That’s illegal. And when people break the law, we should prosecute them. It’s ridiculous to conclude that a law is broken solely because some people abuse it.
I’ve seen no evidence that tax breaks for charity are less effective as incentives than any other tax break. And in the absence of evidence, if we argue that tax breaks don’t increase charitable giving, then there is no reason to suppose it will increase education spending.
The only way to get a big deduction is to make a big donation, and the only way to make a big donation is to have a lot money. So I guess you’re right that if you “make a killing” then you must have been wealthy.
Nevertheless, even if you take into account the tax break, you will never be financially better off after making a donation. No matter how much money you started out with, no matter how much you donate. Which is why all this talk about “making a killing” is nonsense. Tax break or not, every time you donate you will lose. It’s just a matter of how much you lose.
And please spare me the righteousness about conscience and ego. If I could snap my fingers to get just $100 for charity but it also resulted in every single rich person feeling really, really good about themselves, then of course I would do it. What kind of sociopath would like to see less money for the needy because it would make other people feel bad? That’s the kind of gross reasoning I usually associate with the Right.