<div dir="auto">FWIW my grandson Matthew's photo is on the front page of the Santa Fe New Mexican because of his work to send packages to Ukrainian refugees.<br><br><div data-smartmail="gmail_signature">---<br>Frank C. Wimberly<br>140 Calle Ojo Feliz, <br>Santa Fe, NM 87505<br><br>505 670-9918<br>Santa Fe, NM</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Mar 7, 2022, 11:04 AM glen <<a href="mailto:gepropella@gmail.com">gepropella@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">It's not clear to me if EricC is accidentally or purposefully distorting the message. In order for us to accuse the participants in Patriotic Millionaires (PM) of *not* supporting any given cause, we'd need to look at their individual philanthropy. Looking at the stances, lobbying, and messaging of PM is inadequate.<br>
<br>
E.g. If we took a look at an issue PM says is Good, a "value", and we examine the donations of all the PM participants and found that either a) they don't donate any of their money at all or b) they donate to everything except the values of the PM, *then* EricC's rhetoric would have some traction.<br>
<br>
Otherwise, what an org advocates is not, cannot ever be, identical to what its members advocate.<br>
<br>
I've done none of that work of comparing PM's advocacy/lobbying and its participants' actions. Perhaps others have?<br>
<br>
On 3/7/22 09:51, Eric Charles wrote:<br>
> Pick a cause if you want, or just send your money to the government if the<br>
> point is that you think the government should have it. ¯\_ (\u30c4)_/¯<br>
> <br>
> <<a href="mailto:echarles@american.edu" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">echarles@american.edu</a>><br>
> A Javelin missile costs $175,203 according to Wikipedia. 4 years of college<br>
> education is cheaper than that at most institutions. *Any *millionaire<br>
> could just cover one of those, if they thought that was the best use of<br>
> their money. *Any *millionaire could cover 4 of them, and still have a<br>
> significantly higher net worth than the median American under 40. We need<br>
> to stop pretending otherwise. If someone has several million, they could<br>
> cover a whole lot more and still be doing just fine.<br>
> <br>
> "Look, man, I think helping kids go to college is a morally crucial<br>
> activity and that those who have an obligation to support it should do<br>
> so... But I won't help with that unless I know a legislature is forcing<br>
> lots of other people to help kids go to college!" Well.... ok.... but<br>
> that's a pretty shitty position to take.<br>
> <br>
> Maybe you think it's so important that you want to help yourself, and you *also<br>
> *you think others should be forced to help. Sure. I don't like that<br>
> position, but it is sensible, and you can morally ground it in all sorts of<br>
> ways. But no level of moral importance should exist as a category where you<br>
> won't help unless everyone else is forced to as well. Yes, people take that<br>
> position all the time. But it is a morally shitty position, and we should<br>
> treat it that way.<br>
> <br>
> Phrased differently: Having the government pick up the slack when<br>
> individual action is insufficient can often make sense. Claiming that only<br>
> government action should happen, and then acting as if that claim somehow<br>
> relieves individuals from any obligation to live up to their purported<br>
> moral values, is crap.<br>
> <br>
> If you think it is important to support local kids getting a college<br>
> education, then step up. You are in absolutely no sense "a bum" or "a<br>
> sucker" if you help someone afford a college education and your neighbor<br>
> doesn't. That's not how moral action works. Not at all. The correct<br>
> response to someone trying to act that way is to try to force them to admit<br>
> the obvious truth, which is that they have chosen not to support whatever<br>
> the cause is that is in question.<br>
> <br>
> Again, if they *are *supporting the cause, and adding on top of their<br>
> individual support a statement that they also think others should do more,<br>
> that's a much more defendable position. Statements like "I think the arts<br>
> should be supported, which is why I donated $XX,XXX to The Kennedy Center,<br>
> while lobbying my federal congressperson for more tax support" is perfectly<br>
> reasonable, as is "I think we need to better support local kids going to<br>
> college, which is why I provided 5 $X,XXX local-kid scholarships this local<br>
> high school graduates, while also talking with my state congressperson<br>
> about upping state funding to state schools."<br>
> <br>
> Do a survey of the "Patriotic Millionaires" and ask them how much more they<br>
