Who's More Generous; the Rich or the Poor?

There’s a great little speech by Ma Joad in the The Grapes of Wrath:

Being a millionaire and all, I was initially offended by this comment. Just some more commie-pinko Steinbeck classism, I thought.

But then I thought on it a little longer, and you know what? Ma Joad is right. So what if Bill Gates gives 100 million dollars to charity? That’s not even one percent of his total worth. Some poor bastard who is willing to share his last loaf of bread with a fellow unfortunate is more generous than all the rich philanthropists who ever lived, put together.

Whatcha think?


Elmer J. Fudd,
Millionaire.
I own a mansion and a yacht.

I believe that this is the basis for the Biblical maxim “It is easier to drive a wagon through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven” (or something close to that). My giving away 10% of my income has way more impact on my life than a multi-millionaire giving away 10% of his / hers.

Well, the 10% of a poor person does have a greater impact to their standard of living than does the 10% of a rich person.

But does that necessarily make the poor person more generous?

That is should a richer person give away enough money that it would have the same effect on their standard of living? Sure Bill Gates is (on paper) worth like $80 billion but most of that is Microsoft stock. His liquid assets are likely a lot less. So, if Bill gives 10% of his income to charity did that make him any less generous than a poorer person (which is most everyone else in the world). I think not.

Now, if Bill says 10% is too much that he will give 1% then while that 1% is a lot of money, he is being less generous, but afterall it is his money to do with as he pleases.

To the original quote, a poorer person is likely to give someone that they don’t know a quick bit of help, but considering the charity that richer people tend to give to, the poorer person is more likely to get substantial help from a richer person.

Jeffery

wagon = camel :slight_smile:

What is more generous: A thousand bucks, or the spare bed, and a hot meal to the lost traveler?

Most of the time, the rich will give money through charities. The poor will give their time, effort, loaf of bread, shirt off their back…etc. I think it’s almost comparing apples and oranges. Both give in their own capacity, but neither is more generous.

Adam


“Life is hard…but God is good”

But if I was Ma Joad, I’d go to the rich person. If I’m in need of someone else’s generosity, 10% of Bill Gates’ income is going to be more helpful to me than 10% of the income of the schmuck down the street.

Bill Gates is not about to give you as an individual 10% of his income, nor is Ma Joad. But if you knocked on Bill Gate’s door and asked for help changing a flat tire, he might send the butler (you wouldn’t see Bill face to face) but Ma Joad would probably tell you that you looked tired and you sit down and rest while she changes your tire. If you want to discuss which one could provide more assistance to a charity, that is a different matter.

To continue the analogy, Bill Gates probably has fifty people stop by his house with flat tires every day before noon. Bill probably had to hire a few extra butlers just so he could get some work done without being bothered by the entire flat-tire population of the world.

How many people do you think go up to Ma Joad and demand that she help them with a tire?

Not really a big deal, but I just thought I’d mention, in light of ARG’s comment…

Many rich people devote a lot of time to charity. They sit on boards and serve as patrons to many worthy causes and, by using their connections to other rich folks, help to raise money. Joe Smith down the street does not have the connections or the infulence to raise $100,000, but Mrs. J.G. Buckley, III needs only to tell her friends that she is serving on the board of ABC Charity and that there will be a $500 a plate fundraiser on the 25th and suddenly, raising $100,000 in an evening is possible.

I do not mean to in any way diminish the contributions of the less-well-off, but many rich people do a whole lot more than just write a check.


“I should not take bribes and Minister Bal Bahadur KC should not do so either. But if clerks take a bribe of Rs 50-60 after a hard day’s work, it is not an issue.” ----Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, Current Prime Minister of Nepal

Also, many rich people have much more time to do charity work than does your average working family. Putting together fundraisers takes a lot of time, and my Mrs. Buckley III, not having to have a full-time job and having the benefit of household help, can devote much more time to charity work.

Jesus told about a widow who gave all the money she had to the temple (“The Widow’s Mite”. He said that she had given more than the rich men who gave much more money, but it was only a small portion of their fortune.

But the point that Jesus was making is really different, I think, from what the OP wanted to discuss here.

If I, as an individual, give $500 to a charity, and Bill Gates, as an individual, gives $500 million, then certainly my gift is a bigger percentage of my wealth than Bill’s is. But the real question was, who gives the most – rich or poor? Obviously, Bill gave the most, so the answer is, “the rich”.

I think that what we need to do here, with all these references to Bill Gates and Ma Joad, is to determine exactly what we’re looking for. Do we want to know who has the kind, sweet, gentle, giving heart, or do we want to know who ponies up the biggest bucks?

It’s probably true that poor people, who know what’s all about to be destitute, may be more willing to give a small handout, a meal, a hand-me-down shirt, to another person than is Mr. Gotrocks. On the other hand, Mr. Gotrocks is likely giving large amounts to charities, and is also quite a bit less likely to even be approached by some poor homeless person in need of a bagel.

Where do I begin? I suppose that saying that the rich do not think like normal people is good, and that the wealthier they are, the more estranged they are from people who make minimum wage or lower, and in many cases, more contemptuous of those whom they perceive as being ‘beneath’ or 'not equal to them. Their thought processes revolve around wealth and the need to accumulate it.

