You wrote: “every billionaire should be on how many solutions for a sustainable future they have supported instead of how much money they give away”
Are you talking about EA Billionaires?
If so: If you’d discover that they donate mainly based on things like “expected impact” and not “how much money they give away”, would that change your mind?
You wrote: “telling them we are giving up on the possibility for them to generate income to have a descent life”
You also wrote:
A charity could be giving millions every week some milk, bread and eggs, for how long? Is going to impact on their daily lives but not on the root of their problem.
Do you mean that giving money to poor people directly will prevent those people from, for example, getting a job and looking out for themselves?
If so—I’ll note that this is probably (?) only a guess of yours regarding what happens, it’s not that you’ve checked? Or maybe I’m wrong?
If so—would it change your mind if you’d see convincing studies by GiveDirectly, running RCTs on the effects of giving people money?
You wrote: “Entrepreneurs with solutions focused for example in promoting and offering the tools to grow any crop sustainably and anywhere would mean instead an opportunity to solve the problem.”
I agree. The thing is that developing such crops is not a kind of help that will surely work, it’s high-risk-high-reward. I’m not saying that as a bad thing. The EA community also tries finding solutions like this, if you’re interested (but not specifically “finding a crop that could grow anywhere”, at least not that I’ve heard of. I assume that’s hard to do, but it’s not my domain, I don’t know)
“If so: If you’d discover that they donate mainly based on things like “expected impact” and not “how much money they give away”, would that change your mind?”
It would be much better than just assigning money to charities for sure but I think giving back by investing to create opportunities directly or supporting others to do that is the real impact.
“Do you mean that giving money to poor people directly will prevent those people from, for example, getting a job and looking out for themselves?”
“ If so—would it change your mind if you’d see convincing studies by GiveDirectly, running RCTs on the effects of giving people money?”
I have seen that case. When you are wealthy and you help people giving them money regularly they will count on it very soon and if they know the benefactor has so much they would assume that is the least you can do (believe me) and don’t even think about stoping at some point you would be the evil because you are doing them a great harm now. About the job, that is what they need, opportunities, giving away money to poor people would not prevent them from getting a job but will not encourage them to do it neither. I would think about committing to help for a limited time while they are looking for a job offering a certain amount as a prize for getting a job and a bonus for every year they stay employed for 2 years, make sense? My basic idea is that creating opportunities is the answer.
“ The EA community also tries finding solutions like this, if you’re interested (but not specifically “finding a crop that could grow anywhere””
I assume you just suppose they are trying to find that kind of solutions because I can tell you is hardly the truth. Even if you have the solution to change the world to make it a better place you will never reach them unless you sell it to one big corporation that takes away the goodness of your solution to make of it another source of big profits and only then the same members of the EA community will be ready to hear and invest.
What I said was “the tools to grow any crop sustainably and anywhere would mean instead an opportunity to solve the problem.” As of today there is no sustainably grown food, anywhere. I was talking about a technology to grow sustainably any crop anywhere, meaning minimum energy and water consumption, full use of sun light. no arable land needed and no pesticides required. Sounds incredible? It’s real but as I said the people passionate about solving this problem went through years of research, engineering, construction until proving it but no matter how hard they have tried, all the doors are closed to reach the EA community… lots of foundations but just try to get to anybody...they would need connections and normally those kind of independent people passionate about finding answers are far from those circles. So it looks like no only the poor need opportunities right? Imagine that solution generating jobs everywhere and solving the problem of food security with food healthy for both the people and the environment.
Hey!
You wrote: “every billionaire should be on how many solutions for a sustainable future they have supported instead of how much money they give away”
Are you talking about EA Billionaires?
If so: If you’d discover that they donate mainly based on things like “expected impact” and not “how much money they give away”, would that change your mind?
You wrote: “telling them we are giving up on the possibility for them to generate income to have a descent life”
You also wrote:
Do you mean that giving money to poor people directly will prevent those people from, for example, getting a job and looking out for themselves?
If so—I’ll note that this is probably (?) only a guess of yours regarding what happens, it’s not that you’ve checked? Or maybe I’m wrong?
If so—would it change your mind if you’d see convincing studies by GiveDirectly, running RCTs on the effects of giving people money?
You wrote: “Entrepreneurs with solutions focused for example in promoting and offering the tools to grow any crop sustainably and anywhere would mean instead an opportunity to solve the problem.”
I agree. The thing is that developing such crops is not a kind of help that will surely work, it’s high-risk-high-reward. I’m not saying that as a bad thing. The EA community also tries finding solutions like this, if you’re interested (but not specifically “finding a crop that could grow anywhere”, at least not that I’ve heard of. I assume that’s hard to do, but it’s not my domain, I don’t know)
Hi!
“If so: If you’d discover that they donate mainly based on things like “expected impact” and not “how much money they give away”, would that change your mind?” It would be much better than just assigning money to charities for sure but I think giving back by investing to create opportunities directly or supporting others to do that is the real impact.
“Do you mean that giving money to poor people directly will prevent those people from, for example, getting a job and looking out for themselves?” “ If so—would it change your mind if you’d see convincing studies by GiveDirectly, running RCTs on the effects of giving people money?”
I have seen that case. When you are wealthy and you help people giving them money regularly they will count on it very soon and if they know the benefactor has so much they would assume that is the least you can do (believe me) and don’t even think about stoping at some point you would be the evil because you are doing them a great harm now. About the job, that is what they need, opportunities, giving away money to poor people would not prevent them from getting a job but will not encourage them to do it neither. I would think about committing to help for a limited time while they are looking for a job offering a certain amount as a prize for getting a job and a bonus for every year they stay employed for 2 years, make sense? My basic idea is that creating opportunities is the answer.
“ The EA community also tries finding solutions like this, if you’re interested (but not specifically “finding a crop that could grow anywhere””
I assume you just suppose they are trying to find that kind of solutions because I can tell you is hardly the truth. Even if you have the solution to change the world to make it a better place you will never reach them unless you sell it to one big corporation that takes away the goodness of your solution to make of it another source of big profits and only then the same members of the EA community will be ready to hear and invest.
What I said was “the tools to grow any crop sustainably and anywhere would mean instead an opportunity to solve the problem.” As of today there is no sustainably grown food, anywhere. I was talking about a technology to grow sustainably any crop anywhere, meaning minimum energy and water consumption, full use of sun light. no arable land needed and no pesticides required. Sounds incredible? It’s real but as I said the people passionate about solving this problem went through years of research, engineering, construction until proving it but no matter how hard they have tried, all the doors are closed to reach the EA community… lots of foundations but just try to get to anybody...they would need connections and normally those kind of independent people passionate about finding answers are far from those circles. So it looks like no only the poor need opportunities right? Imagine that solution generating jobs everywhere and solving the problem of food security with food healthy for both the people and the environment.