There is a failure mode in which people will identify a cause they think is important, and, expecting some future increase in income, say they will donate lots of money when they can afford it, but never seem to decide that now is the time to start giving. The solution is that if you think you should give a lot when you can afford it, you should give a small amount that you can afford now, like around $10, and form the habit of giving what you can at any time, while you can still be working to increase your income and the amount you give.
Well, it seems like if I wanted to donate, say, a quarter to Singinst (and I couldn’t just hand it to Jasen next time I saw him), it probably wouldn’t be worth our time to transfer the money.
Collecting money in one place that people are congregating at anyway would seem to obviate that, though, so I’m still confused.
What does this mean, assuming it isn’t joke? I skimmed the articles linked from http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/3a2/100_for_the_best_article_on_efficient_charty_the/ and don’t see an obvious argument that optimal philanthropy starts at some amount.
There is a failure mode in which people will identify a cause they think is important, and, expecting some future increase in income, say they will donate lots of money when they can afford it, but never seem to decide that now is the time to start giving. The solution is that if you think you should give a lot when you can afford it, you should give a small amount that you can afford now, like around $10, and form the habit of giving what you can at any time, while you can still be working to increase your income and the amount you give.
Well, it seems like if I wanted to donate, say, a quarter to Singinst (and I couldn’t just hand it to Jasen next time I saw him), it probably wouldn’t be worth our time to transfer the money.
Collecting money in one place that people are congregating at anyway would seem to obviate that, though, so I’m still confused.