
Why India's rich don't give their money away - happy-go-lucky
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-47566542
======
anonymous_i
I will give you my interpretation:

\- There is an incredible amount of systemic corruption in India. This means
there are people- a lot of them, who are rich not by the value creation or
inheritance.

\- A measure of wealth in India is land ownership, not swathes of hundreds of
acres of land like Bezos, but owning a 200 Sq.Ft. land or some real estate
property in cities. A flat in a decent city like Bangalore or Hyderabad goes
upwards of million dollars.

\- Binami. These are aliases of rich politicians mostly their family members
control hordes of wealth.

When these people start to give away, it actually generates negative social
capital. They face a backlash from the same people they are donating to
because, they cannot donate enough. The reason why recipients are insatiable
is because, they view the wealth accumulated by these people is thru' non-
legit means.

\- We are seeing a new generation of multi-millionaires in this country.
Seeing what they saw I don't think they will be inspired to donate. If they
set up an organisation be it a private charity, there is a good chance they
will have to deal with misappropriation of funds in their own organisation.

\- Add caste based and religion based inconveniences you may cause to general
public with your charitable work, unbeknownst to you.

~~~
abhiminator
It's also partly cultural, imo. Most Indians believe in reincarnation [1] and
also believe that the current state one is in is because of "mistakes" from
one's "previous life." (aka karma)

That gives rise to extreme apathy, zero sympathy for folks on the lowest rungs
of society, and a general lack of credence in effecting change.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reincarnation#Hinduism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reincarnation#Hinduism)

~~~
nsenifty
This is a straight up propaganda from Christian organizations I grew up
reading in India.

Very simply put, the concepts of Good and Evil in Christianity is not
externalized in Hindu philosophy and instead explained through the principle
of cause and effect known as Karma. Hinduism views suffering is an integral
part of life. Selfish desire causes suffering, controlling your senses lets
you achieve selflessness and eventual liberation from the cycle of suffering.
All this "suffering" refers to your mental state, not the material reality
such as wealth and status.

There is apathy, but IMO it's mostly due to desensitization by how much of it
is out there and constantly having to watch your back from some people willing
to take advantage of you the moment they notice how charitable you are.

~~~
saiya-jin
> There is apathy

Thats a massive understatement from western point of view. I have only
personal anecdotes, but tons of them due to backpacking all over India for 6
months. Generally the poorer the people, the better the character, with
exceptions (which is maybe universal human trait).

Utter ignorance of plight or suffering of dalits you see everywhere (simply
because there is 300 million of them). They will never get a fair chance in
life like rest of wealthier society. The mostly IT folks you will meet in west
(or on call support call) are never from this caste, they just can't escape
the vicious circle of poverty.

Seeing young women not giving a nano-fraction of a f*ck about dog dying in the
middle of the street from horrible wounds sustained from being hit by a car
(literally stepping over it like it was some dirty rag, I sat there crying my
eyes out and the memory is still strong in me even after 10 years).

When talking to young brahmin couple, educated, visited west, very nice, soft-
spoken and polite, and they considered its perfectly fine that 5-year old kids
of poor have to work in firework factory and will never go to school (and they
are 1 mistake away from ending up as finger-less beggars for rest of the
life). 'At least they bring home some money' was their mantra. I had strong
urge to ask them if they would be OK for their daughter to walk the same path
but didn't want to be nasty for their generosity (they gave me a ride when
hitchhiking in Yamunotri).

The treatment of leprosy (or more precisely lack of it due to religion, aka
kiss of god).

I could go on and on, 6 months gives you a bit of perspective especially when
you cover a lot (mostly north, west and south, not much east) from such a
massive and diverse country.

It is probably still the best country in the world to do backpacking, it can
change your perspective on the world and life, but boy sometimes it was too
much.

~~~
nsenifty
See my point about desensitization. If you live in India and want to remain
sane, you have to develop a barrier. Kind of the barrier you develop in the
west pretending to not know where or how your hamburger was made.

~~~
ovi256
>Kind of the barrier you develop in the west pretending to not know where or
how your hamburger was made.

Is there any data about how widespread this issue is ? I know plenty of people
who know perfectly well from where their meat comes from, and are not bothered
by it. Some even want to know, think Ron from Parks and Recs, who refuses to
eat anonymous animals. On the other hand, I'm totally ok if other people do
not want to have to think about it. A succesful society should provide for
both needs.

~~~
AnIdiotOnTheNet
Widespread enough that people find it shocking how poorly food animals are
often treated when they bother to look.

