This document discusses how careers in finance can be ethical by enabling graduates to save many lives through donations. It argues against the view that charity careers are most ethical, noting one can indirectly benefit many more people through a high-paying city career. For example, an altruistic banker earning £400k could fund 10 doctors saving 100 lives per week, more than one doctor alone. With the right career choices and donations, one could save thousands or even millions of lives while still living comfortably. The key is choosing impactful work and causes based on cost-effectiveness research rather than intuition.

1. Can the City be ethical? Will CrouchFaculty of PhilosophyUniversity of Oxfordwill@highimpactcareers.org

2. IntroductionCity careers have a bad reputation.

3. Often, graduates are presented with a dilemma:

4. High paying, exciting career?Or an ‘ethical’ career?2

5. IntroductionCity careers have a bad reputation.

6. Often, graduates are presented with a dilemma:

7. High paying, exciting career?

8. Or an ‘ethical’ career, in the charity sector?

9. I’ll show that this dilemma is ill-conceived.

10. I’ll show that one can do far more good through a city career than by working in the charity sector.3

11. Part I: How to Think about CareersNormally, we think that charity careers are the most ethical.I’ll suggest that’s wrong, based on mistakes regarding: indirect benefit; fungibility; marginal benefit; and harm.Part II: How much good can you do?I’ll look at how many lives you could save.I’ll conclude that we can do a tremendous amount to help others if we put our minds to it.Overview Of This Talk4

12. What’s the point of thinking about this?You’ll spend 70 000 hours of your life working.

13. Career choice is one of the most important decisions you’ll ever make.

14. If you’re thinking ethically, the decision is evenmore important.

15. It’s not just a critically important decision for you.

16. It’s also a life-or-death decision for hundreds or thousands of other people.5

17. Part IHow to think about Careers6

18. The Standard ViewAccording to the Standard View, the paradigm examples of ethical careers are the ‘direct benefiters’.But consider the following story…7

19. Suppose that Jo becomes a doctor working in the developing world. She performs 10 life-saving surgeries every week:The story of the doctor and the altruistic banker8

20. Suppose that Lorna becomes an professional philanthropist, earns £400k/yr, and donates enough money that she pays for 10 developing-world doctors:The story of the doctor and the altruistic banker9

21. That means 100 lives per week would be saved:The story of the doctor and the altruistic banker10

22. The story of the doctor and the altruistic banker11

23. Doctors, bankers, and indirect benefits: The MoralThe banker was able to save ten times as many lives as the doctor, even though she wasn’t directly saving any lives in her career.12

24. Doctors, bankers, and opportunity cost: The Moral The Moral: Ways of indirectly benefiting others, such as earning big and donating, can do much more good than directly benefiting.13

25. FungibilityThe previous story underestimated the discrepancy between the banker and the doctor.The discrepancy in cost-effectiveness among different causes is huge.And the doctor is limited in her choice about where to work. Let’s suppose she’s an HIV/AIDS specialist…14

26. Charity Cost-EffectivenessTreatment of Kaposi’s SarcomaAntiretroviral therapy

27. Charity Cost-EffectivenessTreatment of Kaposi’s SarcomaAntiretroviral therapy£20,000 / QALY barrier

28. Charity Cost-EffectivenessTreatment of Kaposi’s SarcomaAntiretroviral therapy

29. Charity Cost-EffectivenessTreatment of Kaposi’s SarcomaAntiretroviral therapyPrevention of transmission during pregnancy

30. Charity Cost-EffectivenessTreatment of Kaposi’s SarcomaAntiretroviral therapyPrevention of transmission during pregnancy

31. Charity Cost-EffectivenessTreatment of Kaposi’s SarcomaAntiretroviral therapyPrevention of transmission during pregnancyDistribution of condoms

32. Charity Cost-EffectivenessTreatment of Kaposi’s SarcomaAntiretroviral therapyPrevention of transmission during pregnancyDistribution of condoms

33. Charity Cost-EffectivenessTreatment of Kaposi’s SarcomaAntiretroviral therapyPrevention of transmission during pregnancyDistribution of condomsEducation for high-risk groups

