This week’s topic has definitely shifted my views on what rich people can do. I had the exact same thought as Prof. Chan that if I could become rich, I would be able to make a positive environmental impact. However, I’ve come to realize that it’s more nuanced than that. There are reasons why rich people are rich, and it’s because there are loopholes that they can take advantage of. That is why I believe that big companies should be more transparent with what they do with the “donations” they state to make. I envision a world where rich people can provide more solutions than just throwing money left and right — evading further taxes. My solution to this would be that instead of having big businesses evade taxes through donating, they are rewarded by investing in solutions that the government oversees. If let’s say the government see’s an actual benefit to their solution, then the government can match up to a certain percentage and return it to big companies. And they can choose to double down and compound the investment into their solution. Thus, creating a snowballing effect towards the right solutions. 💰
top of page
Make the pledge to push for system change with CoSphere.
Create an account to join and begin connecting with our community.
Why Join?
Why Join?
THE COMMUNITY FORUM
bottom of page
This was a very interesting read! I haven't though of a business based equality solution. I think matching the investment of companies in humanitarian initiatives is a good idea, and more companies may invest responsibly if there is profit in it other than for tax purposes.
I really like your solution! Utilizing government matching grants for charitable donations seems to be a completely new concept to me, and once that I think could have very positive implications.
I personally believe we should allow the government to take a larger stake in innovation as most innovative research is already funded by the government. I think we give companies and corporations a little too much slack already, if corporations payed their fair share of taxes anyway they wouldn't have to worry about charity in the first place!
Hi H! I found your vision for the future super interesting! I agree that transparency is required to avoid businesses from making false claims and think your idea of introducing an incentive is a great idea!
Hey, I like your idea, given our current situation and economic climate, we are really distrustful of wealthy individuals and large companies. My question is that given we are already distrustful, how can we have trust in the government to do the right thing?
I really like your idea of the government better regulating business donations! I think businesses would have interest in this since it could still help avoid some taxes and their donations could be used for good, so this idea would benefit a lot of different groups.
Hey H!
I agree with what you said about the importance of big companies being transparent with their donations. I had no idea about 501(c)(4)s and other methods employed by the wealthy to save money before watching Patriot Act.
I also like your idea of incentivizing companies to invest in programs that require government oversight. How would the government effectively monitor the activity of these companies? We know from the VW example in class that companies may "appear" to comply with regulations and laws, but don't necessarily follow them if the costs are significant. How would we prevent companies from appearing transparent, without actually being more transparent?
Rich people may not make a positive environmental impact, on the other hand, people with no property means they are no choice to say no, and they will do anything to gain more money, whether hurt the environment or not. The two extremes are both harmful. The entire social system, like the government, has more possibility to make a correct decision than one person.