charity

Peter Singer, a world-renowned philosopher, tells a story: You are walking by a river in your nice new brown shoes on your way to work when you see a small child floundering in the water, in fear of drowning. Do you jump into the river to save the child, knowing it will ruin your shoes, or do you walk on by and let the child drown? I think it would be safe to say that almost everyone would indeed make an effort to save the child, even if it did mean ruining those nice shoes you just bought.

Now, let's extrapolate this example a little bit. There is a child in a faraway African country who is starving for want of food and won't survive past this Christmas season if nothing is done. You've been saving up for your Christmas shopping, and have some money that if properly spent, will tide the child over until the next harvest. What do you do? In this scenario, I imagine a most people would choose to spend the money on gifts rather than on saving this child.

I imagine there are a few big reasons for this:

1. Distance: in the first scenario, the child is in front of you - you can see him thrashing about, perhaps hear his cries for help, whereas there is no such direct connection with the African child. But should that really make a difference? Is the child in front of you more morally valuable than the child faraway? Is the notion that all men are created equal not impressed from us from the earliest moral teachings? If we truly believe that all people are indeed equal, then an argument of distance is not an argument at all, but rather a willful ignorance of the values who supposedly profess to support so strongly.

2. Effectiveness: In the first scenario, it's quite obvious that you can save the child (assuming you can swim!) whereas in the second, people are often skeptical that the dollars they spend are going to the right places. Now, I don't doubt that there are a lot of pretty poor charities out there, but I also am sure there are good ones as well. As per my earlier entry, using sites like givewell.org (incidentally started by a couple of young hedge fund wizards who wanted to make a difference) and charitynavigator.org really can substantially simplify navigating the morasse of charities that exist. They do the work so you know what you are giving to is effective.

3. Overwhelmed by the problem: Presumably, children aren't always going to drowning in rivers on your walks to work, but the number of impoverished children who are at risk of starvation must seem overwhelming. This is somewhat true, but the fact is the dollar value to eliminate to poverty in the world is absolutely paltry compared to military spending or TARP bailouts, etc... On a more personal level, I think one of the key differences between poverty alleviation and something like climate change is that the beneficaries are individual and discrete: what I mean is that if you decide to donate, you are assured that you will be making a significant diference in the lives of 10, 100, or even a 1000 people. On the other hand, being more green will not stem the tide of global warming unless a helluva lot of other people do it too (not to knock enivronmentalism, because it's very important to). My point is simply that we all can make a substantial difference in the lives of a significant number of people because of the huge imbalance of resources between us in Canada and those who are in extreme poverty abroad. To say that you have saved the lives of an entire family, what could be more rewarding or meaningful than that?

4. I really want to do Christmas shopping: The fact is, you can do both your Christmas shopping AND make those vital charitable donations. We are lucky to be blessed by such an abundance of wealth in Canada that I think we don't actually need to make any major sacrifices to make a big difference. I know that most of the people who read this blog are professionals / soon-to-be-professionals, and I know that all your PTs and engineers, and doctors will be making far, far in excess of the average Albertan family (which is ~65,000/year). I think the average Albertan lives pretty well at that wage, and knowing that many of you will make hundreds of thousands a year, sharing some of that with others who need it more shouldn't hurt too much at all.

I think charitable giving is often framed as some sort of sacrifice that we have to make - "if I give to charity, I won't be able to buy this TV, this stereo, this new car". But I don't think that is how we should think. Rather, think of it like this - that child I sponsor will be able to learn to read and to write and be able to work their way out of poverty, the vaccines I help purchase will prevent that group of people from developing a debilitating illness, the food packages I help will literally save the lives of a family from starvation.

People are always looking for meaning, and what greater meaning and purpose can there be than giving the basic needs so people can live - live to make lifelong friendships, live to fall in love, live to know the joys of family, live to find dreams and aspirations and to realize them - this is what we value in our lives, and this is really what charity is all about.