kalu_miah
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2009
- Messages
- 6,475
- Reaction score
- 17
- Country
- Location
See, I just can't agree with this, because his message is clear. You're making a big deal out of a simple message of good will.
Also, your entire idea for the Nordic system was that it doesn't have a role for charity, don't try and twist your own meaning.
The idea of state run welfare is all fine and dandy, but like I've mentioned before, it's unreasonable to expect the government to take care of everyone all the time. The government is very limited in what it can do, no government has that kind of reach, even in Canada. This is why governments allow charity groups to operate, it's why the Chinese gov hasn't shut down every single charity group that exists in the country.
Bill was not telling the Chinese gov to change it's policy or it's practices, his message wasn't even directed towards the gov, but rather the wealthy in China. What I find disturbing is that people are actually defending the ultra rich, which is exactly what is causing the income inequality in nations like the US and China.
There is no simple message of goodwill. It reeks of supremacy complex, I know better than you, kind of stuff. If you lived in Canada long enough, you should know by now.
State run welfare is perfectly reasonable and can be done, all a matter of how the governance system is setup.
Having said that, Charity tax seems like getting a lot of objection from people in China:
Why No One Trusts Government Charities in China Anymore - Rachel Wang - The Atlantic
Also the idea of Charity seems to be growing in China. If charity is run as non profit enterprises with people who feel passionate about helping people in need and if it is more efficient than govt. welfare then, there could be a place for it, I think this is the direction that China could be moving towards very slowly. If govt. run charity is failing to do the job and private charity does better, then I would support going with the more efficient choice. But I would make sure that the fund goes through govt. control and screening department:
source link belowThere are signs, however, that philanthropy is on the rise in China. Last Thursday, Jack Ma and Joe Tsai, founders of the e-commerce giant Alibaba said they established personal charitable trusts that could be the nation’s largest.
The trusts hold about 2 per cent of Alibaba’s equity, according to a company press release. The fund could be worth between US$2 billion to US$4 billion, after the e-commerce giant’s listing on the New York stock exchange expected later this year.
The new trusts will operate alongside Alibaba’s corporate charitable foundation that has already existed since 2010 and earmarked 0.3 per cent revenue for charity.
“We hope to live in a world with bluer skies, cleaner water and better access to health care,” Jack Ma was quoted in the press release. “We must assume responsibility and take action to improve the environment that our children will inherit.”
No Chinese billionaire has yet signed up to the Giving Pledge, an initiative by Gates and Buffett in which they ask the world’s richest to give at least 50 per cent of their wealth to charity.
The Chinese government has however gradually been moving toward improving the regulatory environment for philanthropy, said Kennedy. "The key step will be the passage of a Charity Law, which may occur this year," he said. "Once issued, we can expect the overall level of philanthropy to rise rapidly."
My personal opinion, the rich know how to create enterprise and create jobs, they should use their surplus capital for job creation, not for charity. In developed countries, many almost are full employment economies, so job creation is not as big a priority as in developing countries. Here is a similar comment from the same news:
Bill Gates urges China's richest to give to charity in People's Daily article | South China Morning Post
guy.pantApr 29th 2014
2:40am
Just because not many are giving (unnecessary) credence to the Gates-Buffet name, doesn't mean money isn't given in another name, anonymously, or through other other means. I recall a Chinese national saying Chinese people would rather see money put into job creation - the best form of giving - by the wealthy than a hand-out.