> paid in taxes than what they owed. My guess is that you would find $0 as<br>
> the across the board answer. If it's not $0 across the board, certainly the<br>
> median will be $0.<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2022 at 9:47 AM Marcus Daniels <<a href="mailto:marcus@snoutfarm.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">marcus@snoutfarm.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
>> Let\u2019s say it is not a box of cookies but a four year college scholarship<br>
>> or a Javelin missile launcher. The millionaire might be able to pay those<br>
>> individually, but no one else. In that situation there is no sales for the<br>
>> individual girl scouts to perform. At best a few heroic medium-sized<br>
>> donations.<br>
>><br>
>> Some purchases will be out of reach without spreading the cost around,<br>
>> even over thousands of millionaires.<br>
>><br>
>> On Mar 7, 2022, at 6:04 AM, Eric Charles <<a href="mailto:eric.phillip.charles@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">eric.phillip.charles@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> \ufeff<br>
>> Marcus,<br>
>> Let's say you have a neighbor who's always talking about wanting to<br>
>> support the girl scouts, and who even goes so far as to set up a web page<br>
>> about how important it is to support the girl scouts, and pays to have<br>
>> signs printed and distributed around town about how important it is to<br>
>> support girl scouts. You have a cousin in the girl scouts, so you send her<br>
>> over with the girl-scout cookie order form. The neighbor takes a look at<br>
>> the forms and tells your cousin "While I *do *think I should support girl<br>
>> scouts, I am not going to give you any money unless everyone else in the<br>
>> neighboorhood is forced to give you money too. Don't ask me to be a chump."<br>
>><br>
>> What would we make of that?<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> <<a href="mailto:echarles@american.edu" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">echarles@american.edu</a>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Sun, Mar 6, 2022 at 11:13 PM Marcus Daniels <<a href="mailto:marcus@snoutfarm.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">marcus@snoutfarm.com</a>><br>
>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>>> Facebook had advertisements on TV for a few months talking about their<br>
>>> efforts to review content for fake news. They advocated government<br>
>>> regulation. Commonality being that a taxation or regulation impacts them<br>
>>> and their competitors in the same way, so their effective power and<br>
>>> influence won\u2019t be negatively impacted. \u201cDon\u2019t ask me to be a chump.\u201d<br>
>>><br>
>>> On Mar 6, 2022, at 8:02 PM, Eric Charles <<a href="mailto:eric.phillip.charles@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">eric.phillip.charles@gmail.com</a>><br>
>>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> \ufeff<br>
>>> Frank,<br>
>>> That all seems 100% positive to me.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Do you also routinely publicly complain about how legislatures are lax in<br>
>>> not forcing you to do more of that sort of thing, because you strongly<br>
>>> think that you should do more, but are unwilling to without the government<br>
>>> forcing you to?<br>
>>><br>
>>> THAT is what the Patriotic Millionaires are doing.<br>
>>><br>
>>> <<a href="mailto:echarles@american.edu" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">echarles@american.edu</a>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> On Sun, Mar 6, 2022 at 9:43 PM Frank Wimberly <<a href="mailto:wimberly3@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">wimberly3@gmail.com</a>><br>
>>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>>> I probably shouldn't volunteer to be a case in your argument but...<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I do make donations to universities and a church. Today my wife and<br>
>>>> grandson Matthew assembled packages of hygiene products for Ukrainian<br>
>>>> refugees which included things like towels, toothpaste, toothbrushes, soap,<br>
>>>> shampoo etc. This was done at United Church of Santa Fe. As for financial<br>
>>>> contributions we spend $20k per year for tuition at Matthew's school which<br>
>>>> is a Montessori school for kids with executive function problems. There<br>
>>>> are a number of scholarship students whose families wouldn't be able to<br>
>>>> send their kids there without help.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> The church group put together 137 packages this morning. We donated<br>
