That's not exactly how I read that article. Carnegie wasn't some saint but he could have piled his money up and sat on it if he wanted to. Adjusted for inflation he donated almost $6 billion dollars to charities and argued with the powered wealthy elite in America that it was their moral obligation to give their money to charity. He directed his money definitely and it could be argued that his money could be spent more effectively in other ways but if the options are Carnegie sits on his money or he donates how he wants then I think the latter is the better option (or the least worse option). Government wasn't interested in building libraries and Carnegie built over 2,500 of them in the US but also throughout Europe, South Africa, Barbados, Australia, and New Zealand. Carnegie was a bastard businessman, people died at the Homestead strike he's a grade-A bastard. But he's a bastard that built libraries that otherwise wouldn't have been built. It would have been better if his workers were protected and his wealth taxed and spent responsibility but that wasn't in the cards at that time. It feels like it isn't in the cards today either. But I'd be happier, or less angry, if Bezos or Musk spent their money on charity rather than low orbit space tourism and Twitter.