Effective altruism is a net positive, but it’s not a panacea. It suffers from the same problems as central planning and communism. Donors and nonprofits think

Effective altruism is a net positive, but it’s not a panacea. It suffers from the same problems as central planning and communism. Donors and nonprofits think they can calculate the most “effective” way to allocate funds — if only we can pack enough phds in this boardroom we’ll end poverty! Problem is, there’s no space in the room for the experts themselves — the ppl actually in poverty. Poverty is complex and no group of people can predict all the externalities of trying to address it — like using bed nets for fishing instead of malaria prevention or changes in behavior when the rich scientists come to town with their clipboards to conduct their RCTs. I find it funny that capitalists are all about trusting the free market and self-interest when it comes to business and politics, but when it comes to philanthropy, they know best. In reality, the solution is quite simple — just ask “the people in poverty” if and how they want help. Most of the time they’ll likely ask for money or a job, which seems pretty reasonable to me and can be accomplished with very little overhead.