The Man Who Did Not Save the World

Last month, “Salvatore Mundi,” portrayal of the Savior Jesus of the World by Leonardo da Vinci, was auctioned for $400 million, twice as much as the previous record held at an auction for an art work. The buyer was also forced to pay another $50.3m on commissions and fees.

The painting has been heavily updated, and some experts have even questioned whether it really is Leonardo's work. Jason Farago, a New York Times art critic, described  that as a good “but not a particularly religious painting from the sixteenth century cadre in Lombardi, which has passed a series of restorations. ”
The buyer for whom many believe that it is the prince of the Saudi crown, Mohammed bin Salman, who acted through a distant cousin he paid a very high price for painting a man who is said to have advised another rich person: “Go, sell your wealth and give to the poor, and after that you will earn a treasure in the sky.” This makes it important to ask: What can one do for the poor with $450 million aside?
The Lives You Can SaveA nonprofit organization that I founded a few years ago, there's one The Impact Accounter of the Merciful which enables you to see what can be accomplished with donations to organizations that have a proven history of helping the world's poorest people. The accountant shows that, for $450 million, you can return your sight to nine million people with curable blindness, or provide 13 million households with tools and techniques to raise 50% more food.
If you want to follow Jesus ' command in a literal way, you can simply give money to the poorest families of the world to use as they please. An organization called Direct Giving will identify families most in need and transfer your money to them, holding only 10 percent for their administrative costs.
If you feel that people who take such money will spend it on alcohol, gambling, or prostitution, one Independent Rate has shown that they don't. Money assistance directly increases food security, mental health, and beneficiary possession. For 450 million, you can also buy 180 million bed nets, enough to protect 271 million people from malaria. (For all these interventions, real numbers will likely be slightly lower than they are from the Benevolent Impact, since this has not been conceived for large sums and therefore does not take into account that the cost of relief distribution increases when people in need who are more easily accessible are covered and should go further away.)
When a person chooses to buy “Salvatore Cani” instead of turning a look at nine million people, what does this mean about their values? One thing is clear: They hardly feel about others. Whatever pleasure they, their families, or their friends will receive when they see the picture, it can hardly be compared to the benefit of restoring the sight of one person, not many million.
Right or wrong, most of us give more weight to our direct interests and the interests of our children and relatives and friends before the interests of others. The more distant and the more different of us these are, the greater the standard of ignoring that we apply in practice.
However, there is a limit on which the norm rate becomes so large and the interests of others are treated with so indifference that we should say no, that is too much. We can argue that the richest people are on the wrong side of this border. What I find to be inexplicable is that worrying about having a picture rather than looking at many million people is far beyond the border.
In 2006, legendary investor Warren Buffett promised to provide most of its wealth to about 30 billion for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Foundation to help people in extreme poverty. This gift, the largest single gift ever given by someone doubled the foundation's resources. To mark the 10th anniversary of Buffett's gift, Bill and Melinda Gates recently Report to him what the foundation had done, along with other organizations, to improve world health over the decade.
The figure Bill and Melinda Gates point to is 122 million. This is the number of lives of children saved since 1990 by progressive reductions in infant mortality rates. In other words, if infant mortality remained constant from 1990 to today, 122 million more children would have died from actually dying during this period.
Perhaps the biggest contribution the Gates Foundation has to this decline is the grant of $750 million to establish the Global Alliance for Vaccination and Immunification (known as the Gavi, Alliance of Vaccina), a public and private alliance working with governments and United Nations agencies to improve the vaccination rate in poor countries and to help develop new vaccines. Already 86% of the world's children receive basic vaccines the highest rate ever.
The Gates family says that each dollar spent in immunizing a child benefits $44 in the economy, including money that families under other conditions will lose if the child is sick and the parent is unable to work. Warren Buffett's contribution to accounting may be the best investment he has ever made.
What do you think can make a person happier? Having a picture of whether it is the most wonderful picture in the world or knowing that you have kept millions of healthy children, saved lives and helped families at the same time? Logic as well as Psychological Research It suggests that the greatest satisfaction is not having the painting.