Why do famous millionaires always ask....?

Question

what we can do to make poverty history. I find that to be a bizarre question. As we are all aware a famous rock star asked that same question on this site and I found that to be a disingenuous question giving this person is almost a billionaire with a wide property portfolio.. does anyone else get cheesed off by this sort of thing? My answer tp these sort of questions is give away half of your fortune and that might make a small dent somewhere!!

Don't get me wrong.... I hugely admire people like Angelina Jolie who gives away one-third of her earnings....

My question was in reference to Bono..... who posted that topic on YAnswers...

I'd like to pose this question to Bono as it seems I'm not the only person who feels this way!!!

To be honest I have little respect for people like Bono, or the Beckhams. They talk a good talk, but they are still living their excessively rich lives, which is somewhat morally repugnant to me... I find it insincere to say "well they shouldn't donate anything as it wouldn't help.." that just seems to be a convenient excuse. Furthermore, it always seems to be the less well off people who are prepared to part with what little money they have, and give to such causes, the rich just try to entice us to do so whilst living off the fruits of this earth.

To Jay: My question isn't one of Capitalism vs Commuism.. it's about the moral compass of people who demand that we make poverty history whilst continuing to line their own pockets...

"Used to live"... True that we don't know whether these people give money to charity or not... but their excessive greed far outweights the pittance they might hand over. Furthermore, the Beckhams are such publicity seekers that they would definately try to get the details leaked if they were donating anything!! Giving money doesn't absolve these people from the mercenary lifestyles they lead in my opinion.

Answer 1

That is a good point, and something I have thought before. My conclusion was that even if they gave every penny they could spare it would barely make a difference, whereas drawing attention to the issue with the intention of getting governments and society as a whole to change the way things are done has the potential to really change things (in theory).

I was watching the documentary about Colleen McLoughlan (I think it was on tonight with Trevor McDonald) about children's hospices. She was campaigning to keep a hospice open, and I though, why can't her and Wayne just give them the money to keep it open each year? But then I realised that's not the point, it's about trying to get the government to fund this kind of hospice, which they don't currently do. You can't rely on one-off donations from kind celebrities- it has to be about bigger changes.

Answer 2

None of the millionaires I've known has ever asked this question. The only ones I can imagine ever asking that question would be the philanthropists. And in their case, I think you're probably looking at this the wrong way around and are not being fair to them.

I'd guess a millionaire might ask this for exactly the same reason as you or I might ask this. When you have money and resources to give away, whether it's a few bucks to a panhandler in the street or many millions to charities and hospitals or whatever, actually contemplating and doing something usually has the bittersweet character that while you know you've helped, you also know it's a drop in the bucket.

Millions of dollars are a drop in the bucket compared to the world's poverty. Billions are. And while I think that were all the world's wealthy to give away much of their wealth it would make a very large difference, if you know anything at all about poverty you'll know that unless many other things were changed at the same time most everything would go back close to the way it was given enough time. The real problem with poverty, the reason it exists, isn't that there's not enough stuff to go around, it's that there's a whole bunch of systemic and institutional things that create and perpetuate it.

People around the world that make their lives' work fighting poverty are very aware that generosity and the transference of wealth are almost always only short-term solutions (and even then they often are much less solutions than everyone hoped) and to really change things you have to change all those things that create poverty.

Anyway, it seems to me that while it's possible that some or even most of the millionaires you're referring to are saying this only to appease their own guilt, it's also very possible that it's a sincere expression of frustration that results from feeling like one has a lot of ability to help because one has a lot of money, but to do stuff and realize the hard way that giving away millions of dollars solves some people's specific problems, but it doesn't solve the problem of why so many people live so awful and impoverished lives.

Answer 3

This is a great question with no really good answer. I am glad that people help at all, and I'm glad people do what they can. How much is enough and how much is not enough? Hard questions all. If I had a even a million dollars how much would I give? I really can't say 10, 20 50% and where to give to do the most good. I know Bono has given time and money and gone to other countries to do good work. But as for the money could it be more? Unfortunately I don't know enough about the man or his money to say. I hope I could be selfless enough to give half away. Anyway I would rather he had asked the questions to "government" rather than you and I.

