It's well-known that spectacular natural disasters tend to do a better job of stimulating charitable giving than long-simmering catastrophes like malaria infections or simple day-to-day grinding rural poverty. An via Tyler Cowen, an interesting paper that finds a bias within the bias toward catastrophism—donations are strongly correlated with the number of people who died in a disaster, and once you control for death, they're uncorrelated with the number of survivors.
But obviously while it's tragic for people to die in an earthquake, the dead people don't need your help. The people who need help are the people who are still alive but left in need of shelter, medical attention, safe drinking water, and food. In some sense a disaster with a high death toll is also likely to have a high level of survivor need. But it's a very imperfect proxy, and both the giving public and the media could try to do a better job of not anchoring on the death toll.
TODAY IN SLATE
Don’t Worry, Obama Isn’t Sending U.S. Troops to Fight ISIS
But the next president might.
IOS 8 Comes Out Today. Do Not Put It on Your iPhone 4S.
Why Greenland’s “Dark Snow” Should Worry You
How Much Should You Loathe NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell?
Here are the facts.
Three Talented Actresses in Three Terrible New Shows
The Human Need to Find Connections in Everything
It’s the source of creativity and delusions. It can harm us more than it helps us.
- German Fraud Investigator Says Anonymous Client Will Pay $30 Million for Info on MH17 Shootdown
- A Brief Reminder That Not Everything in the World is Terrible
- How Many Countries Were Created Through Secession Votes?
- Gun-Control Group Investigates 81 People Looking for Guns Online, Finds Eight Have Criminal Records
More Than Scottish Pride
Scotland’s referendum isn’t about nationalism. It’s about a system that failed, and a new generation looking to take a chance on itself.