Chapek and D'Amaro continue the tradition of no bonus or Christmas gift for Disney's Cast Members

[ImperfectPixie]

OMG, you really believe that? They give away enough to give them good cred, but it is a small fraction of their total worth. The amount the wealthy donate is determined by what they need to avoid taxes and is comparable to parking meter change for the rest of us.

Some are true philanthropists, but the majority are not.

Truth.

They donate for their own interests. If it didn't have a benefit worth more than the donations themselves, they wouldn't do it.

 

[John park hopper]

I won't name names but a family set up a foundation to help victims of the Haitian earthquake little or no money actually going to the victims the money went to the foundation salaries and buying influence. Not all charities are for the benefit of those in need.

 

[Lilofan]

OMG, you really believe that? They give away enough to give them good cred, but it is a small fraction of their total worth. The amount the wealthy donate is determined by what they need to avoid taxes and is comparable to parking meter change for the rest of us.

Some are true philanthropists, but the majority are not.

They still giveaway billions of their net worth even if it helps their cred. Warren Buffett is pushing 90 years old and wonder where billions in his fortune will go to . He certainly doesn't spend much on lunch when he sometimes eats at Dairy Queen and drives a pre owned Cadillac.

 

[Goofyernmost]

They still giveaway billions of their net worth even if it helps their cred. Warren Buffett is pushing 90 years old and wonder where billions in his fortune will go to . He certainly doesn't spend much on lunch when he sometimes eats at Dairy Queen and drives a pre owned Cadillac.

I addressed that with my last sentence. He is indeed one of the more generous. Yes, in spite of their reasons they do supply a lot of needed funds for good causes, but to call it an award winning sacrifice on their part... not so much.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

I addressed that with my last sentence. He is indeed one of the more generous. Yes, in spite of their reasons they do supply a lot of needed funds for good causes, but to call it an award winning sacrifice on their part... not so much.

The timing with which this came up is kind of funny...I was just saying to my husband the other day that if all corporations and wealthy donors pooled their annual donations into a single trust, they could likely give every household in America $1,000,000 in less than 10 years.

 

[Ayla]

OMG, you really believe that? They give away enough to give them good cred, but it is a small fraction of their total worth. The amount the wealthy donate is determined by what they need to avoid taxes and is comparable to parking meter change for the rest of us.

Some are true philanthropists, but the majority are not.

MacKenzie Scott is a true philanthropist. She is a woman to be admired.

 

[John park hopper]

The timing with which this came up is kind of funny...I was just saying to my husband the other day that if all corporations and wealthy donors pooled their annual donations into a single trust, they could likely give every household in America $1,000,000 in less than 10 years.

If we all had a million dollars a quart of milk would be 100 bucks. If they pooled their wealth and built factories to make things we used to and pay a decent wage and employ people would be great achievement.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

If we all had a million dollars a quart of milk would be 100 bucks. If they pooled there wealth and built factories to tomato things we used to and pay a decent wage and employee people would be great achievement.

It would. My overall point being that siphoning money through charities doesn't do enough, but that if they combined their efforts, large corporations and the wealthy could really change the world our children are living in for the better in a huge way.

 

[John park hopper]

It would. My overall point being that siphoning money through charities doesn't do enough, but that if they combined their efforts, large corporations and the wealthy could really change the world our children are living in for the better in a huge way.

I'm reminded of the saying give man fish and you feed him for a day teach man to fish and you feed him for a life time. My updated version --Teach a man a skill and provide a good job and he can take care of himself for life

 

[ImperfectPixie]

I'm reminded of the saying give man fish and you feed him for a day teach man to fish and you feed him for a life time. My updated version --Teach a man a skill and provide a good job and he can take care of himself for life

AMEN.

 

[Lilofan]

I addressed that with my last sentence. He is indeed one of the more generous. Yes, in spite of their reasons they do supply a lot of needed funds for good causes, but to call it an award winning sacrifice on their part... not so much.

Mackenzie Scott, Jeff Bezos ex-wife is off to a good start. She has given away $8.5 billion to charity from the $35 billion settlement she received from their divorce. Whoever the divorce lawyer was for Bezos, helped out his client. Bezos did not have to giveaway 50% of his net worth to his ex wife in the divorce settlement.

 

[dovetail65]

It's crap whats being said here and not true. It is the middle class that does not give!




Middle-class Americans donate a less. But the lower-income population surprises by giving more than the middle—and in some measures even more than the top. (As a percentage of available income, that is. In absolute dollars, those in higher income groups give much, much more money.)


Wealthy households donated an average of $43,195 in 2020, according to a newly released survey on high-net-worth people's charitable giving from Bank of America BAC, -1.49% and the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy at Indiana University.

Those in the top 1 percent of the income distribution (any family making $394,000 or more in 2015) provide about a third of all charitable dollars given in the U.S.

When it comes to bequests, the rich are even more important: the wealthiest 1.4 percent of Americans are responsible for 86 percent of the charitable ...

What that's not enough? percentage wise at worst the rich give as much, most studies show it far more, but dollar wise it is not even close, without the rich charities would not even exist.

People that are rich(what does that even mean) are no different than you or me. Just like people that can afford or what I should say choose to allocate their funds to AP's are not different, they are not self entitled, they are not mean, they are people like everyone else. We are all people, that is it. Generalizing and spouting things about an entire group of people based on their income and nothing more, the people that factually sustain our charities is nothing but mean spirited and possibly demonstrating jealousy.

 

[Cesar R M]

No one is worth the insane amounts of money CEOs make. NOT ONE PERSON. Boiled down to it's simplest form, it's just big egos feeding other big egos.

