April 18, 2008
$70-Million Donor Should 'Cool His Jets'
After the Freakonomics blog this week solicited suggestions for how a real-life donor could distribute $70-million to charity, fund raisers of all types — including arts leaders, heads of healthy charities, and even a representative of Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster chimed in online to make their pitches.
But Jack B. Siegel, a nonprofit lawyer and author of Charity Governance blog, suggests the wealthy man, identified only as Michael, “cool his jets” and wait to give his money away.
Mr. Siegel writes that the 31-year-old has his entire life to be a philanthropist and that he shouldn’t be too hasty with his giving.
“We bet there are already charities and others trying to identify Michael so that they can sink their avaricious claws into him and his money,” he writes.
Mr. Siegel would like to see Michael mature a bit more before making huge charitable decisions.
“Michael may find at age 35 or 45 that he believes the best way to serve humanity is to start a company, invent a new product, or invest in a venture. It would be a shame if Michael couldn’t do that because he had acted too quickly,” he writes.
What do you think? Should Michael slow down and wait to discover how he feels in a few years about philanthropy?
— Ian Wilhelm
Comments
Commenting is closed for this article.
Previous: The Language Barrier in Grant Seeking
Next: Sigourney Weaver Tops Reader Poll
It sounds like Michael needs me as a wife!
— stacey Apr 18, 11:17 AM #
I don’t know, it sounds to me like starting a company, inventing a new product, or investing in a venture would benefit HIMSELF more than it would benefit humanity. What causes he supports should be up to him rather than up to total strangers on the internet, but the fact is that there are plenty of charities that could use his support NOW, not in another 10 years. Hell, in ten years an asteroid might have wiped out the whole planet for all we know!
— Tracy Kaufman Apr 18, 01:03 PM #
As Milton Friedman pointed out many years ago, the free market is the engine which lifts individuals, and nations, out of poverty. Michael, whoever he may be, should invest in entrepreneurial activity in developing nations and wait on the philanthropy till much later.
— Sam Davis Apr 18, 02:27 PM #
Does Mr. Siegel’s hubris know no bounds?
— Tom Welsh, MNPL Apr 18, 02:45 PM #
I would support the suggestion to wait awhile. I’m interested in different issues now than I was when I was younger. Why not invest the bulk of it and then make a personal pledge to annually disburse a portion of it in what interests him at that time?
— annetta Apr 18, 03:21 PM #
I agree with Mr. Siegel. By my calculations, that $70 Million could be north of $75 Million just a year or so from now – well invested, that is. A little bit of time and the research it will allow would benefit all involved, including “Michael”. He needs to see this as a huge investment, especially because he will not share in the financial return. At least it would provide him some time to examine exactly what impact on the world he’d like to have. I appreciate his willingness to allow input from a variety of sources (that’s a fun opportunity, akin to thinking about winning the lottery!), but the bottom line is he needs to make an investment that is aligned with his values. If he doesn’t, then he may develop regrets over his contribution(s) down the line. The time would be well-spent to ensure that he’s comfortable with the decisions. Well, that’s what I’d do if I had $70 Million to give away!
— Skip Apr 18, 03:21 PM #
Isn’t it amazing how those with resources like Michael are challenged to find the appropriate strategy to share their wealth, or the appropriate advisors and counselors? I think a wise investment would be the one that brings the greatest satisfaction to the donor! Anyone who has an extra $70 milion waiting to be given away will always find the “demons of resistance” advising them to invest in other mechanisms, products, and vehicles to make even more wealth, even if it is for charity. And those demons will likely profit from such good investment advice. The classic story, of course, is not to kill the goose that lays the golden egg. Wise advise and counsel in a paradoxical kind of way. I wonder whether the goose ever gets tired of laying all those eggs. What’s more, I wonder whether the goose (Michael) ever feels like he is being exploited and the opportunity to give it all away would be a welcome relief!
I think the greater paradox in this dilemma is intrinsic value the donor places on the gift and the infinite possibilities for doing good are diminished by the infinite possitibilities of doing good! What a pity.
— Jay Tatum Apr 18, 06:18 PM #
Ms. Kaufman might be interested in the activities of the TED conference – as might Michael.
— Chris Casquilho Apr 19, 06:13 AM #
Why put off to tomorrow the good that he can do today? I do not advocate that Michael make a hasty decision, but time waits for no one. We can’t be certain that we will live to see tomorrow, so it behooves us to live today as if it is our last.
— Carol Apr 19, 05:01 PM #