It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
And my point was that I'm annoyed - not that there should be a "rule" change.
The Charity shouldn't fix state problems issue is one I'm very familiar with - legal aid work. Many legal aid lawyers earn so little they are themselves eligible for legal aid, but still do a huge amount of work pro-bono because otherwise people are unrepresented. If that stopped over night the system would completely collapse.
https://soundcertified.com/speaker-ohms-calculator/
If Google and Apple put their $250 billion dollars together and spend it on wiping out global starvation and providing everyone with clean water, they'd have no money to operate their businesses and would go bankrupt.
So now they've eliminated global starvation and they're gone. But Poverty is a systemic problem of cultures, human nature, economic systems, poor governance etc, and we haven't changed that system. So poverty will return. Giving people a route out of poverty is about a lot more than spending money on them. It's about giving people an environment where they can succeed, and then equipping them with the skills and attitudes that let them.
And ironically, smartphones and internet access are part of that solution.
Bandcamp
Spotify, Apple et al
Seeing Notre Dame damaged like this brought back a lot of memories and really knocked me back. I really hope it can be restored.
Having said that, the discussion on billionaires finding a few hundred million in their back pocket to fix Notre Dame does make me wonder about priorities. Having lived there I am certain that money could be used better to help people living in poverty.
Free choice I suppose. Wouldn’t be my choice though.
Bandcamp
Spotify, Apple et al
Yeah, I know. You raise an interesting argument, worth discussion. Could the world's ills be partly solved/assuaged by more philanthropy? Probably, maybe.
And yes, the contrast is stark: how overnight almost a billion euros can appear to rebuild something physical, as opposed to pouring it into say the homeless problem. A problem that I would argue is more important to a society, but that is only my opinion.
But, I think that solving social problems is the responsibility of all of us, spear headed by a government that represents us and has the infrastructure and ability to tackle it properly, for the duration, not just the emotive short haul.
Whilst I have massive respect for charities, and anyone who supports them, including pro bono work etc, I don't think its the answer. It probably makes the problem worse in the long term: it keeps problems (sort of) at arm's length from the powers that be. By helping out, a charity almost dulls down an issue, so it's not as sharp and in the face urgent where government is concerned.
One example that is at the forefront of my thinking here is cancer research. They do amazing work, and fund truly life saving developmental treatments and units. But it is simply appalling that this has to be funded by charity.
Why should a hospital need to become a registered charity to fund themselves? The more you think about that, the more disgusting it is.
the charity element of this is taking the problem away from those who should be paying for it- the government through our taxes.
/ranting yes, I know!!
Shame to see a nice old building burn, but provided it's restored well no reason it shouldn't stand for several hundred more years
The rest was fine though.
The Catholic church is a massively wealthy organisation and could have easily funded the repairs themselves, so it does make you wonder why these billionaires rushed to donate so quickly. I’m going to ponder this whilst wearing my new Notre Dame edition Gucci sliders.
Feedback
I'm not locked in here with you, you are locked in here with me.
anyone ?
No?
I wonder why that is.