T

Tyner

755 karmaJoined Serra Mesa, San Diego, CA, USA

Comments
81

Toby - I appreciated reading your updates based on the events of the last 5ish years.

I'm am wondering if you have also reconsidered the underlying analyses and assumptions that went into your initially published models?  There's been a fair amount written about this; to me the best is from David Thorstad here:

https://reflectivealtruism.com/category/exaggerating-the-risks/

I would really value you engaging with the arguments he or others present, as a second kind of update.

Cheers

Answer by Tyner16
4
0

I would really appreciate further analysis of family planning as an intervention.  Some specific questions I’d like to see tackled:

  • What is the cost effectiveness of these interventions/organizations when looking at a variety of metrics (e.g. preventing maternal deaths, preventing obstetric fistula, increasing subjective well-being, increasing wealth etc.)?
    • Some framework for tallying these benefits.
  • Do these interventions lead to a permanent reduction in family size, or a temporary one?
  • What is the impact to farmed animals (i.e. does this intervention benefit from the meat-eater problem)?
  • What about climate change or other environmental impacts?

Here are some posts that provide a start:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/WYmJoDxJZToDcA9Bq/population-size-growth-and-reproductive-choice-highly

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/zgBmSgyWECJcbhmpc/family-planning-a-significant-opportunity-for-impact

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/BMzmCohuPYRaGPcZD/maybe-family-planning-charities-are-better-for-farmed

And here’s a really good report on one org:

https://rethinkpriorities.org/publications/family-empowerment-media

And CE has some good reports on some interventions:

https://www.charityentrepreneurship.com/health-reports

I don't think that SEADS still exists.  They haven't posted in a while and their website is dead

https://seads-ai.org/portfolio.html

>What I personally think is that those who are pledgees should consider donation matching as part of a prospective job's compensation as it is a permanent cost. (also would incentivise negotiation in that direction)

I'm not sure I understand.  Are you suggesting that GWWC should include the donation match in the denominator, but not the numerator?  Or include in both?  Or are you not talking about GWWC at all here?

I'm giving to the EA Animal Welfare Fund.  

https://funds.effectivealtruism.org/funds/animal-welfare

I thought this was likely among the best giving opportunities around.  And then was further persuaded by the investigation from GWWC.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hqYNZ9zJfe3D_nyJ4b21J0IJs210upAXTw8fPWnYJe8/edit#heading=h.kiw67f2s2v90

You say "don't yet"...are you aware of anyone working on a project to incorporate deontology or other non-utilitarian factors in cause prioritization?

because we don't yet have a way to give enough weight to subjective wellbeing, the value of self-determination, or justice

Do you have thoughts on giving now vs. later?  

Investing to give e.g. (https://www.founderspledge.com/research/investing-to-give)?

If you got google stock options or grants from 2013 (I don't know if you did) then those would have increased in value about 800%, so could your giving go much further if delayed to take advantage of gain?  Or do you think of it some other way?

Thanks.

Hi Joel,

I would love to do this but do not have the bandwidth right now.  I believe that Froolow is also a health economist and may be available.

Cheers

How does Focus Philanthropy compare and contrast with Farmed Animal Funders?

Good luck!

Load more