4 ms·

I see charity as being a space filling algorithm. If everyone was charitable to their neighbors then everyone in the world would ultimately receive help! But if

I see charity as being a space filling algorithm. If everyone was charitable to their neighbors then everyone in the world would ultimately receive help! But if everyone in the world donated to, say, Save the Children, would railroad workers in Cambodia suffer less work-related deaths? I believe that immediate and far reaching help should be in the hands of governments. I have no connection to the people in Myanmar, but I'm sure a part of my nation's economy and politics does. So I will leave my government to consult with experts about the situation in order to organize best our aid paid with a portion of my tax money. There's also the question of giving help to people without teaching them anything and perpetrating a useless cycle, but that's a whole other matter...

zozbot234 4y ago
Governments have little or no incentive to spend foreign aid money effectively. They get their money from the taxpayer regardless, and policymakers are incented to alter the set up of foreign aid programs in pursuit of goals that are entirely unrelated to effectiveness.
- orwin 4y ago
  > set up of foreign aid programs in pursuit of goals that are entirely unrelated to effectiveness. Mostly true, but the side-effect are quite positive. I'd argue that in the long run, foreign aid between 1990 and 2012-ish was more effective than any charity donation. They set up vaccine and OMS programs, they created ports and infrastructure and pressured some government into being a bit more republican (not democratic sadly, but since a third of the third world country was colonized by Bonapartists, and a half by a parlementary monarchy, i'll settle for republic). Yes, Foreign aid do have some undercover agents, but most charity have them too, and the one pushed by GiveWell the most (the Malaria one) is too.
IHLayman 4y ago
The problem is that not everyone has the same neighbors. If everyone gave what they could to their neighbors, then people in poorer neighborhoods would still be worse off. Maybe you are speaking more in the abstract, but I think it is important to also donate to groups who _aren’t_ in your local topology, or else you will still have wealth/benefit disparity.
- pessimizer 4y ago
  > If everyone gave what they could to their neighbors, then people in poorer neighborhoods would still be worse off. Depends on whether your neighborhood gives charity to its neighboring neighborhoods.
yboris 4y ago
> I have no connection to the people in Myanmar, We live in an interconnected world, a world where our governments, through the power of taxes they collect from us, interfere with other governments (e.g. US fucking up other countries for its own benefit). This is parallel (in direction, even if not in extent) to WW2 German citizens paying their taxes. Regardless of how well intentioned they are, they were supporting a regime that caused damage to people in other countries. I believe we have a duty, as US citizens, to give money to organizations that work on helping people in other countries, at the very least to get them to a state of where they would have been, had we (the US) not fucked them up in the first place. For reference, the western world pillaged so many countries across Africa and South America, that we ought to do a lot more (effective!) philanthropy. For a fuller treatment, consider reading Thomas Pogge's World Poverty and Human Rights https://www.amazon.com/World-Poverty-Human-Rights-Thomas/dp/074564144X https://www.amazon.com/World-Poverty-Human-Rights-Thomas/dp/...

zozbot234 4y ago

Governments have little or no incentive to spend foreign aid money effectively. They get their money from the taxpayer regardless, and policymakers are incented to alter the set up of foreign aid programs in pursuit of goals that are entirely unrelated to effectiveness.

orwin 4y ago
> set up of foreign aid programs in pursuit of goals that are entirely unrelated to effectiveness. Mostly true, but the side-effect are quite positive. I'd argue that in the long run, foreign aid between 1990 and 2012-ish was more effective than any charity donation. They set up vaccine and OMS programs, they created ports and infrastructure and pressured some government into being a bit more republican (not democratic sadly, but since a third of the third world country was colonized by Bonapartists, and a half by a parlementary monarchy, i'll settle for republic). Yes, Foreign aid do have some undercover agents, but most charity have them too, and the one pushed by GiveWell the most (the Malaria one) is too.

IHLayman 4y ago

The problem is that not everyone has the same neighbors. If everyone gave what they could to their neighbors, then people in poorer neighborhoods would still be worse off. Maybe you are speaking more in the abstract, but I think it is important to also donate to groups who _aren’t_ in your local topology, or else you will still have wealth/benefit disparity.

pessimizer 4y ago
> If everyone gave what they could to their neighbors, then people in poorer neighborhoods would still be worse off. Depends on whether your neighborhood gives charity to its neighboring neighborhoods.

yboris 4y ago

> I have no connection to the people in Myanmar, We live in an interconnected world, a world where our governments, through the power of taxes they collect from us, interfere with other governments (e.g. US fucking up other countries for its own benefit). This is parallel (in direction, even if not in extent) to WW2 German citizens paying their taxes. Regardless of how well intentioned they are, they were supporting a regime that caused damage to people in other countries. I believe we have a duty, as US citizens, to give money to organizations that work on helping people in other countries, at the very least to get them to a state of where they would have been, had we (the US) not fucked them up in the first place. For reference, the western world pillaged so many countries across Africa and South America, that we ought to do a lot more (effective!) philanthropy. For a fuller treatment, consider reading Thomas Pogge's World Poverty and Human Rights https://www.amazon.com/World-Poverty-Human-Rights-Thomas/dp/074564144X https://www.amazon.com/World-Poverty-Human-Rights-Thomas/dp/...