That 0.6$ seems to me very low. The annual revenue of THL is almost $20M, so THL neutralizes the harm caused by 30 million people?
It is supposedly more than 30 M people in high income countries, because I used the marginal cost-effectiveness (of 15.0 DALY/$), which will tend to be lower than the ratio between impact and cost due to diminishing returns. Are there any factors going into my estimate which seem especially off to you?
So 10 conversations reduces the harm caused to farmed animals by the annual food consumption of a random person.
Thanks for the Fermi estimate! If each conversation optimistically takes 6 min (I am trying to cancel out your supposedly pessimistic assumption), 10 would take 60 min. So the the corporate campaigns for chicken welfare would be 30.0 (= 60⁄2.00) times as cost-effective if the outreach costed 17.3 $/h.
Please let me know how I could have earned extra money at those times when I do deep questioning ;-) I think it’s really difficult
To clarify, I think it is worth having the opportunity cost in mind, but I am not claiming it is sufficiently high for you to decrease your outreach.
It is supposedly more than 30 M people in high income countries, because I used the marginal cost-effectiveness (of 15.0 DALY/$), which will tend to be lower than the ratio between impact and cost due to diminishing returns. Are there any factors going into my estimate which seem especially off to you?
Thanks for the Fermi estimate! If each conversation optimistically takes 6 min (I am trying to cancel out your supposedly pessimistic assumption), 10 would take 60 min. So the the corporate campaigns for chicken welfare would be 30.0 (= 60⁄2.00) times as cost-effective if the outreach costed 17.3 $/h.
To clarify, I think it is worth having the opportunity cost in mind, but I am not claiming it is sufficiently high for you to decrease your outreach.