At the end of the day, philanthropy can only ever be an adjunct to what governments provide. And government coffers need to be replenished.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
The responsibility of philanthropy rests with us. The wealthier we are, the more powerful we get. We cannot put the entire onus on the government.
In philanthropy, many of us give a little bit and each year we give more and more to see what actually works and not just throw money out there and see if it's going to work. If the government did the same thing, fabulous.
There is a place and a time for philanthropy, and there is only so much money you can give away.
Philanthropy is commendable, but it must not cause the philanthropist to overlook the circumstances of economic injustice which make philanthropy necessary.
Philanthropy is not about giving money but about solving problems. While well-meaning, the idea of writing a check and calling it 'philanthropy' is extremely short-sighted and unfortunately, extremely pervasive.
Philanthropy should be taking much bigger risks that business. If these are easy problems, business and government can come in and solve them.
Shouldn't you put the same amount of effort into your giving as you might for your for-profit investments? After all, philanthropy is an investment, and one in which lives - not profits - are at stake.
The most generous part of your philanthropy could be the time you put in to procure the same results and same outcomes and same returns you demand in business.
Philanthropy should be voluntary.
You cannot mandate philanthropy. It has to come from within, and when it does, it is deeply satisfying.