Something I've found to be shockingly common is that uncertainty around how much we should requite to clemency can often prevent people from giving anything at all.

Yet if you search the internet for advice, you'll generally find claims that at that place's "no correct answer" and that information technology'due south a "deeply personal decision." While these answers are largely true, they are not very helpful. They don't actually provide any actionable advice, whatever directions any for what we should do.

Instead of dodging the question or trying to divine a unmarried prescriptive answer from the fabric of the universe, we are going to wait at a range of standards that you could apply to your life, and recommend some approaches that might work for you.

The Extremes of Giving

To start with, let'southward look at the extremes of giving.

Nothing

There are some people who believe that the right amount to give is nothing, e'er. They might believe that charity doesn't help people, that it'due south not their responsibleness, or they're non excited past the incredible opportunity most of usa have to use our money to assist others. If that'southward you, I'thousand not going to dissuade yous here (simply nosotros recommend that yous check out our myths about charity folio).

Others believe that they should give nothing, still. This might be suitable for you either if (a) your fabric circumstances are very dire; or (b) you are a patient philanthropist who is putting away money now in order to give to charity later (and accept taken measures to brand certain you lot'll actually follow through).

Everything humanly possible

The other far extreme of giving is to requite everything humanly possible right up until your circumstances are equal to those whose welfare you are concerned near.

One of the well-nigh powerful moral arguments for charitable giving comes from the renowned philosopher Peter Vocalizer in his drowning kid thought experiment.

According to Vocalizer, given that there are millions of people effectually the earth in need, engaging in frivolous consumption instead of donating to charity is quite similar walking past a drowning kid and non saving them for fear of dissentious a fine suit.

The problem with this thought experiment is that, taken to its extreme logical conclusion, it becomes very morally demanding. Not but are we morally required to requite something to help others, merely we should give all we possibly can.

One human being did simply this. After converting to Christianity, evolutionary scientist George Price was convinced that he had a moral obligation to give away all of his possessions to the poor.

George Price

Toll would seek out the homeless and give them anything they asked for, from his money to the clothes off his back. If they needed a place to sleep, he hosted them  at his place indefinitely. Eventually he had given away so much that he became homeless and as poor equally those that he was helping. This, very unfortunately, eventually led to his suicide.

His altruism is in many means admirable, but it's clearly not a healthy path to follow, and is ultimately going to be cocky-defeating (leading to less proficient for everyone involved, not more).

Finding a Good Standard for Giving

So, when we look downward the barrel of these two extremes and see that neither of them are correct for u.s.a., nosotros may inquire ourselves this this begs the question: "What is the right corporeality for usa to requite to charity?"

Let'south expect at some standard approaches to giving.

Give what you lot don't demand

If you experience a strong moral obligation to assist others, you might determine to give what you don't need. This thought has been formalised by Oxford philosopher Toby Ord who was inspired past ethicists such as Peter Singer.

In 2009, Toby felt that he had a truthful moral obligation to requite what he didn't need. He knew that a significant portion of his income could be so much more valuable to others than it would be to himself.

To put this into do, he prepare himself a living allowance and so gave everything that he earned above that level away. He calls this the Further Pledge.

Toby after founded the Giving What Nosotros Can community and after more than a decade, he is still giving everything above his inflation-adjusted living allowance. Many others have since taken this Farther Pledge, and even more than people have modelled their giving on this 'living allowance' idea. Deciding what they need to live on sustainably, and giving away the remainder.

Give generously

Y'all might exist more motivated to have a steady increase in your standard of living every bit your income rises, only still desire to give a meaningful amount that is more generous than what most people requite.

If you are earning above boilerplate income in your land, information technology's probable that y'all can requite more than generously than an boilerplate person tin give. If you were born in a loftier-income land it is likely that your income is at to the lowest degree 10x that of the average person and roughly 100x that of someone living in extreme poverty.

Philosopher Willam MacAskill calls this the "100x Multiplier":

"Imagine a happy hour where y'all could either buy yourself a beer for five dollars or buy someone else a beer for v cents. If that were the instance, we'd probably be pretty generous –next round's on me!" – William Macaskill, Doing Good Better

This realisation has led many people to choose to exist generous with their relative wealth - whether they encounter this as an obligation to share their luck, or as an incredible opportunity to make a difference.

Religious traditions beyond the world also enquire their followers to not only give, simply to give generously. In Judaism and Christianity this is made more explicit as a 10% of income contribution referred to as 'Tithe'.

The Giving What We Tin can Pledge besides uses 10% equally a benchmark number for giving generously.

X percent has a few perks as a giving standard:

  • It is depression plenty that it's accessible to those who have ways;
  • It is high enough that it actually feels meaningful to most people;
  • It is much more generous than what most people are otherwise giving;
  • It's non and so loftier as to be off-putting or overly demanding; and finally
  • 10% is very easy to summate.

Many people would jump at the risk to accept a job if it were more meaningful, even if information technology paid x% less.

So if you're seeking to make a meaningful contribution (and you aren't under whatsoever financial strain), this is probably the right number for you.

Give at an average level

If you care well-nigh helping others just don't desire to requite more than than boilerplate, you could aim to give what an average person gives.

This can vary significantly by income level and state, but for many people this is roughly 2-six% of their income.

Give what yous won't miss

At the very least yous could give what you wouldn't miss. This is the idea behind the Effort Giving pledge and the One For The World pledge, both of which encourage people to give at least 1% of their income. Similarly, The Life Yous Can Save pledge recommends a variable amount that'southward calibrated to take a "barely noticeable" consequence on your standard of living.

