Every time I read something like this I think about all my rich friends in Silicon Valley who engage in armchair socialism. Gives me a good chuckle. ^.^
As another responder pointed out, there's nothing inconsistent about it. Just because someone believes all of the rich should pay more doesn't mean they're willing to be the only ones doing so while their more callous peers coast by.
You know what's inconsistent? Claiming to care about an issue, but opposing any means of addressing it. If you're going to preclude the government addressing poverty, you can't also go around undermining everyone else who tries. For example, in other comments on this story I see people complaining about volunteers' lack of professionalism, and about spending money on marketing. Clue time: money for marketing is a necessity for any long-term enterprise. If the government got out of charity altogether, each charity would have to try even harder to draw attention to their cause among all the others. The marketing industry would love it, but from the standpoint of helping the poor it's a form of inefficiency. Those who rail against government inefficiency should admit and consider the inefficiency in their own chosen model, lest they seem dishonest.
What is funny about this? It seems entirely consistent.
Socialists think the government should provide social services.
Rich people not donating money for social services seems completely philosophically compatible with being socialists.
The vast, vast majority of my rich friends believe we should raise taxes on all rich people, not donate to non-profits who then have to spend the money on marketing.
You know what's inconsistent? Claiming to care about an issue, but opposing any means of addressing it. If you're going to preclude the government addressing poverty, you can't also go around undermining everyone else who tries. For example, in other comments on this story I see people complaining about volunteers' lack of professionalism, and about spending money on marketing. Clue time: money for marketing is a necessity for any long-term enterprise. If the government got out of charity altogether, each charity would have to try even harder to draw attention to their cause among all the others. The marketing industry would love it, but from the standpoint of helping the poor it's a form of inefficiency. Those who rail against government inefficiency should admit and consider the inefficiency in their own chosen model, lest they seem dishonest.