Answer 4

The guy is a hypocrite.. simple as.. I feel that he has a total nerve to ask that question. He has established a private equity fund to invest more than 1 billion in a number of money making ventures; has a personal fortune of £400 million; has a property portfolio consisting of: a villa in the south of France, an Italian palazzo near Dublin, a £15 million penthouse in New York [which takes up 2 floors of a 27 storey tower and boasts 12ft nickel and bronze doors and floor to ceiling windows costing £40k each); has a family sized Maserati and a fleet of luxury cars and spends thousands on a single bottle of wine at his favourite New York restaurant....
Source: recent newspaper articles.. he has not sued them so I take it that they are correct!!!
Hypocrite is all that I can say.... He only needs at the most 2 homes, so why not sell the rest and adopt a villlage or town in Africa, Asia, wherever and be entirely responsible for its upkeep. That would not even make a dent in the interest he makes on his fortune! I will NEVER LISTEN TO SUCH PEOPLE. Angelina Jolie is more credible as at least she gives away a third of her income!!!

Answer 5

It has to do with credibility. If a poor person would ask money they are likely portrayed as beggars, cheaters and liars for their own good rather than that people believe that they would use the money for the purpose they say it is for. How hard would you believe the first street bum who walks up to you and says he needs some of your money for hungry Africans? You'd probably kick him in the nuts on the spot or something.

It's strange though that the initiative seems to come from the rich people. But at the same time we've all been watching documentaries and infomercials of people dying of hunger for almost as long as TV exists and for some reason we can't seem to get enough of it because they keep popping up on our screens. A lot of people say that that is due to the tribal wars going on in Africa. Though how come the weapons do make it to Africa and not the food? And who sends those weapons anyway? Well those are the filthy rich people of the world who for 60 years for sure and probably way longer benefit from the misery in Africa. At the same time we all benefit from Africa's misery. If only for some people to call it a shithole and feel better about themselves being able to say just that. But mainly because a lot of African soil is in use to feed us exotic fruits and vegetables, to adorn us with diamonds and gold. I could go on how this intricacy works but it would take book volumes.

At any rate someone credible has to speak up on behalf of the have nots. A have not from the western world would not be considered credible, but a Bono or an Oprah would definitely qualify. In this world we don't only work to earn money but it also earns us credibility. Besides it's less of a waste of time to become aware of how we can end hunger than watch people become a clone of say Donald Trump or Martha Stewart. Do we need more of those or could we live with the fact that after the hunger is over in Africa that other good things may follow out of just that?

Answer 6

Some of them do give away large sums of money to various good causes, but they don't do it in a way that everybody will know about it. They don't want the headlines to read 'Celebrity X gives half a million pounds to charity'. Raising money for charity eg band aid is a different matter, or supporting big charity events. We don't know for a fact that the Beckhams, for example, never give anything to good causes, do we?

Answer 7

yes most millionaires have money enough to last them generations but all they do is talk some just give just a speck of what they have to make an impression, but the money they donate really never get to the poor and the deserving but some one who is also rich themselves, millionaire donnars never take a personnal interest as to where their donations are going,more donations come from the middle class people,but how may people really benifit just a hand ful, the rich should give employment as employment makes a person independant,

Answer 8

Totally agree wit ya like bob geldof shouting give us ur f##kin money at live aid!give them some o ur money!the stars think their so wonderful givin their time 4 'free' big deal if they gave half their money they'd still b far richer than us normal people!an people like bill gates sayin hes gonna give his money away wen he dies he could give 90% of it away now an still be rich so yes it does annoy me glad im not the only 1!

Answer 9

Who knows why any one person asks any one question......we cant see inside of their mind to know what's going on.

As for the money part of it.......I believe there is a point where a person has enough money and the rest is excess. LIFE isnt fair and as far as I can see will never be.

Answer 10

Gah, human beings will continually p.c.. "ask" via fact it rather is the unusual answer. They sense unique, they sense particular while they p.c.. the single that doesn't look glaring. human beings all too often grab onto the poetic, the words that look paradoxical, via fact they like it greater beneficial than rather solutions and truths of the international. of direction answering a question is greater sturdy than asking one, for god sakes. an answer is frequently, for one, plenty longer than a question, and demands plenty greater theory. a question is the subject count sentence, the respond is the essay. One shapes the different, yet you could pull questions out of no longer something. solutions, authentic solutions, could incorporate dutiful contemplation and pondering.