[No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK


No Such Thing as a Free Gift

READ Á No Such Thing as a Free Gift Ll and Melinda Gates Foundation As large charitable organizations replace governments as the providers of social welfare their largesse becomes suspect The businesses fronting the money often create the very economic instability and ineuality the foundations are purported to solve We are entering an age when the ideals of social justice are dependent on the strained rectitude and uestionable generosity of the mega rich. I really wanted to like this I think we should be taking a good look at what McGoey terms philanthrocapitalism and I think she makes some good points But ultimately I think she comes to conclusions that the evidence doesn t support and she s so eager to criticize that she misses the pointHere s what I agreed with philanthropy on the grand scale could do a lot better transparency Because of Board of Directors usually the people who ultimately make the funding decisions confidentiality people don t always know how or why grants are made social enterprise business or social benefit businesses deserve a lot of scrutiny We definitely should not take any business at their word that claims to be doing social good and it can often be a smokescreen other parts of a not so ethical business diverse boards are a good thing and while I wouldn t go as far as McGoey does and mandate a two thirds non family seat count I would strongly encourage boards to consider opening their membership to non family experts the American tradition of using charitable dollars to fund deeply partisan think tanks that work to undermine the rights of the poor and advance the rights of the rich is pretty gross Read Dark Money The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right for a great take on thisBut here s where we diverge McGoey argues that philanthrocapitalism which she defines as large private granting foundations whose founders usually but not always drive the granting and strategy of the organization is ipso facto a bad thing And I just can t agree with this Look I definitely agree that not all grants made by those organizations are effective or perfect But you know what All of those people could have just bought another super yacht Or island Or two super yachts three private jets and four islands A lot of those grants do good and I think what McGoey is really criticizing is an economic and regulatory system that allows wealth accumulate among a small group of people McGoey thinks the rich should not be afforded the tax shelter of setting up a foundation and should just be forced to pay the tax But in my opinion it s naive to think that the rich wouldn t find other tax loopholes or avoidance strategies McGoey ascribes a lot of behavior to foundations that I would argue is not representative of the whole Foundations are incredibly diverse and there s a silly saying that once you ve met one foundation you ve met one foundation For example she criticizes foundations for allowing people to sink a whole bunch of money into a foundation and then disburse only 5% a year the American regulatory minimum suggesting that citizens are forgoing tax revenue for benefits they may never see And while this is certainly true of a few foundations many have existed for years and disbursed than the value of the original gift into their communities Other foundations are flow through entirely and allow people to give anonymously McGoey does not state but mistakenly implies that there are no large anonymous donors And the Gates Foundation the subject of this book will spend all of it s money within 50 years of either Bill or Melinda Gates s death whoever dies second McGoey strongly criticizes the Gates for not investing of their research dollars in developing nations even uoting one doctor from an African country who won t apply any because he s already been rejected twice Ok look Maybe the Gates Foundation should fund research in the Global South and focus on developing human capital there But maybe they have thoughtful reasons for choosing a different strategy And maybe that guy who applied and was rejected twice wrote really bad applications Or maybe he wrote good applications and there were enough people that wrote great applications that he didn t make the cut It just seemed a bit disingenuous to criticize their strategy when McGoey doesn t even think they should existI guess I just think McGoey is missing the forest for the trees Large scale philanthropy is not the problem a system that directs wealth into the hands of the few is And I just can t get on board with the idea that people like Bill and Melinda Gates and Warren Buffett pledging to give away half their wealth before they die is better than them buying stuff or hiding the money in offshore accounts even if you don t always agree with how and