MBlume comments on A "Failure to Evaluate Return-on-Time" Fallacy - Less Wrong

47 Post author: lionhearted 07 September 2010 07:01PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (109)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: drcode 08 September 2010 02:26:14AM 2 points [-]

I doubt that simply donating money to charity is an efficient way to make the world a better place. There are studies that question, for instance, how much good all the money has done that we've given to developing nations.

It's definitely possible, I think, that creating a great video game might bring more happiness to the world than simply writing a check for a charity.

I am not saying, by the way, that being charitable is a bad idea. However, I do think you need to be strategic for it to be effective. For instance, it might be better to help a struggling neighbor or cousin by getting actively involved in their problems and helping them in a more involved manner. Or, if you have specific skill that can be helpful for a charity organization, that may be a better investment than just giving them money.

My point is, there is no simple, clear path to making the world a better place. We all have to actively think about how to make it happen. And it may happen in unexpected ways.

Comment author: MBlume 09 September 2010 05:55:14AM 8 points [-]

Most charities suck. A few don't. Finding the ones that suck least and then pumping money into them is actually a pretty efficient way to make the world a better place.