4 ms·
So if the top 400 wealthiest individuals in the US gave half their net worth to charity, they'd merely double the annual charitable giving of the rest of the Un
by roc 15y ago
So if the top 400 wealthiest individuals in the US gave half their net worth to charity, they'd merely double the annual charitable giving of the rest of the United States? [1]
In other words, in four years, the United States in total will have donated more than the entire net worth of those 400 people -- net worths that typically took lifetimes and generations to amass.
If you ask me, that single factoid casts the Giving Pledge in an entirely new light. Yes, Gates and company have done some fantastic things with their charity [2]. But the rest of the country is doing far more than they're getting credit for. Year after year. And as they aren't spending down their net fortunes, it's entirely sustainable.
That's something we don't hear nearly enough.
[1] Give or take some, as I'm sure those 400 people themselves likely contribute to that total.
- MikeCapone 15y agoIt also matters how effectively the money is being used. The Gates Foundation tries to measure its effeciveness and reduce waste. I'm not so sure that other charities - many of them religious - are spending as effectively and making as much of a difference per dolllar. Another thing that matters is long-term vision. Many charities try to spend on what is visible to help fundraising, while big private foundations can often invest in R&D and other high-risk high-reward projects.