where they direct the funds To use another cliche it seems like McGoey is throwing the baby out with the bathwater here Grenadier Volume 7 Grenadier justice are dependent on the strained rectitude and uestionable generosity of the mega rich. I really wanted to like this I think we should be taking a good look at what McGoey terms philanthrocapitalism and I think she makes some good points But ultimately I think she comes to conclusions that the evidence doesn t support and she s so eager to criticize that she misses the pointHere s what I agreed with philanthropy on the grand scale could do a lot better transparency Because of Board of Directors usually the people who ultimately make the funding decisions confidentiality people don t always know how or why grants are made social enterprise business or social benefit businesses deserve a lot of scrutiny We definitely should not take any business at their word that claims to be doing social good and it can often be a smokescreen other parts of a not so ethical business diverse boards are a good thing and while I wouldn t go as far as McGoey does and mandate a two thirds non family seat count I would strongly encourage boards to consider opening their membership to non family experts the American tradition of using charitable dollars to fund deeply partisan think tanks that work to undermine the rights of the poor and advance the rights of the rich is pretty gross Read Dark Money The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right for a great take on thisBut here s where we diverge McGoey argues that philanthrocapitalism which she defines as large private granting foundations whose founders usually but not always drive the granting and strategy of the organization is ipso facto a bad thing And I Alice in Wonderland just can t agree with this Look I definitely agree that not all grants made by those organizations are effective or perfect But you know what All of those people could have The Great Game The Struggle for Empire in Central Asia just bought another super yacht Or island Or two super yachts three private Claudette Colvin Twice Toward Justice jets and four islands A lot of those grants do good and I think what McGoey is really criticizing is an economic and regulatory system that allows wealth accumulate among a small group of people McGoey thinks the rich should not be afforded the tax shelter of setting up a foundation and should Thrill Me Do Not Disturb just be forced to pay the tax But in my opinion it s naive to think that the rich wouldn t find other tax loopholes or avoidance strategies McGoey ascribes a lot of behavior to foundations that I would argue is not representative of the whole Foundations are incredibly diverse and there s a silly saying that once you ve met one foundation you ve met one foundation For example she criticizes foundations for allowing people to sink a whole bunch of money into a foundation and then disburse only 5% a year the American regulatory minimum suggesting that citizens are forgoing tax revenue for benefits they may never see And while this is certainly true of a few foundations many have existed for years and disbursed than the value of the original gift into their communities Other foundations are flow through entirely and allow people to give anonymously McGoey does not state but mistakenly implies that there are no large anonymous donors And the Gates Foundation the subject of this book will spend all of it s money within 50 years of either Bill or Melinda Gates s death whoever dies second McGoey strongly criticizes the Gates for not investing of their research dollars in developing nations even uoting one doctor from an African country who won t apply any because he s already been rejected twice Ok look Maybe the Gates Foundation should fund research in the Global South and focus on developing human capital there But maybe they have thoughtful reasons for choosing a different strategy And maybe that guy who applied and was rejected twice wrote really bad applications Or maybe he wrote good applications and there were enough people that wrote great applications that he didn t make the cut It Vildanden just seemed a bit disingenuous to criticize their strategy when McGoey doesn t even think they should existI guess I The Russo Japanese War 1904 1905 just think McGoey is missing the forest for the trees Large scale philanthropy is not the problem a system that directs wealth into the hands of the few is And I Duffy just can t get on board with the idea that people like Bill and Melinda Gates and Warren Buffett pledging to give away half their wealth before they die is better than them buying stuff or hiding the money in offshore accounts even if you don t always agree with how and where they direct the funds To use another cliche it seems like McGoey is throwing the baby out with the bathwater here

