I don’t understand this reply. It seems to say that few people are donating as much as Jeff because Jeff is a strong outlier, which seems to be a tautology, what am I missing?
But to get to 1k EAs donating this much money, you’d need like 300 companies with similarly sized EA contingents.
Or you’d need a 30 times larger EA contingent at Alphabet and at 10 other high-paying companies. Why aren’t more people donating 50%?
As one who donates 50%, it doesn’t seem like it should be that uncommon. One way I think about it is earning like upper-middle-class, living like middle-class, and donating like upper-class. Tens of percent of people work for tens of percent less money in sectors like nonprofits and governments. And I’ve heard of quite a few non-EAs who have taken jobs for half the money. And yet most people think about donating that large of a percent very differently than taking a job that pays less. I’m still not sure why—other than that it is uncommon or “weird.”
(leading a—dare I say—successful effective nonprofit)
Sure—go ahead and dare. :)
My day job is associate professor of mechanical engineering at University of Canterbury in New Zealand, and I volunteer for ALLFED. Nearly 100% of my donations are to ALLFED. I think that ALLFED is the most cost-effective way of improving the long run future at the margin (see here and here, though I’m not quite as bullish as the mean survey/poll results in those papers), but there are orders of magnitude of uncertainty, and I think more total money should be put into AGI safety.
I don’t understand this reply. It seems to say that few people are donating as much as Jeff because Jeff is a strong outlier, which seems to be a tautology, what am I missing?
Or you’d need a 30 times larger EA contingent at Alphabet and at 10 other high-paying companies. Why aren’t more people donating 50%?
As one who donates 50%, it doesn’t seem like it should be that uncommon. One way I think about it is earning like upper-middle-class, living like middle-class, and donating like upper-class. Tens of percent of people work for tens of percent less money in sectors like nonprofits and governments. And I’ve heard of quite a few non-EAs who have taken jobs for half the money. And yet most people think about donating that large of a percent very differently than taking a job that pays less. I’m still not sure why—other than that it is uncommon or “weird.”
Yeah, Giving isn’t demanding and the median annual UK salary is £26,800
Could you share where you donate? I’ve always found it fascinating when people like you (leading a—dare I say—successful effective nonprofit) donate.
If you don’t donate to ALLFED, why is that? (Are you hedging, are you actually not convinced it’s the best giving opportunity out there...)
If you donate to ALLFED, what’s the case for not just taking a lower salary? (Or is that what you do?)
Sure—go ahead and dare. :)
My day job is associate professor of mechanical engineering at University of Canterbury in New Zealand, and I volunteer for ALLFED. Nearly 100% of my donations are to ALLFED. I think that ALLFED is the most cost-effective way of improving the long run future at the margin (see here and here, though I’m not quite as bullish as the mean survey/poll results in those papers), but there are orders of magnitude of uncertainty, and I think more total money should be put into AGI safety.