Name: 我為什麼要將收入的 10%捐給慈善機構（直到永遠） (Why I’m giving 10% of my income to charity (forever))
Uploaded: 2024-08-15T10:39:44.000Z
Duration: 16 min 48 s

Hey friends, welcome back to the channel.

to 不定詞

So I have recently decided to take something called the 10% pledge, which is where you donate 10% of your income to effective charities for the rest of your life.

是以，我最近決定參加一個名為 "10%承諾 "的活動，即在餘生中將收入的 10%捐給有效的慈善機構。

過去簡單式

Now, I actually took this pledge back in 2019 for my personal income, but this year I've decided to take the pledge for my business as well.

實際上，我早在 2019 年就為個人收入做出了這一承諾，但今年我決定也為我的企業做出這一承諾。

So we as a business from now on forevermore are gonna be donating 10% of our business profits to effective charities every year.

是以，從今往後，我們企業每年都會將企業利潤的 10%捐獻給有效的慈善機構。

And so in this video, I want to share a little bit more about what is the 10% pledge, why I am taking it, and why you might want to consider it as well.

是以，在這段視頻中，我想與大家分享一下什麼是 10% 承諾，我為什麼要這樣做，以及為什麼你也可以考慮這樣做。

Okay, so the 10% pledge is run by a nonprofit called Giving What We Can.

好吧，10% 的承諾是由一家名為 "盡我們所能 "的非營利組織發起的。

They are not partnering with us or sponsoring this video in any way, just for the record.

他們與我們沒有任何合作關係，也沒有以任何方式贊助本視頻，僅供參考。

And there's two aspects to the 10% pledge.

There is the 10% bit, and then there is the fact that you are donating it to effective charities.

有 10%這一點，還有一個事實是，你把錢捐給了有效的慈善機構。

Now, the first thing to say is let's talk about this effective bit of effective charities.

現在，首先要說的是，讓我們來談談有效慈善的這一有效之處。

Now, the key thing here is that just like there are some businesses that are better or more effective than others, there are also some charities that are more effective than others.

現在，最關鍵的是，就像有些企業比其他企業更好或更有效一樣，有些慈善機構也比其他慈善機構更有效。

This was a real game-changing insight for me when I first heard about it like five years ago, which is that not all charities are created equal.

五年前，當我第一次聽說這個問題時，我就意識到，並不是所有的慈善機構都是一樣的。

Like people who specialize in researching the effectiveness of charities have found that sometimes there is a 100 times difference in effectiveness between a less effective charity and a more effective charity.

就像專門研究慈善機構有效性的人發現的那樣，有時一個有效性較低的慈善機構和一個有效性較高的慈善機構之間的有效性相差 100 倍。

Like what these guys say on the website is many people lump charities into one doing good bucket.

就像這些人在網站上說的那樣，很多人把慈善機構歸為一個做好事的桶。

Others are skeptical that donating works at all.

其他人則對捐贈是否有用持懷疑態度。

The reality is that not all charities are created equal.

現實情況是，並非所有慈善機構都是平等的。

Most do good work, but the difference between good and great can be substantial.

大多數人都做得很好，但好與好之間的差距可能很大。

Some charities are significantly more impactful than others.

有些慈善機構的影響力明顯高於其他慈善機構。

And they've got a really good post on their website about effective giving 101.

他們的網站上有一篇非常好的文章，介紹有效捐贈 101。

So what does it mean to give effectively?

Well, give means using our resources to benefit other people.

那麼，"給予 "意味著利用我們的資源造福他人。

When we see suffering in the world, it's natural to feel an emotional pull to do something about it.

當我們看到世界上的苦難時，自然會產生一種情緒上的牽引力，想要為之做點什麼。

Giving to charity is one way to turn this emotional response into direct positive action.

向慈善機構捐贈是將這種情緒反應轉化為直接積極行動的一種方式。

But then you have the effectively bit, which is where you're achieving the best results with the resources that we choose to give.

但是，我們也要有效地利用我們選擇提供的資源，取得最佳效果。

In essence, giving effectively involves taking action on the basis of where our charitable giving can do the most good, rather than doing some or a little bit of good.

從根本上說，有效捐贈就是要根據我們的慈善捐贈能在哪些方面發揮最大的作用來採取行動，而不是做一些或一點點好事。

There's reason to believe that choosing where to give can be more important than choosing how much to give.

我們有理由相信，選擇在哪裡捐贈可能比選擇捐贈多少更重要。

Since charities often differ considerably in how effective they are, it's worthwhile to take the time to research which ones can produce the greatest benefit with each dollar.

由於慈善機構的成效往往大相徑庭，是以值得花時間研究一下哪些慈善機構的每一美元都能產生最大的效益。

Okay, so why is it important to give effectively?

好吧，那麼為什麼有效捐贈很重要呢？

There are many pressing problems facing the world from extreme poverty to the mistreatment of animals to existential risks that threaten humanity's very survival.

從極端貧困到虐待動物，再到威脅人類生存的生存風險，世界面臨著許多亟待解決的問題。

Moreover, there are millions of charities to choose from, 1.5 million charities in the US alone, and it isn't always clear which ones we should support.