READ ´ MIAMIMOTELS.US È Linsey McGoey

READ Á No Such Thing as a Free Gift Philanthro capitalism How charity became big businessThe charitable sector is one of the fastest growing industries in the global economy Nearly half of the than 85000 private foundations in the United States have come into being since the year 2000 Just under 5000 were established in 2011 alone This deluge of philanthropy has helped create a world where billionaires wield power over education policy global agriculture. I ve read a number of books on philanthropy over the last couple of years but I think this is the one I would most highly recommend if you were thinking of reading just one I think that is because it uses Carnegie and Bill Gates as examples to show how philanthropy has been used to make the world in the image of very wealthy people Both men made their fortunes by using monopolistic practices and often if not actually breaking the law coming so close so as to leave a taint and stench of anything but an excess of morality Both then sought a kind of redemption by giving away large proportions of their wealth But this giving away idea is complicatedFirst of all there are tax benefits in giving away money At one point in this the author says that if an insanely wealthy person gives away 100 million they might save 75 million in taxes You might think well we are still 25 million better off than if they hadn t given the only problem is that we don t get to decide where any of that money is spent It might all go to Yale or it might go to the Opera Money paid in taxes is much likely to redistribute wealth than donations to charities do that is taxes tend to help the poor than money rich people overall donate to charities and this is because a rich person often gives their tax deductable money to their favourite form of recreation which doesn t always help the poor in anyway at allBut a bigger problem is that rich donors have an out sized influence on the overall direction of many of the organisations they support So even when these organisations are set up to do good or as Gates seems to like to say to do god s work their preferences can override the choices that experts might otherwise have made I m going to give a few examples hereThe first is in an area I m particularly interested in education A while ago Gates became a bit obsessed with small schools He noticed that small schools were often at the top of the achievement distribution curve It is not too hard to come up with a series of reasons why this might be the case Smaller schools have intimate relationships with their students they are like a community maybe the students all feel like family and so help each other out perhaps teachers get a better opportunity to deeply engage with their students rather seeing them as some faceless hoard All of these reasons sound plausible enough However the actual reason is basic statistics If you have a large school it is going to be populated by lots of kids and having lots of kids will mean kids at all levels of ability Which in turn means a large school is likely to end up pretty close to the average school pretty much in the same way that if I toss a coin a million times I am likely to come pretty close to 5050 heads to tails But if you have a small school and a couple of well educated families send their kids to the school that could tip the school s results right up to the top of the achievement curve in much the same way that if I toss a coin five times I might end up with all heads and no tails Small samples are easily skewed large ones not so much If Bill had looked he would have noticed that small schools were clustered at the bottom of the achievement curve too and for exactly the same reason they just ended up with tails than heads by the luck of the draw It is easier for a small school to over or under achieve than it is for a large schoolBut Bill was attracted by the interesting and plausible reasons for small schools doing better than he was with the boring statistical reasons and so he pumped millions into researching and supporting small schools All good you say so what if he was wrong Money was still going to schools and so the world is still a better place Yeah except for what happened next One day the results started coming in and those weren t so good So Bill decided to cut funding to the project It s his money after all Except that the schools that had come to rely on that money were left high and dry They had become victims of the whims of a wealthy donor with a short attention span something perhaps caused by his spending too much time interacting with screen based technologiesBut even whim isn t the worst of the problems here It would be hard to criticise a billionaire who sets out to eradicate polio or to end malaria or to vaccinate Africa What could you possibly have against that Well again the problem is that we are dealing with an all too human being and one who has no real expertise in the area of health that he has come to dominate He also appears to be doing a lot of this work at least in part to be recognised and remembered for it Look many of us want immortality of some sort or other I guess However his immortality can complicate the lives of many many people An example given in this book is the efforts that are being made to fully eradicate polio This has been a major focus of Gates and although this isn t literally said in the book it might be because it would make for a particularly good news story if a diseases with a name everyone knows ends up getting