> These globally rich people have the least amount of potential because they already exceed what a single human can do by a wide margin, they are dependent on a

> These globally rich people have the least amount of potential because they already exceed what a single human can do by a wide margin, they are dependent on a huge amount of "supporters" to reach their current potential. I don't think Beckstead would disagree, but that he's making a different point. Being able to reach your potential requires support networks and opportunities. Someone from a third world nation like Liberia will not. All things being equal, a random child born in the US will have more impact on the world than a random child from Liberia. While that could be made different, and people from those poorer countries have as great a potential as any American, it's unlikely anything will change in the near future to allow a greater proportion of them to achieve that potential. I don't want to endorse any of his ideas on whether that means American lives should take priority, but I don't think his overall point about Americans currently having a higher expected value vis a vis long term impact on humanity is wrong.