I believe Aaron has an account here. If so, I'd love for him to read this comment, and anyone who generally supports his ideas to read this comment, because I think it could change lives.

I read this piece by him:

http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/handwritingwall

Short summary: A speaker tells a story about an evil king. The king gets 10 hostages, and you, and asks you to decide, "I'll kill the hostages, or you can die in their place. What do you choose?" When asked, most people choose to sacrifice themselves.

Same scenario. Evil king, 10 hostages. But now the king asks, "I'll kill the hostages, or you can give me all your money and live in poverty for the rest of your life. Which do you choose?" And the people asked think, and it seems reasonable to choose the poverty alternative. Certainly, it's better than dying, and they already agreed to die to save the people.

Then it talks about children dying in Africa, and how with just a little bit of money you could save those people. The speaker concludes, "Thus if you decide to go on with the life you were probably planning to lead, you will be letting 10 people die rather than give up your flat-screen television and your cocktail parties. And that is more than gluttony, it is murder."

Now there's a major, major, major flaw with this line of thinking, which is also in "Poverty Kills" and many pieces along those lines. It's the assumption that there are no choices besides the "evil king" and "dying/sacrificing for the rest".

Never was this more clear than my travels in the back provinces of China. I climbed Mount Emeishan in China, and the locals farm the mountain and live quite poorly. By selling food and crafts on the side of the road to visitors (mostly Chinese, didn't see any foreigners besides me) - by selling, they got the money they needed to buy tools, medicine, and so on. I got to eat some local food, and bought a wooden sword for my then-kid brother. The sword cost basically nothing except a few hours, and the money from that could buy weeks worth of medicine or seasons worth of clothing, and so on.

This money went to the heads of households and most industrious people on Emeishan, who in turn would help their relatives and so forth. The Communist Chinese government couldn't begin to do half the job feeding and providing medicine to these people that free trade did. It was never more clear to me - honestly working for money and spending it on things I wanted helped other people. It helped the people who paid me to for them (I freelance/contract work, I haven't been salaried ever). It helped the people who I bought food and crafts from. Everyone won.

So back to the "evil king" - what if instead of giving in for the hostages right now, you came back later, kicked in the door with your sword, and assassinated the evil murderous king? That's the third option.

There's more choices than "give up your money in taxes/charity or bad outcomes happen". I almost built an international school in China with my girlfriend. I still might go build schools someday. If I do, they'll run for a profit. The teachers will be paid more than they would at another job (or else they wouldn't come work for us). The parents will value it (or else they wouldn't send their kids there). The administrators of the school will be paid. The kids will learn better, speak more fluent English, and increase trade between China and English speaking countries. That'll bring more money to China, and lower the expenses of all English speaking people abroad who can afford the Chinese goods.

If there were more taxes, and I had less of my own money to fund a school, it wouldn't be possible. The Chinese government is not run by people as driven, intelligent, and empathetic as my girlfriend. If they took her money, and the American government took my money, then we couldn't build a school, and instead you'd have schools like Sichuan and the United States currently have. Quality - not so much.

Charity has its place. I've run charity events and donate to charities. I tend to support St. Jude's Children Hospital in North America and Great Ormond Street in London. A friend is getting a therapy dog program started in Tokyo, I pledged some money for that and volunteered for the auction.

But there's greater options. Really now, governments have proven themselves incompetent many times over. And nonprofits, God bless them, frequently have people drawing way over market salaries and making themselves rich, while working at a job with less pressure, lower expectations, and very little accountability. If you look at the statistics, nonprofits are depressingly ineffective and do very little towards succeeding in their missions and improving the world.

There's a third option. It's improving the world honestly, getting compensated for it, and paying people who improve your life in return. That system has built almost everything of value on the planet. I reject the "evil king or your life" dichotomy; it is false; there are other options.

Aaron's a hell of a writer, and I hope he reads this. I know political views can be like religions - but I try not to make mine. I've studied all sorts of history and sciences and commerce and all manner of things. The results look like charity/government (and especially taxes) underperform the rather cold and heartless market in any long term time horizon. Now, these aren't fashionable viewpoints in many intellectual circles, but we all ought to consider them - is the end good is our objective, then even unfashionable opinions against our circles' worldviews must be considered.

If anyone knows Aaron, would they kindly point him to this comment? He seems like an incredibly intelligent and thoughtful guy, and I really hope there's something I've written in here that's valuable to him.