Shame on you, OP. How dare you infer anyone else's intent, especially someone giving so much. You're inference that they would prefer to look good rather than do good is speculative and insulting. Better you should just say, "Thank you," and STFU.
Hanson mentions "folks like Alex trying to 'do good'", and that his proposed alternative of funding innovation "wouldn't have looked so good for Mr. Grass". He notes that Mr. Grass "[showed] loyalty to his clan", but parents also show unfortunate baby dribbling, whether they like to or not. Even the quoted line fails to show whether Mr. Grass is of the former or latter group. Hanson laments the social structures that promote and reward "looking good" in lieu of "doing good", implying that someone with the goal of "doing good" may accidentally "look good" instead.
Did you actually read the article, req2? If you had, you would have noticed among other insults:
But when folks like Alex spend their later years trying to "do good" with the millions they were paid for actually doing good, they usually end up pissing it away.
Pretty explicit to me. It's stunning that OP, or anyone else for that matter, would question the motives of those giving charity. His total lack of class completely overshadows any other message he may have had.
What you said to me was either a personal insult or a bad joke. Doesn't matter. Either way, this conversation is over.
It's pretty stunning to me that you would think any motives are beyond reproach. Your reverence for men who do nominally good things is the very thing Hanson is trying to limit in preference of actually good things.