>>>> funds for the purchase of some of the stuff.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Melinda Gates said that if you're a billionaire you can donate half of<br>
>>>> your assets without any impact on your lifestyle. But that's a different<br>
>>>> question.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Frank<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> ---<br>
>>>> Frank C. Wimberly<br>
>>>> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,<br>
>>>> Santa Fe, NM 87505<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> 505 670-9918<br>
>>>> Santa Fe, NM<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> On Sun, Mar 6, 2022, 7:24 PM Eric Charles <<br>
>>>> <a href="mailto:eric.phillip.charles@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">eric.phillip.charles@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>>> While some of the goals of groups like "Patriotic Millionaires" are<br>
>>>>> admirable, I can never get past the blatant hypocrisy of it all. Maybe<br>
>>>>> "hypocrisy" isn't exactly the right term. You could also see the part<br>
>>>>> that bugs me as a bizarre worship of the benefits of authority over<br>
>>>>> individual choice. Let me rephrase their primary claim: "I, as a rich<br>
>>>>> person, recognize that I really *should *give more of my money to<br>
>>>>> certain causes, but I adamantly refuse to do so unless forced to do so by<br>
>>>>> the federal legislature."<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> What is anyone really to make of that position? Is it any different<br>
>>>>> than trying to look virtuous by saying that you know you should stop using<br>
>>>>> child labor in your mine, while also publicly refusing to stop unless the<br>
>>>>> government makes you?<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 3:08 PM glen <<a href="mailto:gepropella@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">gepropella@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>> Obviously, I'm either procrastinating or unclear on how best to do<br>
>>>>>> actual work today because here is yet another thing I meant to talk about<br>
>>>>>> with someone, anyone, awhile back:<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> <a href="https://patrioticmillionaires.org/about/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://patrioticmillionaires.org/about/</a><br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> A salon participant recently asked whether "greed" was our most<br>
>>>>>> nefarious trait as a species. It's a great question for sparking<br>
>>>>>> discussion. My answer was that the most nefarious trait of *all* species is<br>
>>>>>> myopia, the inability to reason over externalities, from pond scum to the<br>
>>>>>> Trust <<a href="https://raised-by-wolves.fandom.com/wiki/Trust" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://raised-by-wolves.fandom.com/wiki/Trust</a>>. But to<br>
>>>>>> de-emphasize what people think of as "greed", I said "Trying to ensure you<br>
>>>>>> have enough money to live out your life in relative comfort is not greed.<br>
>>>>>> Greed is, after acquiring billions of dollars, you feel the need to acquire<br>
>>>>>> more billions of dollars."<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> I found Patriotic Millionaires prior to that conversation. And it<br>
>>>>>> seems legit ... a set of outwardly greedy people who recognize limits to<br>
>>>>>> their greed ... a recognition that there's a spectrum of merit, some luck,<br>
>>>>>> some effort, some systemic infrastructure, etc. Overall, [m|b]illionaire<br>
>>>>>> philanthropy (and especially effective altruism) seem like jokes to me,<br>
>>>>>> very postmodern jokes. "Here, let me given you a billion dollars without<br>
>>>>>> fundamentally rewriting your genetic code." Pffft. Give anyone enough money<br>
>>>>>> and you'll corrupt them fundamentally, often against their will.<br>
>>>>>> Philanthropists know this. Effective Altruism is an oxymoron. You can't<br>
>>>>>> both be coercive and altruistic at the same time. >8^D<br>
>>>>>><br>
>>>>>> Anyway, I'd welcome any opinion on Patriotic Millionaires.<br>
<br>
-- <br>
glen<br>
When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers.<br>
<br>
<br>
.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .<br>
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 <a href="http://bit.ly/virtualfriam" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br>
un/subscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>
FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a><br>
archives:<br>
5/2017 thru present <a href="https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/</a><br>
1/2003 thru 6/2021 <a href="http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/</a><br>
</blockquote></div>