 |
|
If you've got the money, give it (away)
By Ravi S. Narasimhan (China Daily) Updated: 2008-03-13 07:21
Indian newspapers went into raptures last week when the Forbes' global billionaires list was released: Four of the top 10 were from the country. The hyperbole can be forgiven since a decade ago, any such suggestion would have been laughed off as a scam orchestrated by phishers (or their predecessors) from a country famous for it. The coverage was only a little less muted in China, where the number of billionaires in the top 500 hit 42, up from 20 last year. Only a generation ago, austerity was the archetype for the wealthy in India. By and large, ostentation was odious. Today, they got it, and they flaunt it. One of the richest Indian quartet has been in the news over the past year for planning to build a 27-story home, replete with a couple of helipads and a few floors for cars, for a family of five. And another for a $60 million bill for a daughter's wedding. A generation ago, possessing billions was unthinkable in China given incomes were in the five or six digits, even for the richest. Today, the media are flush with stories of the noveau riche snapping up private jets and plush yachts. But let's look at the two who swapped the No 1 and No 3 positions on the rich list: Bill Gates and Warren Buffett. They've been in the news not for their earnings, but for their giving. The Microsoft founder and the Oracle of Omaha have pledged almost all their fortunes to charity, as duly acknowledged by Forbes. Tellingly, Forbes last year announced that it would cancel its China philanthropy list, "mainly due to the immaturity of the charity sector" and many rich people's "unwillingness to have their wealth disclosed and their names published". And as far as I could ascertain, the magazine publishes no such list for India. If four Indians were among the 10 richest people in the world, shouldn't they be proportionate practitioners of charity? If 42 Chinese are among the top 500 richest, shouldn't they figure in the donor list in roughly the same ratio? There are plenty of exceptions, such as real-estate entrepreneur Yu Pengnian, property developer Zhu Mengyi and dairy tycoon Niu Gensheng. And Chinese are certainly giving more to charity. So why is there still a big disconnect? Plenty of explanations - and socio-psycho-babble - have been bandied about: Asians are in the early stages of wealth creation, and they need to focus on earning more rather than giving it way; money needs to remain in the family for generations to come; they are reluctant to "show off"; and there are no institutional structures in place. No one accuses Gates or Buffett of showing off, but rich Chinese are right about not having a clear legal framework which would encourage charity. Zhang Jindong, founder of Suning, the country's second-largest home appliance retailing chain and a CPPCC member, has called on rich people and enterprises to be more giving and urged the government to speed up legislation on charity. Experts say that a law that provides for reasonable tax deductions is the key to increasing charity. And a big step forward would involve empowering NGOs. Showing the way is Li Ka-shing, chairman of Hong Kong conglomerate Hutchison Whampoa and the 11th richest man on the Forbes list, who said in an interview to the Asian Wall Street Journal in November: "In the US, philanthropic support from entrepreneurs is tightly integrated into the fabric of society Now, slowly, China will know this." Faster would be better. The author is editor-at-large of China Daily (China Daily 03/13/2008 page7) |
|
