It’s official. The wealthy are not obligated to help the poor.
That was the conclusion from this year’s ”Great American Think-Off,” the amateur philosophy debate held annually in New York Mills, Minnesota.
When I wrote about this contest back in March, my attitude was, “Duh, of course the well-to-do should share with those less fortunate.” But the winning debater — through personal story-telling and clever emphasis on the word “obligation” — was able to convince the audience (the final judges) that, indeed, we should not be required to share our wealth. After all, if you are forced to share, then it’s really about taking, not giving, and wouldn’t you be abdicating your individual moral responsibility to share? (You can read winner David Eckel’s essay at www.think-off.org.)
The outcome of the debate is a good reminder to us all that philanthropy in the U.S. is voluntary. But it also brings to mind the heated discussions in the field today about the extent to which government should mandate giving toward certain groups or causes.
Well, no matter your point of view on those issues, we can probably all agree that more philanthropy is better. And we should join forces to actively promote more voluntary philanthropy. Today’s opinion piece by John Verant in the Star Tribune really reinforces why it’s more important than ever for the well-to-do to give, and to give generously. Verant writes:
The past 30 years have witnessed the largest redistribution of wealth in the history of America. When Ronald Reagan came to power, the richest 1 percent of Americans held 20 percent of the total wealth. When he left office, that figure was 36 percent. Today it is 43. The distribution of income has similarly skewed. Since 1980, the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans had their share of all income increase 2 1/2 times. And the top 0.1 percent had their share of our national earnings increase an amazing six times.
This summer we heard that Bill and Melinda Gates and Warren Buffett challenged American billionaires to give at least half of their net worth to charity. They apparently recognize their individual moral responsibility to care for their fellow men and women. Let’s hope their wealthy friends — who are not obligated to give to the poor — do, too.
– Wendy Wehr, MCF v.p. of communications and information services
[...] to some who believe that people shouldn’t be required to give to the poor (presented in one of our previous blog posts), the One Percent Foundation invites the whole American population to do just [...]
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by OnlyFoundations, Mickie Kennedy. Mickie Kennedy said: Must We Give to the Poor? Guess Not. But Should We?: It’s official. The wealthy are not obligated to h… http://bit.ly/axcHlI #nonprofit [...]