6 ms·

You gave the money to Louis, he spent it however he felt like, which includes giving to charity. Where's the problem?

swombat 15y ago
You give your son $100 as a birthday present. He spends $20 on himself and throws the rest in the bin. That's his choice, but next time, will you give him money? I wouldn't.
- bsphil 15y ago
  Except that's a terribly inaccurate analogy. This isn't a $5 gift, it's a transaction for a product. He's not throwing away the rest, he's paying bills and donating to charities. How you came up with "throwing $80 in the bin" is beyond me.
  - johnthedebs 15y ago
    Just wanted to add to this (not that it's needed to make the point): Louis C.K. isn't your child.
  - bira 15y ago
    Charity apparently equals to throwing money in the bin, according to his pov.
  - jamesbritt 15y ago
    He's not throwing away the rest, he's paying bills and donating to charities. Indeed, one can think of it just more purchase, only he's buying a better[0] world. [0] Modulo your opinion of those charities.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- mononcqc 15y ago
  Oh yeah that is a completely valid analogy. Here's an equally valid one: you're selling a product and using the money for something I do not agree is worth it (like buying things for yourself instead of giving to charity). I thus decide it would be better to steal the thing you sell and deprive you of the money you ask for it. It's a bad argument based on your personal value of what the other person should be doing with their good that you gave them in order to obtain a product; not as a favour or as a gift.
- ma2rten 15y ago
  There was a study where some students where given varying amounts of money. Half of the students were instructed to spend the money on themselves. The other half was instructed to buy something for a friend or give it to charity. Those who spent it on themselves had the least improvement in happiness - no matter what the amount was. Think about it... maybe Louise CK actually made the best investment he could for his own happiness.
- officemonkey 15y ago
  Do judge all people with what they do with the money they earn, or just famous people? Do you not shop at a store because you've seen the cashier going into a strip club? Isn't it exhausting to be that judgmental?
alextgordon 15y ago
Imagine that Louis takes the $280k and buys a yacht. You may not agree with Louis that a yacht is a particularly worthwhile use of $280k, but the effects of the purchase are localized: Louis gets a yacht, the yacht company gets $280k. Conversely, charities are designed to have broad effects on the world. Often these effects are undeniably good, but not always! Some charities give out bibles, some campaign for the right to abortion, some campaign against abortion, some give food to the poor without regard to local economies, and some campaign for free software. I challenge you to find any one person who agrees with all of these things :) Now, I don't believe that the charities that Louis has chosen are doing bad work! But if you are going to be donating 28% of someone's purchase to charity, it would be courteous to explain, ahead of time, exactly which charities are going to benefit -- because not everybody is going to agree.
- officemonkey 15y ago
  This is a disturbing trend of on-line entitlement that really needs to be nipped in the bud. Here's the thing: you bought the video from Louis CK. What he does with the money is his business. He's not "donating 28% of your purchase to charity", he's spending _his_ money. It stopped being _your money_ when you bought something from him. If he decided to spend 100% of his money on hookers and blow, what business is it of yours? It's his money, not yours. It doesn't become yours again just because he decides to tell you how he spent it.
vidarh 15y ago
It seems like he feels he paid his $5 as "charity" to support this experiment, and now feels cheated because he realize that the experiment would've been successful at a lower price point, and so part of his money was spent on something other than his purpose. So the issue here is that he made his buying decision seemingly not because he thought $5 was a fair price for the product. Which doesn't really make it any less ridiculous...

You give your son $100 as a birthday present. He spends $20 on himself and throws the rest in the bin. That's his choice, but next time, will you give him money? I wouldn't.

bsphil 15y ago
Except that's a terribly inaccurate analogy. This isn't a $5 gift, it's a transaction for a product. He's not throwing away the rest, he's paying bills and donating to charities. How you came up with "throwing $80 in the bin" is beyond me.
- johnthedebs 15y ago
  Just wanted to add to this (not that it's needed to make the point): Louis C.K. isn't your child.
- bira 15y ago
  Charity apparently equals to throwing money in the bin, according to his pov.
- jamesbritt 15y ago
  He's not throwing away the rest, he's paying bills and donating to charities. Indeed, one can think of it just more purchase, only he's buying a better[0] world. [0] Modulo your opinion of those charities.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
mononcqc 15y ago
Oh yeah that is a completely valid analogy. Here's an equally valid one: you're selling a product and using the money for something I do not agree is worth it (like buying things for yourself instead of giving to charity). I thus decide it would be better to steal the thing you sell and deprive you of the money you ask for it. It's a bad argument based on your personal value of what the other person should be doing with their good that you gave them in order to obtain a product; not as a favour or as a gift.
ma2rten 15y ago
There was a study where some students where given varying amounts of money. Half of the students were instructed to spend the money on themselves. The other half was instructed to buy something for a friend or give it to charity. Those who spent it on themselves had the least improvement in happiness - no matter what the amount was. Think about it... maybe Louise CK actually made the best investment he could for his own happiness.
officemonkey 15y ago
Do judge all people with what they do with the money they earn, or just famous people? Do you not shop at a store because you've seen the cashier going into a strip club? Isn't it exhausting to be that judgmental?

alextgordon 15y ago

Imagine that Louis takes the $280k and buys a yacht. You may not agree with Louis that a yacht is a particularly worthwhile use of $280k, but the effects of the purchase are localized: Louis gets a yacht, the yacht company gets $280k. Conversely, charities are designed to have broad effects on the world. Often these effects are undeniably good, but not always! Some charities give out bibles, some campaign for the right to abortion, some campaign against abortion, some give food to the poor without regard to local economies, and some campaign for free software. I challenge you to find any one person who agrees with all of these things :) Now, I don't believe that the charities that Louis has chosen are doing bad work! But if you are going to be donating 28% of someone's purchase to charity, it would be courteous to explain, ahead of time, exactly which charities are going to benefit -- because not everybody is going to agree.

officemonkey 15y ago
This is a disturbing trend of on-line entitlement that really needs to be nipped in the bud. Here's the thing: you bought the video from Louis CK. What he does with the money is his business. He's not "donating 28% of your purchase to charity", he's spending _his_ money. It stopped being _your money_ when you bought something from him. If he decided to spend 100% of his money on hookers and blow, what business is it of yours? It's his money, not yours. It doesn't become yours again just because he decides to tell you how he spent it.

vidarh 15y ago

It seems like he feels he paid his $5 as "charity" to support this experiment, and now feels cheated because he realize that the experiment would've been successful at a lower price point, and so part of his money was spent on something other than his purpose. So the issue here is that he made his buying decision seemingly not because he thought $5 was a fair price for the product. Which doesn't really make it any less ridiculous...