The Billion Dollar Debate
4/22
The story that swept the news, the burning of the Notre Dame in Paris, had only its roof and a single stained glass window destroyed. even though it may seem I am taking this lightly, you are incorrect. Of course I am completely aware that a very important historical building had been slightly destroyed and that that part of history (roof and window) may not be here it is not the end of the world. But it did sure seem like it was the end of the world to many people as in under a week one billion dollars was donated to the reconstruction of the historic building. Though it is a very important building and that it most likely if not definitely has some sort of sentimental value to the people of Paris if not many more.
Though the large donation of money for the cathedrals reconstruction is very important and crucial to many, a huge debated uprawed on social media as many have come to the quick realization that billionaires and millionaires had just donated collectively at least a billion dollars in the matter of days. But the fury from the people was about the fact that millionaires and billionaires could make that big of a difference in such a short time will their money, but there are bigger problems the world has compared to the reconstruction of the cathedral. Many claim that these billionaires can help better causes like help fighting world hunger, poverty levels, or just people in need. Though this is true, some people are taking this debate and creating it into a bigger problem than it needs to be and others are trying to come to a compromise and keep the public sane.
Though this situation can be very important and meaningful, some take into the consideration of the people who don't have this type of cash that can make this big of a difference. The debate of the Massive Notre Dame Cathedral Donations spark backlash vs The False choice between helping Notre Dame and helping poor people. Both of these articles are focusing on different parts of the article they think is important. But who says one is wrong anyways? both articles bring up important points to the discussion, but the word choice they use is interesting. the article from the VOX.com had been titled "The False choice between helping Notre Dame and helping poor people" which straight from the beginning makes you think from the word "false" that the donations shouldn't be there at all when I think many can disagree with as I think there should be a balance which is also later described in the article. While the other article does fight that there should be a better use of the money they really go into detail the brands and billionaires that should choice to take part in helping the rest of the world who had donated to the church.
://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/4/20/18507964/notre-dame-cathedral-fire-charity-donationsttps://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2019/04/18/notre-dame-cathedral-fire-billionaires-donations-spark-backlash/3514968002/
The story that swept the news, the burning of the Notre Dame in Paris, had only its roof and a single stained glass window destroyed. even though it may seem I am taking this lightly, you are incorrect. Of course I am completely aware that a very important historical building had been slightly destroyed and that that part of history (roof and window) may not be here it is not the end of the world. But it did sure seem like it was the end of the world to many people as in under a week one billion dollars was donated to the reconstruction of the historic building. Though it is a very important building and that it most likely if not definitely has some sort of sentimental value to the people of Paris if not many more.
Though the large donation of money for the cathedrals reconstruction is very important and crucial to many, a huge debated uprawed on social media as many have come to the quick realization that billionaires and millionaires had just donated collectively at least a billion dollars in the matter of days. But the fury from the people was about the fact that millionaires and billionaires could make that big of a difference in such a short time will their money, but there are bigger problems the world has compared to the reconstruction of the cathedral. Many claim that these billionaires can help better causes like help fighting world hunger, poverty levels, or just people in need. Though this is true, some people are taking this debate and creating it into a bigger problem than it needs to be and others are trying to come to a compromise and keep the public sane.
Though this situation can be very important and meaningful, some take into the consideration of the people who don't have this type of cash that can make this big of a difference. The debate of the Massive Notre Dame Cathedral Donations spark backlash vs The False choice between helping Notre Dame and helping poor people. Both of these articles are focusing on different parts of the article they think is important. But who says one is wrong anyways? both articles bring up important points to the discussion, but the word choice they use is interesting. the article from the VOX.com had been titled "The False choice between helping Notre Dame and helping poor people" which straight from the beginning makes you think from the word "false" that the donations shouldn't be there at all when I think many can disagree with as I think there should be a balance which is also later described in the article. While the other article does fight that there should be a better use of the money they really go into detail the brands and billionaires that should choice to take part in helping the rest of the world who had donated to the church.
Comments
Post a Comment