{"items": [{"author": "Jonatas", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/613456690752?comment_id=613457464202", "anchor": "fb-613457464202", "service": "fb", "text": "It depends on who you would replace.", "timestamp": "1369118783"}, {"author": "Wayne", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/613456690752?comment_id=613457883362", "anchor": "fb-613457883362", "service": "fb", "text": "", "timestamp": "1369119366"}, {"author": "David Chudzicki", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/613456690752?comment_id=613459195732", "anchor": "fb-613459195732", "service": "fb", "text": "I'm starting to question things I used to think about replacability anyway -- increasingly, Givewell seems to find the philanthropy markets more efficient than expected. Limitations in human capital (relative to funds available) may be a bigger deal than we thought.", "timestamp": "1369121420"}, {"author": "David Chudzicki", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/613456690752?comment_id=613459235652", "anchor": "fb-613459235652", "service": "fb", "text": "With respect to replacability-- if the selection mechanisms are any good, you're replacing someone near the bottom of the talent pool, if anyone.", "timestamp": "1369121543"}, {"author": "William", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/613456690752?comment_id=613463038032", "anchor": "fb-613463038032", "service": "fb", "text": "It's a great question, Jeff. I think there's too much emphasis on EtG as the *best* option rather than as the *baseline* option (and as the most public proponent of EtG I'm the one to blame for this!!). As well as working for meta-charities, there's also working for top charities (improve SCI's effectiveness by 10% and you're doing much more good than EtG to it - perfectly possible, esp. if you are a great fundraiser or grantwriter), going into philanthropic foundations and getting the ear of billionaires, becoming a program manager at the World Bank or other major organisations (a friend moved about $400mn in this role over 5 years), working in resource allocation of a major NGO and funding more effective programs, and potentially politics as well (though I have a much less clear view of that - I'm mainly thinking being a staffer who actually writes legislation rather than a politician). There's also a general theoretical argument against EtG: namely that altruists have a great asset of having unusual aims, and that pursuing something that everyone else already wants (namely making a lot of money) squanders that asset (compared to, say, convincing others to give their money to the best causes). Among all these top contenders, I think it ends up being down to the person. E.g. I encouraged Matt Wage to go into earning to give rather than working for CEA, and Ben Todd vice-versa, because of their personal situations and comparative advantages. Ben Kuhn and Sam are probably interested in this. In general: for the very most dedicated EAs, it's vital to get one-on-one advice from multiple sources, including a few people at 80k, because it's by no means obvious that EtG will be the best option for you. (Note, though, that this is a counter to all this: which is that EtG normally has great option value - because the highest-earning jobs are often highest-status, and give you flexibility in where you go next. So in situations of great uncertainty about what to do - like what we're in now - it makes sense to take a job with very high option value).", "timestamp": "1369133529"}, {"author": "Sam", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/613456690752?comment_id=613463312482", "anchor": "fb-613463312482", "service": "fb", "text": "I agree with what Will said--it's not clear to me that just EtG alone is the best, mostly because it's not clear to me at all what is the best--there are lots of things which are much trickier to quantify than EtG but might have really large expected value. Right now I'm thinking about EtG partially for the reason Will said--while I think about what I ultimately want to do, it's hard to imagine that having more money won't be useful for it.", "timestamp": "1369134330"}, {"author": "Rob", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/613456690752?comment_id=613463542022", "anchor": "fb-613463542022", "service": "fb", "text": "Though I think this is probably right, EA organisations haven't made much of an effort to convert higher wages into more skilled staff. I'm not sure how much GiveWell has tried higher pay as a drawcard. Elie Hassenfeld?", "timestamp": "1369134888"}, {"author": "David German", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/111229345142780712481", "anchor": "gp-1369140971020", "service": "gp", "text": "I'm not sure \n@Nick\n's response supports your conclusion. \u00a0If I read it correctly, he's saying that metacharities can do more with great people than they can with money. \u00a0You're asking whether it's better to work for a [meta]charity, or earn to give to a top charity. \u00a0Not quite the same thing?", "timestamp": 1369140971}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1369142679396", "service": "gp", "text": "@David German\n\u00a0\"You're asking whether it's better to work for a [meta]charity, or earn to give to a top charity.\"\n
\n
\nI'm asking whether it's better to work for the organization where you can do the most good or give to the organization that can do the most good with your money.", "timestamp": 1369142679}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/613456690752?comment_id=613471800472", "anchor": "fb-613471800472", "service": "fb", "text": "@William: \"too much emphasis on EtG as the *best* option rather than as the *baseline* option\"
I agree that it's a lower bound, but in the past [1] I was thinking most people would have trouble doing better than it, and now I'm not sure.
