> A foundation with 20M$ and these ambitious goals is a gift for the society. However, it is also the typical American way of company-society interaction. The actually intended way is called "paxing taxes".
Not really. It depends on what you think taxes should be paying for. If you think they should cover essential services that can't be taken care of by the private sector (ex: roads, police, national defense) then lower taxes and private sector philanthropic spending is a better choice.
It removes the particularly heinous problem of government officials spending the public's money on things the public doesn't actually want them to spend it on. The private sector has no such issues as by definition they're spending their own money.
Not really. It depends on what you think taxes should be paying for. If you think they should cover essential services that can't be taken care of by the private sector (ex: roads, police, national defense) then lower taxes and private sector philanthropic spending is a better choice.
It removes the particularly heinous problem of government officials spending the public's money on things the public doesn't actually want them to spend it on. The private sector has no such issues as by definition they're spending their own money.