If their money making methods are ethical then isn't this a better strategy, to leave the decisions to others rather than impose your values on them while alive? Also presumably Buffett and his cohorts are better than others at growing their money, so in the vein of the EA argument, it would be best to leave the money untouched while it is being actively managed by the donor, then hand out the windfall after they are dead.

For this argument to work, you have to stop at the donor themselves - you can't keep extending it ad infinitum to their descendants or inheritors. But in the case of the pre-committed amounts, like Gates and Buffett, that isn't the case.

They do, for example Buffet donated $5 billion last year. His fortune is so vast that is only perhaps 3%.

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/28/buffett-donates-another-5poi...