There are tax reasons & annual donation multiplier reasons like employee donation matching or matching events or credit card incentives, that make donating some percent each year of life make more sense.
Any rough quantification? If I live my life as a non altruist, build a net worth of 10 million dollars and give 5 million away at death and am part of a population of people who, instead of giving a little here and there or giving 10% of annual salary, just build wealth, buy cars, buy a home or two, take vacations, live capitalistically but with some smug consolation that they’re going to leave half to their kids and half to effective charities, the math that I’m seeing (and showed) is that if that population is >750k, donations will be higher immediately and continue to outpace a similar financial population that does 10% annually. Plenty of assumptions and simplifications in the model.
By “make more sense” I mean like change the calculations to be more positive for, but still uncertain on the broader decision of give now vs. invest.
Like I’d assume one could at least 2X their annual donations with these things. So for someone using these strategies the give now argument should be 2X stronger for the sum of donations they can multiply now that they can’t multiply in the future.
There are tax reasons & annual donation multiplier reasons like employee donation matching or matching events or credit card incentives, that make donating some percent each year of life make more sense.
Any rough quantification? If I live my life as a non altruist, build a net worth of 10 million dollars and give 5 million away at death and am part of a population of people who, instead of giving a little here and there or giving 10% of annual salary, just build wealth, buy cars, buy a home or two, take vacations, live capitalistically but with some smug consolation that they’re going to leave half to their kids and half to effective charities, the math that I’m seeing (and showed) is that if that population is >750k, donations will be higher immediately and continue to outpace a similar financial population that does 10% annually. Plenty of assumptions and simplifications in the model.
By “make more sense” I mean like change the calculations to be more positive for, but still uncertain on the broader decision of give now vs. invest.
Like I’d assume one could at least 2X their annual donations with these things. So for someone using these strategies the give now argument should be 2X stronger for the sum of donations they can multiply now that they can’t multiply in the future.