A Change Is Coming 

I’ve decided to publish this blog once a week rather than twice. The original idea was to lighten the load for me and J, my editor. And I hope to do that. But knowing the way I work, I suspect my once-weekly issues will end up being about twice the size of my twice-weekly issues.

So, what do I intend to accomplish by making this change?

I’ve received a good deal of feedback from my readers, and I now have a better idea of what they like and don’t like. Most of what they like are the pieces that are more useful than newsy. So, starting next week, that’s what I’ll be focusing on. You can expect to receive a somewhat longer issue that will include not only the kind of bits and pieces and recommendations that I’ve been sharing with you all along, but also regular comments on the economy and investment advice.

Things I’ve Been Thinking About Lately 

I don’t like the word charity. It implies a certain condescension. I don’t like referring to Fun Limón, the community center we established in Nicaragua, as a “family charity.” It sounds elitist and self-aggrandizing. I prefer to think of it as a Not-For-Profit Public Project or NFPPP (an acronym I made up that will never catch on because it would be too hard for people to remember). I believe the charitable impulse is not an a priori good. Quite the contrary, unless one works very hard to safeguard against it, it is difficult to act charitably without creating negative side effects, such as feelings of dependency and entitlement. Charity is not a divine impulse. It is a deeply human survival instinct that promotes not only the survival of one’s particular DNA, but of the species as a whole.

Because charity is so potentially dangerous in terms of creating collateral damage… I never felt comfortable giving dollars to organizations I knew next to nothing about for the benefit of feeling like I was being good and virtuous, when what I was really being was careless and self-indulgent. So, when I decided to start my own charity to help people in need, I took the responsibility seriously. My family foundation has three NFPPPs, all of them run with the same attention that we give to our businesses. Our motto: “Do less harm than good.”

I’m thinking that charities are not only like businesses in many ways, they’re also like financial investments.Stocks, for example, can be roughly divided into two kinds: growth stocks and income stocks. One buys growth stocks for future appreciation and income stocks for near or current cash flow. The one is generally about the future. The other about the now. If you consider NFPPPs from that perspective, there are projects that provide immediate benefits to the  “investors” (the people providing the funding) – e.g., the pleasure they get from seeing how their efforts have changed recipients’ lives. And there are projects that take years or even decades to accomplish, with benefits that may arrive only after the death of the “investors” – e.g., the endowment of museums, scholarships, and major cultural programs.