Okay, I get that the administration wants to encourage our plutocrats-in-training to get involved, roll up their sleeves and pony up some part of their fortunes to effect positive social change. (At least that's the story they're stickin' to.) But we've kinda been there/done that before, whether it's the era of the Rockefellers and the Morgans or the era of the Medicis and the Borgias, and while those oligarchs each made important contributions to culture, the arts, education et al, they also amassed obscene amounts of wealth while 90 percent of their countrymen, walled off from their gated compounds, died in the streets by the millions from tuberculosis and plague. In other words, most other Western societies in our history came to the conclusion that relying too heavily on the largesse of rich people was woefully inadequate---and potentially dangerous---to address many of those societies' most pressing social problems. Maybe someone should remind the administration of that.
---
Baron V