat your competitors solely off the merit of your ideas, business savvy, and hard work. It's possible to hire employees without grossly underpaying them, or cutting their benefits. It's possible to rise to societal power without abusing that power. In theory, the road to wealth can be an ethical one. However, I think that once someone has traveled along that road for long enough to have made a billion dollars, and chooses to keep going down that to make even more money, they are no longer a good and moral person, however uncontroversial their path to wealth was. In my opinion, a billion dollars is such an obscene amount of money, so far beyond what any human being could possibly need to be able to live a happy and comfortable life, that it's impossible for a person with sound morals to make that much money, keep it, and strive to make more, when people are suffering below the poverty line around them. So I believe that even the condition of having a billion dollars automatically makes someone a bad person, no matter how many tiny fractions of their wealth they donate to make themselves look good.
ReplyDelete(It's worth noting that not all philanthropists just donate tiny fractions of their wealth. Jack Dorsey, CEO of Twitter, just donated $1 billion, or about 28% of his entire net worth, to fund COVID-19 relief efforts (https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/7/21212766/jack-dorsey-coronavirus-covid-19-donate-relief-fund-square-twitter). This is incredibly commendable, but a rare exception in the size of most billionaire donations.)
I could not agree with you more that the ultra wealthy are not doing enough in terms of their donations, because their ability to hoard their wealth without regulation and be fondly recognized for "donating" their money works in their favor, while leaving the working and middle classes to suffer. I also like that Hannah's bold statement above: billionaires are practically automatically live in error and lack good judgement, being blinded by greed, selfishness, and the illusion that money brings wealth. There are also studies and scientific evidence hypothesizing that the accumulation of wealth causes a person's empathetic nature to diminish. Although I think those that hoard wealth have great error in their ways, it is hard for me not to try to understand and empathize why they prioritize their own lives selfishly, as we live in an individualistic society that promotes doing what will make you financially stable in every aspect of life. The ability to empathize with that, though, does not dismiss the harmful error of their ways or the continual suffering of those of lower socioeconomic status.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sabrina, that is it time for change. I think the circumstances COVID-19 has brought upon us has exacerbated the harm and errors of late-stage capitalism, and many people are now realizing this. But the question remains: How can change happen? I don't believe that reform within our current political and economic structures will bring about the radical changes that must be made. The circumstances we are in has inflamed the subsequent anger and resentment that the working and middle class feel, which has historically been the seeds of revolution. Is there enough outrage to incite this revolution? Is it already coming?
(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1950124/)
Hi Bridget!
ReplyDeleteI actually really admire the Gates family ways of giving in light of philanthropy. In their Ted Talk we watched earlier on in the semester “Why Giving Away Our Wealth Has Been The Most Satisfying Thing We Have Ever Done”, they talked about how they have taught their children about money and giving. Most importantly they stated that they wanted their children to work hard for their success, and not just receive their parents enormous wealth with little to no work involved. In addition to that, they brought up the idea of how to look at organizations before giving to them. They wanted people to fully understand and research everything about the organization before giving away money to them. There are good and bad organizations to give to, and the Gates couple wanted people to do their research before giving away money. While I agree that many of the billionaires and participants in big philanthropy tend to give to certain organizations to boost their public image, I believe that most of them do have good intentions, otherwise they would not be giving away their money in the first place.
At the beginning of this course I didn’t understand the importance of doing my homework on the organizations I want to give to. After listening to many of my classmates charity pitches, reading about different organizations and their role in society, it has allowed me to realize the importance of truly understanding everything about an organization before donating to them.
