Altruism defined in wealth terms is very narrow. It allows you to steal billions and give away millions and come out with a net balance of "wealthy philanthropist". The characters of this article are so carefully constructed to evade this question that I have to assume malice.

I think many do-gooders struggle with the problem on different terms: whether they can find a place where they both fit in the system and yet also do good for the system. For example, a basic researcher in the sciences does nothing at all now but might open the door to great achievements later. A politician will be distrusted no matter what they do, but if they are adept they gradually reorganize the landscape to enable policies progressive towards their vision of a better society. There is enormous room for people to do work that benefits them and nobody else, but that doesn't lead to a concrete conclusion about all workers, because this problem is faced in every sector.