On the salary issue, I’m in a position to comment:
(1) I agree that it’s unfortunate, because practically speaking this will deter some talented people from participating in founding charities. On the flipside, lower salaries do mean self-selecting into more intrinsically motivated/altruistic individuals, but I’m not sure if it outweighs the former effect.
(2) My own view is that the salary structure doesn’t disadvantage less affluent individuals per se—at least not on a global scale. Think of it more as a U-shape curve, whereby a potential cofounder from a low or middle income country is able and willing to tolerate a much lower salary; while a rich world individual on the upper end of the income spectrum (e.g. inherited family wealth or savings from their previous banking/tech/consulting job) can afford a low or zero salary; it’s more those on the lower and middle part of the income spectrum in developed countries that are unable to cope (relative to the standard of living they are accustomed to).
(3) Older individuals, with family or children commitments are the hardest hit. That said, students/fresh grads will probably be able to manage the matter.
(4) But at the end of the day, if we’re serious about doing good, and saving/improving people’s lives, we really should make a conscious choice to make the sacrifice.
It’s not just “standard of living” but also security—if you have advantages like a savings cushion, a supportive and well-resourced family, etc. you can tolerate certain risks on a near-minimum wage salary[1] better than someone without those things. Those risks include major medical expenses, short/medium term disability, the need for major car repairs, the project not working out and being unemployed until you can find your next job, etc., etc. As you implied, there are also various factors that make you more prone to risks or less able to weather them—like having moral responsibility for the well-being of one’s child(ren), being older (and thus relatively more exposed to medical expenses and disability risks), and so on.
I think some of the disconnect here is between the sacrifice we’re implicitly asking of would-be CE incubatees in developed countries in comparison to what other orgs are paying for fairly entry-level work. To the extent your point (4) is valid, it suggests to me that some orgs are significantly overpaying for those positions.
It is a fairly reasonable case to make, that some organizations are overpaying, at least from the standpoint of maximizing welfare per dollar.
On the medical expenses issue—that’s a legitimate concern, but to be fair, I find it’s a US-centric worry insofar as other EAs from high income countries are protected by more robust public healthcare systems. And it was even worse pre-ACA, of course!
Best of luck, J.T.
On the salary issue, I’m in a position to comment:
(1) I agree that it’s unfortunate, because practically speaking this will deter some talented people from participating in founding charities. On the flipside, lower salaries do mean self-selecting into more intrinsically motivated/altruistic individuals, but I’m not sure if it outweighs the former effect.
(2) My own view is that the salary structure doesn’t disadvantage less affluent individuals per se—at least not on a global scale. Think of it more as a U-shape curve, whereby a potential cofounder from a low or middle income country is able and willing to tolerate a much lower salary; while a rich world individual on the upper end of the income spectrum (e.g. inherited family wealth or savings from their previous banking/tech/consulting job) can afford a low or zero salary; it’s more those on the lower and middle part of the income spectrum in developed countries that are unable to cope (relative to the standard of living they are accustomed to).
(3) Older individuals, with family or children commitments are the hardest hit. That said, students/fresh grads will probably be able to manage the matter.
(4) But at the end of the day, if we’re serious about doing good, and saving/improving people’s lives, we really should make a conscious choice to make the sacrifice.
It’s not just “standard of living” but also security—if you have advantages like a savings cushion, a supportive and well-resourced family, etc. you can tolerate certain risks on a near-minimum wage salary[1] better than someone without those things. Those risks include major medical expenses, short/medium term disability, the need for major car repairs, the project not working out and being unemployed until you can find your next job, etc., etc. As you implied, there are also various factors that make you more prone to risks or less able to weather them—like having moral responsibility for the well-being of one’s child(ren), being older (and thus relatively more exposed to medical expenses and disability risks), and so on.
I think some of the disconnect here is between the sacrifice we’re implicitly asking of would-be CE incubatees in developed countries in comparison to what other orgs are paying for fairly entry-level work. To the extent your point (4) is valid, it suggests to me that some orgs are significantly overpaying for those positions.
Where I live, minimum wage is $15 per hour, so slightly more than $30K/year.
It is a fairly reasonable case to make, that some organizations are overpaying, at least from the standpoint of maximizing welfare per dollar.
On the medical expenses issue—that’s a legitimate concern, but to be fair, I find it’s a US-centric worry insofar as other EAs from high income countries are protected by more robust public healthcare systems. And it was even worse pre-ACA, of course!