3 ms·

There’s a heuristic in here somewhere regarding philanthropy & first principles. I respect the authors commitment to showing how MrBeasts philanthropy can be i

There’s a heuristic in here somewhere regarding philanthropy & first principles. I respect the authors commitment to showing how MrBeasts philanthropy can be ineffective if not counter productive. But, in his stated intentions of getting google admoney and redistributing it to people in need, what else is he supposed to do? We can agree to disagree that this itself is a bad premise. What I’m really interested in is knowing what the Beast Philanthrophy has to say about these things. Are they aware that 6/10 wells are in disrepair in some parts? Are they willing to invisibly commit funds to future maintenance? How does Beast Philanthropy vet orphanages to ensure they’re not the mentioned “farms”? On the hierarchy of benevolent individuals in this example we have: 1. Rich People Philanthrophy with the intent of helping the less fortunate 2. Journalists stating 1 is inefficient for X, Y, Z, and working with 1 to improve the efficacy of their philanthropy, with the intent of helping the less fortunate 3. Rich People Philanthrophy with the intent of improving their own self image 4. Journalists writing about 1 or 3 with the intent of making them look bad instead of improving outcomes for those in need.

throwaway48476 2y ago
There's also a heuristic for people whose smile doesn't reach the eyes.
aimazon 2y ago
Many of the philanthropy videos are either manipulated or outright frauds. If you state your aim is to earn a million dollars to spend a million dollars on philanthropy and then after earning the million dollars you spend half a million dollars on philanthropy, the half a million spend is not a great philanthropic gift, it does not justify misappropriating the other half. Philanthropy as a shield is a strategy as old as time. We can forgive people for failing to meet their stated aims if they failed due to naivety following an earnest attempt. Can we forgive people for failing to meet their stated aims wilfully? The premise of your position is that philanthropy is always a net good, but that isn't true: philanthropy can be harmful. Homelessness is the easiest example to think about, where half-baked philanthropic efforts can have immediate harmful consequences, as we see time and time again.
pkphilip 2y ago
As someone who has worked in community projects in rural areas, I would like to point out a few things: 1. It is not the donor's fault if the wells are not being maintained properly. Ideally this should be something that the locals are paid and trained to do but honestly, if you can't even be bothered to take care of your primary source of water, you have big problems which cannot be solved by ANYONE's philanthropy. 2. That brings me to the point about local attitudes towards donors and what is done for them: I have seen locals really benefit from things donated to them and they then use the new facilities to build a much better future for themselves and their children. HOWEVER, I have also seen locals who absolutely waste whatever is given to them. They may even loot everything down to the last nut and bolt. I have some theories about why this happens (based on personal experience) but I have noticed very different outcomes in different villages for the EXACT SAME help received from donors.
- aimazon 2y ago
  If a community isn't prepared, willing or able to maintain a well, is building a well in that community a good example of philanthropy? or is it an example of a lazy one-size fits all solution that reflects poorly on the donor, not the community? The donor is responsible for their choice of donation.
  - pkphilip 2y ago
    It is a complicated problem. A single village may consist of multiple groups who don't get along with each other. Also, there are people who benefit from the status quo in many ways. Secondly, there is this issue of trust. There are villages where the people simply do not trust each other AT ALL. I have seen villages where each person thinks they ought to steal first before their neighbours do.
    - eesmith 2y ago
      What responsibility does the donor have to evaluate the trust issues? If someone is willing to donate a new facility, but the local people would prefer the "nuts and bolts" which make up the facility, why should they respect the donor's wishes over their own needs?

throwaway48476 2y ago

There's also a heuristic for people whose smile doesn't reach the eyes.

aimazon 2y ago

Many of the philanthropy videos are either manipulated or outright frauds. If you state your aim is to earn a million dollars to spend a million dollars on philanthropy and then after earning the million dollars you spend half a million dollars on philanthropy, the half a million spend is not a great philanthropic gift, it does not justify misappropriating the other half. Philanthropy as a shield is a strategy as old as time. We can forgive people for failing to meet their stated aims if they failed due to naivety following an earnest attempt. Can we forgive people for failing to meet their stated aims wilfully? The premise of your position is that philanthropy is always a net good, but that isn't true: philanthropy can be harmful. Homelessness is the easiest example to think about, where half-baked philanthropic efforts can have immediate harmful consequences, as we see time and time again.

pkphilip 2y ago

As someone who has worked in community projects in rural areas, I would like to point out a few things: 1. It is not the donor's fault if the wells are not being maintained properly. Ideally this should be something that the locals are paid and trained to do but honestly, if you can't even be bothered to take care of your primary source of water, you have big problems which cannot be solved by ANYONE's philanthropy. 2. That brings me to the point about local attitudes towards donors and what is done for them: I have seen locals really benefit from things donated to them and they then use the new facilities to build a much better future for themselves and their children. HOWEVER, I have also seen locals who absolutely waste whatever is given to them. They may even loot everything down to the last nut and bolt. I have some theories about why this happens (based on personal experience) but I have noticed very different outcomes in different villages for the EXACT SAME help received from donors.

aimazon 2y ago
If a community isn't prepared, willing or able to maintain a well, is building a well in that community a good example of philanthropy? or is it an example of a lazy one-size fits all solution that reflects poorly on the donor, not the community? The donor is responsible for their choice of donation.
- pkphilip 2y ago
  It is a complicated problem. A single village may consist of multiple groups who don't get along with each other. Also, there are people who benefit from the status quo in many ways. Secondly, there is this issue of trust. There are villages where the people simply do not trust each other AT ALL. I have seen villages where each person thinks they ought to steal first before their neighbours do.
  - eesmith 2y ago
    What responsibility does the donor have to evaluate the trust issues? If someone is willing to donate a new facility, but the local people would prefer the "nuts and bolts" which make up the facility, why should they respect the donor's wishes over their own needs?