> I think Bregman skirts close to the "Effective Altruism" movement and his work has similar problems of choosing flashy, exciting, elitist projects over boring, uncomfortable, policy changes.

I'm sorry, but what? The most prominent EA projects focus on cost effective interventions that save and improve lives.

Give Well's current top recommendations are medicines and nets to prevent malaria, vitamin A supplements and promoting regular childhood vaccinations. None of them are flashy or elitist.

You don't need to apologize! People like GP are just liars.

It's incredible the consistency with which you can go from [negative opinion about EA] to [revealed extreme ignorance of EA]. Just let the person talk for another sentence or two and they'll out themselves as having literally zero familiarity whatsoever with EA.

"EA sucks because it pursues flashy, exciting projects" is an insane position that, truly, only a liar could write.