Sounds great! Thank you very much :)
Thank you for this idea. I should definitely think more about leading a research team.I really don't mean to say that I'm unenthusiastic about Charity Entrepreneurship; I'm just currently unsure whether it's the very best thing to do. There are a lot of things that would very much appeal to me about CE, so I want to be sure not to jump into it too fast. (I think a lot depends on one's moral position about the importance and tractability of shaping the long-term future, and this is something that I'm planning to spend time reading and thinking about during my time out.)
Thank you very much for these suggestions.I'm not convinced charity entrepreneurship is for me, partly because I'm unsure whether it's the most impactful thing I could do, but I think it would be great to get a better understanding of what they are doing.The idea of volunteering with a newly launched CE charity is a very good one and not something I had thought of. Thank you!
Hello and welcome! What do you think this community would look like? I'm curious :)
It's been great to see and read through this thread. Any thoughts on my own situation would be especially appreciated.I'm in my final year of PPE at Oxford with a focus on the more technical/quantitative parts of economics. I consider myself quite entrepreneurial and have for some time wanted to do something in that vein - broadly considered, to include e.g. charity entrepreneurship.
After reading a book over the summer that challenged my perspectives, I am considering a broader range of issues and careers than before (brain dump from then here: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/RnmsaX5TEDoaH6XcB/systemic-change-global-poverty-eradication-and-a-career-plan ). That post was just about development, but I'm also thinking more about longtermism and the other causes it suggests. It seems that to maximise my impact I should affect EA-meta or policy in some way.
Affecting policy seems challenging because I'm not confident of my personal fit in academia or government bureaucracies. One of my new interests is in combining policy/'systemic' change with an entrepreneurial approach, so any suggestions here would be welcome. I'm motivated and willing to work hard; enjoy learning new things; and would like to do work that combines high impact, intensity, some level of intellectual challenge, and fairly fast feedback loops. I'm still unsure about my cause prioritisation. I like quantitative subjects and am mathematically competent but don't think my comparative advantage lies in (purely) quantitative work. Since I have more questions than I can answer now, while focused on my end-of-degree exams, I plan to take some time (9-12 months) after graduation to explore certain key questions and areas via independent study and internships/volunteering. I've got a full-time job offer at quite a prestigious strategy consulting firm, which it is very likely that I can defer until after that.I want to use these 9-12 months as best I can and would like to hear anyone's thoughts on how to do this. These could include:
Things I'm already going to do:
Please also let me know if you'd be willing to chat about all this around June-time, when I'm figuring out plans for the time out more concretely :)Thank you very much!
Thank you! I've been thinking along similar lines, actually, although I'd like to do some more research on the first bullet point. It seems plausible, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's actually true, and it seems very important to have a good idea of whether it's true.
Fascinating. Thanks for this alternative perspective. I certainly need to read more.
I think his point was related to development via protection, etc., that was then loosened somewhat. But not sure.
I agree. I'm concerned about the same, and want to look at both
I just haven't been able to do it yet, since I'm in the middle of an internship. That's why I wrote this post with some first thoughts.
This is fair, although I take Richard's point below as well. (I'm not sure about its truth, because I don't know enough about China or Africa.)
I think the point is that there are two points
(Hickel claims that China's very non-neoliberal policy enriched its people, while African countries' mandated structural adjustments impoverished its people. I don't know enough to say if this is true, but it's another reason Hickel excludes China.)