This is a clickbait title. The article clearly says "Rich Indians might be charitable, but not enough of them are philanthropists." So the title should be "Why

This is a clickbait title. The article clearly says "Rich Indians might be charitable, but not enough of them are philanthropists." So the title should be "Why India's rich don't give their money away to philanthropy"? But going by the comments in this thread I guess the title has achieved in drawing the reactions it really wanted to. Still as per the quoted report[0], private funding grew by 15% compared to less than 10% growth in US[1] (unfortunately drawing a parallel between private funding is kind of difficult). Additionally, the article says "ultra-rich households have grown at a rate of 12% over the past five years". So, the private funding growth (15%) has kept up with the UHNI growth in past 5 years? Sure, we can make a case of more funding for UHNI but then the title makes even less sense. Additionally, to add one more of the interpretations in the ring. Indians donate lots of money in temples like Shirdi, Thirupati Balaji which goes to some chartiable trusts. Though again the major point is charity vs philanthropy. [0] - https://www.dasra.org/assets/uploads/resources/BAIN_BRIEF_India_Philanthropy_Report_2019.pdf https://www.dasra.org/assets/uploads/resources/BAIN_BRIEF_In... [1] - https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/report-projects-growth-in-charitable-giving-in-2019-20 https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/report-projects-grow...