What next? Perphaps "Why Richard Meredith is wrong about Peter Singer being wrong about 'effective altruism'"?

What is really wrong is jokers like this talking about altruism using other peoples' money. Even worse, they want 'talented' people who should be doing something productive acting like Robin Hood, knicking from the rich to help useless drongos to continue being useless drongos.

The nonsense of wealth re- distribution, by governments or parasitic not-for-profit- organisations and NGOs, all with their own fat cats and bureaucracy (spending as much if not more than they 'redistribute') is communistic and merely serves the political and self-aggrandizing needs of their organizers.

What makes you think Communist countries share wealth. Communist countries are more likely to pay better wages for menial tasks than capitalist countries. That is where the difference is.

Talent is not homogenous. A person capable of earning millions as a pop star, basketball player or even business CEO may not have the skills and ability to lead an NGO. And vice versa.

It seems to me Singer’s point is not that capable people should eschew NGOs, but that that people should concentrate on what they’re good at, to maximise the social gains. It seem quite sensible to me – far better that the narcissistic grandstanding of the rich and famous doling out free Christmas lunches, or spending one night every few years sleeping on the streets (both with media in tow).