I’m a bit surprising “honest” matching isn’t more common. It seems like in some cases individuals would be ambivalent on how to trade off between their selfish and philanthropic desires, and could decide to sponsor some kind of matching to avoid making the decision and spur more donations from others.
ambivalent on how to trade off between their selfish and philanthropic desires
Imagine I offered a real match, pulling from some pool of money that wasn’t yet allocated for giving or self-spending. The leftover money would go into my self-spending pool. Then I need to not adjust future years self/giving division based on this extra self money.
This only works because I have carefully divided self-spending and giving pools of money. Otherwise while you and I both might think I was providing a real match, in reality the money might have been going to end up being donated anyway a little later.
I’m a bit surprising “honest” matching isn’t more common. It seems like in some cases individuals would be ambivalent on how to trade off between their selfish and philanthropic desires, and could decide to sponsor some kind of matching to avoid making the decision and spur more donations from others.
BTW, Jeff, I’d like to thank you on the behalf of the 8-9 Africans whose lives you can expect to save.
Imagine I offered a real match, pulling from some pool of money that wasn’t yet allocated for giving or self-spending. The leftover money would go into my self-spending pool. Then I need to not adjust future years self/giving division based on this extra self money.
This only works because I have carefully divided self-spending and giving pools of money. Otherwise while you and I both might think I was providing a real match, in reality the money might have been going to end up being donated anyway a little later.