4 ms·
"He also noted that her donation had no strings attached, an approach he praised as anti-paternalistic."
by rmrfstar 6y ago
"He also noted that her donation had no strings attached, an approach he praised as anti-paternalistic."
- thephyber 6y agoThis article[1] talks a little more about Rob Reich's discussion of why large donations to charity can be paternalistic. From memory, most donations "with strings attached" establish something new (like a new building), but explicitly disallow the donation to be used for mundane (but very necessary) maintenance (eg. heating, electricity, maintenance, janitorial, admin/professor salaries). I think the quote is simply reinforcing the idea that a university probably knows better where the additional dollar should be spent than a wealthy donor who hasn't been on campus in years (if ever). [1] https://news.stanford.edu/2018/12/03/the-problems-with-philanthropy/ https://news.stanford.edu/2018/12/03/the-problems-with-phila...
- satya71 6y agoThis is true of almost all donations to all organizations, IMO. That's why I like Give Directly. The recipient is the best judge of what they need. There are things that specialist organizations with economies of scale can do, but by far no-strings-attached cash donations are better than most.