This is a neat capability, and it seems like it might sometimes be useful. I’m not entirely sure how recipients are likely to reason about this—will they tend to take it at face value and reduce their donations (if they wouldn’t normally donate windfall cash)? Or will they want to follow a chain of reasoning about what the money you’ve given would otherwise have been used for?
Note on terminology: it seems to be a kind of indirect transfer, but it’s definitely a causal one: your actions cause them to have more money. I think it’s good to reserve the term “acausal” to situations where causality is not involved.
This means you can transfer them money at any time, without their permission, without needing much coordination, without needing to set up a way to make payments between each other, in any country where a donation can be made, regardless of what country they are in. It’s also a power only really available to EAs. …And that’s kinda cool to think about.
It’s worth noting that this is a financially efficient way to ‘transfer’ money to people in other countries (for example when paying them for goods or services), without any of the currency exchange or bank fees that are normally associated with this.
I’d be willing to do more direct work, like remote research assistance, for free in my spare time if somebody donated on my behalf. Would that count as acausal labor? Acausal work? Could the promise of my work be guaranteed by using a contract stating the donation wouldn’t take place until the work was completed to satisfaction?
Thumbs up for this.
Creating a labor market for people who are willing to work for causes seems high value to me.
A few years ago, before I spend most, and while Brazil was doing well, I didn’t care about money, and as usual I was working and paying my own work out of pocket.
If it was an option then, I would have wanted to work on far future EA, and hedge my bets by asking other people to donate to near future causes on behalf of the work I was doing.
I currently lean much more strongly towards far future though, so most of my eggs are in that basket.
You can consider writing a post about indirect donations between EAs, in the spirit of Direct Funding Between EAs. I believe Rox Heston would be happy to help conceptually, and Matt Reyes would be happy to help editing.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/moraleconomics
Tax complicates this. If I’m in a higher tax band than you, I can make a donation to charity more cheaply than you can, so you will “receive” more than I “give”, and vice versa.
This is a neat capability, and it seems like it might sometimes be useful. I’m not entirely sure how recipients are likely to reason about this—will they tend to take it at face value and reduce their donations (if they wouldn’t normally donate windfall cash)? Or will they want to follow a chain of reasoning about what the money you’ve given would otherwise have been used for?
Note on terminology: it seems to be a kind of indirect transfer, but it’s definitely a causal one: your actions cause them to have more money. I think it’s good to reserve the term “acausal” to situations where causality is not involved.
It’s worth noting that this is a financially efficient way to ‘transfer’ money to people in other countries (for example when paying them for goods or services), without any of the currency exchange or bank fees that are normally associated with this.
I’d be willing to do more direct work, like remote research assistance, for free in my spare time if somebody donated on my behalf. Would that count as acausal labor? Acausal work? Could the promise of my work be guaranteed by using a contract stating the donation wouldn’t take place until the work was completed to satisfaction?
Thumbs up for this. Creating a labor market for people who are willing to work for causes seems high value to me.
A few years ago, before I spend most, and while Brazil was doing well, I didn’t care about money, and as usual I was working and paying my own work out of pocket.
If it was an option then, I would have wanted to work on far future EA, and hedge my bets by asking other people to donate to near future causes on behalf of the work I was doing. I currently lean much more strongly towards far future though, so most of my eggs are in that basket. You can consider writing a post about indirect donations between EAs, in the spirit of Direct Funding Between EAs. I believe Rox Heston would be happy to help conceptually, and Matt Reyes would be happy to help editing. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/moraleconomics
Tax complicates this. If I’m in a higher tax band than you, I can make a donation to charity more cheaply than you can, so you will “receive” more than I “give”, and vice versa.