Only a cool 0.3% of their combined networth.

Pocket change to them, while they maintain the system that ensures that some people have to rely on charity in the first place while they hoard millions if not billions.

Don't play along

I copy paste one of my comments about charity:

It creates a subordination to the rich. The poor will be dependant of the charity to live.

The charities should not exist at all. It's neoliberal to privatize everything so the state is smaller and smaller and create a direct control of the masses by the rich. This system is even more perverse. The rich can make the own rules and own regulations to give even more control on the poorer.

The work done by the charity must be done by the state itself with it's own employees. It finances these programs through the taxes and regulations. The state must be strong. You have your word here what's not the case with charity.

The best thing is to remunerate the work at its fair value. The workers thus recover the majority of the money earned by the company. This also solves the problem of profits and dividends.They are used to pay workers properly, which is not the case today.

If you don't know how the wealthy class use non-profits and other "philanthropy" to funnel money, here is a clip below that explains.

Oprah's Maui Fund QUESTIONED (clip)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHs6DXUm21U

They pledged $10 million. Which means that they just will pay whatever people paid. Not their money.