Corporate and private charity in crisis: Wealth redistribution done right

It started yesterday when my wife informed me of a report that said U-Haul is making an extraordinary outreach to help students affected by COVID-19. The company is extending free storage for 30 days to college students.

“More and more universities are giving instructions to leave campus and go home. Students and their parents are in need of moving and storage solutions. We have the expertise and network to help, and that’s exactly what we’re going to do,” a spokesperson for the company says.

What a great way for those with means to help those who do not. It is the perfect Christian, humane, and free-market reaction. It is giving voluntarily to help those in need. There is no government program. But note: it requires giving. Further, it requires giving freely from what is considered one’s own profits. It is what Christ speaks of in Luke 6: lend, expecting nothing in return. Better yet, just give, expecting nothing in return.

With a quick search, it became clear that there are many charitable-minded companies giving this way: Comcast is giving away free internet to needy families. Many companies are paying non-working employees or providing other benefits: Microsoft, Amazon, Expedia, Facebook, Twitter, Google, Salesforce, Starbucks, Lyft, Uber, Walmart, Postmates, CVS, Wells Fargo, Olive Garden. I am sure there are more.

Some companies are paying employees even if they are sick or required to be out. Twitter, notably, has mandated all employees work from home (a small benefit to many).

NBA rookie standout Zion Williamson joined several others in pledging $100,000 each to help pay temporarily unemployed workers from their own home arenas.

The executives from multiple airlines, Delta, United, Southwest, are forfeiting their salaries in view of plummeting demand, but certainly to help prevent increased layoffs, at least to some degree.

These are all ways private companies and individuals can redistribute wealth for legitimate needs without costly and ineffective government intervention (which usually skims a fat percentage for its own services).

Note: if this approach can meet the steep demands of a major crisis, there is no reason it cannot be the norm, for all times of need, and for smaller, individual crises. To be quite honest: it should. Christian companies ought to lead the way in such things. It would utterly shame the calls for government-run socialism. It would also expose it as inferior to private charity.