Day-After-Christmas Roundup
The San Francisco Chronicle has this story on the effects an anti-gang injunction has had on its community. This story is important for two reasons: 1) San Francisco is copying the procedure, obtained its first anti-gang injunction last month and hopes to get more, and 2) Prof. Bundy has done work on the case for Petitioners. For those who heard me ranting about City of Chicago v. Morales a few weeks ago, look at how the prosecutors have evolved around the decision's vagueness and notice concerns. There's a lot to think and debate in these cases.
In the story that won't die, I point to this story on the Bay Area's parsimonious giving compared to Los Angeles. Congratulations Armen. If you want to spin this up, I'd love to hear you explain and allow people to comment and develop on shaping pro bono practice through board service.
In the story that won't die, I point to this story on the Bay Area's parsimonious giving compared to Los Angeles. Congratulations Armen. If you want to spin this up, I'd love to hear you explain and allow people to comment and develop on shaping pro bono practice through board service.
posted by Tom Fletcher at 9:14 AM
3 Comments:
The article hints at the new money/old money distinction, which may explain some of it: old money seems to come with a venerable tradition of charitable giving, but the same can't be said of the noveau riche who are just learning how to handle ten-figure bank accounts.
However, there may also be a difference derived from HOW people make their money. Specifically, I'm thinking of the entertainment industry down south vs. the tech millionaires up here.
I remember reading an article a few years back speculating on why Hollywood was so liberal. One hypothesis was that the successful people down there realize their success is mostly due to blind frigging luck. They know there are plenty of people more talented/disciplined/smart than they are who never caught a break in Hollywood. This inculcates an appreciation for the role of chance and, channeling Rawls here, promotes an egalitarian sensibility, a belief in correcting the unfair vagaries of life. Thus: liberalism, and maybe more charity too.
A few hundrer miles north, things may be different. In a previous job, I spent about a year in touch with very, very rich tech people from the Valley, and they almost universally believed their success was due solely to their own amazing genius and hard work. This sense of entitlement promoted two themes: 1) They deserved to keep every penny and 2) If they could make it, so could everyone else. Thus, why give money to chaity to help those less fortunate?
None of which is to disparage the wealthy who give across California. But at the margins, and in terms of averages, this ethos may be responsible for driving down the Bay Area's numbers.
Keen insight E-dub. I think I learned more abour Rawls in that paragraph than I did in [the class I took at Boalt that turned out to all be about philosophy to my shock and chagrin].
I add this link to the post-Christmas reading of anyone who passes through here.
Earl Warren's comment about the SV folks makes sense, but according to the article, SV givers were more charitable than the rest of the Yay. And if they're really as stingy as EW thinks they are, that says a lot about the rest of the limousine liberals around here.
At my last (pre-LS) job, we could designate payroll deductions to go to specific charities. It was an easy and painless way to give; you don't miss what you don't see. A lot of people, including myself, donated that way. There were a few people there that still tithed 10% (or more) to their church. Crazy. Oh, and that job was in the public sector, so we were all underpaid public servants.
We also did an annual "baby shower" for all the poor kids born at the county hospital. We would each go out and buy baby clothes, bottles, stuffed animals, etc., wrap them, and have a big party opening all the gifts before we donated them. It was a lot of fun and felt good to do. Yeah, there were a lot of chicks at that job.
Post a Comment
<< Home