5 ms·

What a fantastic argument against this kind of “philantropy”. Relying on rich people to help you is a fundamentally flawed principle.

by Aeolun 2y ago

falcor84 2y ago
In case you haven't been following, there have been massive closures of government-funded programs over the last few months too, so I don't think relying on those is any better. At the end of the day, all you can do is make the best choice when opportunities are presented, and roll with the punches when things change. Edit: grammar fix
- UncleMeat 2y ago
  At least with the government we have a degree of democratic control over outcomes. "Hope a billionaire doesn't get bored or otherwise change their mind" is considerably less stable, even if government programs are not 100% guarantees.
  - falcor84 2y ago
    > "Hope a billionaire doesn't get bored or otherwise change their mind" I wish this didn't apply to the person in charge of the government.
- Aeolun 2y ago
  > there have been massive closures of government-funded programs over the last few months Sure, if more than 50% of the country votes for being shafted.
bko 2y ago
I think it argues the opposite. The school was likely a failure. I couldn't find any stats on success of children but I find that telling as if it was lifting kids out of poverty effectively it would have been advertised. Its probably just not effective and the money could be better spent elsewhere. Were this a public project it would have persisted indefinitely and have a lobbying constituency to keep setting money on fire. We want more failed experiments. If committing to a venture where there is no off ramp if it doesn't work, no one will invest
- UncleMeat 2y ago
  Failing or not, it still has an ongoing obligation to its enrollees. A kid attending the school doesn't really care if the school is meeting its particular metric goals. That kid is still upset that their school is closing and their education and social life is disrupted. I also don't think that "the school was likely a failure" is a claim we can make in the modern world. Zuck (and other tech CEOs) is/are very clearly fleeing visible commitment to diversity initiatives. "We will give out a bunch of cash to people who no longer have a school" is better than nothing, but absolutely nothing mandates that this happen the next time.
  - bko 2y ago
    From the article > CZI plans to donate $50 million to the communities and families affected by the closure, the school said in its note this week. Again, the point is no one is going to experiment if you can't wind it down. I don't know if it's a failure but I know the 300m zuck spent in Newark schools was a huge failure and waste of money and very well documented. If it was a success they would be making a big show and not shutting it down
    - UncleMeat 2y ago
      Right. And I mentioned that in my post. I'm glad that Zuck is doing this but he is not obligated to do so, which is one of the perils of this sort of program funded by billionaires.
      - woleium 2y ago
        … or any other funding entity?
        em-bee 2y ago
        like the government? they better not be shutting down failing schools, leaving the kids in the lurch. but instead they should research why the schools are failing and figure out how to fix the problem. a private entity may not have such an obligation, but we as a society sure do.

What a fantastic argument against this kind of “philantropy”. Relying on rich people to help you is a fundamentally flawed principle.

by Aeolun 2y ago

What a fantastic argument against this kind of “philantropy”. Relying on rich people to help you is a fundamentally flawed principle.

falcor84 2y ago

In case you haven't been following, there have been massive closures of government-funded programs over the last few months too, so I don't think relying on those is any better. At the end of the day, all you can do is make the best choice when opportunities are presented, and roll with the punches when things change. Edit: grammar fix

UncleMeat 2y ago
At least with the government we have a degree of democratic control over outcomes. "Hope a billionaire doesn't get bored or otherwise change their mind" is considerably less stable, even if government programs are not 100% guarantees.
- falcor84 2y ago
  > "Hope a billionaire doesn't get bored or otherwise change their mind" I wish this didn't apply to the person in charge of the government.
Aeolun 2y ago
> there have been massive closures of government-funded programs over the last few months Sure, if more than 50% of the country votes for being shafted.

bko 2y ago

I think it argues the opposite. The school was likely a failure. I couldn't find any stats on success of children but I find that telling as if it was lifting kids out of poverty effectively it would have been advertised. Its probably just not effective and the money could be better spent elsewhere. Were this a public project it would have persisted indefinitely and have a lobbying constituency to keep setting money on fire. We want more failed experiments. If committing to a venture where there is no off ramp if it doesn't work, no one will invest

UncleMeat 2y ago
Failing or not, it still has an ongoing obligation to its enrollees. A kid attending the school doesn't really care if the school is meeting its particular metric goals. That kid is still upset that their school is closing and their education and social life is disrupted. I also don't think that "the school was likely a failure" is a claim we can make in the modern world. Zuck (and other tech CEOs) is/are very clearly fleeing visible commitment to diversity initiatives. "We will give out a bunch of cash to people who no longer have a school" is better than nothing, but absolutely nothing mandates that this happen the next time.
- bko 2y ago
  From the article > CZI plans to donate $50 million to the communities and families affected by the closure, the school said in its note this week. Again, the point is no one is going to experiment if you can't wind it down. I don't know if it's a failure but I know the 300m zuck spent in Newark schools was a huge failure and waste of money and very well documented. If it was a success they would be making a big show and not shutting it down
  - UncleMeat 2y ago
    Right. And I mentioned that in my post. I'm glad that Zuck is doing this but he is not obligated to do so, which is one of the perils of this sort of program funded by billionaires.
    - woleium 2y ago
      … or any other funding entity?
      - em-bee 2y ago
        like the government? they better not be shutting down failing schools, leaving the kids in the lurch. but instead they should research why the schools are failing and figure out how to fix the problem. a private entity may not have such an obligation, but we as a society sure do.