Trae Young

[thebigabd]

no it is 10,000 dollars that is an actually amount of money

I see what SoonerBounce is getting at here.. It's not unfair to gauge it in proportion to their income or net worth, and assess that is the equivalent of a median income worker giving $5 or whatever. Like others have said, you have no idea how much money he has donated in other areas, or if this particular gift only required $10,000, etc. Also, he isn't required to give anything to anyone.

 

[hoopsaustin]

calm down dude.

This donation is a good thing.
But it is the equivelent of a teacher in Oklahoma donating $50.

The biggest positive of this is that it raises awareness to the ridiculousness of health care costs in the US and that paying down debt like this is an option for charitable contributions

Wow... "Ackchyually" its not very much.

 

[MsProudSooner]

Not only is it a good thing but it's a smart thing. It's not a lot of money to Trae but it could keep families out of bankruptcy court. Good for him!

 

[SoonerJK12]

calm down dude.

This donation is a good thing.
But it is the equivelent of a teacher in Oklahoma donating $50.

The biggest positive of this is that it raises awareness to the ridiculousness of health care costs in the US and that paying down debt like this is an option for charitable contributions

Literally no one:
You: it was like a teacher donating 50 dollars.

Legitimate question: How much money does he need to donate to a SINGLE charity before you take away your asterisk?

 

[coolm]

First - the fact Trae did anything is a testament to what a nice kid he is.

That said ... this is a perfect example of why you do not leave social welfare to the whims of charitable giving instead of an actual, funded social program supplied with consistent capital. The money he used will benefit the creditors more than those in whom the bills were incurred. He just made a donation to rich people.

Look at it this way - let's say someone is starving to death and Trae comes along and decides to help. How does he help the poor starving soul? He buys her some cheap Halloween costumes at a K-mart blue light special for 4 cents on the dollar. Sure, it's a nice gesture. But it's helping the business more than the person. That was a debt the collector was never going to be able to collect and that they themselves purchased for a few cents on the dollar. So his charity merely encouraged secondary and tertiary debt markets and harassing collection procedures. They were going to have to write those debts off and now they (the rich people) are getting some pay-off instead.

All it helps is raise the poor's credit score by a few points that still won't solve their problems. When you aren't making money then incurring more debt only gets you in a bigger hole. This $10,000 would have been MUCH more wisely used by purchasing $10,000 worth of white socks and donating them to a shelter. But someone got the brilliant (??) idea that this was a great charity move. it's not.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Literally no one:
You: it was like a teacher donating 50 dollars.

Legitimate question: How much money does he need to donate to a SINGLE charity before you take away your asterisk?

I'm simply sayign that what he did is something that millions of americans do every month.

Its a nice gesture but not newsworthy.

Just putting things in perspective

 

[BanjoCharley]

Millions of americans from his age group do that? B.S.

 

[paboomersooner]

And here it is...:facepalm

First - the fact Trae did anything is a testament to what a nice kid he is.

That said ... this is a perfect example of why you do not leave social welfare to the whims of charitable giving instead of an actual, funded social program supplied with consistent capital. The money he used will benefit the creditors more than those in whom the bills were incurred. He just made a donation to rich people.

Look at it this way - let's say someone is starving to death and Trae comes along and decides to help. How does he help the poor starving soul? He buys her some cheap Halloween costumes at a K-mart blue light special for 4 cents on the dollar. Sure, it's a nice gesture. But it's helping the business more than the person. That was a debt the collector was never going to be able to collect and that they themselves purchased for a few cents on the dollar. So his charity merely encouraged secondary and tertiary debt markets and harassing collection procedures. They were going to have to write those debts off and now they (the rich people) are getting some pay-off instead.

All it helps is raise the poor's credit score by a few points that still won't solve their problems. When you aren't making money then incurring more debt only gets you in a bigger hole. This $10,000 would have been MUCH more wisely used by purchasing $10,000 worth of white socks and donating them to a shelter. But someone got the brilliant (??) idea that this was a great charity move. it's not.

 

[Hollisp]

From The Athletic

Young’s $10,000 donation cleared out exactly $1,059,186.39 of debt for 590 individual debtors living in 41 different zip codes in Atlanta. Two debtors living in zip code 30363, for example, had an average debt of $11,574.55 that was wiped out. Because the debt was purchased for a penny on the dollar, that’s how $10,000 turned into more than $1 million.

It goes on...

Most donations are random, and beneficiaries don’t know who helped them, but Young’s was public at the behest of the non-profit, according to his father. RIP Medical Debt’s website had a 260 percent spike in website traffic on Wednesday as opposed to the rest of the month so far. The news was picked up by People.com, CNN...

https://theathletic.com/1525726/202...al-effects-it-can-have/?source=shared-article

 

[Hollisp]

I’m now completely convinced that we will argue over anything on the MB. Unreal.

 

[sheepdogs1]

I’m now completely convinced that we will argue over anything on the MB. Unreal.

No we don't.

 

[hoopsaustin]

No we don't.

Lol nice

 

[Hollisp]

No we don't.

Well done sir... well done

 

[OUReality]

First - the fact Trae did anything is a testament to what a nice kid he is.

That said ... this is a perfect example of why you do not leave social welfare to the whims of charitable giving instead of an actual, funded social program supplied with consistent capital. The money he used will benefit the creditors more than those in whom the bills were incurred. He just made a donation to rich people.

