Make it clearer that earning to give shouldn’t involve straightforward EV maximisation because charities / NGOs benefit from certainty and stability, and you shouldn’t make decisions which have a high risk of losing money which has already been promised to charities even if the decision is positive EV.
I agree certainty and stability are quite relevant, but these can be integrated into expected value thinking. So I would say “straightforward money [not EV] maximisation”, as “value” should account for the risk of the assets.
Make it clearer that earning to give shouldn’t involve straightforward EV maximisation because charities / NGOs benefit from certainty and stability, and you shouldn’t make decisions which have a high risk of losing money which has already been promised to charities even if the decision is positive EV.
I agree certainty and stability are quite relevant, but these can be integrated into expected value thinking. So I would say “straightforward money [not EV] maximisation”, as “value” should account for the risk of the assets.
Yes that makes sense to me!