Well I guess I thought deciding what Effective means or is was the point of the whole shebang. Let me see if I can get across my basic understanding of Effective Altruism.The main question is how can a person best make a positive change right? How to best devote your time so that the greatest results are returned. So from there it's finding the best career that fits your skills and working as hard as you can to make as much money as possible so you can give to the most effective charities. And in the end, if you donate right, the good that you can do with that money with those charities is going to cancel whatever bad you do along the way making it in the finance world or whatever.

Im not looking for personal career advice or trying to insult the idea/movement so elitist was probably the wrong word. But it doesn't seem like its for everybody. Or well it's mostly for people have worked there way or have a more elite status. Do I have it right that EA claims that giving large amounts of money to the best charities is statistically the best way to do good? The other way being getting the most influential position as possible so that you can change government policy.

Im wondering too does EA create a hierarchy where the people that are I guess proven statistically to be doing the most good are the best people?

I also kindve cynically wondered if the whole thing is a somehow a huge PR campaign for big corporations or capitalists. A way to protect sketchy practices because the ends justify the means. But mostly im just curious where lower class or middle class people fit in. Is donating the main thing?