[orzig]

> There's no money you can donate

I understand you don't mean that literally, but (to minimize disinformation among others): There is absolutely some number of lives saved which would compensate for that.

https://www.givewell.org/charities/top-charities

Before writing off an entire industry, I beg you to consider that $45,000 could save 10 lives and improve many more (Yes; it's not precise. No; it's not out of their ass - read their extensive discussion of the calculations)

[hcnews]

Again there are different people with different value systems.

1. Some people are happy with creating more positive than negative. 2. Some people want to do no negative.

The practical problem with what you proposed is that now I need to vet the charities I donate and make sure its not a scam. Its a hard task to (i) spend 8 hours a day doing net negative (ii) spend more time per day to make sure you as a whole are net positive (iii) be social and have family etc.

[riezebos]

That is a practical problem, but it does not apply to the proposed solution. The proposed solution is an organization whose purpose is literally to do the vetting for you. You only need to vet GiveWell, you can then outsource the rest of the vetting to them.

From their website: "GiveWell is a nonprofit dedicated to finding outstanding giving opportunities and publishing the full details of our analysis to help donors decide where to give."