An article that allows for more discussion on the topic of research before giving the article, Before Giving to a Charity (https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0074-giving-charity) outlines reasons you should reflect on before giving, not giving in to the calls or propaganda posted about different organizations, the possibility for sham organizations and the befores, durings, and afters of giving that occur to someone. I thought this article helped solidify the notion that you should do your homework before giving. Homework is bothersome, but it helps us in the long run :)
- Elly
Yes, I agree with what you have said about some forms of selfish philanthropy. But the truth is, we really don't know for sure which philanthropists are selfish and which are not. However, I want to point out that the origin of philanthropy is inherently good. As Andrew Carnegie pointed out in "The Gospel Of Wealth," the rich should NOT become philanthropists because they want to be applauded or given tax cuts. Instead, they should become philanthropists because they can afford to, and therefore, it is their responsibility to give back. I think that it is unfair to say that all philanthropists have evil intentions. For example, in the midst of COVID-19, Mario Salerno, a Brooklyn Landlord, canceled rent for his tenants across 18 buildings (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/03/nyregion/coronavirus-nyc-landlord-mario-salerno.html). I'm sure that he did not do this for selfish purposes. Another example is Jose Andres, the Spanish chef who founded World Central Kitchen, "a non-profit devoted to providing meals in the wake of natural disasters" (https://wck.org/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIjIOKxeqL6QIVB8DICh3kaQoqEAAYASAAEgLuEvD_BwE). I think that it is important to recognize that in a time of crisis like this one, philanthropy is at it's peak because it is our moral obligation to assist our struggling communities.
ReplyDeleteNice post, I remember talking about these ideas earlier in the semester. I think the Bezos Australia example was a perfect way to begin this post, as it sums up everything about the argument. The interconnection of big business and philanthropy is one that will always exist, as morally, people tend to believe that billionaires should donate large amounts of their money. Morally, it makes sense to me - you make more, you have a surplus, so why not donate to a good cause while you can. It’ll most likely just be a drop in the bucket, when most people can’t even imagine donating such a quantity. Overall, billionaires have most likely worked pretty hard to get into the positions in which they are in, and I believe that it is their right to handle the money in the ways in which they do. In a philanthropic sense, I do in a way see them as having more responsibility to donate if they’d like to, as they have great opportunities with the potential difference they could create. However, we all have great opportunities to be an effective philanthropist no matter the amount, as we’ve learned how philanthropy is not all about money.
ReplyDeleteI also liked how you touched on corporate social responsibility, as it can be part of the motivation for donations, making business look favorable to the public. I thought the idea that you pointed out about how “there is a fine line between “extraordinary helping and extraordinary hoarding”, was important to include as well. A world in which all businesses took initiative to delve deep into the philanthropic world and find meaningful, helpful places to donate would look even better for CSR, and make more of an impact.
Bridget,
ReplyDeleteI agree that billionaires use philanthropy as a tool to placate the masses while obscuring their true motives. The divide between the ultra rich and the rest of the population continues to grow wider, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. This crisis has truly shown us where our government's priorities lie, and spoiler alert, we are not the priority. This can be seen in the massive bailouts Trump has given to corporations. Because really, they're the ones suffering the most during this pandemic, not the millions of now unemployed Americans who are unable to feed their families. During this time, the top one percent of the country has amassed an additional $308 billion while 26 million Americans have lost their jobs. Taking advantage of loop holes in Trump's $349 billion dollar bail out, billionaires and corporations managed to steal the overwhelming majority of this money that was meant to save small businesses. However, this is not reported on major news sources. Instead, the media praises the charitable donations made by these individuals to help the American population during this crisis. The system is broken, and philanthropy has been corrupted to make sure the table stays tilted towards the rich.
-Ryan Marrone
Hi Bridget! I really liked your post. The points you made about philanthrocapitalism are so true, and I will definitely be adding that word to my vocabulary. I found this question particularly interesting: "Are [Buffet, Gates, and Zuckerberg] any better than Bezos?" Personally, I think if there was a scale of goodness for everyone in the world, it might look like all the billionaires were right on top of each other somewhere at the bottom of the list. But if we zoomed in, could we see differences in their goodness levels? I can't help but innately feel that Bezos is worse than the others. This stems from a couple things. For one, he is THE richest by billions more than the second richest. To me this means that he has been even more exploitative of the system and of people in order to make so much, as evidenced from the horror stories coming from employees at his Amazon warehouses. It also means that, as you said, he donates the least of his wealth to philanthropic causes.
