6 ms·

With the Elon musk submarine story all I kept thinking throughout is that he's a billionaire and if he really wants to help people so much give money to people

by maym86 8y ago

With the Elon musk submarine story all I kept thinking throughout is that he's a billionaire and if he really wants to help people so much give money to people who need it. Charities actually know what to do with it and are far more effective than clumsily trying to do it directly. Out of everything this is what bothered me most because he really can help people and there is already a clear way to do it for someone with his means.

mLuby 8y ago
Objectively speaking of course you're right, but maybe he values his intelligence/work ethic more highly than his money (the latter being largely a result of the former + luck).
- maym86 8y ago
  Yes but that's exactly the problem. He's focuing on himself. He has huge resources beyond his mind (ego). It lacks self awareness to think only you can solve problems and as a manager of multiple companies he must know other people are better at some things especially when they are 100% focused on the problem. He could also use his media reach to publicize some charities and not just focus on himself.
- CompelTechnic 8y ago
  Elon has signed Buffett's giving pledge. So (if he's true to his word) eventually he will donate the vast majority of his wealth to charity. In the meanwhile, most of his net worth is tied up in shares of his companies. Selling or directly donating shares means giving up more control, and if he believes his companies will outperform other investments (or even just that it beats inflation), there is a non-clear moral tradeoff even for a strict altruist- do I donate now to solve problems now, or do I hold onto my money so it can grow and solve more problems when I donate later?
- s73v3r_ 8y ago
  Then that's worse, cause now, instead of listening to the people who have actually worked with and studied these things, he's acting like he's some kind of Jesus figure, where "only he can fix things."
chrisseaton 8y ago
> Charities actually know what to do with it and are far more effective than clumsily trying to do it directly. What gives you so much faith in charities? What do charities know about being efficient that other people don't? Why would they be the only ones with good ideas? Being a charity is just a way to set up an organisation. Having that status doesn't inherently make you a force for good.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- wcarron 8y ago
  Not OP; just thought I'd chip in organizations like GiveWell. They're a non-profit dedicated to reviewing and researching charities to find the "best", most efficient, cost-effective ones in need of funds. Their website explains better: https://www.givewell.org/ https://www.givewell.org/ Seems like the charities they've selected are well versed in the issues they attempted to address and have done a lot of work finding the best way to address them. After all, the employees of these charities are dedicating their lives and careers to solving a specific problem. Note: I am not affiliated with GiveWell or their charities in any way besides having used them to donate.
  - js2 8y ago
    GiveWell was discussed a bit on HN a couple years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13243780 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13243780
- maym86 8y ago
  Believe it or not people actually assess the effectiveness of charities and you can choose good ones. https://www.givewell.org/charities/top-charities https://www.givewell.org/charities/top-charities Some charities are more effective than others and obviously some are used for other reasons (like avoiding tax which silicon valley knows all about). There are good charities that do good work and if you want to help people they already exist. It's not about "good ideas" but actually having the infrastructure and staff to do something that is known to work (e.g. vaccinating people, educating people, housing people, clean water etc.). Your focus on "good ideas" is the problem with Silicon Valley style thinking in this area. It's not the case that if only charities had better ideas they'd be more effective. The ideas and organisations are there. What they need is money and resources. That's where people with money, like Elon Musk, can really help. He could also publicize some charities and not just focus on himself.
flopdrol 8y ago
Daily Socialist Drivel: > Charity they feel to be a ridiculously inadequate mode of partial restitution, or a sentimental dole, usually accompanied by some impertinent attempt on the part of the sentimentalist to tyrannise over their private lives. Why should they be grateful for the crumbs that fall from the rich man’s table? They should be seated at the board, and are beginning to know it. As for being discontented, a man who would not be discontented with such surroundings and such a low mode of life would be a perfect brute. Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man’s original virtue. It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion. Sometimes the poor are praised for being thrifty. But to recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less. - Oscar Wilde Be sure to leave your political nonsense in the comments.

by maym86 8y ago

mLuby 8y ago

Objectively speaking of course you're right, but maybe he values his intelligence/work ethic more highly than his money (the latter being largely a result of the former + luck).

maym86 8y ago
Yes but that's exactly the problem. He's focuing on himself. He has huge resources beyond his mind (ego). It lacks self awareness to think only you can solve problems and as a manager of multiple companies he must know other people are better at some things especially when they are 100% focused on the problem. He could also use his media reach to publicize some charities and not just focus on himself.
CompelTechnic 8y ago
Elon has signed Buffett's giving pledge. So (if he's true to his word) eventually he will donate the vast majority of his wealth to charity. In the meanwhile, most of his net worth is tied up in shares of his companies. Selling or directly donating shares means giving up more control, and if he believes his companies will outperform other investments (or even just that it beats inflation), there is a non-clear moral tradeoff even for a strict altruist- do I donate now to solve problems now, or do I hold onto my money so it can grow and solve more problems when I donate later?
s73v3r_ 8y ago
Then that's worse, cause now, instead of listening to the people who have actually worked with and studied these things, he's acting like he's some kind of Jesus figure, where "only he can fix things."

chrisseaton 8y ago

> Charities actually know what to do with it and are far more effective than clumsily trying to do it directly. What gives you so much faith in charities? What do charities know about being efficient that other people don't? Why would they be the only ones with good ideas? Being a charity is just a way to set up an organisation. Having that status doesn't inherently make you a force for good.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
wcarron 8y ago
Not OP; just thought I'd chip in organizations like GiveWell. They're a non-profit dedicated to reviewing and researching charities to find the "best", most efficient, cost-effective ones in need of funds. Their website explains better: https://www.givewell.org/ https://www.givewell.org/ Seems like the charities they've selected are well versed in the issues they attempted to address and have done a lot of work finding the best way to address them. After all, the employees of these charities are dedicating their lives and careers to solving a specific problem. Note: I am not affiliated with GiveWell or their charities in any way besides having used them to donate.
- js2 8y ago
  GiveWell was discussed a bit on HN a couple years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13243780 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13243780
maym86 8y ago
Believe it or not people actually assess the effectiveness of charities and you can choose good ones. https://www.givewell.org/charities/top-charities https://www.givewell.org/charities/top-charities Some charities are more effective than others and obviously some are used for other reasons (like avoiding tax which silicon valley knows all about). There are good charities that do good work and if you want to help people they already exist. It's not about "good ideas" but actually having the infrastructure and staff to do something that is known to work (e.g. vaccinating people, educating people, housing people, clean water etc.). Your focus on "good ideas" is the problem with Silicon Valley style thinking in this area. It's not the case that if only charities had better ideas they'd be more effective. The ideas and organisations are there. What they need is money and resources. That's where people with money, like Elon Musk, can really help. He could also publicize some charities and not just focus on himself.

flopdrol 8y ago

Daily Socialist Drivel: > Charity they feel to be a ridiculously inadequate mode of partial restitution, or a sentimental dole, usually accompanied by some impertinent attempt on the part of the sentimentalist to tyrannise over their private lives. Why should they be grateful for the crumbs that fall from the rich man’s table? They should be seated at the board, and are beginning to know it. As for being discontented, a man who would not be discontented with such surroundings and such a low mode of life would be a perfect brute. Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man’s original virtue. It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion. Sometimes the poor are praised for being thrifty. But to recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less. - Oscar Wilde Be sure to leave your political nonsense in the comments.