[7Figures2Commas]

> If you really cared about the water problem, couldn't you have donated part of your (steady) income for that?

This.

There are tons of great organizations (non-profits, etc.) that are already doing wonderful things in a variety of areas. Even the ones with considerable human resources, knowledge, relationships, infrastructure and donor bases usually typically have a need for more support. What these organizations need less of: duplicative efforts that produce fragmentation and are likely to see good ideas die quietly because those trying to do their own thing couldn't obtain the resources to execute.

It's sad that so many well-intentioned, idealistic people apparently fail to recognize or refuse to believe that minute for minute and dollar for dollar, their time and money will almost always produce a far greater ROI when invested in existing efforts.

[gruseom]

I strongly disagree. People ought not to let themselves be talked out of unreasonable dreams of greatness. Your comment reads to me like depression distilled into words.

[7Figures2Commas]

This isn't about being talked out of trying to do good. It's about finding the best way to actually do good.

Most organizations rely on outsiders who contribute their time, money, expertise and ideas, and they gladly welcome such contributions. By getting involved with an established organization, individuals can often take advantage of its existing resources, increasing the likelihood that whatever is contributed will produce an ROI.

Obviously there's no absolute guarantee of this, and I wouldn't suggest that there's no room for new organizations, but new non-profits are a lot like new businesses: most do not "succeed", and a lot of the ones that don't fail outright plod along and never achieve what was hoped for. It doesn't take more than a quick read of a few random Form 990 filings to see this.

So to put it simply: you do not need to start your own thing to help solve big problems. People who have the itch to save the world would be wise to consider that they are far more likely to make a bigger impact by channeling their time, money, passion and ideas to organizations that have been saving the world for years.

[owyn]

Yep. I think individuals can choose to work directly or indirectly on a problem and both are worthy. But Buffet didn't start his own foundation, he gave a bunch of money to Gates because duplicating all that infrastructure would be wasteful. I really respected that...

[unclebucknasty]

This is akin to advising would-be entrepreneurs to instead invest their time and money into existing companies because it's more efficient.