eradicated due to his efforts However in seeking to fully eradicate polio other diseases that cause much harm and deaths are being ignored or sidelinedThe problems get difficult because people who are rich tend to think that how they became rich is natural inevitable and an indication of their own virtue and merit And again perhaps we are all deluded in our own ways but the impact of say my delusions are likely to be fairly minor whereas someone who has a wealth in the order of 100 billion they can basically weaponise their delusions Now for virtually all of his life Gates has spent his time protecting copywrite laws his wealth depended upon it so it is hardly surprising he is fairly keen on the subject However defending patents and copywrite laws in the face of the crushing poverty of the global south isn t necessarily in the best interests of these people The examples given mostly involve him seeking technological fixes for the problems of the developing world the creation of higher yield seeds or of patent medicines and these come with a price tag Charity is a business in so many ways But here the lines between aid and business become particularly blurred The example is discussed again here of the Indian farmers forced by the high cost of Monsanto crops to commit suicide by drinking the pesticide they need to purchase and that has driven them into crushing poverty Another example is HIVAIDS where he has not supported the use of drugs as a preventative some antiretrovirals reduce the viral load in a persons bodily fluids and this in turn means those infected are less likely to pass on the virus to their sexual partners But Gates has strenuously opposed this Now there might be many reasons for him doing this one of which might be his stated concern that since there is only so much money to go around it would be effective to pursue prevention rather than cures However as someone uoted here says access to ARVs antiretrovirals would be a threat to intellectual property the regime of which he staunchly supports This book is fascinating not least because it covers so many aspects of Gates activities agriculture health education while also linking the discussion around these back to his employment investment and other business histories The biggest concern here is that Gates has bought his way onto the world stage He has power than the majority of world leaders maybe than all of them given he has not fixed time to retire Also unlike those world leaders he is almost entirely unaccountable At one point in this book an exchange is uoted between Gates and Piketty Piketty had just given a speech in which he called for a wealth tax Gates is uoted as saying to him after the speech I love everything that s in your book but I don t want to pay tax Piketty is uoted as saying I think he sincerely believes he s efficient than the government and you know maybe his is sometimes Yeah maybe he is but there are no conseuences for the times when he is not efficient And because he has so much power that becomes a real problem Flora of Maine A Manual for Identification of Native and Naturalized Plants of Maine Vascular just one I think that is because it uses Carnegie and Bill Gates as examples to show how philanthropy has been used to make the world in the image of very wealthy people Both men made their fortunes by using monopolistic practices and often if not actually breaking the law coming so close so as to leave a taint and stench of anything but an excess of morality Both then sought a kind of redemption by giving away large proportions of their wealth But this giving away idea is complicatedFirst of all there are tax benefits in giving away money At one point in this the author says that if an insanely wealthy person gives away 100 million they might save 75 million in taxes You might think well we are still 25 million better off than if they hadn t given the only problem is that we don t get to decide where any of that money is spent It might all go to Yale or it might go to the Opera Money paid in taxes is much likely to redistribute wealth than donations to charities do that is taxes tend to help the poor than money rich people overall donate to charities and this is because a rich person often gives their tax deductable money to their favourite form of recreation which doesn t always help the poor in anyway at allBut a bigger problem is that rich donors have an out sized influence on the overall direction of many of the organisations they support So even when these organisations are set up to do good or as Gates seems to like to say to do god s work their preferences can override the choices that experts might otherwise have made I m going to give a few examples hereThe first is in an area I m particularly interested in education A while ago Gates became a bit obsessed with small schools He noticed that small schools were often at the top of the achievement distribution curve It is not too hard to come up with a series of reasons why this might be the case Smaller schools have intimate relationships with their students they are like a community maybe the students all feel like family and so help each other out perhaps teachers get a better opportunity to deeply engage with their students rather seeing them as some faceless hoard All of these reasons sound plausible enough However the actual reason is basic statistics If you have a large school it is going to be populated by lots of kids and having lots of kids will mean kids at all levels of ability Which in turn means a large school is