I'm with the professor on this one. This practice of shaming organizations because they received cash gifts seems odd to me. Seems like another kind of "first w

I'm with the professor on this one. This practice of shaming organizations because they received cash gifts seems odd to me. Seems like another kind of "first world" angst that I'll be struggling to explain to friends in other countries. It's not like they were naming a building after him. As for always getting something in return, in economics you must always consider the alternative. The man had millions of dollars. For millions of dollars you can get "something" from all directions. Harvard's refusal to take his money would not have made him nine million dollars poorer. And as long as Harvard-donor-bragging-rights are just as available to anyone as a multi-million dollar beach house would be instead, I don't see why it matters.