At the last I heard, Bill Gates was worth over 40 billion. 10% of that donated to charity would be 4 billion – which would probably provide a fix for Social Security, or enable over 12 million of the nations 40 million poor and starving to get food stamps for years or low income housing or
medical care. ** BUT** that 4 billion is his** and, as such, he probably would rather part with his left hand than give it away. (Even if he could get a massive tax write-off for it.)

I had the ‘misfortune’ of working for several members of the rich-rich some years back, when I was younger, idealistic and actually thought there was a lot of good in people and that most politicians were actually honest. (Yeah! THAT long ago.) I was paid a then pretty good wage to help them in their homes and those were SOME homes, in exclusive communities. One place I worked in, the living room was round, with all corridors of the place entering it, and each with a door and a garden in the center surrounded by Grecian columns – the roof opened up like a missile silo to let in sunlight! There were servants quarters – unused but fully equipped, that made my small, cheap apartment look like shit. The older man and wife ate off of gold plated silverware. I had to park my little Hornet off to the side, AWAY from the front of the house so it could not be seen. The place was spotless – kept so by a cleaning service. Three of my family homes could have fit easily in it and the lawn was huge! The couple decided to move, for various reasons, and among things they decided to get rid of were works of art, expensive medical equipment and other valuable odds and ends – but I was not allowed any of it. They gave it to friends who did not actually need it and their occasional day maid managed to get a couple of paintings worth a few grand. I was politely talked down to, and when I left, they did not even give me a $2 tip after months of good service. They would give thousands to their clubs and ‘in’ charities – like saving the whales, donations to the local museum – which was built on the land of the wealthy area and visited mainly by the wealthy – but nothing to the real poor. They talked condescendingly about their yard man, their ‘help,’ their ‘Realtor’ (who came out of retirement to scoop the sale of their home from his employees – and the couple thought that charming, forgetting that his percentage of the sale would be nearly a million). and other hired help.

I worked for others who would spend several thousand dollars decorating their homes for holidays in their multimillion dollar community and give the local rich children expensive treats but considered the homeless as people who should be in jail and would spend $100,000 on their clubhouse but not give a cent to food for the poor.

One man lived on the beach in a massive house and I had to be by him daily as he called up his employee managers, swear at them, threaten them with their jobs, pull them away from their families on their vacations and holidays and unconcernedly order the firing of people like swatting bugs. I had to park in the under the house garage, so my old Olds could not be seen. Then I had to be around as he and his wife bitched about the new people down the block who only paid a million for their home and how they were not their kind of people and should move elsewhere. ( I got fired from that job because I just could not kiss his ass and fawn all over him. That was the only such job I ever was fired from and I was glad.)

I worked with people who married each other to combine their wealth and obviously were NOT in love with each other, but ‘affectionate.’ Some considered welfare, food for the poor, homeless shelters and free medical help for the impoverished as pointless and a HUGE tax drain. Those who lived on the beach absolutely hated having to allow the common people on the government owned sands and tried to get a small, open air beach submarine shop – which had been there long before them – shut down because the kids and young adults gathered there to eat and played loud music. One guy I worked for was disabled and his wife and his apartment cost more than two of my homes, and he drove a late model caddy that was in show room condition and wanted to get a new car. None of the dealers would give him what he wanted for it, so he bought another with cash. That left him the car. I worked there on weekends and drove a battered Ford Courier, his week day ‘girl’ drove a crappy Chevy. She had invited them for Christmas, made a fuss over them and they loved her to pieces. He decided to give his old car to his millionaire son, who did not want it at all. It never dawned on him to give the car to his beloved day girl or, unlikely, to me.

The 1970s meltdown did not even cause him to blink an eye because his investments had not been affected. I would drive them to their club on Sundays for lunch, then got to sit in the car, across the street, facing the club, so as to know when they came out so I could drive up and pick them up. I was not welcome in the sacred halls of wealth. They would pay $2,000 to have their pocket sized kitchen ‘redecorated’ (that meant this lady came in, changed the wall paper – about all 10 square feet of it – took a small brush and highlighted the raised edging along their cabinet doors, put in some small curtains, change the pastel color of the 10 square feet of painted walls to another pastel that looked remarkably like the original color and toss a few doilys around. (I could have done it for $400). After working for them for a year, I resigned and though they professed mightily that they thought highly of me, the old man gave me a $5 tip!

I worked in a community that if one moved into it, one had to have a guaranteed income of over a couple of million a year. The cheapest ‘mansion’ started at a million, along with small apartments (used seasonally) and, if, say, the main income was from the husband and he died and the wife’s income fell below the designated amount per year – the community kicked them out! They would buy back the house, and tell the widow to leave!! It was in the purchase agreement!

These people would drop $1000 on a dinner with a few friends, but absolutely refuse to give any donations to food for the poor, though they would give thousands for the preservation of some dead famous millionaires writings or for the reconstruction of his mansion, thousands for the preservation of art, (last I knew, one cannot eat art), or thousands to buy cement golf cart paths through their extensive, local golf course.) I used to take some shopping in the city, where they always hit the moderately priced grocery stores, and they would be contemptuous of the regular people walking in and out. Some family, obviously poor, would drive by in a battered smoker and they would mumble about getting inspections back to get such wrecks off of the road – even if the owners could not pay for repairs.

