4 ms·

Yes but I want to say to anyone who wants to do this Give the money away! Someone else can do so much more with it. It really annoys me when people do the "I

• iskander 15y ago
  You could, you know, spend it on people other than yourself.
• prostoalex 15y ago
  A lot of the philantropic efforts are dealing with manifestations of the problems instead of root causes. They're giving the man a ration of fish instead of fish rods. Charities that give out food to the hungry take the money away from research that could result in genetically modified foods that are extremely cheap and easy to grow. Charities that provide college scholarships for gifted/athletic/underachieving/overachieving students contribute to overall inflation of the cost of education for everybody else. Splurging doesn't achieve a net effect of life improvement for society in general, and neither does blind charity.
  • lucasjung 15y ago
    Sometimes the effects are even directly counterproductive: if you dump loads of free grain into a poor society, guess what happens to local farmers who are trying to grow and sell grain for a living?
  • notJim 15y ago
    So your point is what? Giving to charities is universally bad? One should should just throw out the whole concept of charity, because some are less effective than others?
    • prostoalex 15y ago
      Original poster suggested "just giving" instead of "sitting on the money". Implied rushed decision can be counter-productive. Bill Gates is a good example of efficient philantropist, instead of donating to charities who spread awareness about malaria or global warming, he invests in lasers that kill malaria mosquitos and deep-ocean technologies that prevent global warming.
      • wh-uws 15y ago
        Ah I see the confusion now. I didn't mean to do it without thinking about it. Just that it frustrates me that someone who could happily live with $70,000 a year sits on millions or more. Make use of the money in some way for someone even if its not yourself