此外，有數以百萬計的慈善機構可供選擇，僅在美國就有 150 萬家慈善機構，而我們並不總是清楚應該支持哪些慈善機構。

And by giving effectively, you can significantly increase your positive impact in the world.

通過有效的捐贈，您可以大大增加對世界的積極影響。

Let's see how this is true with an example.

讓我們通過一個例子來看看事實如何。

Suppose a donor is considering making $1,000 donation to one of two charities, charity A, which offers corrective surgery for blindness-inducing cataracts, and charity B, which provides sightseeing dogs to individuals with limited vision.

假設一位捐贈者正在考慮向兩家慈善機構中的一家捐贈 1,000 美元，A 慈善機構為致盲的白內障患者提供矯正手術，B 慈善機構為視力受限者提供觀光犬。

On the conservative end, it costs about $1,000 to reverse a severe case of visual impairment, i.e. about $1,000 to literally cure someone's blindness if they're affected by this disease.

保守地說，扭轉一個嚴重的視力損傷病例大約需要 1000 美元，也就是說，如果有人患上這種疾病，大約 1000 美元就能真正治癒他的失明。

Conversely, it typically costs $30,000 to $50,000 to provide one sightseeing dog.

相反，提供一隻觀光犬通常需要 3 萬至 5 萬美元。

So I think this example is pretty interesting.

是以，我認為這個例子非常有趣。

Imagine you're walking in a park and you see that there's a pond and you see that there is a child drowning in the pond.

想象一下，你走在公園裡，看到一個池塘，池塘裡有一個溺水的孩子。

Would you jump into the pond to save the dying child?

你會跳進池塘去救奄奄一息的孩子嗎？

Anyway, like, yeah, it's not even a question.

What if you're wearing a really expensive pair of shoes or your expensive suit?

如果你穿著一雙非常昂貴的鞋子或昂貴的西服怎麼辦？

Would you jump into the pond ruining your suit to save the child?

你會為了救孩子而跳進池塘毀了自己的衣服嗎？

You'd have to be a real psychopath and associate path to not do that.

你必須是一個真正的精神病患者和合夥人，才能不這麼做。

Who cares about the few thousand dollars that your suit costs if you can literally jump in and save the child?

如果你真的能跳下去救孩子，誰還會在乎幾千美元的訴訟費？

Well, what if you were walking on the border of France and Germany and you see the pond and you see the drowning child, but they're over the border.

那麼，如果你走在法國和德國的邊境上，你看到了池塘，你看到了溺水的孩子，但他們已經越過了邊境。

Would you still walk over the border, assuming you're not gonna get shot by the border force and go and save the child?

假設你不會被邊境部隊射殺，你還會走過邊境去救孩子嗎？

Like just because they're technically in a different country doesn't mean their life is worth any less.

就像僅僅因為他們在技術上是在不同的國家，並不意味著他們的生命就不值錢。

And of course you would still give up your fancy expensive suit in order to save the child.

當然，為了救孩子，你還是會放棄你那套華麗昂貴的衣服。

You know, you're in the French and German borders.

你知道，你在法國和德國的邊界。

You can't see the child on the other side of the wall, but you know the child is there because you can hear the child.

你看不到牆那邊的孩子，但你知道孩子就在那裡，因為你能聽到孩子的聲音。

You can hear the child drowning and you have to, you know, get up and scale the wall, jump onto the other side and then save the child.

你可以聽到孩子溺水的聲音，你必須站起來，爬上牆，跳到另一邊，然後救出孩子。

You would have to be dumb not to save the child.

不救這個孩子，你就是個傻子。

Just because you cannot see the person who's drowning does not mean the person is not drowning.

你看不到溺水的人，並不意味著他沒有溺水。

And you know that if you were to take action, you could save that child.

你知道，如果你採取行動，就能拯救那個孩子。

And then the question becomes, what if you knew with certainty that there is a child dying right now, let's say in a random country in Africa or something like that.

然後問題就變成了，如果你確切地知道，比方說，在非洲的某個國家或類似的地方，現在有一個孩子奄奄一息，你會怎麼辦？

And you knew that there's a child drowning and you can't see the child, you can't hear the child, but you know that that child is drowning.

你知道有一個孩子溺水了，你看不到孩子，也聽不到孩子的聲音，但你知道那個孩子溺水了。

And what if you knew that if you were to donate $5,000 to an effective charity like the Against Malaria Foundation, for example, you could literally save this child's life.

如果你知道，如果你捐出 5,000 美元給一個有效的慈善機構，比如抗擊瘧疾基金會，你就能拯救這個孩子的生命。

Is the life of a child in a developing country worth any less than the life of someone in America or someone in the US or someone in Germany or Canada or the person that you can see?

難道開發中國家兒童的生命就不如美國人、美國人、德國人、加拿大人或你能看到的人的生命值錢嗎？

The whole idea behind, you know, Peter Singer's philosophy here, which I broadly agree with, is that all lives are created equal.

