The claim that it’s natural to donate to one’s employer given one’s prior decision to become an employee assumes that EAs—or at least those working for EA orgs—should spend all their altruistic resources (i.e. time and money) in the same way.
No, the claim is not that all employees should donate to their employers. The claim is that it’s natural, viz. that there is a pro tanto reason for it.
I think the claim should be that there is a prima facie reason for donating to one’s employer. If the reason was pro tanto, one would have reason for donating even after learning that one’s employer e.g. has no room for more funding.
I agree with the claim so interpreted. If you believe working for some organization is the best use of your time, there’s a presumption that donating to this organization is the best use of your money. So I now see that my original comment was uncharitable.
At present, I don’t have a good sense of how strong this presumption should be. So it’s unclear to me how much weight I should give to arguments that appeal to this presumption.
No, the claim is not that all employees should donate to their employers. The claim is that it’s natural, viz. that there is a pro tanto reason for it.
I think the claim should be that there is a prima facie reason for donating to one’s employer. If the reason was pro tanto, one would have reason for donating even after learning that one’s employer e.g. has no room for more funding.
I agree with the claim so interpreted. If you believe working for some organization is the best use of your time, there’s a presumption that donating to this organization is the best use of your money. So I now see that my original comment was uncharitable.
At present, I don’t have a good sense of how strong this presumption should be. So it’s unclear to me how much weight I should give to arguments that appeal to this presumption.