News Archive

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

1988

Philanthropy Of The Few Lets The Rich Off The Hook

The Age

Wednesday May 28, 2003

Of all the reasons why we should be kind to the rich, that they might bestow gifts upon us must be one of the poorest.

Denis Tracey's somewhat obsequious defence of Rodney Adler et al (Opinion, 26/5) openly endorses the real reason why philanthropy shouldn't be especially praised. Those few among the very rich who philanthropise, he suggests, are motivated mainly by the desire to give back to ``a society that has enabled their success". Well, exactly. One might think that this ``enabling" even brings with it certain obligations to that society.

To the extent that our society is dependent on philanthropy - and, increasingly, it is - philanthropy should not be seen as optional. A few percentage points added to the income tax rate for the very wealthy would give (``give back"!) to society far more than the collective voluntary contributions of a few magnanimous millionaires.

The official orthodoxy calls for more philanthropy to fully fund our educational and cultural institutions. But why should we ask the few virtuous rich to give more than their fair share when we can make all of the rich give (back) a little bit more each? Why rely on these virtuous few to ``inspire" other rich people when we can simply legislate? By increasing the top tax rate, we would even be decreasing the monetary burden on the few philanthropers out there - who may then even have enough cash left over to have their philanthropy and their luxury yacht, too.

Tracey insists that we should ``reward" philanthropers more than we do, by which he means that we should praise them. But praise is cheap. We should put money where he thinks our mouth should be: we should compel philanthropy by raising the top tax rate marginally, thereby rewarding philanthropers by requiring less of them. In this way, everybody wins - except the rich non-philanthropers - without our having to do what is most inconsistent with the national culture: namely, sucking up to the rich.

John O'Dea, research school of the social sciences, ANU

© 2003 The Age

Back to News Index | Back to Home