Scan barcode
mattaukamp's review
4.0
Not the easiest or most accessible read. Perhaps needlessly academic and dry for the ideas it conjures. But, full of incredibly interesting history, discussion, and analysis. A thorough examination of one facet of philanthropy as a suspect institution. Namely, the benefit or hindrance of foundations in a liberal democratic society.
You may find this take narrow in scope if you're hoping for discussion about philanthropy in an increasingly conservative and undemocratic world. Or if you're hoping for more than cursory mention of how wealthy giving shapes a world for the wealthy. Mostly its about tax benefits and institutions in perpituity.
He generally approaches his topics with assumptions about well-functioning democracies and well-meaning charities, which is necessary for his argument but incongruous with the real world.
Also, I'm a bit skeptical of his final conclusions. He leans on the idea that preserving the stability of democratic institutions is a preferable use for our money to providing for the currently-needy. I wonder if he's considered how failing to provide for the needy is a VECTOR for future destabilization of democratic institutions.
Still, a smart and insightful read with a ton of political and philosophical value about a subject that WAY MORE PEOPLE should be paying critical attention to.
You may find this take narrow in scope if you're hoping for discussion about philanthropy in an increasingly conservative and undemocratic world. Or if you're hoping for more than cursory mention of how wealthy giving shapes a world for the wealthy. Mostly its about tax benefits and institutions in perpituity.
He generally approaches his topics with assumptions about well-functioning democracies and well-meaning charities, which is necessary for his argument but incongruous with the real world.
Also, I'm a bit skeptical of his final conclusions. He leans on the idea that preserving the stability of democratic institutions is a preferable use for our money to providing for the currently-needy. I wonder if he's considered how failing to provide for the needy is a VECTOR for future destabilization of democratic institutions.
Still, a smart and insightful read with a ton of political and philosophical value about a subject that WAY MORE PEOPLE should be paying critical attention to.
matthewbrand's review against another edition
2.0
I feel like the author took Dan Savage's advice too literally:
- tell them what you're going to do.
- tell them what you're doing
- tell them what you just did
Half of this book was just meta-book. The entire thing should've been a blog post. I walk away with the feeling of "current system bad", but I don't think I could explain any of the reasons.
- tell them what you're going to do.
- tell them what you're doing
- tell them what you just did
Half of this book was just meta-book. The entire thing should've been a blog post. I walk away with the feeling of "current system bad", but I don't think I could explain any of the reasons.
sandrinepal's review
3.0
Somewhat dry, but very interesting in some parts. I picked this up because of a footnote in Thomas Piketty's Capital et Idéologie, which was marginally less dry, but considerably longer! Reich's position (which I share) is mostly opposed to unchecked philanthropy, but he leaves no stone unturned in examining the arguments on both sides. One point I found compelling is that, in systems where charitable donations are essentially subsidized by taxpayers, the failures of some philanthropic ventures become all of our failures, in a sense. Another point, on the topic of deducting donations: the 'reverse progressiveness' of those deductions had never occurred to me. A person in a high tax bracket gets a bigger deduction from the same gift than a person in the lowest bracket (not to mention people who have to take the standard deduction because their gifts and other deductions do not warrant itemizing). On a silly note, it must be rough being in this line of research and having as a homonym a former Secretary of Labor.
ella1212's review against another edition
informative
medium-paced
3.0
As dry a read as the Sahara desert. Informative? Yes. Do you also need at least a masters in economics to understand it? YES
ladamic's review
4.0
There is interesting discussion about the history of foundations in the US and how tax breaks for charitable giving are regressive. The political philosophy was interesting at first but grew a bit repetitive. One point the author kept returning to was how allowing foundations to operate in perpetuity would harm future generations. But short of hypothetical catastrophic events that would need the resources, there were no examples given (I think) of foundations being somehow outdated in purpose or over-constrained. It was also not clear why future generations could not change laws or make other adjustments to make foundations work for them. Overall a thoughtful exposition.
happy_stomach's review
5.0
I applauded every chapter of this book. As much a way to think systematically about philanthropy, this was also an introduction for me to the notion of public morality. I hope Reich writes a follow-up that further develops the notion that foundations should be a locus of innovation work.
lilyofthevalley_reads's review
This book is very academic, i.e. not written for the normal lay person to understand. It’s unfortunate that it is probably written for someone doing a degree in economics and/or finance because the topic itself seemed really interesting to me.
chicagoliz's review
4.0
This is a very academic book, and even though it was only 200 pages, it took me a while to read it, as it was not a quick read. That said, it was worthwhile and it raises a lot of interesting points. I hadn't thought about the potential for charitable foundations to be anti-democratic, as they give plutocratic voices and outsized voice in social policy. This is a good read for those interested in social policy and in charities and non-profit institutions, but it's not for everyone.