Comments on: The Practice of Philanthropy http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/04/the-practice-of-philanthropy Sat, 11 Oct 2008 11:40:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Albert Ruesga http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/04/the-practice-of-philanthropy#comment-226 Albert Ruesga Fri, 11 May 2007 13:49:37 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/04/30/the-practice-of-philanthropy/#comment-226 WCT staff writer Sally Wilde got a hold of Schambra's remarks and blogged them <a href="http://postcards.typepad.com/white_telephone/2007/05/culture_wars_sc.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>. WCT staff writer Sally Wilde got a hold of Schambra’s remarks and blogged them here.

]]> By: Phil http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/04/the-practice-of-philanthropy#comment-225 Phil Tue, 01 May 2007 22:01:49 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/04/30/the-practice-of-philanthropy/#comment-225 Follow the logic to the end, where Schambra's funders sit. We get private charity to take over from dwindling goverment programs. We cut taxes. And the rich are free to give or not give as they see fit. Let the bleeding hearts take up the slack. Bill is a great rhetorician as Phil A. says, a former speech writer for Ed Meese. His brilliance expresses itself best in polemic. He would have been a great professor. To his credit, he knows that he is writing to confound his enememies. He appreciates the give and take, and probably does not take too seriously anyone who takes him too seriously. Root causes of social ills hire Schambra to defend them from change. Follow the logic to the end, where Schambra’s funders sit. We get private charity to take over from dwindling goverment programs. We cut taxes. And the rich are free to give or not give as they see fit. Let the bleeding hearts take up the slack.

Bill is a great rhetorician as Phil A. says, a former speech writer for Ed Meese. His brilliance expresses itself best in polemic. He would have been a great professor. To his credit, he knows that he is writing to confound his enememies. He appreciates the give and take, and probably does not take too seriously anyone who takes him too seriously.

Root causes of social ills hire Schambra to defend them from change.

]]> By: Phil Anthropoid http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/04/the-practice-of-philanthropy#comment-224 Phil Anthropoid Mon, 30 Apr 2007 20:19:03 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/04/30/the-practice-of-philanthropy/#comment-224 Bill is a great thinker and a great rhetorician. I very much wanted to catch his latest ideological excesses but was prevented by another appointment. From your description, however, I sense his talk was a variation on his usual stump speech which consists of five parts straw-manning, one part conservative sloganeering, and ten parts pure baloney. To begin with, national foundations don't generally fund community-based work for two reasons: (1) many foundation executives believe – rightly, in my view – that it's the role of government, not the role of private philanthropy, to guarantee the health and well-being of seniors, and (2) if there’s room for other kinds of investments in these community-based organizations, they should be made largely by <em>local</em> donors (I include foundations in this category). It's a howler of the first magnitude to claim that large foundations don't fund the charity you mention because the charity's leaders are "too emotional and close to the events." Are you telling me that nobody in the room split his sides laughing when he heard that claim? If so, we are living in dark times indeed. Just as an aside: I'm guessing that many programs like those described by Bill are in fact supported by national foundations. Did he marshal any evidence for his claim? Many people have drunk Bill’s small government Koolaid down to the dregs. He masks the poison with heartfelt appeals to heroic and generous local action by local communities, free from the tax-devouring, ineffectual bete noire of Big Gubmint. Big phooey. Bill is a great thinker and a great rhetorician. I very much wanted to catch his latest ideological excesses but was prevented by another appointment. From your description, however, I sense his talk was a variation on his usual stump speech which consists of five parts straw-manning, one part conservative sloganeering, and ten parts pure baloney.

To begin with, national foundations don’t generally fund community-based work for two reasons: (1) many foundation executives believe – rightly, in my view – that it’s the role of government, not the role of private philanthropy, to guarantee the health and well-being of seniors, and (2) if there’s room for other kinds of investments in these community-based organizations, they should be made largely by local donors (I include foundations in this category). It’s a howler of the first magnitude to claim that large foundations don’t fund the charity you mention because the charity’s leaders are “too emotional and close to the events.” Are you telling me that nobody in the room split his sides laughing when he heard that claim? If so, we are living in dark times indeed.

Just as an aside: I’m guessing that many programs like those described by Bill are in fact supported by national foundations. Did he marshal any evidence for his claim?

Many people have drunk Bill’s small government Koolaid down to the dregs. He masks the poison with heartfelt appeals to heroic and generous local action by local communities, free from the tax-devouring, ineffectual bete noire of Big Gubmint.

Big phooey.

]]>