Billionaires could be spending their money responsibly. But they aren't, are they? Their only interests seem to be hoarding more of the planets wealth, and destroying democracy.
They could have been doing cool shit like, say, funding a new LRT line in their home town, or fully funding all the canal restorations in England, or like funding hospitals in impoverished parts of their countries, or...
@Gurre Here's the thing the less-than-philanthropic billionaires fail to realise, yet their robber-barron forefathers knew.

Let's imagine you're a mega-wealthy tycoon.

For argument's sake, in this hypothetical example, you're a steel magnate.

You just cemented your fortune by selling the forerunner of US Steel to JP Morgan: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Carnegie

You donate a portion of your wealth to build a major music hall. Naturally, it carries your name: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_Hall

Over 100 years later, people won't remember the shitty things you did.

Like that time you installed new equipment at your steel mill to improve productivity, and then cut your workers' wages. So they formed a union because they were fed up with making more steel for less money. So you locked them out. So they formed a picket line. So you hired an army of private security guards to break the picket line and let scab labour into the plant. But the steelworkers fought them off. So you called the governor to call in the state guard, with some of the laid off unionised workers getting killed in the process: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike

Or that other time when you and around 50 of your wealthy buddies owned an exclusive hunting club on a property with a dam you were too cheap to maintain, despite your immense wealth. So the dam burst, releasing 14.55 million cubic meters of floodwaters to a town downstream, killing more than 2000 people: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnstown_Flood

Instead, they'll associate your name with the performing arts.

And when schoolkids go on excursions of your music hall, they'll learn how you were a great patron of the arts, who enriched the public realm with this magnificent building.

And they probably won't hear about some of those other unfortunate unpleasantness that you may have been infamous for in your lifetime.
Andrew Carnegie - Wikipedia

@aj @Gurre so I read that rich people often have poor choices in philanthropy and that's why we need to tax them instead of waiting for their generosity. It's not JUST because they don't donate as much as they would be taxed.
It's because they donate to their hobbies, like museums and concert halls or getting a building on an already wealthy university named after themselves, while what we need is support for children with learning disabilities and low cost housing.
@chantaryu2 @aj 100%.
And the funding neds to be ongoing andconsistent. Not when some crush-the-workers arse feels like it.

@chantaryu2 @aj @Gurre Mainly that. Charity in this form is neither equitable nor sustainable. Mostly it's yet another mechanism for the wealthy to reduce their tax burden, which is why they often run so-called charitable foundations instead of just straight up giving money.

And as you said, the money is often not going where it's needed. But also things like housing, healthcare and education are basic services that should not depend on charitable whims but must be funded consistently.