> Then we are lucky that EA promotes giving more to charity as the primary function of accumulation of wealth.
no, we are not lucky. EA-good-because-charity-good is a brain-pretzel way of lobbying against equitable taxation.
> Is a guy getting a well-paid job at Microsoft and donating half of his salary to African charities really your best example of antisocial behavior?
you're inventing a competitive debate regarding a hypothetical "best example of antisocial behavior". i didn't target anyone specifically with any part of my post.
Well, I base my opinion about EA on specific people I happen to know, such as https://www.jefftk.com/news/ea , but of course that shouldn't stop anyone from making up edgy interpretations and posting them as a fact. Because what is the point of discussing actual effective altruists when imaginary villains are a much more interesting topic.
no, we are not lucky. EA-good-because-charity-good is a brain-pretzel way of lobbying against equitable taxation.
> Is a guy getting a well-paid job at Microsoft and donating half of his salary to African charities really your best example of antisocial behavior?
you're inventing a competitive debate regarding a hypothetical "best example of antisocial behavior". i didn't target anyone specifically with any part of my post.