Executive summary: The post makes the case for EA investment in US policy interventions to alleviate poverty as a highly cost-effective way to improve health, then lays out a framework to assess tractability, neglectedness, and other considerations in determining priority.
Key points:
Impact can be evaluated similarly to global health interventions using cost-effectiveness. There is also an argument for partiality towards one’s own country.
Tractability depends on cost, popular opposition, and moneyed opposition. Implementation tractability is generally high if legislation passes.
Neglectedness varies—some issues need critical momentum to pass legislation. Highly opposed issues are riskier despite neglectedness.
Pros include sense of responsibility for poor Americans and being a well-funded, coordinated group that could influence legislators.
Cons include economic uncertainty, low policy success rates, and increased perception of EA having too much power.
This cause aligns with recent EA government work and could help build US popularity. Existing research expertise also helps guide policy.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, andcontact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: The post makes the case for EA investment in US policy interventions to alleviate poverty as a highly cost-effective way to improve health, then lays out a framework to assess tractability, neglectedness, and other considerations in determining priority.
Key points:
Impact can be evaluated similarly to global health interventions using cost-effectiveness. There is also an argument for partiality towards one’s own country.
Tractability depends on cost, popular opposition, and moneyed opposition. Implementation tractability is generally high if legislation passes.
Neglectedness varies—some issues need critical momentum to pass legislation. Highly opposed issues are riskier despite neglectedness.
Pros include sense of responsibility for poor Americans and being a well-funded, coordinated group that could influence legislators.
Cons include economic uncertainty, low policy success rates, and increased perception of EA having too much power.
This cause aligns with recent EA government work and could help build US popularity. Existing research expertise also helps guide policy.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.