Inspired by http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html
Anonymous or pseudonymous responses encouraged!
Inspired by http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html
Anonymous or pseudonymous responses encouraged!
That I've wondered if reducing abortions might be a suitable focus area for EA (more abortions per year in the US than people dying of smoking related illnesses in the US).
That I don't think it's terrible that Trump is President.
Due to politicization, I'd expect reducing farm animal suffering/death to be much cheaper/more tractable per animal than reducing abortion is per fetus; choosing abortion as a cause area would also imperil EA's ability to recruit smart people across the political spectrum. I'd guess that saving a fetus would need to be ~100x more important in expectation than saving a farm animal for reducing abortions to be a potential cause area; in an EA framework, what grounds are there for believing that to be true?
Note: It would also be quite costly for EA as a movement to generate a better-researched estimate of the parameters due to the risk of politicizing the movement.