If celebrities gave half of their earnings, would that solve some of the worlds biggest problems?

Question

For example: The One campagin to end poverty.

Answer 1

How would they do this? The world's biggest problem is political despotism and religious tyranny.

The despots and tyrants have a long history of diverting aid to enrich themselves.

If you were a little older, perhaps you might remember various efforts people have tried to provide food for african countries.

The leaders stole the food and money, to feed their soldiers and supporters, and actually sold some of it to other places for cash to enrich themselves.

Some leaders even let the food rot rather than go to the intended recipients, because they wanted to punish some group.

Also, another part of human nature plays into the scenario. If you gave 10 people each 1 million dollars, very soon some of them would be poor again because they were unfaithful stewards of the responsibility entrusted to them.

Answer 2

Properly applied, if they gave their money and their assets to such a program that really addressed the biggest problems rather than the most glamorous, YES.

It would also serve as an example to others, and become a networking source for the celebrity want to bes.

Answer 3

It helps a great deal. Look at what rock musicians like Kenny Loggins with his Unity charity and support for animal preservation, Olivia Newton-John with her cancer charity and animal preservation charities, Elton John with his AIDS charity, Paul McCartney with his various charities, and such others are doing. The truth is that 1% of the US owns 99% of the money, yet they screamed when Bill Clinton made them give just a tiny percentage of it to help out the rest of the country. What would this country be like if the entire 1% gave half of their money to help out?

Love, Hope, & Peace,

Cal-el & Swissy

Answer 4

Interesting, isn't it, how we now have *one* Roxy asking the question, and "another" Roxy bashing the poor by saying "they're all lazy uneducated bums", kinda like how Fox News does, in complete defiance to all evidence to the contrary....

But nah, I'm not going to copy my dozen-plus Best Answer links on the subject of what being Poor in America is *really like* into my Source here to refute that, that wouldn't answer the actual question, now would it? :p

The idea sounds good to me on its face, but in my humble opinion targets the wrong people. Most celebrities are just artists working for a living, and while many would argue that "that ain't workin'/that's the way you do it/you play the gee-tar on the MTV/", the truth is, there really aren't *that* many filthy rich celebs out there to exploit like that.

Now if we targeted the *CEOs* for this, that would make more sense, as they are truly the One Percenter crowd that is screwing us all over. Think Microsoft, Wal-Mart, Big Oil, Big Banking sending you *nearly shredder proof* credit-card solicitations....

Hit the Executive Class. Hit them hard. Hell, history bears this one out...during World War II, the *tax rate* for the richest 20% of the country was 90%. That is NINETY PERCENT folks....and yet the economy grew *out* of the Great Depression.

Or, barring that as your Suits would just scream bloody murder on that Media They Own....go after the laywers and politicians, they *too* have gained plenty of money, hand over fist, at the expense of just about everyone else. Literally, since a lot of that money is paid by way of taxes, and you can't cut them off without cutting off needed funds for *the rest of civilization*, for things like schools, roads and power plants....

But yeah, the whole "give half back to the poor you stole it from," thing sounds like a *really* good idea on its face. :) It might actually solve some problems.

Which is why your One Percenters, your CEO Executive Class *will not* let it happen. Because we are Post-Petroleum, Post-Peak-Oil already, we can't grow the economy any more unless we *just plain exploit* the daylights out of every problem on earth, make a Cottage Industry out of every *last* bit of misery and debt, all in the name of keeping the damn filthy Suits happy.

We aren't allowed to solve problems anymore. Count on it!

Answer 5

A wise person once stated that if you were to redistribute wealth amongst the world's poorest people that within 15 or so years it would be back in the hands of the wealthy.

Someone commented that mentality is the real issue and I would tend to agree with that.

Answer 6

Possibly. There would be greater funds available for charity and will help even out the distribution of income to a certain extent. If everyone does their little bit and contributes to a good cause the results can really be phenomenal and help so many people.

Answer 7

until now I retired I worked with victims of family members violence.. I had to be a sturdy listener and by using staffing situations, I had to apply what I was hoping became my sturdy judgment. I worked up a treatment plan by using assessing their desires and referred them to available aspects. I had to apply sturdy judgment, and be independent. I did this for sixteen years, helping adult men, females and babies. It on no account entered my ideas to ask what their faith and politics have been. I helped all nationalities and various people who necessary help jointly as they have been here from different worldwide places. i assume it boils right down to the reality that many Yahoo solutions are judgmental and thank you to biased. some have an schedule, that's obvious once you song there Q and A's. some are youthful and a few are older like myself. whilst i became youthful I had some stupid ideas of what the international became all approximately and did no longer somewhat like authority. some have not any admire for any ingredient or every physique. Freedom of speech is all approximately admire for others. in keeping with risk on the right of the sign in or each and every internet site, some sentences might desire to be written to those that choose to take part could instruct admire for people who ask questions and answer questions. so a techniques as those from different worldwide places. there is not any way of understanding in the event that they are from the U. S. otherwise the place as quickly as I sign in. that would desire to be useful to understand what united states of america we've been related to. that would desire to place a distinctive lite on information their question.

Answer 8

no it wouldn't. it takes more than just money to solve the world's problems. it requires a certain frame of a mind and enough people who are willing to do something to change the world.

also, even though they are filthy rich, celebrities earned their money and are entitled to it. they are not responsible for solving the world's problems just because they happen to be rolling in the dough.

Answer 9

No...I don't think it would. Money isn't a cure for everything. In the case of poverty, it might help for awhile, but it doesn't solve the deeper issues. It would only help temporarily.....if that.

Answer 10

Depends on who they gave it to. If they gave it to my brother, for example, then that would just increase the world's problems. :-)

Why the "if," though? It's their money; they get to decide what to do with it; I don't see much use speculating about what would happen "if"--especially since it's such a big "if."

Plus, money doesn't solve the world's problems. 'Specially if you're Andre Young: "mo' money, mo' problems."