Public subsidization of private philanthropy needs to stop

I am the first one to say that generosity is a good thing, but watching the Carnegie presentations this weekend on c-span started me thinking.

Eli Broad was a winner, and all through his speech he thanked everyone and said how grateful he was that he could "give back.

Here's the thing, though...

Kaufmann & Broad construction (ticky-tacky calif developments as far as the eye can see, out here in CA) has made a BUNDLE "developing" land that probably should still be wild and undeveloped...but I digress..

During the decades of development, we would see many an article that listed them as the sue-ee, in lawsuits brought by homeowners whose walls cracked, ground shifted, pipes broke,etc. There would be a furor for a while, and then a secret settlement would happen, the homes would be patched up, and they became the problems of the next buyers.. I seem to recall a lawsuit that was so acrimonious, that they changed their company name to KB, instead of Kaufmann & Broad, after the lawsuit.. (reminiscent of Arthur Anderson & Choice-point)

but I digress again!

While these places were sprouting up all over the place in the 80's & 90's, the wages paid to workers , in NO way kept pace with what these monstrosities sold for, and I'm guessing that ole Broad & Co took advantage of every loophole they could pay for through their campaign donations. I have not looked to see which party received them..it really does not matter..

What matters is this.,.

Eli became fabulously wealthy, by cutting corners, and paying his workers less than he could have..and he did it for decades..and now in the twilight of his life, he is a "philanthropist", deciding from his "throne" , who should receive his beneficence and who does not deserve it.

His foundation

As an example, his foundation believes in giving money to the "leadership & governance" segments of education, which may be ok, but it's kind of just recycling money to people who are usually the highest paid, and are already in positions of power and influence..

.....................
http://www.broadfoundation.org/mission/index.shtml
The Broad Foundation’s mission is to dramatically improve K-12 urban public education through better governance, management, labor relations and competition.

Our goals are ambitious:

To train a broad, deep bench of current and aspiring leaders in education.

To redefine the traditional roles, practices and policies of school board members, superintendents, principals and labor union leaders to better address contemporary challenges in education.

To attract and retain the highest quality talent to leadership roles in education.

To equip school systems and their leaders with modern tools for effective management.

To provide tangible incentives for educators to advance academic performance.

To honor and showcase success wherever it occurs in urban education.
................................................................

Having never been super-rich, I may be off base here, but I am guessing that there are some pretty nifty tax incentives for big-bucks foundation, so perhaps they are getting as much of a benefit as the ones they are helping.

All this money has been removed from the general circulation, and is instead, stashed away, waiting for the super rich to hand out to "deserving" people now and then.

Don't get me wrong, I am in favor of helping people, but perhaps a better way (although less hooplah on the high & mighty) would have been to pay higher wages all those years, and to charge less for those cracker boxes lined up on every ridge-line in Southern California..

Another thing that bugs me, is that if anyone dares to even mention anything, or questions their motives, they will immediately be accused of hating children or sick people..

The super rich always seem to have plenty, no matter how much they "give away" too, so one has to wonder just HOW MANY people got "shortchanged" during the amassing of such outrageous wealth..

I always remember a scene at my grandparents church, when I was a kid.. My grandmother was digging into the corners of her purse, to come up with a suitable donation when the little velvet bag on a the end of a very long pole, came our way.. I don't know how much she gave, but I know it was every cent she could find..and some guy in front of us made a very big show of all the money in his wallet, as he fished out a $20..

I remember asking her if "that guy" was rich.. Her answer, "probably"..

Who gave the "most"?

I always thought my grandmother was more generous:)

You are right, your grandmother was more generous. :thumbsup:

it is almost a sentimental sop, the way the rich wear philanthropy. or the bishop his mitre or the widow her sorrow or the warrior her valour or the lion his mien. It confounds the genuine expression of esteemed values with the begging of virtue.

My guess is it is the combination of the two and how much of one and how much of the other is in the weighing of the two and the utility of the perception...be it to buttress the idea of generosity or esteem status. (the way it is tied to virtue)

attributed to the high cost of research. How much research is federally subsidized? How much research is tax deductible? Do drug companies really have to keep the price so high on drugs because of 'R&D'?

Those same drugs sell for a fraction of what we pay..in OTHER places..

and yes.. the research GRANTS are often public funding, given to universities that also receive federal money just to exist..and yet their higher and higher fees & tuitions are excluding more and more young people...but of course, the children of the elite have no financial obstacles put in their way..

The rich get extra benefits all along the way..and much of it is a direct result of public funding ..either through tax write-offs or "access" to information the rest of us never have.

The lazy media we have will always attribute it to "luck meeting opportunity" and hard work, but it's more like starting a marathon at mile 22..