A common misconception is that 80,000 Hours thinks Earning to Give is typically the way to have the most impact with your career. We’ve never said that in any of our materials. All we have said, for instance in the paper we published on Earning to Give, is that there is strong reason to think that Earning to Give is better than taking a typical nonprofit job.
When it comes to how to make the most difference with your career, we think there’s huge room for debate. Whether it’s best for someone to pursue Earning to Give normally depends on difficult to estimate empirical considerations unique to the situation, like some of those mentioned here, whether your cause is more talent-constrained or funding-constrained, what other people are doing, and issues like what else you could do with an Earning to Give job (often high earning jobs give you a useful platform to advance high impact causes independent of the money you donate yourself). When people have come to us in the past interested in pursuing Earning to Give, we’ve advised some to do it, and others not to do it. See our recent intro video for some examples.
This is why we welcome a recent article by ex-Givewell employee Jonah Sinick on why Earning to Give might not be optimal…