A solution to 90% of the article is maximizing average expected utility which avoids several flaws with traditional utilitarianism.
GiveDirectly is a ground-up solution to the long-term problem of poverty.
Now I get very political, but I think it's also empirically true: global capitalism is the major force for extreme poverty in this century. Cheap labor is highly desirable and economically efficient for everyone except the poor. I think one convincing piece of evidence is how many countries are in favor of free trade agreements but not free movement (immigration, emigration) agreements, except between economic peers.
EDIT: The article does mention GiveDirectly but says UBI is a better solution, which is strictly true, but requires political will to implement much like changes to immigration policies whereas individual charity can have immediate benefits while political will shifts.
GiveDirectly is a ground-up solution to the long-term problem of poverty.
Now I get very political, but I think it's also empirically true: global capitalism is the major force for extreme poverty in this century. Cheap labor is highly desirable and economically efficient for everyone except the poor. I think one convincing piece of evidence is how many countries are in favor of free trade agreements but not free movement (immigration, emigration) agreements, except between economic peers.
EDIT: The article does mention GiveDirectly but says UBI is a better solution, which is strictly true, but requires political will to implement much like changes to immigration policies whereas individual charity can have immediate benefits while political will shifts.