Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Meet Watsi, Y Combinator's First Nonprofit

ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 173 posts

Re: Meet Watsi, Y Combinator's First Nonprofit

#141

Post by loceng »

philwelch wrote: post #65
loceng wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"guaranteed medical care" - of what quality, with what results? And the value of medical care being covered is that it doesn't destroy the rest of your life. It's actually kind of pointless to help someone just get to the point of surviving, and then leave them to fend for themself.

To me, it's plainly obvious that people in those other countries need our help more than people in the United States. What other concern is there? "I'd like to help people in MY country" is just a vaguely nationalistic bigotry.

There are millions and millions of people, tens of millions in North America, that aren't taken care of well or properly. Fixing people when they're bad enough to absolutely need help or they'll die, otherwise letting them suffer, isn't a great attitude to have; Not saying that is your attitude, though it's what our culture currently has in place.

Re: Meet Watsi, Y Combinator's First Nonprofit

#142

Post by tinco »

philwelch wrote: post #126
tinco wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone is saying giving to local people is nationalist and bigotry, I am merely refuting that.

There are some ways that I preferentially give to local people because it's easier. I've helped more street beggars in my neighborhood than in Port au Prince because I don't walk down the streets of Port au Prince. But when it comes to paying for perfect strangers to receive medical treatment, and I'm choosing between someone in the US, whose medical treatment costs more, and who will receive the medical treatment an…

Well you can downvote me all you like, but it's just not bigotry. Merriam-Webster defines bigotry as the state of mind of "one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance".

This is just not the case, so first of all you are wrong.

And second of all, that you think one should spend his charity with maximum (perceived) efficiency is just _your_ ethical view.

I give charity to the Dutch cancer battle fund. I don't do this to save anyone I love, they are either already dying of cancer and won't be helped because of my donation or have already died.

A majority of people will never live to die of cancer. It is a disease that kills rich healthy people. Yet I give as much to them as I give to unicef. It is because the disease hits close to home.

Anyway, that might make me an egoist. But not a nationalist bigot. And frankly I think it was hateful of you to introduce those slurs into this conversation.

Re: Meet Watsi, Y Combinator's First Nonprofit

#143

Post by tinco »

philwelch wrote: post #88
tinco wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not so obvious. There's a lot of suffering going on in your country too. Charity comes from the heart, and where you should direct your love is your own choice. If you feel the people in your country are closer to you, there's no shame in helping them before others. We are human after all.

> If you feel the people in your country are closer to you That's the nationalistic bigotry I was talking about. That's like saying if there was a charity that only helped white people, maybe I should contribute to that because I feel that people of European descent are "closer to me".

It is not bigotry, you are misinformed. Black people contributing to http://blackcharities.net/ are not bigots, they merely support those whose fate they identify with.

Re: Meet Watsi, Y Combinator's First Nonprofit

#144

Post by mb2100 »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #2

This is really cool, but I'm curious how an investment in this is different than a charitable contribution. The contribution is awesome for the network it introduces Watsi to, but I can't imagine there will ever be a return on this kind of investment. (This is not meant to sound negative. I am truly excited to see it, interested to see what the YC network can bring to it, and very curious about the investment thinkin…

Exactly what I was thinking. It says on Wikipedia that YC takes about 6% of the company's equity. But I suppose a nonprofit doesn't have equity. So what's the benefit to YC? Simply some good PR?

Re: Meet Watsi, Y Combinator's First Nonprofit

#145

Post by robg »

pg wrote: post #98
dasht wrote: post #72

Paul Graham, or anyone "in the know", may we please hear a bit about what the equivalent of a term sheet looks like for a Y Combinator non-profit investment? Is Y Combinator giving a grant? Is Watsi issuing debt to Y Combinator? What's the financing model here?

It's just a donation.

Have you considered ycombinator.org? Call it a program-related investment and mirror the .com?

Re: Meet Watsi, Y Combinator's First Nonprofit

#146

Post by loceng »

philwelch wrote: post #88
tinco wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not so obvious. There's a lot of suffering going on in your country too. Charity comes from the heart, and where you should direct your love is your own choice. If you feel the people in your country are closer to you, there's no shame in helping them before others. We are human after all.

> If you feel the people in your country are closer to you That's the nationalistic bigotry I was talking about. That's like saying if there was a charity that only helped white people, maybe I should contribute to that because I feel that people of European descent are "closer to me".

If you did that it could mean you're racist, the act of donating to such a cause doesn't make the act itself bigotry though IMHO. The intent behind a charity is what would be a determining factor for me - not in the end who it ends up helping, though that likely plays a role in most people's decisions.

Re: Meet Watsi, Y Combinator's First Nonprofit

#148

Post by cdcarter »

callmeed wrote: post #80

I'm curious if there's a reason Watsi couldn't or shouldn't be a for-profit company? I like the fact they're not taking a transaction fee. But, it seems to me that they're also a benefit to healthcare providers, insurance companies, and big pharma (after all, the money raised is going to end up in their pockets). Aren't there ways Watsi could make money from these companies?

Not-for-profit companies aren't prevented from making a profit, and are in fact encouraged to (how else would they sustain!?). All the not-for-profit distinction means, business wise, is that the profits must be reinvested in the organization and not distributed to the owners.

This is a common misconception about not-for-profits. They are expected to make money, and overhead is important.

Re: Meet Watsi, Y Combinator's First Nonprofit

#149

Post by dsjoerg »

ichabodcole wrote: post #114
philh wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Watsi didn't exist, many of the patients on our site would have likely died. How do you quantify that impact? Roughly, by comparing it to the number of people who die in other hypothetical scenarios. You can't get exact numbers, but you can do a damn sight better than saying "it can't be done". > How do you prove that all the donations made via Watsi would have been allocated to some other cause had we not exist…

I think one thing to keep in mind is whether or not people who donate money through a system such as Watsi, would have otherwise donated that money to some other type of organization, and whether by donating through a Watsi like system they will be more likely to donate to other types organizations in the future. These questions could definitely use some study (I'll bet there are some already out there). Anecdotally,…

This.

People who are already giving the max to GiveWell-supported charities should not divert their funds to Watsi.

People who have more to give and want maximum impact should follow GiveWell's recommendations.

However, many people have not given to the max, nor do they care so much about maximum impact. For them, there is Watsi to direct their dollars to a noble cause, rather than on Minecraft-themed plush toys or something.

Re: Meet Watsi, Y Combinator's First Nonprofit

#150

Post by dbaupp »

glimcat wrote: post #5

So, the really cool part is this: "At Watsi, 100% of your donations directly fund medical treatments. Watsi.org is separately funded. They pay all their operational costs from their own funding, and none from your donations. They even eat the credit card processing fees." This works great with Watsi's crowdfunding-style model. It probably wouldn't help with things which need legs on the ground full-time, but it would…

Although it is a good sign, it's not that cool. The operating overhead of a charity should be largely irrelevant to working out if it is a good charity.

For example, given charities X and Y both distributing anti-malaria pills (or something). X and Y are identical except X has operating overheads of 80%, and distributes 50 pills per dollar donated and Y has no operating overhead, but only manage 20 pills per dollar donated.

Clearly X is the better charity, since it moves more pills, even though only 20% of the donations it receives get through.

What I'm trying to say is: operating overhead is a poor metric for comparing charities, since the thing that matters is the final outcome given a certain donation amount.

(That said having a high overhead is probably a sign that a charity could improve, and so do more good per dollar.)

Post reply on HN