If an outsider looked at our world,
they’d wonder what on earth we are doing.

We have plenty enough resources
to fix all the worst problems,

we’re just not using them right.

This isn’t exactly the fault
of particular individuals,

it’s just that our world is driven
by systems that maximize values

different from those ones
that we actually most care about.

For example, the businesses
that dominate the market

are those that are best
at maximizing profit.

The politicians we get
are those who are best

at maximizing their chances
of getting elected.

And the stories we are most likely to see
and read in the media

are those that are best
at maximizing the likelihood

that people would want
to read and share them.

In the long run, this is bad,
because values we might care about more,

like the environment,
or the welfare of workers in factories,

or our access to true
and useful information,

get bulldozed out of the way.

I’m going to tell you about a system
that doesn’t do this.

A system that allows us
to direct our resources

to exactly what we believe
is most important.

And that system
is effective charitable giving.

I say effective,
because it’s not usually obvious

which charities are actually
doing the most good,

and in the usual charity ecosystem,
the charities that thrive

are those that are the best
at getting people to give them money,

not necessarily the ones that are best
at making the world a better place.

However, through research and transparency
it is possible to locate charities

that are incredibly good
at improving things.

Schistosomiasis Control Initiative
doesn’t get a lot of funding

because it’s a weird disease
with a long name,

and the 200 million people infected
are mostly incredibly poor,

so no-one’s ever heard of it.

But we know reliably
that Schistosomiasis Control Initiative

can treat one child for a debilitating
parasitic infection for just 50p.

And de-worming
doesn’t just improve health.

Surprisingly, it’s much better
for improving educational outcomes

than more obvious things like scholarships
or giving textbooks to schools.

A £70 donation to SCI
will get 150 months of education

for children living in poverty.

Or, you know, you could use
that money to buy, what?

Three meals out?

Because we’re so used to this world,

in which hardly any of our resources

are actually invested
in the most important things,

it’s astonishing how good charity could be
if we just took it more seriously.

If the richest 10%
gave 10% of their incomes to charity,

what could we do?

Well, that would be $4 trillion a year.

Jeffery Sachs estimates that it would cost
$175 billion a year for two decades

to solve global poverty forever.

That would be less than 5%
of the money we’d have.

What would we do with the other 95%?

Well, if 10% gave 10%,
this is my quick breakdown

of what spending
could look like in the first year.

(Laughter)

In fact, if 10% gave 10%,

the first year would give us enough
to eliminate extreme poverty and hunger,

eradicate all neglected tropical diseases
and many others besides,

triple medical research,

give everyone secondary education,

permanently save
every rainforest in the world,

get us well on the way
to fixing climate change,

fund an unparalleled
renaissance in the arts,

and have enough left over to launch
several manned missions to Mars.

(Applause)

That would be the first year.

(Laughter).

Goodness only knows
what we’d do in year two.

How can we make this happen?

Luckily, there are some simple answers:

give more, give more effectively,
and encourage others to do the same.

There’s a growing movement
called Effective Altruism,

which is about this idea of using
the resources available to each one of us

- our time, our skills, our money -

to do as much good
in the world as possible.

For example, Givewell undertakes
detailed, rigorous research

in order to locate
the world’s best charities, like SCI.

I highly recommend you visit Givewell

next time you make any decision
about charitable giving.

And another example:

there’s an organization
called Giving What We Can.

And this organization has a pledge.

A pledge that over 1,000 people
have taken, myself included.

A pledge to give 10%
of your lifetime income

to those organizations you believe
can most effectively use it

to help improve the lives of others.

When I first heard about this, it seemed
like a big, scary commitment to make.

But if I earn a usual
graduate starting salary

of £25,000 per year, and give away 10%,

I’ll still be in
the richest 5% of the world.

And all the evidence suggests
that giving money to charity

makes you happier
than spending it on yourself.

I believe we can create
a society where giving 10%

isn’t this kind of weird,
unusual commitment,

but something that everybody does,

just as part of being
a normal, decent person.

Where within a few years,

things like poverty, and illiteracy,
and environmental problems

will be things of the past,

and where we have
this huge pool of resources

dedicated to fixing
any problems that might remain,

that’s a world I’d be proud to live in.

Help me make that world happen.

Thank you.

(Applause)