> [...] she's helping more people than you are.

It's not a contest though, is it? I'm sure we can all help one another in some way, and it's disheartening to see comments such as yours discrediting (passively as it may be) the help some people give, as if their help is less worthy than others.

It's because the GP is discrediting MacKenzie Bezos that he or she is being discredited in response. If GP is going to find fault with someone donating $4 billion and ask "why not more," the question rightly comes back to "well what have you accomplished compared to her?"

The issue is GP has made sacrifice but MacKenzie doesn't have to scarify as much as GP. GP am not saying MacKenzie have to make sacrifice but he is just pointing the fact we live in society where richest people hoards money instead of using it for betterment society. And most of the donations are just plain PR strategy or some tax escape strategy.

You may argue they earned hard for that money but some people are just lucky and don't have to struggle and are so greedy they don't care about anyone else.

The Commentary is quite interesting here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesson_of_the_widow%27s_mite

The OP literally chose to make it a contest, complaining MacKenzie wasn’t doing as much as him percentage wise.

The used metric was "impressiveness", not raw percentages.

The OP argued, that assuming she had donated 59B out of the total of 60B, while this would (probably) be a higher percentage than the OP, it still would not be "impressive". She would retain 1B, which, I hope we can all agree, is more than enough to live a wealthy life, and certainly more than the 3k left on the account of OP.

Yeah this is what I meant, thanks for helping explaining it so well.

> and it's disheartening to see comments such as yours discrediting (passively as it may be) the help some people give

How is stating that his sacrifice is admirable a way to discredit the help he/she is giving?

>, she's helping more people than you are.

I think the fairer point is to generalise both her and OP's behaviour. If everyone at a professional salary level was giving as generously as OP we could go a lot farther than even every single multi-billionaire throwing in a few billion.

Truth is, the entire net worth of all American billionaires together pays for about one year of national healthcare give or take. We could fleece them all and it wouldn't get us that far in the long term.

> she's helping more people than you are

While sacrificing absolutely nothing. She could give so much more and still sacrifice nothing.

> While sacrificing absolutely nothing.

While some people may give charity as an act of sacrifice, others are aimed at helping people. The two are not mutually exclusive, but the former is not a defining aspect of charity.

"A bone to the dog is not charity. ... Charity is the bone shared with the dog, when you are just as hungry as the dog." -- Jack London

Jack London was not an authority on the matter.

Spoken like someone who hasn't read much Jack London and knows nothing of his life.

Assuming that someone who has read much Jack London and knows about his life would come to the same conclusions as you regarding his expertise on the matter is an easy trap to fall into.

Two philosophers were crossing a bridge over a koi pond. One pointed to two fish swimming in the pond and remarked: "Boy, those are some happy fish." The other replied: "You, not being a fish, don't know whether they are happy or not." The first said: "You, not being me, don't know whether I know they are happy or not."

In case it’s not obvious and extending a generous interpretation to your comment - i did not imply she is giving as sacrifice.

I implied that the limits of her giving are not informed by any kind of sacrifice.

In contrast to me, you, and 99.9% of people giving to charity and having a limit based on sacrifice.

I disagree she's helping more people. That money came from Amazon, from the value of other people's work. Those people deserve the full value of their work and not for Bezos to siphon off the vast majority of it. Bezos employees and therefore harms over a million people every day. Giving back some of this doesn't undo that harm.

What is he sacrificing? He makes a huge difference for a number of people.