Very few people would discover a difference if they were to live off only 99% of their income, rather than 100% of it. Well-nigh everyone would take a job that paid i% less if information technology brought them more meaning in life.

Some other standards

We've covered some income-based giving standards, withal there are a few other approaches that you lot may take:

  • Wealth-based approaches such as the Giving Pledge where billionaires pledge to requite away at least half of their wealth, and Zakat where muslims donate 2.v% of their wealth each year.
  • Event-based approaches such as increasing your giving when y'all become a raise; donating your bonus, stimulus checks, or tax rebate; giving when y'all receive an inheritance (e.g. Generation Pledge); or giving from a liquidity effect such as the sale of a business (e.g. Founders Pledge).
  • The 'fair share' approach where you lot give the amount that would atomic number 82 to the best outcome if everyone in the earth gave the aforementioned amount. The problem with this approach is that nearly people will not give their fair share, and it's incredibly difficult to calculate what your off-white share would in fact exist.
  • Earning to give where you seek out loftier paying jobs so that you can give much more than than ordinarily (due east.g. working on Wall Street while donating l% of your income).
  • Leaving a bequest where y'all requite from your estate when yous laissez passer away.

Recommendations for giving to charity

Now that we've covered some of the most common standards, here'due south what I would personally recommend.

i. Give what yous tin

Unless y'all're financially insecure, I recommend that y'all start giving something.

Getting into the habit of giving will change who you are equally a person. Yous will go 'someone who gives money to charity' and will first to experience the joy and satisfaction that you lot get when y'all know that you're helping others with your coin.

Beyond giving something, I recommend that yous choice a standard that makes it meaningful to yous. Be bold, be ambitious, exist generous!

You lot might desire to outset modest and work your way upward – each yr – to your ideal target, sit with that for a while, and then challenge yourself.

My favourite example; i couple reported that they increase their giving by 1% of their income each year on their wedding anniversary.

If y'all're wealthy, requite much more. Mayhap follow the example of many notable philanthropists like Andrew Carnegie and showtime cartoon down that wealth before you lot dice and then that in that location's less inequality in the earth, and so that your children volition non exist spoilt with excess wealth.

2. Give effectively

It'south not just how much you give, but too how effectively y'all requite that matters. This is considering the differences between charities and their affect can be astonishing.

A $i donation to a highly constructive charity is going to be worth tens, hundreds, or thousands of times more than the same donation to an average charity… and worth infinitely more than than a donation to a clemency that accidentally does harm.

Giving x times more effectively is much easier than giving 10 times more than.

Combining these two approaches is ideal: if you lot give ten times more and 10 times more finer then you've increased your touch a hundredfold. Impact multiplication is a really powerful force.

For more than on this topic, I recommend that you check out Giving What Nosotros Can's effective giving recommendations.

Observe the almost constructive charities

3. Give publicly

Another mode to multiply your affect is to influence others through social proof. This is the well-established psychological phenomenon entailing that people tend to do what they see others doing. Because as humans, we are incredibly social animals.

If everyone kept their giving private, most people would think that giving isn't normal. On the other mitt, giving publicly tin can influence others to follow your behaviour.

By being public (merely non boastful) about your giving decisions – for example by making a giving pledge – you tin help create a social norm where people give more, and requite more than effectively.

Take a giving pledge

4. Give sustainably

Take the view of giving over your lifetime. Ask yourself 'what will be sustainable? considering y'all don't want to end upwards like George Price, and yous don't want to give too much, likewise soon if it causes you to burn out and stop giving.

Take the fourth dimension to plan your giving. Recall carefully nearly how much you want to give and how you are going to do it.

Some resources for giving sustainably:

  • Why you should salve 6-24 months runway past 80,000 Hours.
  • Personal finance course for beginners by Yeild and Spread.
  • Personal finance articles on the EA Forum.
  • Why non give 90%? by Hayden Wilkinson

5. Give regularly

I recommend y'all likewise give regularly. This is because regular donors are more generous, and therefore more likely to have a bigger bear upon. They are estimated to requite around 42% more per year, and up to 440% more over a lifetime.

Giving habitually means you are more likely to continue, less likely to skip donations, and you lot tin upkeep your giving much better.

Regular giving also helps the recipient charity to operate more efficiently since they will receive more than predictable revenue, and also spend less on fundraising.

If you are a patient philanthropist and desire to invest to give later, use a mechanism similar a Donor Advised Fund to get the immediate tax benefit while preventing value drift, and making sure that you'll live up to your values.

vi. Give together

Finally, share the joy of giving with other people. This volition not only help establish norms around giving, but it can help you lot make amend decisions, and yous volition have people to share this meaningful role of your life with.

Involving your family with your giving is a smashing way of edifice a family culture of care, generosity and critical thinking. Involving your friends and colleagues can be a bang-up activity to bond over. You could try running a fundraiser, a giving circle, or a giving game.

If you want to discuss your donation decisions with others, you lot're very welcome to join the Giving What We Can customs, or attend one of our public events.

At the end of the day, clemency is optional. No 1 is forcing you to give away your money, information technology is truly your choice…and that is what makes it so incredibly empowering.

We get to choose to make the globe a ameliorate identify. We each have an incredible opportunity to use our money to help others.

Not simply does this make the globe improve, it enriches our own lives too.

So how much volition you choose to give?

how much should you give to charity - may 2022