------
rishav_sharan
My take;

We Indians are used to seeing sights of abject poverty everyday and it simply
desnsitizes us. Most people from developed nations dont understand whats it
like to see these things every single day. Some who come to India, get a huge
cultural shock (though it is getting better) and are simply unable to process
all the misery they see around them.

When I was kid, I used to give money to beggars but now that i am an adult
with a steady income, I dont do it anymore. Either I feel that my few rupees
is not gonna have any effect on the other person's poverty, or that this
beggar is just trying to scam me by leveraging my kindness.

I am just a middle class person in India. But if I were to suddenly become
super wealthy, I fear I would carry much of this baggage with me.

I cant substatntiate this with data, but I believe that rich people from other
developing nations also have this problem. they dont give their wealth away.

Better education and a growing middle class will help improve the perspective
of the average indians. Till then apathy and cynicism will prevail.

------
iamgopal
The real way of giving away money, using corruption free ways to needy in
India, is to start a business venture that is not so profitable but gives tons
of employment, like TATA had done since ages. India has so many people ( even
wealthy people are poor compare to Western counter part ) that philanthropic
activity does not move the needle much, while business venture helps a ton. I
hope indian rich keep not-giving away money and instead keep investing in
employment generation.

~~~
temporalparts
How do you feel about ride sharing and delivery companies like Ola and Uber?

~~~
djangovm
Not OP, but here is my take.

While Ola and Uber would not actually aim to be philanthropic companies, they
definitely have enabled people to come from different walks of like and become
a driver. I have met many drivers who came from villages to drive and support
their family, and Ola and Uber made it very easy for them to get started.

Overall, good for a larger segment of the society i would say.

~~~
kamaal
>>I have met many drivers who came from villages to drive and support their
family, and Ola and Uber made it very easy for them to get started.

Making a virtue out of compulsion, eh?

Those people leave rural farming jobs and come to cities, because irrigation
infrastructure is in shambles. Farming is not open to free market economics,
there is not enough water, and overall its not profitable. They sell what they
have and inhale CO day in and out to put food on the table.

Farmer to cabbie ain't exactly a good career transition.

~~~
0815test
Many rural farming jobs are seasonal - there's nothing much to do for part of
the year so no matter how successful the farming is, they're still better off
coming to the city and earning an income there.

------
jadbox
Basically it seems like the premise is that the rich generally like donating
because of the publicity it generates for them (trading financial capital to
social capital). However, in India there is a fear of being noticed by the
'taxman' and being asked/audited for higher taxes (it's not clear). This means
the wealthy are afriad of publically donating, and hence, donate less because
there's no 'social capital' to buy via the donation. At least this was my
interpretation.

~~~
jacobolus
In the US, the federal government heavily subsidizes rich people’s charitable
contributions. [https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-
organiz...](https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-
organizations/charitable-contribution-deductions)

Even when completely legal, rich Americans use charities as a means to avoid
taxes while still using their money to influence policy or pursue other
agendas. But there are also a plethora of charity-related tax evasion, money
laundering, and fraud schemes.

The Trump Foundation is a good recent example of how criminal schemes tied to
charitable organizations (like white collar crime more generally) go largely
uninvestigated and unpunished in the USA. The brazen repeated crimes were only
noticed because the chairman/founder became President and started attracting
scrutiny from the media.

------
blackoil
Noting one exception, India's biggest business group 'Tata' is a 100+ years
old family business conglomerate, but is mostly owned by various
trusts([https://www.tatatrusts.org/](https://www.tatatrusts.org/)). It is very
easy to find works around the country funded by them, be it restoration of
historical monument, NGO publishing children education books.

------
thisisit
This is a clickbait title. The article clearly says "Rich Indians might be
charitable, but not enough of them are philanthropists." So the title should
be "Why India's rich don't give their money away _to philanthropy_ "?

But going by the comments in this thread I guess the title has achieved in
drawing the reactions it really wanted to.

Still as per the quoted report[0], private funding grew by 15% compared to
less than 10% growth in US[1] (unfortunately drawing a parallel between
private funding is kind of difficult).

Additionally, the article says "ultra-rich households have grown at a rate of
12% over the past five years". So, the private funding growth (15%) has kept
up with the UHNI growth in past 5 years? Sure, we can make a case of more
funding for UHNI but then the title makes even less sense.

Additionally, to add one more of the interpretations in the ring. Indians
donate lots of money in temples like Shirdi, Thirupati Balaji which goes to
some chartiable trusts. Though again the major point is charity vs
philanthropy.

[0] -
[https://www.dasra.org/assets/uploads/resources/BAIN_BRIEF_In...](https://www.dasra.org/assets/uploads/resources/BAIN_BRIEF_India_Philanthropy_Report_2019.pdf)
[1] - [https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/report-projects-
grow...](https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/report-projects-growth-in-
charitable-giving-in-2019-20)

------
sriram_iyengar
People do it and there is no effective tracking system in place. As any media
house, the headlines and the content inside are contradicting itself. A
headline like 'Philanthropy challenges in India' would have made sense.
Comparing to US is a poor benchmark as well. Please go and check for
contributions made by Indian citizens on crowd funding platforms like
'Rangde', you will realise there is some serious traction on.

------
srndh
There are a million ways to help. Giving money away to charity is just one
way.

In the US, it is a tax write off & status symbol and you have the challenges
of what percentage actually reached the poor.

In India, many huge groups do help in the society. Like the TATA group has
employed members of the victims of 26/11 Mumbai terror attack, not just the
victims that died in the Taj Hotel (Tata owned). Even the families of the cops
kills also got something. These are on top of the financial aid given.
Handicapped service members (soldiers who are hurt during duty) are
extensively employed in the private sector. Basically in India, we believe in
teaching a person to fish instead of supplying them free fish. Its actually a
rule for Govt entities and most private firms, if a person who is employed
dies during on-duty or off-duty. A member of the family will get a job.
Basically they help another member of the family to be employed to replace the
lost revenue. These efforts are never accounted.

Tata's are pioneers and a model company that all Indian companies aspire to
follow. There are many examples of this involving other groups. Actors like
Nana Patekar has adopted villages.

As per the Vedic culture, you actually have to help the needy yourself and not
make someone else to do it. So, the concept of giving a charity cheque is not
accepted to many.

In my village, we have a collective fund that I pay to monthly. The fund is
used to serve dinner to all 365 days a year. We have about 300 people daily
for dinner. Like a soup kitchen in the US.

