I don't think so. I mean, it's their money, so why should they have to give it away?
2006-08-30 20:06:32 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Sociology
hey, if they worked hard for it, then why should they waste it on people that might not even try to help themselves?
2006-08-30 20:42:29 · update #1
Absolutly not! I worked hard for my money for many many years and now that I have it I can now enjoy life to my fullest desires. Im not going to waste it on the poor.
2006-08-31 07:09:38 · answer #1 · answered by The Reverend 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I don't think they have to do it but I think that it would be nice if they did.
When it comes to the wealthy you have to remember that they only got that way from all of the non wealthy people. So it wouldn't hurt for them to choose a nd donate to a fund of their choice. Hopefully something here in the USA and not a foreign country.
For example, when I bought Windows XP it cost me $200.
Now Bill Gates is the richest man in the USA. If he has that much money from his product then he is definately charging way to much for it.
I think that is why he is giving some of it back to charities.
He knows he is robbing the working people. I wonder how much his employees earn? do they all share in the wealth too? Or is it just the executives and Bill that get all the cash?
What makes Michael Eisner and the other executives at Disney worth one million dollars a year?
Is there no one else with enough brains to think so they have to pay that much?
Then insted of saying hey you are sucking the life blood out of the business we can't afford this, they lay off the workers and raise ticket prices to make up for it.
And of course since they made their budget by having the lay offs they have now earned their bonus for the quarter.
There will be a time where the wealthy will have to start paying for everyone in the country.
Since all of the jobs are going over seas and what's left here doesn't pay the bills. More and more will be going on welfare and that is paid by the taxes.
So the wealthy can wise up and pay for the labor or they can pay for tha welfare. But either way they cannot have every penny for themselves.
That time is coming soon.
Why do I say that?
Even Levis Jeans, a great American product is noe being made in :
Mexico, Guatamala, Egypt, and a couple other countries that I can't remember at the moment. But Levi's comapny is still charging the American prices.
So where is the profit going?
To the wealthy and where are they workers? On welfare.
Thanks for your question.
Jerry
:o)
2006-08-31 08:25:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, it is not wrong for wealthy individuals to donate to charity. Also, most wealthy people pay over 39% of their income in taxes to the government, so couldnt that be charity enough?
For causes that they hope to advance, anyone donating to charity does goodwill, but donating to the welfare line might not be the most appealing idea.
2006-08-31 12:21:13 · answer #3 · answered by Simplystunning 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Of course it's not legally wrong and it's definitely their choice as to how they will spend their money...
But I think it's a morally and ethically great thing when they do...
I believe that those fortunate enough to come across wealth, whether through hard work or dumb luck, should share their blessings with those whom the sun hasn't shined so bright on.
It's a beautiful thing when people help each other out of the goodness of their hearts...It gives a glimmer of hope to humanity and a better world.
2006-08-31 03:16:21 · answer #4 · answered by Lee Da Rhymin' Master 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Hell yea! Giving to the poor can make you feel good. Rich people might work hard for it but there are millions of people that work very hard and get little pay. Coal miners, the men that drill in the oceans for oil, people that clean out the sewage pipes, etc. These people have dirty jobs and get little money and they put their lives on the line every day. Many get killed on the job. Puffy Daddy or whatever the hell his name is today has millions just for singing and designing clothes, Tom Cruise demands $20 million per movie. He is just an actor. Paris Hilton gets millions for her parents and men that have sex with her. They don't deserve these amounts of money. Who the hell needs millions of dollars!?!?! I live on $1300 a month with one child. Mac-n-cheese and hot dogs are on the table often. But we have things. and I even give to charities and our church monthly.
2006-08-31 05:42:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
what is defined as being rich (monetarily speaking)? to many in the world, i'm rich because i have running water, a car, t.v., a computer, ect.., things that most americans have. but to most americans, i am far from being rich because my husband brings home about $40,000/year to support a family of 3 1/2 (i'm pregnant) and 2 pets. we live paycheck to paycheck, sometimes can't make ends meet, yet we still have more than majority of the world's population. morally speaking, i think if you are rich in the sense of the way americans think of rich, like most celebrities or c.e.o.'s of corporations, then it would be morally wrong of you not to contribute to charities. but in the sense of the way that the rest of the world looks at most americans, am i morally obligated to give to charity also? you tell me.
2006-08-31 03:20:06 · answer #6 · answered by Peanuts 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I think it is a moral obligation. They obviously have problems, though different from regular people, that bother them. So why not donate to try and cure those problems.
2006-08-31 03:32:52 · answer #7 · answered by Paul L 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Depend .
2006-08-31 03:34:08 · answer #8 · answered by Janice Tee 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. It's not. They aren't obligated to help people they don't even know.
2006-08-31 03:11:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
No, no one should feel obligated to do anything. It is simply a matter of choice.
2006-08-31 04:19:34 · answer #10 · answered by mad 3 · 1⤊ 4⤋