彼得-辛格（Peter Singer）的哲學思想背後的整個理念是，所有生命生而平等，我對此深表贊同。

And so if there is stuff that we can do to save those lives, then, you know, living an ethical and moral life means choosing to do that stuff.

是以，如果我們可以做一些事情來拯救這些生命，那麼，你知道，有倫理道德的生活就意味著選擇去做這些事情。

Now, when I first heard this, I was like, yep, I agree, I agree, I agree, I agree.

現在，當我第一次聽到這句話時，我就想，是的，我同意，我同意，我同意，我同意。

And then I felt really shifty when the question came to, would I donate $5,000 to save the life of a child?

然後，當問到 "我是否願意捐出 5 000 美元來挽救一個孩子的生命？

And I'm like, well, yeah, in theory, but like, you know, I don't have that much money.

我想，理論上是這樣，但我沒那麼多錢。

This was back when I was working as a doctor and it's like, it's kind of expensive and like, oh, it feels weird because I really wanted to buy the Apple Vision Pro and like, it starts to feel like a weird sort of, like I'm being told I'm a bad person for not donating 100% of all of my money to save the lives of people because then I can't live and stuff.

那時候我還在當醫生，這東西有點貴，感覺怪怪的，因為我真的很想買蘋果Vision Pro，而且開始覺得有點怪怪的，好像有人說我是個壞人，因為我沒有把所有的錢100%捐出去救人，因為那樣我就不能活了之類的。

And so like, for years, I was like, yes, I agree in theory, but like, there's nothing I can do about this because I don't wanna give up my entire, I don't wanna like, I don't know, give up my life in the UK and go and work for a charity.

是以，多年來，我一直認為，是的，理論上我同意，但我對此無能為力，因為我不想放棄我的全部，我不想放棄我在英國的生活，去為慈善機構工作。

Maybe I'm a bad person for not wanting to work for a charity.

也許我是個不願意為慈善機構工作的壞人。

I don't wanna give up my quality of life just so I can save the life of kids in developing countries.

我不想為了拯救開發中國家兒童的生命而放棄自己的生活品質。

You can imagine that, you know, the confronting nature of that situation.

你可以想象，你知道，這種情況的對抗性。

But then I came across the 10% pledge and there's this thing that very, like many thousands of people, tens of thousands of people around the world do where they just give 10% of their income to charities, effective charities every year.

但後來我看到了 "10%承諾"，全世界成千上萬的人都在做這件事，他們每年將收入的10%捐給慈善機構，有效的慈善機構。

And that 10% feels like a good number for me.

對我來說，10% 是個不錯的數字。

It was like 10%, for most people, in most parts of the world is not really gonna change your quality of life.

對大多數人來說，在世界上的大多數地方，10% 的收入並不會真正改變你的生活品質。

In fact, what Giving What We Can tells us based on the research is that if you earn $60,000 a year post-tax, you are in the top 1% globally.

事實上，"盡己所能 "的研究結果告訴我們，如果你的稅後年收入為 6 萬美元，那麼你就是全球收入最高的 1%。

You might not think that if you earn $60,000 a year and you're living in like New York or California or someplace that you're in the top 1%, but you are, you are the top 1% globally.

你可能不會認為，如果你年薪 6 萬美元，住在紐約、加利福尼亞或其他地方，你就屬於最富有的 1%，但你確實是，你是全球最富有的 1%。

In fact, if you earn more than $19,000 a year, you are in the top 10% globally.

事實上，如果您的年收入超過 19,000 美元，您就屬於全球收入最高的 10%。

The scale of global inequality is so insane that by leading a normal life in a developed country like the US, the UK, Canada, Germany, Australia, that kind of thing, you're probably in the top 1% globally.

全球不平等的程度已經到了令人髮指的地步，在美國、英國、加拿大、德國、澳洲等發達國家過上正常生活的人，很可能就是全球前 1%的人。

And so when I realised that, I was like, okay, at the time I was earning like 40K a year as a doctor.

所以當我意識到這一點時，我就想，好吧，當時我作為一名醫生，年薪大概有 4 萬。

It's like, if I were to donate $4,000, 4,000 pounds, it's not really gonna change my life in any meaningful way.

這就好比，如果我捐出 4000 美元、4000 英鎊，並不能真正改變我的生活。

But that 4,000 pounds or $5,000 can literally save the life of a child.

但是，這 4000 磅或 5000 美元卻可以挽救一個孩子的生命。

There's also this guy called Greg Lewis who did an analysis of how many lives a doctor saves in their career on average.

還有一個叫格雷格-劉易斯（Greg Lewis）的人，他分析了一名醫生在其職業生涯中平均拯救了多少人的生命。

而這實際上是在 2023 年更新的。

I'll link all three parts of his analysis down below, but essentially being a doctor in the UK, if you were to model statistically how many lives does that save, you land on over the course of your entire career working as a doctor, you on average save somewhere around seven or fewer lives.

我將在下面鏈接他分析的所有三個部分，但從本質上講，作為英國的一名醫生，如果你想統計一下，在你作為醫生的整個職業生涯中，你平均能挽救多少條生命，大約是七條或更少的生命。