I emailed WFP philippines, I'll see if I can source stuff from them (and/or other local NGO's). I think I'll keep Peanut butter on hand though, thank you :) 

Fantastic, thank you. And -I- probably am not clear on what the requirements are either :p

1. As I mention, I'm quite fond of givedirectly. The idea here is to see if it's not possible to do -better- than just giving cash (which I do as well). 
   (one of) My concern with direct cash is that we'll just get more of what we have now, just with less financial suffering. 
   I'm hoping to communicate love and care to the recipients, and teach them to -keep- that and pass it along to others.  

   I basically am trying to assess how much it would costs to change the underlying principles that society bases itself on. From a consumerist/capitalist perspective, to a Sharing/caring/loving community.  The mechanisms can remain, but if we alter people's perceptions and values on a large scale, I feel we can help address not only most of EA's xmas wishlist, but that it would go a long way towards -preventing- new issues from coming up.
   There are 700 million people in misery, I figured that may be a place to start.

2. Great! I knew -someone- had!

3. Yeah rice is the basic staple. They -will- eat rice if nothing else. I prefer to try and procure nutrients they are likely missing. I will check pulses. 

4 I am skeptical as well, hence my post :)

5 yep, buying groceries locally and preparing meals. But I want to have supplies people can take home as well. 

6 Yessss rations thank you!! I'll look into that, though i'm unsure how well-received it will be. Getting people to eat their vegetables is challenging :|  (New foods/new tastes often just aren't practical, hence the milk)

thanks again! 

Extremist indoctrination campaigns clearly have an impact, to the point of getting member to self-sacrifice. Not the path i would want to explore. 

While I'd like to -encourage- love and perhaps other related/close/universally accepted positive values (don't steal, don't murder/hurt others type things), I believe everyone should retain self-agency. 

Basically, people -should- be free to -choose- to hurt others (or at least not benefit them) if they so decide, possibly incurring society's wrath/punishment in the process depending on the degree of harm, as it is currently done (reform of prisons/legal punishments is another topic).

Let's steer clear of 1984. Most people find helping others fulfilling to some degree. We ought to encourage that and make it an easy and early realization. Those that aren't interested can drop out after going through the 101 if they so choose.

I posit that the cost of researching and developing/testing a curriculum to that effect would be minimal compared to the possible impact.

And yes it's a big "if", but we don't have to get it perfectly right from the get-go. 

I'll be back in the Philippines in a few weeks, where i will be launching a sort of 360 housing/living/community program, aimed at the poorest of the poor/most excluded to provide safety, counseling, nutrition, health as well as education, life and professional skills etc. I'd love to have -something- like this to try out with those that join. 

My experience is that the culture is -already- very Altruistic-oriented, if often un-efficiently so. I'd very much like for them NOT to lose that aspect of the culture if/when they join the capitalist bandwagon. 

Great paper! Though I believe one particular value ought to be cultivated above all though it only gets a passing mention in the article.

Kindness (Agape love).

Summary: Practicing "uncalculated" "less-impactful" goodness in frequent, small ways, should prove very helpful in the practice of larger-scale impactful calculated goodness .

• It is common and "easy" to practice/cultivate 
• I posit that a greater level of kindness leads to much greater ease of overcoming the psychological obstacles to cultivating the listed utilitarian virtues. Conversely, someone unkind by nature will have a much harder time to cultivate them
• The IMPACT of becoming kinder thus can affect all other areas, and therefore is likely to be a highly -effective- way of increasing global well-being.
• Increased Kindness has a ripple effect not simply on ourselves and our ability to do more good, but on others as well in ways that are difficult to quantify. 
• Kindness applied daily, by a large segment of the population (or even a small one, arguably, if they are otherwise effective), with minimal effort, could dramatically impact the world, in ways that a similar effort in any one of the other virtues are unlikely to approach.

Which leads to a counter-intuitive hypothesis: 

Kindness, cultivated in daily life, applied to causes that may appear/be less-effective, but that come to us/that we come across during the daily bustle, could actually have the greatest impact on the world. 

I expect there are diminishing returns, and only a (small?) portion of one's resources ought to be dedicated to the effort. Anecdotal evidence however (EDIT: Actually I believe there is research on the topic presented in 80 000 hours?) seems to indicate that at least the emotional energy resource level increases significantly through acts of kindness, providing additional returns on the investment. 

Again:

Practicing "uncalculated" "less-impactful" goodness in frequent, small ways, should prove very helpful in the practice of larger-scale impactful, calculated goodness.