I feel that India lacks a level of philanthropy that is proportional to the wealth that is here, particularly among the top 5,000 industrialists and entrepreneurs.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I think the tradition of philanthropy is far better developed in the U.S. than in India, as is the whole notion of giving away 50% of your wealth while you are still living and not waiting till you're gone.
You have to build a culture of philanthropy. In a country like India, we need to be sensitive and caring about the poorer, more disadvantaged section of our country.
Unfortunately, the mechanism for doing philanthropy in a structured way isn't yet in place in India. I already do a fair bit and support various causes such as education, sanitation, health. But selling costly drugs at affordable prices is philanthropy in itself.
Those of us who have yet to find philanthropy may find there is a far greater reward from it than from wealth creation.
India happens to be a rich country inhabited by very poor people.
For most Indians in America, wealth is not inherited. Neither do we make it as heads of large hedge funds and private equity funds. For us to make it to the top, we have to use our knowhow to create great new technology products and build high-tech companies.
India is a land of plenty inhibited by poverty; India has an enthralling, uplifting civilization that sparkles not only in our magnificent art, but also in the enormous creativity and humanity of our daily life in city and village.
People see poverty all around them in India, but they are desensitized or immune to it. I came to the conclusion that poverty is driven by lack of education.
When India got independence, entrepreneurs were seen as a bad lot, as people who would exploit.
You cannot mandate philanthropy. It has to come from within, and when it does, it is deeply satisfying.
No opposing quotes found.