The least impactful way to spend $300M?
I definitely don't think the big schools like Harvard/Yale/etc. need any more money, but I will play devil's advocate here.> "he donated $300 million in such as a way as to do as close as possible to zero good with it."Oh there are a lot worse ways to spend it with the best of intentions. The Turkana frozen-fish plant is a classic example, a charitable project where back in around 1975 around $150 million (in today's money) was spent on a frozen fish factory next to a lake... a lake that regularly disappears... and in a location without reliable electricity [1] [2]. It was utterly useless.There's a shocking amount of charitable money that just winds up having utterly no impact whatsoever.On the other hand, giving $300 million to Harvard is probably going to have a good chance of some long-term impact. It is ultimately funding education for smart people who are well-positioned to use that education productively, and for research and arts that are meant to benefit humanity. It's not just throwing it away. I absolutely agree there are many institutions with a much greater need for the money, but "zero good" is extreme exaggeration. People have done much, much, MUCH worse with donating money.[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1986/04/05/h...[2] https://www.ibtimes.com/kenyas-turkana-learns-failed-fish-pr...