Carlos Slim went on to explain that billions of dollars have already been spent on poverty, but poverty persists.

Also, Carlos commented that donating money to charities is easy for someone like him, pointless, painless, quick and easy.

Instead, he advocated for people to be more active in their “donations” and seek to apply funds for the creation of new sustainable businesses. Companies are the entities that can really make a difference. Businesses create jobs, find innovative solutions, and ultimately multiply wealth much more effectively than charity.

As an example, he pointed out that Microsoft has given more to the world than the millions of dollars donated to charities by Bill Gates.

At this point, I had to say that I was over my initial shock at his comments and started to see some logic. It sounded similar to the famous saying: “Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today. Teach him to fish; and you have fed him for life.”

Carlos Slim went on to talk about the idea that charity is “ineffective” and creates a kind of “dependency” between donor and recipient. It aims to solve the immediate need, not the cause of the problem.

However, in his view, philanthropy was more aimed at facilitating self-reliance. It’s about identifying the root of the problem and investing private capital to find a cure.

He says that to get this right, “charities” and philanthropic donors need to think more strategically.

Social entrepreneurship is the answer.

A social entrepreneur is someone whose main motive is to obtain a social return, to an equal or greater extent, in the financial performance of the company. Slim’s premise is that social entrepreneurship is a much more effective model than charity. It ensures sustainability, innovation and, most importantly, a higher rate of return (socially and financially) from the use of available funds.

This concept goes against the inspiring simplicity of another quote attributed to Nelson Henderson, a pioneer, who apparently told his son “The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under whose shade you do not expect to sit.”

But as disinterested and wonderful as Henderson’s statement is, it’s hard to argue with Slim’s logic when you look at how ‘trade’ movements like Fairtrade are making a difference.

Fairtrade ensures fair wages are paid to workers in communities that previously lacked sustainable employment. This money creates local wealth, ensures that people can afford food, education, health care and housing. However, there is no doubt that Fairtrade offers the same benefits to the companies involved.

So I can see what you mean. I’m still not 100% sure how I can be more strategic in my donations and move from addressing the symptom to treating the cause.

But I’m happy to try, because I also liked Slim’s parting comment: “It is important to leave a better world for our children, but it is even more important to give better children to the world.”