I thought a lot about frugality when I was getting involved in EA (ex: Living Frugally So We Can Give Away More, from 2010), but I think I (and some other early EAs) could be shortsighted here. For example, in retrospect I think it would have been really valuable for @Julia_Wisešø and me to meet other EAs in person in the UK, but we didnāt go there until 2014. And only then because we could tack it it onto travel for my sisterās wedding.
A focus on minimizing spending can also be a distraction from other ways of increasing your impact. For example, when I wrote that post I was earning (all numbers in 2025 dollars) $106k in a research group. Two years later when I realized I should be trying harder to earn money and Carl Schulman suggested I join Google, my starting salary was $149k and in my first full calendar year I earned $301k. Very quickly I was able to donate more than I had been earning before. A focus on increasing earnings would have resulted in more donations.
On the other hand, I do think some frugality is really valuable. If we had let our expenses grow proportionately during the period when I was earning $700k+ I could easily have become trapped earning to give, but frugality (āa low personal burn rateā if you want to appeal to startup folks) allowed me to leave Google to join an early-stage biosecurity project that spun out into a non-profit that still canāt afford to pay super well. And it has allowed me to take a voluntary salary reduction, allowing the non-profit to get more done with the same funding.
Overall, I think it would probably be good for EA to be moderately more frugal, but to be very aware of the downsides in burnout and turning people away.
Thanks for the thoughtful response. It seems like, if someone wants to earn to give, they do need some conscientiousness about lifestyle inflation in general, but:
If someone could potentially acquire a high-paying job, they should primarily focus on getting a higher pay.
If someone couldnāt potentially acquire a high-paying job, they should primarily focus on frugality.
On the other hand though, if oneās able to live on a very small amount, their level of self control, problem solving, and numeracy might be a strong indicator that, if they go in the right direction, they could substantially increase their salary.
Your comment about saving enough money to join a start-up though does make me, at least personally, skeptical about giving donations. It seems like, if someoneās project-oriented, having significant savings will enable them to embark on much more ambitious and potentially impactful projects.
Also, in regards to that post, this comment is a great list of cons for others who are curious.
I thought a lot about frugality when I was getting involved in EA (ex: Living Frugally So We Can Give Away More, from 2010), but I think I (and some other early EAs) could be shortsighted here. For example, in retrospect I think it would have been really valuable for @Julia_Wisešø and me to meet other EAs in person in the UK, but we didnāt go there until 2014. And only then because we could tack it it onto travel for my sisterās wedding.
A focus on minimizing spending can also be a distraction from other ways of increasing your impact. For example, when I wrote that post I was earning (all numbers in 2025 dollars) $106k in a research group. Two years later when I realized I should be trying harder to earn money and Carl Schulman suggested I join Google, my starting salary was $149k and in my first full calendar year I earned $301k. Very quickly I was able to donate more than I had been earning before. A focus on increasing earnings would have resulted in more donations.
On the other hand, I do think some frugality is really valuable. If we had let our expenses grow proportionately during the period when I was earning $700k+ I could easily have become trapped earning to give, but frugality (āa low personal burn rateā if you want to appeal to startup folks) allowed me to leave Google to join an early-stage biosecurity project that spun out into a non-profit that still canāt afford to pay super well. And it has allowed me to take a voluntary salary reduction, allowing the non-profit to get more done with the same funding.
Overall, I think it would probably be good for EA to be moderately more frugal, but to be very aware of the downsides in burnout and turning people away.
You might also be interested in the top comments on Free-spending EA might be a big problem for optics and epistemics (posted at the height of the FTX-funding era) for some discussion on the pros and cons of EAās more frugal past.
Thanks for the thoughtful response. It seems like, if someone wants to earn to give, they do need some conscientiousness about lifestyle inflation in general, but:
If someone could potentially acquire a high-paying job, they should primarily focus on getting a higher pay.
If someone couldnāt potentially acquire a high-paying job, they should primarily focus on frugality.
On the other hand though, if oneās able to live on a very small amount, their level of self control, problem solving, and numeracy might be a strong indicator that, if they go in the right direction, they could substantially increase their salary.
Your comment about saving enough money to join a start-up though does make me, at least personally, skeptical about giving donations. It seems like, if someoneās project-oriented, having significant savings will enable them to embark on much more ambitious and potentially impactful projects.
Also, in regards to that post, this comment is a great list of cons for others who are curious.