some, not all the wealthy create jobs. I can give one example who was a classmate of mine. besides the 180 corporations he controls, has given hundreds of millions for cancer research and other good causes.
Charity isn't necessary in a society that doesn't have obscene levels of inequality. People should be able to provide for themselves. But, that takes a lot of resources, and the poor, working-class, and even middle-class are all disadvantaged from the start in comparison with the rich. Just simple but critical things like nutrition in early childhood, prenatal medical care, and pollution (like lead dust in inner-city Cincinnati) can make huge differences.
People like to pretend that everyone has equal opportunity but nothing could be further from the truth.
The more charity is needed, the more corrupted a society is by wealth inequality. The only time it may be compatible with a well-run society is when there is a natural disaster, and even then there should be an adequate safety net (fire fighters, police, et cetera).
Charity is PR for the rich. It keeps people from taking back some of the resources that are being hoarded. It is a mechanism for enabling people to provide inadequately for others.
The other issue is this "the wealthy create jobs". No, they don't. They stifle job creation by hoarding resources. The more resources they hoard, the fewer there are to go around. Fewer resources available = fewer jobs.