I read an interesting article today in The Washington Post called “Grappling with a wealth of guilt: Young heirs seek moral balance between inherited windfalls, social responsibilities.” Here’s the Post article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/19/AR2009111902137.html
It resonated with me because it raised a topic that I’ve written about here. Here’s the line that got me: “Burke Stansbury, 33, a nonprofit administrator who inherited $1 million in stock three years ago, opened up about how his newborn’s breathing problems were forcing him to reconsider how much of his fortune he should use for his family and how much to give away.”
OF COURSE he is thinking about this. And any parent would. And no one would fault him (or should, in my opinion).
I wrote two posts about this; here’s a link to help you find one, which can lead you to the other: https://jubileeyear.wordpress.com/2009/04/08/children-are-the-exception/
I was taking exception with my own inclination to use money to spoil my children (who do not want to be spoiled, thank you very much), money that could otherwise truly solve problems or address needs for others. This is a totally different thing than using our own money to meet the serious needs of our own children. Like Stansbury would naturally be inclined to do.
So wouldn’t it be cool if we would use our big bucks to help other people’s kids with their breathing problems? Stansbury sounds like the sort of guy who would.
This sure relates to the notion that we don’t have adequate healthcare in America until everyone has adequate healthcare. I want my government to use the wealth it has to take care of everybody’s newborns, and toddlers, and teenagers, and parents and grandparents.
We’ll probably all need to give twice to see such things happen. And we should.