30 December 2007

Super-rich turn their children into philanthropists

I wonder how far this may be a result of the very rich having a sense that the wealth gap, beyond a certain point certainly, tends to breed a sense of just resentment, so the way to try to head that off is to be seen to be doing good. "High-income parents are enrolling their children in philanthropy workshops designed to teach them how to use their wealth to do good. A new generation of philanthropists are being encouraged to imagine ways they would change the world, and consider which charities might benefit from their money."
The issues this generates are worth keeping an eye on in my opinion. One is mentioned in the article: that philanthropy tends to devolve into support of pet projects that emotionally resonate with the givers.
the youngsters' initial charitable instincts were typical of their age: "All they really cared about was battered dogs and saving the whale. Having had the session with NPC they were more interested in things that relate to children, gang violence, things that happen in east London, say, that are visible and concrete for them

This is rather similar to the issue fashionable charity I mentioned a few days back. And I'm not sure that I like the model that potentially social support would be voluntary rather than there being a state dimension: the welfare state at least tries to address social need fairly and broadly not at whims of individual givers which tends not to address underlying causes. My fear is that philanthropy can be an attempt by the rich to buy their way out of the trouble that the underlying system that allows them to gain riches far beyond how hard they work, mainly because they are able to occupy strategic places in the social and economic structures of our society. Taxation is a surer and fairer way of addressing the issues. The rich should regard their tax burden as rent for their occupation of society's strategic positions and for the infrastructure that the majority of us have a hand in providing and maintaining. It is a recognition of reciprocity. Its redistributive potential is also a way to offset the social ills that accumulate with increasing inequality, which a number of studies are now recognising. The rich have a choice, privatisation which will mean increasingly being separated but therefore being increasingly insecure; or seeking the common good by participation in democratically accountable processes around the redistribution of wealth. Philanthropy is part of the package of the former, I fear, when the health of the world requires the latter.
Super-rich turn their children into philanthropists | Money | The Guardian:

No comments:

"Spend and tax" not "tax and spend"

 I got a response from my MP which got me kind of mad. You'll see why as I reproduce it here. Apologies for the strange changes in types...