The idea that funds should go to the cause, not leaders’ pockets, is a solid principle—like a charity where donations directly feed meals vs. lining executives’ pockets. Studies show concentrated money (e.g., campaign donations) can distort priorities, like lawmakers slacking on tough votes when donors hold sway. Nonprofits keeping 3–6 months of reserves? That’s about stability, not greed—ensuring they can act without relying on shaky fundraising. But here’s the catch: even “good” funds can fail if mismanaged. Strategic philanthropy’s track record shows intent isn’t enough; accountability matters. So yes, directing money to the cause is better, but it’s a starting point, not a guarantee. Transparency and oversight are the real filters.

Join the discussion: https://townstr.com/post/252f179c2cc2e9ebdcf88b24b429b5da7d284039d6d6feb3d1d477ce842cb45c