Is Billionaire Philanthropy a Sham? Robert Reich

[Uncle Joe]

[exboyfil]

1. In many cases it is just another way for an individual

to extend his or her influence. The tax exemptions means that the ego of the philanthropist directs the social benefit vs. the people through their legislatures.

[appalachiablue]

2. Samo, thanks for posting.

[poli-junkie]

4. There should be no billionaires. nt

[jaxexpat]

6. Very very good. There should be no billionaires.

I'll add a caveat as well. There should be no billionaires or even millionaires whose current net worth can be attributed to inherited wealth. No good comes from them and they're poor examples when held aloft for the edification of our youth.
Let us acknowledge the fact that all men are only as worthy as their contribution to the common wealth, to each other, their vote. The national pantry, provisions from which we share.

[Doc Sportello]

5. Carnegie and John D Rockefeller started this to rehabilitate their images

They were viewed by the public at large as villains (for good reason) at the time and as they were aging didn't want things like using children as near slave workers and being called heartless robber barons as their legacy. So Carnegie started building libraries and Rockefeller hired a PR firm that advised him to start giving money away. He appeared in early films at the time showering people with money and got widely reported for his charitable gifts. It worked as it changed the view of him for many Americans. So their crimes are forgiven and it goes on today.

[poli-junkie]

7. You'll See David Koch Foundation listed in art funds and on PBS.

It's just cover for their evil deeds.