Some took over a local beach area, put down expensive homes and highly priced stores – designed to look like those in California – ($2.00 for a small bottle of apple juice, in one. On the mainland, in a 7-11, similar apple juice cost 50 cents.) Then they managed to get the local police to heavily patrol the area and night and one got stopped and questioned if one did not have an expensive car and wandered over there. (They stopped me when I drove a 4 year old Pontiac in great shape and asked me why I was there.) Then, they managed to get the city to rezone the shore and built it up so denly that the public had problems accessing the public beaches --except in small, designated areas. It took

'Salright, I understand. Great rant. I don’t necessarily agree that all the rich are assholes who only care about themselves and other rich people, but that seems to be the majority view.

The wealthy seem to have a sense of entitlement about their money, even if it was inherited rather than earned. The idea is "I/my father/mother/grandfather/whoever/worked hard to earn this money and I’m entitled to keep it. If the poor want money let them earn it the way I/my wealthy ancestor did. Never mind the fact that the wealthy ancestor probably “earned” that money through the labor and sweat of many people who weren’t payed enough to support themselves and their families in any kind of decent style.

The middle and lower income folks seem to have a different mentality. They have a more realistic concept of the relationship between work and money- yes you can be working your ass off and still have barely enough to get by. They have a mentality that “we’re all in the same boat, and the boat is leaking”. They are more likely to share what they have because they realize that in a week or a month or a year, they could lose their job, have a major illness or some circumstance of that nature and find themselves destitute and in need of help.


The trouble with Sir Launcelot is by the time he comes riding up, you’ve already married King Arthur.

MrSleep, try as I might, I just don’t get whatever point you are trying to make. I can assure you that if you “demand” Ma Joad’s help, or mine, you will regret that you did. Asking for help is a different matter.

If I was to help every person who needed charity, I’d be dead broke, and useless thereafter. I’m sure Bill Gates would be broke too, if he tried to help everybody. It’s all relative.

People are either generous or stingy, it’s really not a matter of rich or poor, although I like Andrew Carnegie’s idea, “To die rich is to be a failure.”


There’s always another beer.

I just love this idea that if a rich person inherited their money, they are somehow not really entitled to it.

I assume that all you “regular” people who espouse this idea would immediately, upon winning 50 million in the lottery, give it away. After all, you didn’t earn it, and if you had any sort of compassion you would realize that it’s not really your money and give it all away to the poor.

Ya, right.


“I should not take bribes and Minister Bal Bahadur KC should not do so either. But if clerks take a bribe of Rs 50-60 after a hard day’s work, it is not an issue.” ----Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, Current Prime Minister of Nepal

I cannot tell you who gives more, the rich or the poor. I can tell you though that whenever I have broken down or had a flat tire, it has always been a black man driving a beat up old car that has come to my rescue while the suits driving BMWs and Mercedes always zip by talking on their cell phones.

There are lots of rich assholes in the world, no doubt about it. There are lots of poor assholes, too. I fail to see any direct relationship between wealth and character. The richest man I know personally (not mega-rich, but a multi-millionaire) is also one of the most ethical and conscientious people I have ever known. He is quite generous, but he extends charity in his own way and rarely publicizes it. He is also opinionated, stubborn, occassionally cantankerous and often judgmental. The workd could use more folk like him.

I’m not sure who the poorest person I know is, but the odds are he is addicted to one or more drugs and is unable to care for himself, much less anybody else. This is not a generalization of the poor. It is simply a reflection of those people that I personally know. Some of them are my friends, but I have learned over the years exactly how far that friendship can be trusted. Poverty is not always associated with generosity.

Let me also add that I know people who have less money than I yet are far more generous. Such folk are truly inspirational.


The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*

You people are crazy if you think the rich should give up all they have. Rich people are rich because they know how to make, save and manage their money. I grew up very, very poor in rural Ala-freakin’-bama and noone gave me ****. When I make it rich, I will give some away some of MY MONEY to someone(s) who I consider worth giving money to, but you can take your suggestion of giving all of my money away and stick where the sun doesn’t shine. Furthermore, you people are acting like someone owes something just because they are wealthy. They don’t.

Finally, if the rich were to give away all of their money to the less fortunate it would not result in a utopia where everyone has everything they need. The poor would continue to act like poor people and blow their assets on booze, cigarettes, gambling and painting their pickup trucks about 50 different colors. They are poor because they are (for the most part with some exceptions) STUPID. I’ve seen people spend money on cigarettes when they had nothing to eat. I’ve seen ragged out Chevys with $4000 worth of stereo equipment. STUPID. Poor people who are not stupid are the ones who won’t always be poor and also are the ones it would make any sense to subsidize. But to indiscriminately throw money around (welfare) without some sort of accountability for the recipient is pointless. Yes, we can send a billion dollars worth of grain to Ethiopia, but they still live in a friggin’ desert. What they need is a bus.