~~~
inapis
In India we do both. Teach them how to fish as well as hand out lots of fish -
government’s byzantine number of subsidises or continuous farm loan wavers.

------
boomboomsubban
Despite claims on the contrary, the philanthropist model is a way for a rich
person to use their money to control public policy and garner public support.
I'm no expert on India, but with the wide scale corruption problem I'd guess
they just skip the middlemen.

------
wyxuan
Yeah. There is also the element of how being philanthropic isn't 'cool' as it
might be in the US. The article specially notes the problem of how the are no
economic incentives to do so, unlike the US and China.

~~~
HillaryBriss
i know the US gives tax deductions for charitable giving. i don't know how
this works in China. what are the incentives in China?

------
arisAlexis
Publicly tracking charity donations on the blockchain could solve the problem
of who gave what to whom and how it was spent.

------
known
Casteism is worse than Racism;

    
    
        Casteism = Racism + Slavery 
    

[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2325502/Map-shows-
wo...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2325502/Map-shows-worlds-
racist-countries-answers-surprise-you.html)

~~~
adwww
I advise against taking lessons on racism from the Daily Mail.

------
azemda
[http://socialistreview.org.uk/402/philanthropy-capitalist-
ar...](http://socialistreview.org.uk/402/philanthropy-capitalist-art-
deception)

------
calvinbhai
I'm glad they don't.

Philanthropy is a great way to undermine democracy and is often the way real,
govt lead development projects stall.

It's a nice facade for those who want to get things done without being an
elected official.

Even if the outcome is good, it is still undermining the democratic process.

~~~
skybrian
Wow, how do you think the Carter Center's election monitoring undermines
elections?

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carter_Center](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carter_Center)

~~~
calvinbhai
TBH, I'm not aware of this org. This org as well as many more out there may be
doing genuinely good work.

I'm not an American but I'm skeptical about US politics, of which
"Philanthropy" is a huge part.

So any thing that comes across as a philanthropy especially one whose goal is
to solve a political problem, I'll be a little extra skeptical about it.
Especially from a country that is known around the world to install democracy
of their choice

I'm not sure which side of the US politics you are (I'm neither, since I
cannot vote in the US), but it's kinda funny that Carter Center didn't monitor
elections in the US, so all we have are the "collusion" stories flooding the
news reports every day, in 2019.

If you take a look at the most hated personalities in India, most of them
happen to be the darlings of certain US Philanthropies. (I hope that explains
my skepticism about such orgs).

