Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo
OK, fair come back. We (and you) are still being expected to pay for one of his business locations though.
Edit: He is worth 2.2 billion so he has donated 0.1% of his net worth, which would be equivalent to me donating $100. Not exactly a philanthropist. I don't have to be careful who I call awful either, as we are in a free country.
|
Net worth is not the same as cash on hand. 0.1% is $100 for you; does that mean that $100,000 is your total net worth, from cash and savings and investments, to all your possessions, such as vehicle, house, and land? Or, is that your annual income?
My point is, if you are unwilling to sell your house or sell land or sell your furniture to give the money to charity, then pointing out his net worth is kind of pointless. You would be interested in how much liquid assets he has (if I have my financial terms correct).
I don't know this guy, so I don't know if he is a good person, average person, or bad person, and I am typically skeptical of using taxpayer money to pay for someone's arena, but you have to be careful when criticizing someone's charitable donations. I don't think it's fair for someone like you or I to criticize a billionaire for donating "only" a few million dollars when you or I only donate $1,000 or $2,000 or $5,000 of cash or goods in a year. Other things the same, people try to donate as much as they can sustain, and everyone deserves some benefit of the doubt.