How Much is Enough?

Atlantic Philanthropies has long been a famous case study in the nonprofit space because of their decision in 2002 to spend down the foundation’s assets in a fixed timeline. Their logic was that “it’s imperative to address deeply rooted problems sooner than later.”

This decision was a radical departure from the practice of most foundations, which seek to exist in perpetuity and thus spend only 5% (or a little more) of their assets in any given year. What makes Atlantic’s approach still radical today is that almost no one has followed their lead and developed innovative philanthropy models. (MacKenzie Scott is the notable exception with her $14 billion of giving over the last few years.) 

But while I knew about Atlantic Philanthropies, I’d never heard the story of its founder, Charles Feeney, until he passed away last week. 

Feeney decided not just to give his philanthropic funds rapidly—his project was to actually give away all of his money. 

The New York Times article: “In his last decades Mr. Feeney did not own a home or a car, wore a $10 wristwatch, preferred buses to taxis and, until he was 75, flew coach. He and his second wife lived in a two-bedroom rented apartment in San Francisco.”

Feeney’s example struck a chord with me for two reasons. 

First, it demonstrates the power of having clarity in one’s intention. He had a vision, and then took action. The aspiration didn’t exist as a mere dream that he would get to someday. 

Once Feeney made the decision, he almost immediately “reversed his extravagant lifestyle, quitting wealthy social groups, flying economy class, buying his clothing off the rack and giving up fancy restaurants. He sold his limousines and took subways or cabs.”

Second, Feeney took his personal assets down to $2 million—or just enough to ensure he could live a middle class lifestyle for however many years he had left.

In other words, he had a precise measurement of how much was “enough.” 

It strikes me that most people don’t have that precise measurement.

Some of us are fortunate in that the activities that bring us joy and fulfillment overlap with the activities for which others are willing to pay us. 

But for many others, there’s a tension between those—we have to give up joy and fulfillment for the sake of asset accumulation. And that’s fine.

The question is: How much joy and fulfillment are we willing to give up? And what’s the cost? 

When we don’t have a concrete definition of “enough,” there’s a risk that we pay that cost for too long. 

There’s also a risk that we ask ourselves fear-based What if…? questions that almost always conclude with decisions to wait until tomorrow to pursue the thing we really want. 

That’s why having clarity on “enough”—how much we really need—is liberating. It accelerates the point at which we can shift from accumulating financial assets as a primary driver of our time to accumulating assets that are much more valuable in a human sense. 

When Feeney was asked if he was still rich after giving away most of his fortune, he said, “Beyond all expectations. Beyond all deserving.”