Not necessarily. It may be optimization between what you give now and what you keep for later to make more, with the total effect on others' well-being being the criterion. I mean, theoretically.

If you make a dime and immediately give it away randomly, you are making a worse decision than keeping it by this criterion. If you immediately give it away not randomly, but to somebody you think needs it, still possibly worse because you could try and make much more and then, say, open a pharmaceutical company.

Say, with cattle you'd use some for meat and some to make more cattle to feed more people. You wouldn't just slaughter the whole herd for meat. It's worse.