The irony is.. that CEO defenders (aka people who want to become CEOs and get the same money), do not understand that once you reach the level of a big ceo. You can screw up and still get ZERO whiplash.
You get your golden parashute and you get to the next company.

 

[Cesar R M]

(Waits for someone to tell us that Diznee iz a bizness and $lappie is making money for the shareholders because it's his responsibility)

XD

 

[ImperfectPixie]

It's crap whats being said here and not true. It is the middle class that does not give!




Middle-class Americans donate a less. But the lower-income population surprises by giving more than the middle—and in some measures even more than the top. (As a percentage of available income, that is. In absolute dollars, those in higher income groups give much, much more money.)


Wealthy households donated an average of $43,195 in 2020, according to a newly released survey on high-net-worth people's charitable giving from Bank of America BAC, -1.49% and the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy at Indiana University.

Those in the top 1 percent of the income distribution (any family making $394,000 or more in 2015) provide about a third of all charitable dollars given in the U.S.

When it comes to bequests, the rich are even more important: the wealthiest 1.4 percent of Americans are responsible for 86 percent of the charitable ...

What that's not enough? percentage wise at worst the rich give as much, most studies show it far more, but dollar wise it is not even close, without the rich charities would not even exist.

People that are rich(what does that even mean) are no different than you or me. Just like people that can afford or what I should say choose to allocate their funds to AP's are not different, they are not self entitled, they are not mean, they are people like everyone else. We are all people, that is it. Generalizing and spouting things about an entire group of people based on their income and nothing more, the people that factually sustain our charities is nothing but mean spirited and possibly demonstrating jealousy.

You're denying reality at this point.

 

[Cesar R M]

Their money would have a more dramatic effect if they didn't siphon it through charities - which also pay their administrators way too much money.

Charities have always been a different cause than actually giving away stuff.

1. Bill Gates is very well known to give "away" money and equipment. As long as the receiving end commits to use Microsoft products. Aka they say "if you want this money and equipment, you cannot use MacOS or Linux!" thus create a dependency.
2. Charities are heavily implied in Tax deductions.
3. Charities look very good for PR.
4. Some companies even use charity style scams.. where they say "buy 1$ and we will donate 1$" You're paying for their taxes and you're buying their products.
5. Syphon money thru charities to other parts of your company. Like claim "I donated X amount to buy Y equipment to Z place". They get the deduction and buy themselves products and pay their own crew R amount of wages.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Charities have always been a different cause than actually giving away stuff.

1. Bill Gates is very well known to give "away" money and equipment. As long as the receiving end commits to use Microsoft products. Aka they say "if you want this money and equipment, you cannot use MacOS or Linux!" thus create a dependency.
2. Charities are heavily implied in Tax deductions.
3. Charities look very good for PR.
4. Some companies even use charity style scams.. where they say "buy 1$ and we will donate 1$" You're paying for their taxes and you're buying their products.

One of the ones that ticks me off the most is Walmart and their "we gave "X" meals to the local community!" How about stop treating the local community members who work for you like trash?

 

[Cesar R M]

I won't name names but a family set up a foundation to help victims of the Haitian earthquake little or no money actually going to the victims the money went to the foundation salaries and buying influence. Not all charities are for the benefit of those in need.

I think one of the leading anti cancer "charities" in the USA has been mentioning doing this. The CEO has a into millions wage and uses a ton of money to sue other charities for "copyright infringement" and other dirty tactics to have the monopoly.

Not 100% sure if its the cancer research or other.

One of the ones that ticks me off the most is Walmart and their "we gave "X" meals to the local community!" How about stop treating the local community members who work for you like trash?

This!
And I've heard that these meals are usually about to expire stuff..
So the real donations were literally 0. They just saved money on losing the food for nothing.. instead they put it as "charity".

 

[dovetail65]

You're denying reality at this point.

You are so wrong, do some research Those are facts from studies and most of the information comes form IRS returns and the charitable entities. This is like arguing with people that the earth revolves around the sun adn the earth is flat. Do some research.

YOU ARE DENYING reality.

So what are you saying the rich dont give more than anyone else, because that is a fact. OR do you think the wealthy are not the same as me and some aliens from another planet?

I give NOTHING to charity, I am not rich, but I sure appreciate the rich that do give.

To all the wealthy that give over 40k a year I thank you. To the top 2 % that enable all the charities in the world to exist, I thank you.

To anyone that doesn't believe the poor give more than the middle class percentage wise and that the rich sustain the charities, I say just read.

And from the IRS returns 51% of people give to try to get a tax break, fact is that does not mean if they didn't give they would not have more money in the end. That leaves the other 49% that give just to give, no tax break factored in.

These are all readily available facts so have that anger against the rich if you want, but don't do it became there is a feeling they should give more, they don't need give a gosh darn thing, they have no moral right to do so.

This is like syaing the wealthy don't already pay most of the taxes, they do.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

You are so wrong, do some research Those are facts from studies and most of the information comes form IRS returns and the charitable entities. This is like arguing with people that the earth revolves around the sun. DO some research.

YOU ARE DENYING reality.

So what re you saying the rich dont give more than anyone else, because that is a fact OR do you think the ealty are not the sme as me? and some alien from another planet?

I give NOTHING to charity, I am not rich, but I sure appreciate the rich that do give.

To all the wealthy that give over 40k a year thank you. To the top 2 % that enable all the charities in the world to exist,thank you.

To anyone that doesn't believe the poor give more than the middle class percentage wise and that the rich sustain the charities, I say just read.

No, I'm not. Do some research...total charitable donations doesn't mean anything in relation to the issues that are being discussed.