You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] ilikeskittles ago 

You get free lunch, and you get free lunch and you get free lunch and you get free lunch and you get free lunch.

1
-1

[–] voater-beware 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

Notice that Oprah didn't do a thing, she's a billionaire right? She could have a staff of hundreds finding and paying for these things and not even make the smallest dent in her $$.

0
0

[–] Soyboy69 ago  (edited ago)

Altruism is a slippery slope, Sure it's not making a dent now, so why not just give a bit more, and a little bit more? Then one day things go to shit and your income isn't what it used to be and as a result of that escalating altruism you realized that you've given thousands of random assholes a leg up using money that could have gone to your heirs instead

It's the small scale equivalent to boomers who give willingly money to feed niggers and don't mind them being imported. Nepotism and altruism are mutually exclusive, and of the two nepotism is the only sensible and morally right option.

1
-1

[–] ilikeskittles 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

Rich people never do anything about hungry children, elderly poor, poor downtrodden illegal immigrants, or any other thing they constantly bitch about.