You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Metus comments on The new GiveWell recommendations are out: here's a summary of the charities - Less Wrong Discussion

18 Post author: tog 01 December 2014 09:20PM

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

Comments (17)

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

Comment author: Metus 01 December 2014 11:09:54PM *  1 point [-]

Thank you.

Which I suppose it is, to some extent for most people, but it seems like it shouldn't and it's unfortunate to be encouraging that mode of thinking.

You don't encourage it, you use it. It will be there no matter what you do as humans are social creatures under heavy competition. We can speculate about the reasons but it is what it is.

Would be happier with a calculator that instead suggests an equivalent of the money to be donated considering tax-deductibility? I am imagining something like "You can donate $10k per year to do X, equivalent to about Y1 number of coffees, Y2 movie tickets, Y3 beers, ..." The point of htese calculators is to visualise the stark contrast in life between first world countries and target nations.

Comment author: gjm 02 December 2014 11:36:45AM 1 point [-]

You don't encourage it, you use it. It will be there no matter what you do

It will, I'm sure, but I think the boundary between using and encouraging is a fuzzy one. (So, I guess, is the boundary between discouraging and denying. For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not saying we shouldn't pretend people don't care about relative status. Just that we shouldn't prompt them to think in those terms.)

a calculator that instead suggests an equivalent of the money to be donated

Yes, I think that would be healthier.