Blogs are buzzing about a New York Times article about how a new class of mega-wealthy is shaping America with their financial success and philanthropy.
The Nonprofiteer blog, written by Kelly Kleiman, a nonprofit consultant, takes aim at the assertion made by some in the story that private giving — and not government — is best suited to solve social ills.
She praises donors such as Bill Gates and Sanford I. Weill, chairman emeritus of Citigroup, but questions what large effect they can accomplish with donations.
“Philanthropy is great and we’re grateful for that of Gates and Weill and the others, but if they imagine that it’s actually better to have them do voluntarily a portion of what the government used to tax them to do they don’t understand that social justice can’t be created by individuals — by definition, it has to be the product of our whole society.”
On a Wall Street Journal blog, The Wealth Report, Robert Frank, a reporter for the newspaper, takes issue that the Times compared today’s philanthropists with Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller Sr.
Mr. Frank writes that Mr. Weill, for example, should be commended for supporting Carnegie Hall, but such giving pales with Mr. Carnegie’s achievement of having actually built it. And Mr. Rockefeller cured a number of diseases, brought about the green revolution, and was an architect of modern medical research; Mr. Gates has had “some noble successes,” but none on the same scale, Mr. Frank adds.
“This is not to criticize today’s titans; their philanthropic deeds should be celebrated. But the Times [article] reminds us just how much the original titans towered over today’s rich — both in wealth and philanthropy,” Mr. Frank says.
What do you think? Do very wealthy people today see philanthropy as the solution to social problems, and not government? Do Mr. Gates and the rest of today’s major donors pale in comparison with Mr. Carnegie and Mr. Rockefeller? Click on the comments link below this post to share your thoughts.