In simple terms, wealth is defined by what we have. Capitalism allows us to seek out our fortunes and few, if any, people or obstacles will prevent us from amassing them. And then there are the fortunate few who are born into money. Either way, a number of people on our planet enjoy a great deal of wealth.

Every year, Forbes magazine publishes a list of the world's top billionaires. In 2007, Mr. Gates and Mr. Buffett still sit at the top. In the words of the legendary John Houseman, these gentlemen "made money the old fashioned way….they eaaaaarned it". With a combined net worth of over $100 billion, they also have the luxury of deciding how to spend it. The Gates established The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to put this money to some good use. Much of the planet is either poverty-stricken, in dire need of health care, or both, and the foundation focuses on solutions. In 2006, Mr. Buffett donated a large percentage of his riches to the foundation, and now its total endowment is over $30 billion.

Philanthropic efforts are a fantastic way to create a personal or corporate brand. And among the world's elite, it can become a contest as to who donates to what cause, and how much. Many large corporations, politicians, professional athletes, and others have set up similar types of foundations. So who will win this "contest"? Can it be quantified?

Inspirational speaker and author Tim Richardson has embarked on a new project that aims to accomplish just that. Dubbed The REAL Richest People in America, Mr. Richardson will select 400 people "based not on what they have or earn, but what they give or what they do." The list is expected to be released later this year.

There seem to be dozens of new grassroots organizations and NGO's every year that try to address certain areas on the planet that need the most attention. Most of them serve worthy causes, but these problems don't seem to go away. The fight continues, and so Mr. Richardson will provide us a service and expose what is being done by those who believe that wealth isn't necessarily defined by what we have.

So in the end, are the most wealthy really defined by who has the most….or who needs the least?

Disclosure: There are certain charities I give to every year, including the American Cancer Society. There are companies whose stock I do not invest in because of what they do (or don't do) with their excess cash. XOM is one of them.