or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by cross22

That is not the issue. The point is that they would have to give up an economic activity in order to make a donation, which is why in my opinion they would be more generous.
I think %s are completely worthless when it comes to charity giving and judging someone "cheap". I think it is impossible to judge that unless you take into account at least one's discretionary income and expectations of future income. A poor family that makes 20k a year flipping burgers is more generous dropping a 20 in a donation box than a family who earns 1mill from investments paying 1k.
I think having received scholarships or other educational assistance does not mean one "was trained to see himself as the recipient of charity". I would wager the vast majority of parents would like their kids to get scholarships in college regardless of their socioeconomic means and it won't qualify as them as being trained to see themselves as charity recipients.
I seriously doubt that is the case.
Thanks! And to PJPI
They are splitting 2 for 1 but they are issuing non-voting stocks so that the voting power stays the same way as now. In other words, the founders and large holders can profit by selling the non-voting shares and not reduce their voting powers.
Yes, can we get a TL;DR version? I didn't even finish scanning it like I usually do before reading something.
Trayvon's mother on Today's Show:
New Posts  All Forums: