I basically think so, yes. I think it mainly caused by, as you put it, âthe amount of money from six-figure donations was nonetheless dwarfed by Open Philanthropyâ and therefore people have scaled back/âstopped since they donât think itâs impactful. I basically donât think thatâs true, especially in this case of animal welfare but also just in terms of absolute impact which is what actually matters as opposed to relative impact. FWIW, this is the same (IMO, fallacious) argument ânormiesâ have against donating âmy potential donations are so small compared to billionaires/âgovernments/âNGOs that I may as well just spend it on myselfâ.
But yes, the amount of people I know who would consider themselves to be effective altruists, even committed effective altruists who earn considerable salaries donate relatively little, at least compared to what they could be donating.
I basically think so, yes. I think it mainly caused by, as you put it, âthe amount of money from six-figure donations was nonetheless dwarfed by Open Philanthropyâ and therefore people have scaled back/âstopped since they donât think itâs impactful. I basically donât think thatâs true, especially in this case of animal welfare but also just in terms of absolute impact which is what actually matters as opposed to relative impact. FWIW, this is the same (IMO, fallacious) argument ânormiesâ have against donating âmy potential donations are so small compared to billionaires/âgovernments/âNGOs that I may as well just spend it on myselfâ.
But yes, the amount of people I know who would consider themselves to be effective altruists, even committed effective altruists who earn considerable salaries donate relatively little, at least compared to what they could be donating.