The Wall Street Journal, it seems, has issues with philanthropy. Just the other day it ran a piece called “The Folly of Philanthropy”, reviewing a new book called The Good Rich by Robert Dalzell, that raised a familiar conservative argument against philanthropy that we find rather peculiar. “Charity is a sideshow”, concludes the reviewer, Amity Shlaes. “What matters about the rich, if we are considering the public good, isn’t their charity but their investments – their ideas about what to do with “slimey petroleum” and microchips – and the jobs and activity they create.”

We first came across this argument when we were researching Philanthrocapitalism in an op ed piece in the Journal written by economics professor Robert Barro, who argued that Bill Gates is “kidding himself if he believes that the efforts of the Gates Foundation are likely to provide society anything like the past and future accomplishments of Microsoft”. Ms Shlaes’ twist is to abjure heaping more conservative coals on the head of Bill Gates but, instead, to sing the praises of the late Steve Jobs for sticking to the business of business and not wasting his time on giving. But the thrust of the argument is the same. It is also an argument that we hear frequently at seminars and conferences with conservative audiences. Read more