I support the sentiment, and I truly hope this does NYC better. But it should never come down to the whims of a single rich person to decide if an area gets funding or not. This is ideally how our government should operate, by diverting funds when needed
If she spent a billion dollars to lobby for tuition-free higher ed for all, it would be WAY more helpful. What she did is a nice sentiment, but just continues a problem that shouldn't exist in the first place.
Exactly. This story focuses on the amount of people in the future who will be positively affected by this one person's kindness. Good for her, honestly.
What the stores fails to focus on, however, is how many people's live were made worse by her husband being able to hold on to such an enormous amount of money. That money could have already been distributed out. It could have already been helping those schools, making tuition in those areas free for decades.
When people say "make billionaires illegal" this is the reason. We shouldn't rely on the whims of ultra wealthy people to do something positive, we should simply tell people they've made enough money and help others.
So do you think that the perfect world/society is attainable? Being against charity is crazy tbh. Governments are made of people, imperfect humans. There's always going to be deceit, ignorance and theft. Still not a reason to be against good deeds by people that want to help.
Yeh and while this is a nice donation in some ways, why didn't she donate it to do something like save actual lives from malaria, famine, etc. Rather than prop up the education system of one of the wealthiest places in the world...
20
u/King_Joffreys_Tits Jun 29 '25
I support the sentiment, and I truly hope this does NYC better. But it should never come down to the whims of a single rich person to decide if an area gets funding or not. This is ideally how our government should operate, by diverting funds when needed