“There are things you can buy, but the question is, should you buy them?”

Some people have criticised the business partner of Bill Gates who bought a yacht for $100 million dollars – is that ever justifiable?

Or consider the rich man who travels in his car to go and buy gold taps for his bathroom on a freezing cold day, and passes lots of poor children playing in the streets with no coats on.

And the bright young things who are repeatedly photographed in London night-clubs: people like Paris Hilton, who is set to inherit billions, yes billions, of dollars.

Is that outrageous, when so many have so little, or does she deserve it because of the business skills of her papa?

Would it be so terrible if that sum was reduced to, say, $1 million per year for 100 years and the balance was used to help the unfortunate? Would she really personally notice that it was no longer billions in her bank? What figure would you say is reasonable for her to retain?

My sensitivity to this issue was raised by the Reith Lectures, an annual event on BBC Radio 4 where a major speaker talks about some significant social issue.

Only one of the four programmes has been broadcast so far, but it was Professor Michael Sandel of Harvard who posed that question at the top of this comment, and he will get around to answering it in this series called: “Markets and Morals”.

A most appropriate subject after the recent catastrophic collapse. He usefully examines “What is the role of the concerned citizen in all this?” which is very apposite to this particular post.

Audio and video at:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00kt7rg

Although it may be difficult to determine the most appropriate Biblical reference to quote, perhaps it would be more helpful to consider the societal impacts of wealth, and those who hoard it to themselves irrespective of the clear needs of others.

Would you buy gold taps? Would you be upset that other people thought you shouldn’t? You cannot be wealthy in isolation – to my mind it brings with it obligations to the rest of society; as the great US philanthropists of the past said: “I got rich so I could give it away”.

Does that raise any difficult issues, especially in our reaction to those who have the cash but not the generous spirit?

KC

I’d put both an excessive love for money and an obession with God/religion/morality in there too.

For instance, some commenters above feel they can do more good if they are richer, and so becoming richer must be just fine.

But say you decide to invest in mineral extraction companies like, say, BHP Billiton and their new open-cast aluminium mine in Africa will flood a massive area with no recompense for hundreds of local inhabitants, then the fact that you’ve become richer and donate some of that to charity or to your church is still problematic.

So although you may do good things with the profits you make, sometimes its important to look a little more closely at precisely how the company was able to make that money for you.

I’m also reminded of children in Turkey sitting in poorly ventilated sheds with solvent-laden adhesives for 15 hours a day sticking the soles onto Nike trainers for 10 cents a day.

And mothers in the Carribean sewing sweat-shirts with Mickey Mouse on the front for 15 cents a shirt, when they are sold at retail in the States for $70, and then when they asked to be paid 20 cents a shirt to be able to more easily feed their children, they were told: “Shut up, or we fire you”.

So simply doing good with the money you make sometimes isn’t enough.

KC

I might add that I am commenting ‘late’ because I had a problem accessing my WordPress accounts and couldn’t seem to get anybody from their Support team to respond to my support requests … it was a very LONG weekend Anyway, I seem to be back now!

Adrian.

I think most everyone Loves money, its the earning it that usually is the unlovable part.(with some exceptions)!!!!