I remember very well when I was a teenager in the 70s hearing that line about why doesn't Rawat help to feed the poor with all of his money. I was also told and then subsequently repeated that to others, something along the lines of, "If Rawat gave all of his money to the poor, then he could maybe feed them for one day, but on the next day they would be hungry again." I also remember that when I heard that as a teenager that it actually made sense.Some years later, when I understood more about the things around me, I realized what an incredibly cynical, lame und naive excuse that really was. Of course you don't just give all your money to feed starving people for one day. That is beyond dumb. NFP organisations that really care about helping people set up programs and funds that are designed for long-term improvement of poverty-stricken communities. And they do make a difference. But that takes commitment and a real desire to change things. Something Rawat apparently wasn't interested in.
Today suddenly someone in the Rawat organisation has decided that getting involved in charitable pursuits will help Rawat's image it would seem. Of course, whatever the motive, it is a good thing if it is done responsibly.
But I have to ask myself again, where is Rawat's money in all of this? He has set up a foundation where others can donate money for good causes and he gets the benefit of an improved image. To me it is just one more example of the typical DLM/EV methodology. The premies pay and Rawat gets the benefit. Normally a foundation, like the Gates or Rockefeller or the thousands of others that exist, are named after the person who puts up the initial endowment.
Of course Bill Gates has an image benefit from the Gates Foundation, but I don't have a problem with that. He also donated 27 billion dollars to it. Did Rawat actually endow TPRF? How much of the 120 thousand dollars is his? I would be happy if things have changed around Rawat, but I doubt they have. Otherwise this information would be more prominently available. It rather once again seems a cheap caracature and imitation of the real thing.
