While the article's point is well-taken and frequently correct, I'll disagree in part. In the best of cases, the value brought by a gift can radically exceed t

While the article's point is well-taken and frequently correct, I'll disagree in part. In the best of cases, the value brought by a gift can radically exceed the market value of the gift itself. Time with a loved-one or assistance in a time of need can, indeed, be priceless; something the recipient could not have realistically gotten for themselves, especially on short notice, at any price. A gift of something that someone would, without doubt, enjoy but never acquire for themselves can also unlock value that otherwise never would have existed. I can think of a few such gifts in my lifetime that made a huge impression. A helpful rubric in most cases, though, is to ask, "does the gift I'm about to give impose significant obligations onto the recipient?" If so, it may be very wise to alter the gift in such a way as to limit the ways in which the recipient's future may be restricted. Cash is pretty good in this regard -- it carries few obligations and is as fungible as anything created by humans. It can frequently be traded for time, the most-precious of all commodities.