First, it isn’t generosity, it’s PR. They do get all sorts of tax exemptions, which they are bound to lose unless they at least accept some low income, especially since their endowments keep on growing.
My issues with the “wealthy and powerful” are first, what they do with the wealth and power, second, that they do not delude themselves that the wealth and power means that they are inherently superior people, third, that they stop believing that they deserve their wealth and power by virtue of some inborn traits, and that fourth, they recognize that their wealth is also dependent on masses of people who contributed to it (since the only way that people make money is if the people working for them produce more wealth for their boss than they earn). This is especially true for those who inherited their wealth and power and/or who gained it because of inherent privilege.
I don’t mind that Bezos has that much money. I mind that he neither acknowledges, nor fairly compensates, the people who produce that wealth for him.
That is why taxes on the wealthy should be higher, and that there should be minimum wage requirements. The wealthy are not going to give up any of their wealth voluntarily, no matter how ethical that would be (otherwise, they likely would never have become so wealthy).
The wealth and power are the point, but the Ivies continuously make the claim of being egalitarian meritocracies. Unfortunately, pretending to be a meritocracy is a large part of why the wealthy and powerful send their kids there. I mean, there are kids of wealthy celebrities who would likely be dropping out of an open enrollment college if not for their parent’s money, but they claim to be one of The Best Of The Best Of The Best, because their inherited wealth bought them a place an an Ivy.
I mean, have you ever read or seen a press release from an Ivy which admitted that some of their students really are not the top of the country, academically?