likely to end up pretty close to the average school pretty much in the same way that if I toss a coin a million times I am likely to come pretty close to 5050 heads to tails But if you have a small school and a couple of well educated families send their kids to the school that could tip the school s results right up to the top of the achievement curve in much the same way that if I toss a coin five times I might end up with all heads and no tails Small samples are easily skewed large ones not so much If Bill had looked he would have noticed that small schools were clustered at the bottom of the achievement curve too and for exactly the same reason they Resist Not Evil just ended up with tails than heads by the luck of the draw It is easier for a small school to over or under achieve than it is for a large schoolBut Bill was attracted by the interesting and plausible reasons for small schools doing better than he was with the boring statistical reasons and so he pumped millions into researching and supporting small schools All good you say so what if he was wrong Money was still going to schools and so the world is still a better place Yeah except for what happened next One day the results started coming in and those weren t so good So Bill decided to cut funding to the project It s his money after all Except that the schools that had come to rely on that money were left high and dry They had become victims of the whims of a wealthy donor with a short attention span something perhaps caused by his spending too much time interacting with screen based technologiesBut even whim isn t the worst of the problems here It would be hard to criticise a billionaire who sets out to eradicate polio or to end malaria or to vaccinate Africa What could you possibly have against that Well again the problem is that we are dealing with an all too human being and one who has no real expertise in the area of health that he has come to dominate He also appears to be doing a lot of this work at least in part to be recognised and remembered for it Look many of us want immortality of some sort or other I guess However his immortality can complicate the lives of many many people An example given in this book is the efforts that are being made to fully eradicate polio This has been a major focus of Gates and although this isn t literally said in the book it might be because it would make for a particularly good news story if a diseases with a name everyone knows ends up getting eradicated due to his efforts However in seeking to fully eradicate polio other diseases that cause much harm and deaths are being ignored or sidelinedThe problems get difficult because people who are rich tend to think that how they became rich is natural inevitable and an indication of their own virtue and merit And again perhaps we are all deluded in our own ways but the impact of say my delusions are likely to be fairly minor whereas someone who has a wealth in the order of 100 billion they can basically weaponise their delusions Now for virtually all of his life Gates has spent his time protecting copywrite laws his wealth depended upon it so it is hardly surprising he is fairly keen on the subject However defending patents and copywrite laws in the face of the crushing poverty of the global south isn t necessarily in the best interests of these people The examples given mostly involve him seeking technological fixes for the problems of the developing world the creation of higher yield seeds or of patent medicines and these come with a price tag Charity is a business in so many ways But here the lines between aid and business become particularly blurred The example is discussed again here of the Indian farmers forced by the high cost of Monsanto crops to commit suicide by drinking the pesticide they need to purchase and that has driven them into crushing poverty Another example is HIVAIDS where he has not supported the use of drugs as a preventative some antiretrovirals reduce the viral load in a persons bodily fluids and this in turn means those infected are less likely to pass on the virus to their sexual partners But Gates has strenuously opposed this Now there might be many reasons for him doing this one of which might be his stated concern that since there is only so much money to go around it would be effective to pursue prevention rather than cures However as someone uoted here says access to ARVs antiretrovirals would be a threat to intellectual property the regime of which he staunchly supports This book is fascinating not least because it covers so many aspects of Gates activities agriculture health education while also linking the discussion around these back to his employment investment and other business histories The biggest concern here is that Gates has bought his way onto the world stage He has power than the majority of world leaders maybe than all of them given he has not fixed time to retire Also unlike those world leaders he is almost entirely unaccountable At one point in this book an exchange is uoted between Gates and Piketty Piketty had Non luogo a procedere just given a speech in which he called for a wealth tax Gates is uoted as saying to him after the speech I love everything that s in your book but I don t want to pay tax Piketty is uoted as saying I think he sincerely believes he s efficient than the government and you know maybe his is sometimes Yeah maybe he is but there are no conseuences for the times when he is not efficient And because he has so much power that becomes a real problem

