Wow...Murphy Oil to pay college tuition for all El Dorado HS grads

[MRT144]

but really how is that any different than people without the scholarships. I'd like to see a study of people given scholarships and graduation rate vs. otherwise.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

The caveat is its only for climate studies majors.

[MRT144]

ogie for the point

[Kuciwalker]

[pchang]

Re: Re: sure there is a downside

Originally posted by mrmitchell


I'm sure theres some kind of tax break.

But skywalker - many of the people who recieve this scholarship will move back to El Dorado after they graduate from college. Murphy is based in El Do and it will be good for them if the city remains out of the sinking pit that the rest of South Arkansas has become.

I was talking about the people who said "meh" or "silly" in this thread.

[Jonny]

to Murphy. It's nice to see such corporate generosity.

[Aeson]

It's better than them keeping the money...

It's likely close to financially even given tax breaks...

In essense this money is being taken from customers and/or workers as an unnecessarly high cost and/or low wages, while the corporation takes all the credit for the good deed.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Undoubtedly many of the students in that community didn't think of college because of the costs and simply that few people go to college

This is a pretty harsh indictment on your society.

Maybe if you taxed those profits more, you could actually provide the same levels of education without having to wait for a kind company? (who apparently makes up for hundreds of companies that won't do any meaningful charity)
And maybe you could actually provide that level of support to all American students, instead of just one town?

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Kuci, hopefully you go into some field other than economics. Someone as short sighted as you would either fail brutally, or would do serious damage to our country if you got into any meaningful position...

Private charity does not have to be efficient. If you want to know what's inefficient, it's billionaires. But that's another story.

Point is, charity is just that, charity. Giving charity is not efficient, it generally serves emotional or moral purposes. That's how charity works... all of it. The company could have held on to its money and just given it to its directors instead... but they did something good for society instead.

No, that is not how charity works. And the options aren't to give the money away whimsically and horde it all. Kuci wasn't making that contrast at all.

Most money for charity has a rigorous process for selecting who gets the money and requires recipients to demonstrate they are using the money wisely and for a purpose the foundation or company supports.

Money given to poorly thought out ideas, or scam artists, or money given in other inefficient, wasteful ways could be given more efficiently to produce more good for more people. What if the students at El Dorado were richer than most of the state. Is it wise to give scholarship money to the rich when there are plenty of poor students who need it more? What if the students at El Dorado really have no use for college, and as DanS said, will just get drunk for a few years and drop out. Is it wise to give scholarship money to these people instead of that hardworking A student from Harlem who just can't afford school?

Charity isn't just so the people giving away money can feel good for themselves and brag about it at parties. It exists to do real good in the world and help real people who need it. Just like everything else in life, helping people should be done as efficiently as possible.

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Spiffor

This is a pretty harsh indictment on your society.

Maybe if you taxed those profits more, you could actually provide the same levels of education without having to wait for a kind company? (who apparently makes up for hundreds of companies that won't do any meaningful charity)
And maybe you could actually provide that level of support to all American students, instead of just one town?

I think you'd be hard pressed to find a company that DIDN'T give to charity.

What is or isn't meaningful is of course up for discussion.

[Drake Tungsten]

DanS hasn't posted in this thread.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
DanS hasn't posted in this thread.

Well, it's easy to confuse you guys.

[OzzyKP]

Yea I do confuse you two a lot.

[Drake Tungsten]

Poor Dan...

[OzzyKP]

Indeed. Generally I like what DanS has to say.