2019-01-31T22:44:15.563Z · score: 37 (11 votes)
2018-11-12T20:52:08.539Z · score: 44 (26 votes)
2018-10-12T18:55:01.635Z · score: 23 (23 votes)
Survey of EA org leaders about what skills and experience they most need, their staff/donations trade-offs, problem prioritisation, and more.
score: 6 (9 votes) ·
It sounds like you mostly agree with our take on earning to give in the high impact careers article. That article is fairly new but it will become one of the central pages on the site after a forthcoming re-organisation. Let us know if there are other articles on the site you think are inconsistent with that take - we can take a look and potentially bring them into line.
We agree with you that earning to give can be a genuinely great option and don’t intend to demoralize people who choose that path. As we write in that article, we believe that “any graduate in a high income country can have a significant impact” by earning to give.
That said, we do stand by our recommendation that most people who might be a good fit to eventually enter one of our priority paths should initially pursue one of those paths over earning to give (though while maintaining a back-up option). Those paths have higher upside, so it’s worth testing out your potential, while bearing in mind that they might not work out.
Many of the best options on these paths require substantial career capital, so often this won’t mean starting a direct impact job today. Instead, we think many readers should consider acquiring career capital that can open up these paths, including graduate school in relevant disciplines (e.g. AI/ML, policy, or international relations) entry level policy jobs (e.g. as a Congressional staffer, or working as an early employee at a startup to gain skills and experience in operations. We hope to release an article discussing our updated views on career capital soon.
Of course, these paths aren’t a good fit for everyone, and we continue to believe that earning to give can be a great option for many.
It’s also worth emphasizing that our advice is, of course, influenced by our views on the highest priority problems. We tried to make that clear in “high impact careers” by including a section on how our recommendations would change if someone is focused on global health or factory farming. In that case, we believe “earning to give, for-profit work and advocacy become much more attractive.”
2018-10-09T23:33:16.803Z · score: 12 (15 votes)
2018-10-01T17:48:39.710Z · score: 7 (7 votes)
2018-09-30T06:37:39.139Z · score: 10 (14 votes)
2018-06-04T22:34:07.354Z · score: 8 (8 votes)
How to improve EA Funds
score: 0 (0 votes) ·
"given the relative abundance of cash available to EA orgs (through OpenPhil and Good Ventures), a rate as high as this is surprising."
Three thoughts: i) the range of figures offered was very wide, ii) orgs that are strongly supported by large institutional donors gave lower figures, iii) if those orgs expect OpenPhil/GoodVentures/etc to give them even more money in future years, they could still sensibly report a high discount rate.
2018-04-06T01:06:26.514Z · score: 5 (9 votes)
2017-11-20T18:34:40.766Z · score: 6 (8 votes)
2017-11-03T23:35:32.079Z · score: 8 (12 votes)
2017-10-23T21:10:12.053Z · score: 6 (8 votes)
2017-09-07T02:25:36.080Z · score: 20 (20 votes)
2017-06-20T22:19:34.311Z · score: 16 (18 votes)
2017-02-13T07:50:35.092Z · score: 18 (18 votes)