Should people who are wealthy enough be expected to fund good causes?
It’s common nowadays to hear the phrase ‘ the rich get richer and the poor get poorer’ and this begs many questions such as, shouldn’t the rich donate some of their wealth to someone who is less well off? Charity is considered a good deed in our society and is usually bestowed onto the donor are the qualities of kindness and generosity. However the action of charity is a choice and one that is not always taken upon. Therefore should the rich be morally obligated to part with some of their wealth to benefit the less fortunate and is it right for society to guilt wealthy people for not funding good causes?
Most people are familiar with the lavish lifestyle that the rich have always taken part in whilst the poor struggle to make do everyday. Large portions of the rich take part in charity for the betterment of the poor. Figures such as Warren Buffet and Bill Gates have bestowed vast fortunes onto good causes such as ones focused on eradicating malaria and providing medical services for children. Although there are some who abstain from charity and as such, brought about ill opinions of themselves by the public. Our society is built upon the idea that charity is virtuous; people who are easily capable of charity yet don’t do so, prompting various negative opinions as people who are stingy and lack of compassion. It would seem unfair that just a little bit of charity could have just a great effect on others and yet the wealthy ignore the less fortunate. Morally charity is something that we should all try to partake in, however morals constantly change through the years.
