this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2024
433 points (97.6% liked)

News

23310 readers
3903 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
rjc@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
dezmd@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
JonsJava@lemmy.world
gedaliyah@lemmy.world
Blackbeard@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
jeffw@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
433
MacKenzie Scott donates $640M -- more than double her initial plan -- to nonprofits (abcnews.go.com)
submitted 7 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
81 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Billionaire philanthropist and author MacKenzie Scott announced Tuesday she is giving $640 million to 361 small nonprofits that responded to an open call for applications.

Yield Giving’s first round of donations is more than double what Scott had initially pledged to give away through the application process. Since she began giving away billions in 2019, Scott and her team have researched and selected organizations without an application process and provided them with large, unrestricted gifts.

In a brief note on her website, Scott wrote she was grateful to Lever for Change, the organization that managed the open call, and the evaluators for “their roles in creating this pathway to support for people working to improve access to foundational resources in their communities. They are vital agents of change.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world -2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

There's nothing immoral about a number you dimwit.

So why are you are fixated on the billion number?

numbers tend have labels attached to them

Not when you used them.

represents an amount of resources that no person needs in even a hundred lifetimes.

So why not also target multimillionaires?

So why are children still starving to death? Why are people homeless and without healthcare? Why are people working for slave wages for 80 hours a week when all of these resources exist with plenty to go around?

OK, so it's poverty you are against, not billionaires.

It's because the richest people have concentrated this wealth for themselves even though they could never use it all.

No. Billionaires are small potatoes. The federal government spent $6.13 trillion in FY 2022. $1.62 Trillion on the militarily PER YEAR. A billionaires life's work owns less than 0.1% of that.

It doesn't matter how many people like Taylor Swift's music

Yes it does. It's an excellent example of hard work and skill that is valued >1Bn. It is empirical evidence that your opinion is incorrect.

or how many one dollar things Jeff Bezos has used those making slave wages to create for five cents.

OK, so now you are back on poverty. Not billionaires.

You've been brainwashed into thinking that it's normal but it is a crime against humanity.

Poverty, yes. Billionaires no. I'm not actually defending billionaires. I'm trying to show that your anger is not correctly targeted.

It doesn't matter where billionaires live if they're not able to exist.

So you are proposing a worldwide movement against billionaires, overriding all national sovereignty. You are more likely to get support for poverty to be outlawed than billionaires.

[–] catsarebadpeople@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You're just being obtuse now and straw manning even harder than before. I don't actually believe you're stupid enough to not understand that I'm not upset with the existence of a number instead of what the number represents in context. I don't actually think you're stupid enough to not understand that concentration of wealth is causing poverty. I don't think you're stupid enough to believe that government spending on an entire nation should be compared to a single person's wealth (Although I agree that the military budget is far too high, it employs millions of people so your comparison is moronic). You're a troll and a capitalist simp. Kindly go fuck yourself.

If there are any actual humans reading this I'm sure they understand what I'm talking about since it was stated quite plainly.

You've been blocked as you're not worth conversing with. Cheers!

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

I'm not upset with the existence of a number instead of what the number represents in context.

You picked a billion. People with 50 million have more money than they need.

I don't actually think you're stupid enough to not understand that concentration of wealth is causing poverty.

Weath Inequality and poverty are completely different topics. You can have no poverty and many billionaires. You can have no billionaires and also have poverty.

I don't think you're stupid enough to believe that government spending on an entire nation should be compared to a single person's wealth.

Sure it can. It illustrates that there are bigger, better targets than 750 people.

You're a troll and a capitalist simp.

I'm pointing out that maximising income from billionaires doesn't occur when you tax them at 100%.

Calling for an 80% tax bracket is not simping for capitalism.

Kindly go fuck yourself.

Go get your toys and put them back in the pram.

You've been blocked as you're not worth conversing with. Cheers!

Because you can't handle a different opinion.