> we do that because everybody loves a philanthropist giving. Count me out. I have a really unpopular opinion that philanthropy is nothing more nothing less th

> we do that because everybody loves a philanthropist giving. Count me out. I have a really unpopular opinion that philanthropy is nothing more nothing less than entertainment for the giver. There is no difference between me buing a movie ticket or giving money to a charity. (Well, other than in the movie case I create jobs, in the charity I foster helplessness) If society thinks there are some things where money should be allocated without getting anything tangible back, it should be funded via taxes, not charity. No need to subsidize private charities. (If your government can't be trusted to manage the money, it would be more efficient to use your money to try to fix the government instead of getting yourswlf some feelgood by giving money out to whatever else) Effective altruism? Go and pay your taxes, that is according to economic theory the most efficient way to be altruistic in all the cases someone may bee freeloading on your charity (see tragedy of commons/prisoners' dilemma)