Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

All of Rachel 's Comments + Replies

Who's hiring? (May-September 2022) [closed]
Rachel 2y1
0
0

Longview Philanthropy is a non-profit based in London. We are a grantmaking organisation and we also design and execute bespoke giving strategies for major donors. 

We're looking for a Head of Events Production to ensure the flawless production of a high impact events schedule:

  • Our busy events programme supports our core goals of working with major philanthropists; excellent longtermist grantmaking; and building the longtermist community among important decision-makers.
  • We’re looking for someone who can own all of the logistical elements of our events: f
... (read more)
Reply
2
Lorenzo Buonanno
2y
Hi Rachel! Relatively few people are looking at this post now, since it was May - September. It might make sense to (also) make a frontpage post with the tag job listing (open).
Where are the cool places to live where there is still *no* EA community? Bonus points if there is unlikely to be one in the future
Rachel 2y7
0
0

The incentive to make other connections is already there: you can tell it would make you happier. It's a question of coming up with a good plan and then executing it. 

Some possible ways to make connections in your city: 

  • No EA events for the next six months. If you'll miss your EA friends, tell them you're interested in making friends outside the EA community, and that you'd like to hang out but you'd rather go to a bar or for a hike or something than to an EA meetup, and that they're welcome to invite anyone who would enjoy whatever the activity
... (read more)
Reply
1
nananana.nananana.heyhey.anon
2y
This seems like good advice
Posting More Better: Social Media Rules of Thumb
Rachel 2y9
0
0

Nice post, there's some very useful advice here.  I've made some of my best friends through social media, and found amazing opportunities, & I love how optimistic you are about the potential for good outcomes. 

I would add one note of caution for readers: don't feel compelled to be active on social media if it doesn't work for your psyche. If you can tell that it makes you miserable, it's becoming compulsive,, or it's taking away time that you know is better spent elsewhere (whether that's more impactful work or more rewarding leisure) - scale... (read more)

Reply
3
Nathan Young
2y
Great point. I've added a bit in the article to reflect this.
Where are the cool places to live where there is still *no* EA community? Bonus points if there is unlikely to be one in the future
Answer by Rachel May 11, 202218
0
0

Have you just tried not hanging out with EAs so much where you are? Most EA hubs are big cities, there are lots of other people! 

Reply
6
nananana.nananana.heyhey.anon
2y
This is true. I appreciate you taking a minute to make a supportive comment! I got downvoted but I’m not hating on the community at all. Even more than my previous IRL communities, EAs are consistently kind, interesting, share my values, and offer events that I think are likely to do some actual good. I am drawn to the real life EA community like moth to flame whenever there is one available. But it’s also not sustainable for me to be so involved in EA. That’s not the community’s fault. It’s a quirk of my own psychology. I’d like to live somewhere sunny where IRL EA hangouts is not an option so I’m incentivized to make other connections.
Critique of OpenPhil's macroeconomic policy advocacy
Rachel 2y10
0
0

I don't really follow the argument that inflation causes populism. Do you think that inflation will disproportionately strengthen the "populist" wing of the Republicans, rather than just all of them simultaneously? Or even: particularly the inflation hawks? I don't tend to think of inflation hawks as populists, but I'm not from the US so I don't have a perfect sense of the dynamics there, or whether you are using "populism" as a shorthand for "voting Republican".

You've made a good case that inflation is likely to make Biden less popular, and improve the el... (read more)

Reply
2
Hauke Hillebrandt
2y
Excellent comment - thanks! Sorry I should have been more clear, I think current Republicans are very populist (Trumpist), which I define here and this is bad. I have tried to clarify my claims below. For the strongest claim the general lesson would indeed be trite, if you make bad policy that affects everyone badly, you won’t be reelected. — Concretely, in order of strength, I provide evidence for the following claims on the adverse effects of looser macroeconomic policy: 1. Very strong claim: The first-order effects of too loose policy on the '21 margin were unequivocally bad and will leave most worse off, even the poor, because we way overshot on inflation. Policy in ‘21 added few jobs and real wages are down even for the poor (who suffer the most when their real wages go down even by a little). The second-order effects are that Dems will lose House, Senate, and Presidency. Populists (like Trump) will be elected, whose incompetence will make things even worse. The effects of looser policy in richer countries spill over into poorer countries, where inflation is higher, more persistent (hyperinflation), which leads to less growth, wellbeing, populism and instability. 2. Medium strength claim: Looser policy on the '21 margin was good for the poorest 10% Americans (~30m) as it created more jobs and higher wages, but bad for the middle class (~150m) as their real wages went down. The first-order effects for wellbeing are still positive on average, as the poorest benefit much more than the middle class lost (a simple rule of thumb is that $1 is worth 1/X times as much if you are X times richer and poorest Americans are more than 5x poorer [utility is logarithmic in consumption]). However, because 150m have lost in terms real income, which can predict midterms and naïve extrapolation of current income decline predict Dems losing 50+ seats, the resulting populist incompetence will have, at the very least, high downside risks (like Trumpists starting trade wars). Thi
.01% Fund - Ideation and Proposal
Rachel 2y13
0
0

$100bn to reduce the risk by 100 basis points seems like  a good deal to me, if you think you can model the risk like that. If I've understood the correctly, that would be the equivalent price of $10tn to avoid a certain extinction; which is less than 20% of global GDP. Bargain! 

Reply