Not necessarily, even if the effect on Thiel’s income is my only consideration.
For one thing, Thiel might recommend candidate A over B because he calculates expected income under A > expected income under B, but I might consider Thiel’s expected income calculations incorrect and believe EI(B) > EI(A), in which case I would vote for B. For another, Thiel might recommend A over B because he values other things more than EI… for example, maybe B is a Mormon and Thiel really hates Mormons. In which case Thiel’s endorsement of A would not be strong evidence that I should vote for A. Etc.
In fact, even by novalis’ reasoning, we don’t care about Thiel’s income, we care about the size of Thiel’s donations to SIAI. If Thiel credibly precommits to donating N to SIAI if candidate A wins, and 2N if B wins, then in this case I should vote for B, even if everyone agrees that A will maximize Thiel’s income.
Well, that’s only if we think the marginal effects of policy changes on SAIA donors’ income would be greater than any other difference between the candidates in terms of effects on the world. I think this is pretty unlikely.
In that case I suppose we should let Thiel tell us who to vote for.
Not necessarily, even if the effect on Thiel’s income is my only consideration.
For one thing, Thiel might recommend candidate A over B because he calculates expected income under A > expected income under B, but I might consider Thiel’s expected income calculations incorrect and believe EI(B) > EI(A), in which case I would vote for B.
For another, Thiel might recommend A over B because he values other things more than EI… for example, maybe B is a Mormon and Thiel really hates Mormons. In which case Thiel’s endorsement of A would not be strong evidence that I should vote for A.
Etc.
In fact, even by novalis’ reasoning, we don’t care about Thiel’s income, we care about the size of Thiel’s donations to SIAI. If Thiel credibly precommits to donating N to SIAI if candidate A wins, and 2N if B wins, then in this case I should vote for B, even if everyone agrees that A will maximize Thiel’s income.
Well, that’s only if we think the marginal effects of policy changes on SAIA donors’ income would be greater than any other difference between the candidates in terms of effects on the world. I think this is pretty unlikely.