Nice, thanks for updating your post with the additional data. 

But I think there is an error in the new graph. The bars for Founders Pledge are in the color of Longview Philanthropy and the bars for Longview Philanthropy seem to be missing.

(edit: no longer true, post has been updated to fix this)

There is also this post by Luke Moore and Sjir Hoeijmakers. They only compare 2023 and 2024, but they have also included funding data for Founders Pledge, Logview Philantropy, Macroscopic Ventures and a lot of smaller funders/grantmakers/evaluators/fundraisers. And they calculated that when including all of those, funding has actually increased. Mainly because of more funding through Founders Pledge and Navigation Fund.

A follow-up of his post with newer number is now available: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/tech-pacs-are-closing-in-on-the-almonds

Thanks for the post. I am also currently sending out applications and encouraging messages like this are highly appreciated right now. 

I found that linked post from Scott Alexander quite interesting, but it seems like the numbers are no longer up to date. The paper he cites is from 2003. I think the political landscape has changed quite a bit since then. If I had to guess, I'd say political donations have become larger. It would be interesting to see more recent figures and if these are still small for their impact.

This is just an intuition of mine, and not thoroughly researched, but it seems to me that if we consider all sentient beings, there are many possible futures in which the average well-being would be below neutral, and some of them, especially for non-human animals, would be quite easily preventable. This leads me to believe that marginal resources are currently better invested in preventing future suffering than in reducing the risk of extinction.

Just a minor correction: The author of "The world is much better. The world is awful. The world can be much better." is Max Roser, not Mark Roser.