Linsey McGoey È 1 READ

READ Á No Such Thing as a Free Gift And global health than ever beforeCharities link the farmers in Africa to the boardrooms of corporate foundations and the corridors of the World Economic Forum at Davos Far from being selfless plutocratic philanthropy may be the ultimate profit making toolIn No Such Thing as a Free Gift author and academic Linsey McGoey puts this new golden age of philanthropy under the microscope paying particular attention to the Bi. What thoughtful rich people call the problem of poverty thoughtful poor people with eual justice call the problem of riches R H TawneyThis uote is from the first page it should give you a sense of what the book is about interesting thinking here to follow Guardian Review Times Review

  • Hardcover
  • 304
  • No Such Thing as a Free Gift
  • Linsey McGoey
  • en
  • 18 July 2020
  • 9781784780838

10 thoughts on “[No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK

  1. says: Linsey McGoey È 1 READ READ ´ MIAMIMOTELS.US È Linsey McGoey [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK

    [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK I’ve read a number of books on philanthropy over the last couple of years but I think this is the one I would most highly recommend if you were thinking of reading just one I think that is because it uses Carnegie and Bill Gates as examples to show how philanthropy has been used to make the world in the image o

  2. says: [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK READ ´ MIAMIMOTELS.US È Linsey McGoey

    Linsey McGoey È 1 READ READ ´ MIAMIMOTELS.US È Linsey McGoey SUMMARY No Such Thing as a Free Gift Talk about a well timed release Linsey McGoey’s No Such Thing as a Free Gift The Gates Foundation and the Price of Philanthropy came out just weeks before Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan announced the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative and set off

  3. says: [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK

    READ ´ MIAMIMOTELS.US È Linsey McGoey [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK Outstanding book Full review to come

  4. says: [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK Linsey McGoey È 1 READ

    SUMMARY No Such Thing as a Free Gift Linsey McGoey È 1 READ [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK No Such Thing as a Free Gift by Linsey McGoey is an interesting if flawed critiue on philanthro capitalism By critiue I mean a scathing furious rebuke of organizations like the Gate's Foundation and their upper crust suppo

  5. says: READ ´ MIAMIMOTELS.US È Linsey McGoey Linsey McGoey È 1 READ SUMMARY No Such Thing as a Free Gift

    READ ´ MIAMIMOTELS.US È Linsey McGoey [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK Philanthro capitalism the highest stage of capitalism? Through my ratings reviews and edits I'm providing intellectual property and labor to com Inc listed on Nasda which fully owns Goodreadscom and in 2014 posted revenues for 90 billion and a 271 million loss Intellectual property and labor reuire compensation com Inc is also reuested to provide assurance that its employees and contractors' work conditions meet the hig

  6. says: READ ´ MIAMIMOTELS.US È Linsey McGoey [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK

    [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK Linsey McGoey È 1 READ SUMMARY No Such Thing as a Free Gift “What thoughtful rich people call the problem of poverty thoughtful poor people with eual justice call the problem of riches”― R H TawneyThis uote is from the first page it should give you a sense of what the book is

  7. says: Linsey McGoey È 1 READ [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK

    READ ´ MIAMIMOTELS.US È Linsey McGoey Linsey McGoey È 1 READ SUMMARY No Such Thing as a Free Gift I would give this book 10 stars if I could This is one of the best non fiction books I've read ever McGoey does an impressive job of gathering her facts and basing her arguments on clear data I hesitate to say arguments because I feel like McGoey was actually very well balanced in her perspective She presents a very fair and thorough view of her subjects and I thought she was very fair with her depiction of Bill GatesThis is not

  8. says: [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK READ ´ MIAMIMOTELS.US È Linsey McGoey SUMMARY No Such Thing as a Free Gift

    [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK Linsey McGoey È 1 READ SUMMARY No Such Thing as a Free Gift I really wanted to like this I think we should be taking a good look at what McGoey terms philanthrocapitalism and I think she makes

  9. says: [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK

    [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK Probably the best book I have read all year I thought I knew a lot about philanthropy after working in and studying the aid industry for the past decade or This book tackles large philanthropy specifically Gates but she also mentions Rockefelle

  10. says: [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK

    [No Such Thing as a Free Gift] PDF/EBOOK This is my second read through of this Overall opinion I really like this book Linsey is cogent incredibly well researched f

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *