Hacker News Reader

Comment by FemmeAndroid | Hacker News Reader

Off the top of my head, Jane Yang, who I believe has quit, left non-profits and joined Basecamp to explicitly pursue a strategy of earning to give (https://80000hours.org/articles/earning-to-give/). That seems like she's "put her money where her mouth is," as you say.

What's your basis for believing these people don't really care?

View on HN

Hi Femme, my basis is their career choice. There are plenty of non-profits hiring in tech and doing some great work. And yet, these individuals chose not to work in this space. The earnings-to-give model sounds awfully similar to trickle down economics. Or, “once I get mine, everyone else can have theirs”. I don’t believe that as an altruistic premise. It’s what people convince themselves of in order to continue to feel self-righteous without really sacrificing anything. It has nothing to do with whether these people care or not, it doesn’t matter. Because when push comes to shove, they chose an avenue in spite of what they claim to believe in.

If you haven't read much about earning to give, I recommend jefftk's blog.[0] That was where I first heard about the concept.

I found it interesting to see how much he and his wife had earned for charities by working lucrative jobs and donating a large percentage of their earnings.

[0] https://www.jefftk.com/donations

And things have come full circle. Apparently the "racist capitalist system" (her words, not mine) ends up being the best way to support those who scored the highest in the oppression Olympics.

"Earning to give" is admitting that capitalism won, and is the most effective way at righting their perceived wrongs.

It's the same illogic right-wingers used to defend billionaires, low taxes, etc. since the late 80s early 90s. "But they donate more than anyone else! Philanthropy! Altruism!"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com