[1] http://www.jefftk.com/news/2013-03-02", "timestamp": "1369143531"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/613456690752?comment_id=613471990092", "anchor": "fb-613471990092", "service": "fb", "text": "@Wayne: \"Maybe it's not money OR talent. But culture.\"
How do you change culture? With people, and people need money. Just because you think the most effective way to make the world better involves changing culture doesn't mean working on it full time yourself or donating money so other people can work on it full time isn't a good approach.", "timestamp": "1369143699"}, {"author": "Nick", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/613456690752?comment_id=613472179712", "anchor": "fb-613472179712", "service": "fb", "text": "Since I wrote that comment, I discovered that GiveWell has updated their jobs page to indicate that they are no longer looking for people to fill set positions, though they might make an exception for a highly exceptional person. http://www.givewell.org/about/jobs", "timestamp": "1369143837"}, {"author": "David German", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/111229345142780712481", "anchor": "gp-1369144405975", "service": "gp", "text": "Right. It still seems like not the same thing. ", "timestamp": 1369144405}, {"author": "Wayne", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/613456690752?comment_id=613476066922", "anchor": "fb-613476066922", "service": "fb", "text": "", "timestamp": "1369146856"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1369147120461", "service": "gp", "text": "@David German\n\u00a0Why not the same thing? \u00a0I also think that the metacharities I listed can probably do more with donations than top charities, even if only by moving more than $1 to top charities for every $1 they take in.", "timestamp": 1369147120}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/613456690752?comment_id=613477209632", "anchor": "fb-613477209632", "service": "fb", "text": "@Wayne: \"culture isn't changed with people, or at least not with people as individuals\"
How do you change culture then, if not through the work of dedicated people? And how do you get dedicated people, except by spending time trying to convince people to join your cause?
I think we actually agree on this (cf: Direct Action Everywhere) but are using different words.
\"all the money and people Bill Gates has contributed might very well be less valuable than if he flew off to Africa himself and started feeding children with his own hands (and admonished his colleagues to do the same)\"
I think this is very unlikely, but that's a question of tactics. (The direct positive impact of the Gates foundation is so large that the cultural change initiated by his going to Africa and directly feeding people would have to be enormous. And I think the actual impact of his doing that would be some news stories and maybe a short \"national conversation\".)", "timestamp": "1369148028"}, {"author": "Wayne", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/613456690752?comment_id=613477563922", "anchor": "fb-613477563922", "service": "fb", "text": "", "timestamp": "1369148392"}, {"author": "Jim", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/613456690752?comment_id=613493072842", "anchor": "fb-613493072842", "service": "fb", "text": "> \"another important question is whether effective charities and metacharities are limited more by funding or by hiring.\"
There should be three options here: it depends whether effective charities are limited most by funding, by hiring, or by *founding*. A lack of \"very good people who are self-directed enough\" suggests that the charity world is bottom-heavy: too many people able to do grunt work, and two few people at the top to coordinate them. Certainly for most people this isn't a good or viable option, but for the few people who can build organizations well, it's by far the best.", "timestamp": "1369157782"}]}