Recently I got published an op-ed in The Crimson advocating, sort of, for an Earning to Give strategy.
The Crimson is widely read among Harvard students, and its content runs through many circles — not just those who care about student journalism.
I thought the piece was important to write.
I’ve noticed a recurring trend in conversations about careers here at Harvard: people want to do good, but have no idea how. So either — they give up and “sell out” to a comfy lifestyle, or they follow their passions/work at an NGO/etc. without even considering Earning to Give as a legitimate option.
I’m aware that orgs like 80,000 Hours have moved away from their (original) primary focus on Earning to Give as a career strategy.
But I think, based on folks I’ve talked to at Harvard, it’s still one of the most compelling ways to at least get people on board — it doesn’t require sacrifice of a well-paid lifestyle, but more importantly, it doesn’t require sacrifice of a prestigious career (which is what so many here care about).
80,000 hours also has a set of bulletpoints intended to determine whether you’d be a good fit: https://80000hours.org/articles/earning-to-give/
They ask four questions:
- Do you have high earning potential? (Yes. As I note in the article, Harvard students are lucky enough to be recruited by some of the highest-paying firms in the world.)
- Do you want to gain skills and career capital in a higher-earning option? (Yes as well. Harvard kids want to preserve optionality.)
- Are you uncertain about which problems are most pressing? (Resounding yes. I commonly hear things like “I want to do good for the world, I just don’t know how.”)
- Do you want to contribute to an area that is funding-constrained? (This is fuzzier, I think, seeing as the answer to this question would probably have to come after the last one.)
Anyway, I would appreciate if you gave my article a read. Feedback appreciated!
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/3/26/climaco-harvard-sell-out/
Great post!
Do note that given the context and background, a lot of your peers are probably going to be nudged towards charitable ideas. I would want to be generally mindful that you are doing things that have counterfactual impacts while also taking into account the value of your own time and potential to do good.
I encourage you to also be cognizant of not epistemically taking over other people's world models with something like "AI is going to kill us all" - I think an uncomfortable amount of space inadvertently and unknowingly does this and is one of the key reasons why I never started an EA group at my university.