Skip to comments.Rush Limbaugh - 10th Most Generous Celebrity per The Giving Back Fund
Posted on 01/14/2010 8:00:10 PM PST by Arec Barrwin
Oprah Ranked Most Generous Celebrity Pop Tags: Oprah Winfrey Posted on September 14th, 2008 by Eva Lam
Oprah Winfrey has been proclaimed the worlds biggest giver again.
For the seoncd year running, the day-time host topped a list of the 30 most generous celebrities for giving $50.2 million US last year through the Oprah Winfrey Foundation and Oprahs Angel Network, which fund education, health care and advocacy for women and children.
The list, now in its second year, was compiled by The Giving Back Fund, a charity that aims to encourage philanthropy.
Claiming the No. 2 spot was trumpeter Herb Alpert, who gave $13 million for education, including music lessons, through the Herb Alpert Foundation.
Three athletes also made the top 10, with cyclist Lance Armstrong, basketball star Michael Jordan and Canadian hockey player Eric Lindros giving $5 million each.
Here is the top 10 on The Giving Back Funds list of most generous celebrities (all figures in US dollars):
1. Oprah Winfrey, $50.2 million. 2. Herb Alpert, $13 million. 3. Barbra Streisand, $11 million. 4. Paul Newman, $10 million. 5. Mel Gibson, $9.9 million. 6. Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, $8.4 million. 7. Lance Armstrong, $5 million. 8. Michael Jordan, $5 million. 9. Eric Lindros, $5 million. 10. Rush Limbaugh, $4.2 million.
Thanks to both of you for your explanations. I learn something new on FR everyday that I log on. :)
LOL, love your screen name. Very interesting list, thanks for posting it. Herb Alpert #2, that’s amazing, makes me glad I bought the re-issue of his old Christmas album for hubby a year or two ago. (got good reviews, but hubby didn’t like it, too much old time-y goopiness). And nice to see Ms. Streisand up there too, I admit I can’t hate Barbara.
Good on them all for their generosity.
So no messy divorces to wipe out his wealth.
“Man, do I ever hate that phrase, giving back.
I agree, it just rubs me the wrong way. I think it has to do with the connotation of “owing”. Not “give”, but “give back” like it’s a debt.
There is just something lefty/irritating about it.
“giving back” terminology has a certain “obligatory” feel to it so I understand your discomfort.
As for me?
“Nihil esse grato animo honestius”
(Nothing is more honorable than a grateful heart.) Seneca~
You are very welcome ... a very limited explanation, but to cut to the chase it makes every dollar I give, work efficiently. I firmly believe in charitable giving, but I want it to be efficient from my end, AND more important I want the recipient to be efficient with my gift on their end as well.
For example, over 70% of money given to United Way is eaten up by their own administration costs, AND even though you designate an area, by law they do not have to honor your wishes. To me that is outrageous.
I tend to donate to charities where less than 10% of the gift is eaten up in admin costs. 10% may sound high, but in reality it is pretty reasonable.
good for them ... it is an efficient means of xsfer with a few tax benefits. It is what separates private industry from the public sector ... every thing i do is done in the most efficient way i knw how. Our govt .... seems to never have caught on to that concept.
Sure is. Why wasn't he listed in the top 10 was the question.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.