I should have made my response clearer. I am suggesting a few things.
It seems that on a relative basis, billionaires are on average, about as or more charitable than EAs. I think this is a sign that EAs should be far more charitable.
I think the fact that even EAs don’t seem to donate very much suggests that it actually is very hard to get people to donate significant percentages of their income/wealth.
I think it’s going to be quite hard to convince others (in this case, billionaires) that they should be donating significant sums of their income/wealth when we don’t. It’s just too easy to dismiss people as hypocrites at first glance or that we don’t really believe it.
I think I just don’t see that most EAs are taking very low salaries. Many (most?) make comparable salaries to what they would make in industry, some more, some less. I don’t think EA salaries are particularly low in general.
I think I just don’t see that most EAs are taking very low salaries. Many (most?) make comparable salaries to what they would make in industry, some more, some less.
I’d be curious to later see data on this (not asking you in particular). It seems like a tough thing to measure—ideally we’d want a good idea of what people’s career trajectories are like before and after taking EA directions.
There’s definitely a bunch of anecdotal data around me to suggest that many people take lower salaries than they would otherwise. At the same time, it’s hard to do an apples to apples comparison, as the EA jobs look quite different to the other jobs. For example, it being more altruistic makes it more enjoyable to some people, the work can come with more agency, you can work around people you like more, it can be higher-status in your community, etc.
I should have made my response clearer. I am suggesting a few things.
It seems that on a relative basis, billionaires are on average, about as or more charitable than EAs. I think this is a sign that EAs should be far more charitable.
I think the fact that even EAs don’t seem to donate very much suggests that it actually is very hard to get people to donate significant percentages of their income/wealth.
I think it’s going to be quite hard to convince others (in this case, billionaires) that they should be donating significant sums of their income/wealth when we don’t. It’s just too easy to dismiss people as hypocrites at first glance or that we don’t really believe it.
I think I just don’t see that most EAs are taking very low salaries. Many (most?) make comparable salaries to what they would make in industry, some more, some less. I don’t think EA salaries are particularly low in general.
Thanks for the clarification.
I’d be curious to later see data on this (not asking you in particular). It seems like a tough thing to measure—ideally we’d want a good idea of what people’s career trajectories are like before and after taking EA directions.
There’s definitely a bunch of anecdotal data around me to suggest that many people take lower salaries than they would otherwise. At the same time, it’s hard to do an apples to apples comparison, as the EA jobs look quite different to the other jobs. For example, it being more altruistic makes it more enjoyable to some people, the work can come with more agency, you can work around people you like more, it can be higher-status in your community, etc.