One thing a lot of people miss is that effective altruism has worked! The idea of donating to distant causes that do the most good (which is what EA is and this notion long predates the 21st century) has massively reduced the number of deaths of malaria. Bill Gate's efforts to eradicate polio have done a world of good.
Are EAs now patting themselves in the back for all the altruism that came before them? That's weird but on-brand. "We are responsible for all altruism, wherever it happened in space or time!"
You're making assumptions bigger than the pacific tectonic plate here.
While I absolutely applaud Bill Gate's philanthropy, and have no doubt he's one of the most effective charity donors on this planet, you cannot simply use that as a ledger entry in some karmic balance.
Bill at the peak of of his business career wielded enormous power and played a pivotal role in the IP regime that now rules the world, one that places low income nations at huge disadvantage in life or death industries like medicine.
When you say "effective altruism worked" with Bill as an example, what you're actually saying is "we should welcome abusive or even illegal behavior from people like Bill if they give away money later" which is absurd. There's nothing about philanthropy that requires you to do business like a sociopath as a prequel.
Bill Gates' effective charitable giving should be commended.
Because the outcome of arguing against Bill giving charitably is Bill not giving charitably, not Bill not engaging in predatory business practices. Microsoft was cheating competitors and pursuing lock-in long before Bill founded the Gates Foundation.
