From the site:
Answer: Objectivism holds that there is nothing wrong with charity, so long as one is pursuing one's own values in providing it. As Ayn Rand said, charity is a marginal issue: it is not especially noble to engage in it, but if pursued prudently and seriously, and not at the cost of other important values, it can be a source of good for one's society and ultimately one's self. Objectivists tend to view their donations to causes as investments in some kind of improvement: a better culture, a better city, etc. But like investments, these require attention to make sure they are paying off.I'm not an Objectivist of course - I'm too theistic, too classical, too religious. But I think Objectivists tend to get a bad rap. The problem is, they get a bad rap because they seem - practically to a man - hellbent on coming across like dickheads.
Seriously, just look at that quote from the Atlas Society. "Charity is fine so long as you get something out of it." Thanks for the tip, Flintheart Glomgold. You dick.
Ironically, the Atlas Society's depiction of the Objectivist view on charity... isn't even charitable. No matter how cold the view of it may be, it could be presented more sensibly, less caustic, while sacrificing none of the honesty of its presentation. But Objectivism seems to function as a lint trap for a certain kind of person who just rubs people the wrong way by nature. Go figure.