1160
this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2024
1160 points (92.5% liked)
memes
10637 readers
2442 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- [email protected] : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- [email protected] : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- [email protected] : Linux themed memes
- [email protected] : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I would start by saying that we should all keep the idea of donations in our minds everyday in my opinion, and maybe you should consider donating if you say that you can, you know, be the change you want to see.
But I think you are missing the point that even if your final decision is the same as a billionaire, that is to donate 0%-1% of your savings, you are still not in the same category, not amount wise, not savings wise, and not impact wise. You not donating 10% of your savings does actually make a significant difference in you life while making an insignificant difference in comparison to what a billionaire can donate. A billionaire can donate a significant percentage of his savings with an insignificant difference to himself, while making a significant difference for others.
The billionaire is choosing not to make a really really significant good deed with almost zero consequences to himself, you are choosing not to do an admirable deed that has a tolerable but very real difference to you.
So it might seem the same, but in reality these are not even comparable situations.