34. FungibilityBy choosing to work on the right areas, the doctor can multiply her impact by a factor of hundred.But she’s still limited to HIV/AIDS reduction.In contrast, money is completely fungible. It can be used to further any cause, including those far more cost-effective than HIV/AIDS reduction:23

35. Charity Cost-EffectivenessTreatment of Kaposi’s SarcomaAntiretroviral therapyPrevention of transmission during pregnancyDistribution of condomsEducation for high-risk groups

36. Charity Cost-EffectivenessTreatment of Kaposi’s SarcomaAntiretroviral therapyPrevention of transmission during pregnancyDistribution of condomsEducation for high-risk groupsTreatment for parasitic infections

37. FungibilitySo the altruistic banker can target her donations only to the very best causes; whereas the doctor is much more limited.Moreover, if she changes her views about which causes do the most good, the banker can easily change where her donations go; in contrast, the doctor is tied down to one specific cause.26

38. Fungibility: The Moral The Moral: Do something which is flexible with respect to causes.27

39. Marginal BenefitThe story underestimatedthe discrepancy between the banker and the doctor for a second reason.This is because: had Jo not become that doctor, someone else would have.28

40. Marginal BenefitIn contrast, if Lorna had not earned and donated the money, the result would have been fewer doctors. If she hadn’t become an altruistic banker, all 100 people would have died.29

41. Marginal Benefit: The Moral The Moral: Do something that wouldn’t have happened anyway.30

42. ‘Making a Difference’: The Failure to QuantifyWhere did we go wrong?Perhaps we focused on making a difference rather than making the most difference.Thinking with our gut overlooks the vast discrepancy among different career routes. 31

43. ‘Making a Difference’: The Failure to Quantify32

44. ‘Making a Difference’: The Failure to Quantify The Moral: Going with your gut, or relying on heuristics like ‘do what you’re good at’ isn’t enough. Choosing the right career requires research and reflection, and the willingness to take new ideas seriously.33

45. ‘Making a Difference’: MartyrdomPerhaps we assume that doing good must involve self-sacrifice.But if the altruistic banker earns £6mn over a 30yr career, she could save 10 thousand lives and still have an average salary of £100 000/yr.34

46. ‘Making a Difference’: Martyrdom The Moral:By choosing the right career, you can have a high-flying lifestyle and benefit others far more than you would otherwise have done. 35

47. The most obvious objection to my suggestion is: what if the career you pursue causes harm? Or supports an evil system?Surely that’s the reason why it’s not ethical to go into the city.Causing Harm?36

48. Even granting the premise that a typical city career causes harm, that doesn’t mean that it’s unethical for you as a professional philanthropist to pursue a city career.You need to consider what would happen if you don’t take the job.If someone else would be doing the same evil work anyway, then you don’t help anyone by refusing the job.Causing Harm?37

49. To illustrate this, let’s consider an extreme example.Suppose that the typical manager in a munitions factory causes 10 deaths, by enabling more soldiers to fight in unjust wars:Causing Harm?38

50. Now suppose that you pursue this career path, for the high pay.You, being altruistically minded, will almost certainly cause fewer deaths than the typical manager of this factory:Causing Harm?39

51. Far from harming people, the world is benefited in virtue of you working for a munitions factory. This is a benefit independent of the good that your donations do.Causing Harm?40

52. This example isn’t just hypothetical…The previous story described Oskar Schindler, a war hero who ran Nazi munitions factories and used his earnings to pay for 1200 Jewish lives.Causing Harm?41

53. The Moral: High-impact careers needn’t also involve making people worse off.Causing Harm?42

54. Moreover, if you oppose the current capitalist system, the best thing you can do is take a city job.Then you can fund many anti-capitalist campaigners.Finally, any bad aspects of your career need to be weighed against the good that you do.So let’s turn to that.Supporting an evil system?43

55. Part IIHow much good can you do?44

56. How much good can you do?Bearing in mind the morals of part 1…And bearing in mind that you can save a life for £300…How much good can you do?45

57. Let’s suppose you pursue a lucrative career and donate 50% of your earnings, over your lifetime.By pursuing certain careers, you can make a lot of money….Money-Making46