army1987 comments on Giving What We Can, 80,000 Hours, and Meta-Charity - Less Wrong

44 Post author: wdmacaskill 15 November 2012 08:34PM

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

Comments (182)

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

Comment author: [deleted] 13 November 2012 09:20:03PM 0 points [-]

You might say that you prefer the lamb but poor people would prefer the lamb, and society is biased in favour of poor people.

Er... The first instance of "lamb" was supposed to be "soy" and both instances of "poor" were supposed to be "rich", right?

Comment author: Larks 14 November 2012 12:07:31AM 0 points [-]

Eeek. slightly clearer"

You prefer the resources be spent on lamb for you to eat, but poor people prefer that you bought soy because then there'd be leftover resources to be spent on soy for them. Also, your welfare calculations are generally biased in favour of poor people because of diminishing returns to money.

Comment author: [deleted] 14 November 2012 10:27:19AM 1 point [-]

You prefer the resources be spent on lamb for you to eat, but poor people prefer that you bought soy because then there'd be leftover resources to be spent on soy for them.

Yes (provided that's a generic “you”). If you wouldn't call that a tragedy of commons, then the two of us are just using the term with two slightly different meanings.

Comment author: ChristianKl 16 November 2012 01:11:03PM 0 points [-]

Different people in the Western world spent a different amount of their resources on buying foot. If I spent 150€ instead of 300€ on buying food, the food industry has less resources to produce food. I don't automatically donate those 150€ on buying foot for people in the third world.

The EU produces so much foot that it delibrately throws food away to raise food prices. Simply shipping surplus food to Africa had the problem of wrecking their food markets. It also produces transportation costs. As a result we do ship some of the surplus food to Africa and simply throw away other food.

Soy is cheaper than meat. When you propose that people buy soy instead of buying meat you propose to defund the agricultural sector.
If the EU wanted to produce more food than it does currently it could move more economic resources into the agricultural sector.

Comment author: Larks 14 November 2012 10:43:43AM 0 points [-]
Comment author: [deleted] 14 November 2012 10:49:54AM -2 points [-]

Yes, that's the original meaning. I was using it in the generalized sense of ‘N-player prisoner's dilemma where N is large’, which I think I've seen before on LW.