3 ms·
This is such a tired and lazy argument. 1) The "easy way" is not the same as the "correct and effective way". 2) He's young, retired, enormously wealthy, and
by mthoms 7y ago
This is such a tired and lazy argument.
1) The "easy way" is not the same as the "correct and effective way".
2) He's young, retired, enormously wealthy, and can do anything he wants. But still donated his time/energy to help educate people about wealth inequality. To you, it may be "just talk" but he's already doing way more than 99.9% of people in his position.
- DamnYuppie 7y agoSo he will preach about wealth inequality but won't go and give his wealth to the poor, but will instead donate his time and energy telling everyone how other wealthy people should pay more.
- about_help 7y agoThat is a poor argument and not even really correct. He is advocating for higher taxes on the wealthy which would indeed take away from his own wealth. You can't expect people to sacrifice themselves completely to help others when the necessary changes are systemic and not individual.
- digitaltrees 7y agoAn individual action is not a solution for a systemic problem. His personal donation will do nothing to solve the problem.
- glofish 7y agoit will show if he is serious about saying it "is not fair" Imagine you are in a position when something happens that you believe is unfair and you have a way to reduce that unfairness, even just a tiny bit. Wouldn't you do it? Would you only write an editorial and not rectify it?
- jjeaff 7y agoDid he say that he doesn't give his wealth to the poor?
- sfj 7y agoHe could easily turn around the lives of hundreds of people without affecting his lifestyle at all. That isn't nothing. It would also lead by example. If others followed him, he would have helped the lives of many times that.