Fake Generosity

I really would like to be able to help the homeless, the sick and the needy, but I just can't. I don't have the money nor the organizational talents to make a dent in those huge social problems.

I'm just yelling about it on the sidelines; that's about how much I think I'm able to do, which isn't much, and can even come across as slightly hypocritical. The way to remedy this is to become rich and powerful. Maybe, if by some miracle, I win the lottery, maybe then I could make a difference...

And that's where this train of thought should stop. Unfortunately this is how we view and experience charity; if I want to be generous and help the less fortunate, I will have to become rich first, because how could I donate to or invest in the poor and needy without having the money to do so? This is the wrong way to approach this, I think. In the public eye the biggest philanthropists are the wealthy elite; we're regularly treated to some billionaire in the news who gives away billions of dollars to some charity of his or her choosing. It re-enforces the idea that rich people are good people and that there's nothing wrong with earning insane amounts of money, like more than a million dollar per minute. Many people think it's necessary even, because without billions to give away, those poor schools, hospitals and relief funds would never see the light of day.

In the discussion linked below this article, journalist and writer Anand Giridharadas (yep, I stopped trying to pronounce that), gives the example of San Francisco, the city and the five counties around it, in the United States. He says there's approximately 7400 homeless people there, living right next to 74 billionaires, so 100 homeless people per billionaire. If it was a country, it would be ranked ninth in the world for billionaire population. Like Anand says, it is simply astonishing that such a situation can even exist. What's worse even, is that these billionaires own the companies that refuse to pay their workers a living wage, but hire lawyers to figure out the best ways to evade paying taxes and ship their money elsewhere.

Of course these elites will jump at any chance they get to appear having concern for the less fortunate in the world; it's a chance for them to look good, to guard the status quo. They won't look at the causes of poverty, because that would mean changing the system that got them to their privileged positions. So, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Bono won't bring the change we need to structurally solve our problems, instead they'll look nice into the camera when they swear they "want to give back" some of their fortune to the people they stole from in the first place.

Also, this policy of letting rich people decide which charities should and shouldn't be supported, gives them even more power than they already have. As Anand rightly points out, donating is a form of power exertion. I would like to add that it also degrades the receivers of donations, in the sense that they are supposed to be grateful for any aid they get, when in fact they should ask questions instead of saying "thanks".

The dominant neoliberal politics that have reigned supreme since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 have taken us in a direction of endless tax-cuts for the rich and the producers, with the fable of "trickle-down economics" as an excuse, and the constant warnings of not taxing the rich too much because else they might not produce anymore jobs... I hope I don't have to explain why this is a fable, and that we all see with our own eyes that the rich have been getting richer, while moving the jobs to countries where wages are still low. The wealth inequality today is worse than during the heydays of the Roman Empire.

The everlasting tax-cuts for the rich, coupled with their uncanny ability to hire whole teams of lawyers to figure out to avoid paying what little taxes they still have to pay, has resulted in a top 1% that's insanely rich. Corporations operate under a singular goal, which is to maximize profits for their shareholders, which has resulted in the one-sided affair of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer; the nature of the capitalist ideology itself rewards selfishness and greed, so all wealth lands in the laps of the greedy, it's really that simple. To bring back justice and balance capitalism necessitates heavy re-distribution of wealth. But that's a taboo, wealth redistribution is for communists, right?

Wrong. It was a breath of fresh air when during the 2019 World Economic Forum, Dutch historian Rutger Bregman reminded us where the real problem lies, namely that the wealthy don't pay their fair share of taxes. He reminded us that during America's biggest growth period, during the 1950s, the top tax rate was more than 90%; billionaires paid 90 cents on the dollar. For years this rate was maintained at 70%, until Reagan put an end to it and started calling the government "the problem"... That discussion is linked above for your enjoyment; please do watch it if you haven't already seen it.

In conversations about taxing the rich, their fake generosity is always used as a secondary defense against raising their taxes; taxing the rich is dangerous, so it's argued, because they would stop investing in new jobs, and also look at how much good they do with their money! Well, if they wouldn't have so much of it in the first place, more would be left for the rest of us to democratically decide what to invest in, like universal healthcare or free education. I found the entire conversation with Anand very interesting; it's an hour long, so if you're gonna watch it make sure to have you favorite beverage at hand:

Thanks so much for visiting my blog and reading my posts dear reader, I appreciate that a lot :-) If you like my content, please consider leaving a comment, upvote or resteem. I'll be back here tomorrow and sincerely hope you'll join me. Until then, stay safe, stay healthy!