An Oxfam study published in late January came to the same conclusions, showing that the richest 1,000 people in the world had recouped their losses and expanded their wealth in only the first nine months of the pandemic. Meanwhile, the poor are at a greater risk of falling into a decade-long spiral to further poverty.

It’s no surprise that the accelerating inequality has fuelled louder voices calling for the wealthy to give back more as their fortunes have risen. This call is backed up by a survey showing that the 50 wealthiest people in America have publicly donated only US$1 billion – amounting to a paltry 0.1 per cent of their net worth – for coronavirus relief efforts.

To be fair, some tycoons have given a larger chunk of their wealth for philanthropic causes in these times of need. And, encouragingly, billionaires outside the West are playing a major part in this wider trend.

Take for example Russia’s steel and tech magnate Alisher Usmanov, who topped the list of charitable donations in Russia and the other Commonwealth of Independent States, and gave over US$168 million to combat the coronavirus in 2020.

In China, Jack Ma donated US$14.4 million to efforts in search of a vaccine and Alibaba has earmarked about US$144 million to buy medical supplies in response to the outbreak.

In global financial centres such as Singapore, the wealthy have kept a low profile about their donations. But some donations have made the headlines, such as billionaire Peter Lim giving S$1 million (US$750,000) to provide meals for frontline medical workers. 

Hong Kong tycoon to donate another HK$101 million amid pandemic

These examples show a growing awareness among at least some of the world’s billionaires that hoarding wealth without using it for projects of the common good is not acceptable.

The donations do make a difference, particularly when they’re directed at small independent grass-roots organisations, which tend to be the forces that move the needle on social change and innovation through disruption.

And, in enabling such social renewal, philanthropy highlights this fact: wealth becomes worrying only when it remains entrenched and removed from society – both of which are avoided when large sums of money are donated in a principled and targeted manner.

02:18

Jack Ma donates 500,000 coronavirus test kits and 1 million masks to the US

Jack Ma donates 500,000 coronavirus test kits and 1 million masks to the US

As such, these charitable billionaires, far from being “policy failures”, as US Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has claimed, are paying their dues to society and the economic system that has provided them with the means to succeed in their business ventures.

The question remains then: how do we encourage the super-rich who are not doing as much to give more for the common good? Good deeds should be publicly rewarded through reputational benefits.

The creation of a “Good Billionaire Index” as a go-to reference, akin to the new Forbes Philanthropy Score, could thus become an important tool in keeping track of the philanthropic endeavours of the super-rich,  providing both prestige to those who employ their wealth for good and shaming those who do not.

In the long term, this will heighten people’s awareness of who does what (or not), especially now that an increasingly distinct dichotomy is emerging among the billionaire class between the “gives” and the “give-nots”.

If billionaires can be nudged in the right direction with the right set of incentives, there’s no need for some of the more divisive debates calling billionaires “system failures” or arguing outright for the end of capitalism.

Frederick Kuo is a San Francisco-based writer and broker