Interesting question, Jeff! I personally think that donating more in that case would be more impactful, but the answer is not totally clear to me:
If one believes boosting economic growth is a better proxy for contributing to a better world than increasing human welfare, I think saving lives in high income countries may be better than in low income countries. Therefore donating less can potentially be better to increase economic growth by keeping more resources in higher income countries.
It is not obvious that saving lives is net positive accounting for effects on animals.
Interesting question, Jeff! I personally think that donating more in that case would be more impactful, but the answer is not totally clear to me:
If one believes boosting economic growth is a better proxy for contributing to a better world than increasing human welfare, I think saving lives in high income countries may be better than in low income countries. Therefore donating less can potentially be better to increase economic growth by keeping more resources in higher income countries.
It is not obvious that saving lives is net positive accounting for effects on animals.