re: #453 sattv4u2

The decision to donate the 20K, as benevolent as the intent may be, still results in a benefit to themselves. No, not in the “bottom line” (of course he’d be in total better off is he didn’t donate) but to say he didn’t benefit from it is wrong

This statement by itself is absurd. In economic terms the person is better off not donating.

AND ,, it goes beyond a monetary benefit, which you don’t even seem to consider, instead making it an absolute dollars and cents issue

I’m making a clear distinction between economic benefit and the psychological benefits of helping someone, which are obviously real. My point is that, the more you benefit economically from an action, the less you can be said to be “helping” someone via that action. That just seems to me to be the way most people use that word.

If someone sells a drowning man a life vest for a million dollars, we don’t typically say that was a very helpful thing to do.