Hi Slav,
Re. Aryan's position - we already accepted that oversimplification happens earlier in this thread (net worth v. income) so please, give a break.
Whilst that oversimplification was incorrect as well, that is not the issue that was raised. It was the suggestion that all charity was harmful, which I hope we have demonstrated is certainly not the case.
As for Goldman's "corruption" - you gave a bad example. They offered willing customer that allows them to achieve the desired goal (that of keeping stimulating Greek economy by increasing debt), legally, for a fee. None of that fits a definition of corruption; that's exactly what financial institutions are supposed to do. I compared Goldman to Red Hat Software because both provide innovative services in their respective fields.
We must have a different definition of corruption then. You are taking aa position that because the action was (apparently) legal, then it cannot be corrupt. I would beg to differ. The purpose of the action, whether it was legal or not, was to deliberately aid and abet the Greek government to provide false information. To claim that "[n]one of that fits a definition of corruption" is demonstrably false. For example Kaufmann and Vicente have gone to great lengths to explain how an activity can be legal *and* corrupt, particularly when it breaks the principles of a contextual ideal (for example, transparency in economic relations). It may have been legal for G-S to engage in fraud, but was also corrupt. For further reading see: Kaufmann, Daniel and Pedro Vicente, 2005, Legal Corruption, World Bank. Kaufmann, Daniel and Pedro Vicente, 2011, Legal Corruption(revised), Economics and Politics, v23, pp. 195-219. I would like you to consider what the position of legitimation from law qua law will entail in other fields as well, such as terrorism, murder, rape, etc.
And I think the fact that Ms. Moyo, an African economist, is well fed shouldn't go against her. I'd rather consider merits of her position than assorted trivia about the author.
I have already explained the errors of the position, based on the empirical scale. But I will continue to note that a lot of economists who complain about charity to the impoverished don't really understand the visceral component of the experience. -- Lev Lafayette, mobile: 61 432 255 208 http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt