Suppose you’re convinced by Peter Singer’s thought experiment, and believe that those of us in rich countries have a moral duty to help the global poor. How should we go about discharging that duty?

In my last video, I argued that one of the most effective ways of helping the world’s poor doesn’t involve trying to help them at all. Economic growth has done more to benefit the global poor than any anti-poverty program in the private or public sector. And so one of the most effective things we can do to help the world’s poor today is to preserve and expand the institutions that facilitate that growth.

But even a rising tide won’t lift all boats. The poor will always be with us, even in a world of rapidly expanding growth. And so there will always be plenty of opportunity for charitable assistance.

In my latest video, however, I argue that it makes a great deal of difference what kind of charitable assistance we give to the world’s poor. Specifically, there is a vital difference between the kind of top-down, paternalistic  programs that characterize government (and some private) aid, and bottom-up programs that treat the world’s poor as autonomous individuals capable of acting in ways to improve their own lives.

Take a look at the video here, and let me know what you think!