ReplyDeleteThis is where I get stuck. I agree with you that philanthropy in any form can reproduce the structures of capitalism and allow the problems it addresses to continue to exist. If addressing societal problems from their roots is the best solution, why do I still think that some "Band-Aid" philanthropy is better than none at all? By asking us if these other billionaire philanthropists are "just invested more into their public image?" you have made me seriously reconsider how I view them. Maybe they are all equally bad and I have been swindled by their philanthropy, just as they hoped. Or, it's not even constructive to consider who's best and worst in the first place since they all clump together at the bad end of the scale.
I wonder how this understanding can affect how we respond to billionaires. If we disagree with the philanthrocapitalist system as a whole, why do we criticize Bezos for not donating more to Australia after their fires? There's no amount of money that's "enough." The best way to address the issue is not through the billionaires but through our governments and the laws that regulate people who become ultra-rich. But is it worth accepting the Band-Aids and asking for more Band-Aids in the meantime?
Hi Bridget,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your perspective on the relationship between billionaires and philanthropy. I agree with you that often times billionaires are not doing everything in their power to give back to the community, and that unfortunately, the intentions may be receiving tax breaks or improving a public image. However, I believe we cannot group all billionaires under this category and force them under scrutiny. While I agree with the Gospel of Wealth that billionaires have the ability to make great change, I do not agree that it is their obligation. While it is heavily suggested, I believe they are like us, and should thus be held to similar standards. This can be translated to philanthropic efforts, as they may donate to wherever they deem fit their core values the best, even if that does not align with the needs of the community the most. I do agree that billionaires who are donating with ill intentions should not be applauded. However, the wealthy like Bill and Melinda Gates are utilizing their resources to help deal with COVID-19 along with other significant global issues. Furthermore, I would like to highlight that the inequality gap between the rich and poor is significant, and everyone must take an initiative to improve living standards for all, not only billionaires.
I agree with Arpeet, why are we separating ourselves from the wealthy elite? Weren’t they once, “comfortably middle class,” like so many of us? Donations are choices that people make and some people’s moral codes are steely enough to influence those choices; they don’t have to be philanthropic. If billionaires are just as fallible as the rest of us, why are they held to a higher standard? We are pointing that pressure toward them as some kind of retribution for the unjust capitalist game that they are winning at. I think wealthy people and their financial allocations are only as bad as we make them out to be. Take Bernie Sanders: likeable, clearly advocates well for his supporters, millionaire. But, it’s the way that he gathered that money and allocated it— through small donations and reinvesting into his campaign. How much different is that from Jeff Bezos? He gains small accumulations of wealth through people investing in Amazon, whether through placing orders or buying stock, and then reinvests into his company (a little more indirectly though because of a bunch of unnecessary investment jargon). We choose to support both in order to get a return on investment, one physical and one ideological. Both are contributing to American society and its place in the global pantheon, but we only discriminate between the two because we see that ideology as more altruistic than that package. So, I want to implore everyone to introspect to see whether that distinction is one of personal core value rather than overarching morality or “goodness.”
ReplyDeleteHey Bridget I really liked your post! When we see things like billionaires donating huge sums to foundations or for certain causes, our initial gut reaction is to praise them for using their massive amount of money for the greater good. However, as you pointed out these might not actually be their true motivations. Like the Sacklers, they could be doing it to make their public image better or even as a way to dodge taxes and laws, like you pointed out with the Bill and Melinda Gates example. I don't think all billionaire philanthropy is by nature selfish and exploitative, but I think there are a lot of important nuances people don't see that you correctly point out. Finally, your example of Jeff Bezos is particularly timely and demonstrates your point perfectly. Bezos is the richest man in the world, but can't give his workers hazard pay or protection during the pandemic. His wealth even increased by a huge amount during the crisis. Overall, I think your post was very insightful and its imperative that we look at not only their philanthropy closely, but the actions of billionaires in their business must be scrutinized.
ReplyDelete