Look at it this way - let's say someone is starving to death and Trae comes along and decides to help. How does he help the poor starving soul? He buys her some cheap Halloween costumes at a K-mart blue light special for 4 cents on the dollar. Sure, it's a nice gesture. But it's helping the business more than the person. That was a debt the collector was never going to be able to collect and that they themselves purchased for a few cents on the dollar. So his charity merely encouraged secondary and tertiary debt markets and harassing collection procedures. They were going to have to write those debts off and now they (the rich people) are getting some pay-off instead.

All it helps is raise the poor's credit score by a few points that still won't solve their problems. When you aren't making money then incurring more debt only gets you in a bigger hole. This $10,000 would have been MUCH more wisely used by purchasing $10,000 worth of white socks and donating them to a shelter. But someone got the brilliant (??) idea that this was a great charity move. it's not.

Your points are valid from the objective impact, they miss the subjective impact this had on those who debts were voided. Living with the burden of a debt that you cannot ever pay back is suffocating and depressing. I am sure that most of the people who benefited were overwhelmed to find out that their debt was erased and feel grateful in spite of how much it cost Trae or who really benefited financially. Sure, there may have been some whose conscience wasn't bothered by the debt, so they don't care about the relief. But I would bet the majority did and feel blessed. Charity isn't just about giving someone dollars ... it is also about giving them hope.

 

[BanjoCharley]

This

 

[coolm]

Your points are valid from the objective impact, they miss the subjective impact this had on those who debts were voided. Living with the burden of a debt that you cannot ever pay back is suffocating and depressing. I am sure that most of the people who benefited were overwhelmed to find out that their debt was erased and feel grateful in spite of how much it cost Trae or who really benefited financially. Sure, there may have been some whose conscience wasn't bothered by the debt, so they don't care about the relief. But I would bet the majority did and feel blessed. Charity isn't just about giving someone dollars ... it is also about giving them hope.

you are projecting your own fears and ills. a majority of poor people are more concerned about buying food and keeping the electricity on than they are about improving their credit score.

 

[thebigabd]

you are projecting your own fears and ills. a majority of poor people are more concerned about buying food and keeping the electricity on than they are about improving their credit score.

This... Truly poor people don't care about their credit score. This is classic Maslow. If you don't have secure food or shelter, you don't care about credit.

 

[OUReality]

you are projecting your own fears and ills. a majority of poor people are more concerned about buying food and keeping the electricity on than they are about improving their credit score.

No projection here, silly statement since you don't know me. My perspective has nothing to do with personal fears or ills I have not had to deal with crippling debt. My perspective comes from working with many people who have face debt, loss of employment or needed some sort of financial assistance. You are correct, the poor don't care about the credit score and just care about getting their immediate needs met (not sure why you even brought up, no one is arguing that). We probably agree that there are wiser ways to help these people from a financial perspective. My point is that charity is more than just helping financially. It can be about rebuilding self respect and renewing hope in a person. Your points are valid if we were just consider the $$, but as I said in my previous post, I think the impact is more than $$.

 

[coolm]

No projection here, silly statement since you don't know me. My perspective has nothing to do with personal fears or ills I have not had to deal with crippling debt. My perspective comes from working with many people who have face debt, loss of employment or needed some sort of financial assistance. You are correct, the poor don't care about the credit score and just care about getting their immediate needs met (not sure why you even brought up, no one is arguing that). We probably agree that there are wiser ways to help these people from a financial perspective. My point is that charity is more than just helping financially. It can be about rebuilding self respect and renewing hope in a person. Your points are valid if we were just consider the $$, but as I said in my previous post, I think the impact is more than $$.

well YOU may think the impact is whatever but it's not a matter of what YOU think. It's a matter of what they think. Unless you're merely pointing to the good feelings Trae gets from donating money. I've been working with the poor and homeless and mentally infirm for nearly 3 decades and after a ton of 341 bankruptcy hearings and thousands of criminal cases I can tell you that most of them have neither the time nor the inclination to be worried about their credit score. As I intimated earlier this effort is really just some window dressing that actually helps the secondary creditors more than anyone else. But you're welcome to think whatever you like. I just prefer the truth myself.

 

[sheepdogs1]

well YOU may think the impact is whatever but it's not a matter of what YOU think. It's a matter of what they think. Unless you're merely pointing to the good feelings Trae gets from donating money. I've been working with the poor and homeless and mentally infirm for nearly 3 decades and after a ton of 341 bankruptcy hearings and thousands of criminal cases I can tell you that most of them have neither the time nor the inclination to be worried about their credit score. As I intimated earlier this effort is really just some window dressing that actually helps the secondary creditors more than anyone else. But you're welcome to think whatever you like. I just prefer the truth myself.

Chances are the donation is tax deductible, but we do not know whether that was the motivation for the donation or not and the motivation should be be key as it indicates why people do the things that they do, be it good or bad. Sometimes individuals will make a donation and it's not reflected on their taxes for they do not care if their good deed is rewarded by lowering their tax liability while others certainly do care. We really don't know either way yet for some their reality is comprised of what they want,don't want, like or don't like. I've always thought this corrupts reality because it then becomes a function of opinion as opposed to facts, but that's just me. I agree with your last statement wholeheartedly for opinions are not facts and facts are reality whether we like it or not.