Charities

[Cless Alvein]

then why would my attitude change?

Because you'd get a dose of reality. Bone-marrow transplants, a commonly used leukemia treatment, cost around $260,000. A working middle-class family cannot "plan ahead" that kind of money.

And anyway. I have no obligation to pay for the care of someone else's kids anyway, especially when I'm still a student trying to pay for an expensive education and have no job.

Of course you aren't obligated. That's why it's called "Charity". Nobody is demanding anything from you, so stop acting as if they are. The advertisements you see are there to make you aware that the charity even exists. How else would anyone even know to donate?

[Tenchi_fan]

I only give to charities that help kids.(even though I'm not rich)
And also even though the rich don't owe anything to the poor, they can still help out others in need, it's not like its going to kill them if they donate some money.
And its not like you have to donate alot of money, hell, it can even be just a dollar, it still helps.
If anything happened to you and you needed some type of surgery to live and couldn't afford it, wouldn't you want people to donate money for you?
Ask yourself this, could you watch a child die knowing you could of made a difference?

[Overlord Darth Fluffles]

FWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

I avoid charities.
I advocate Social Darwinism in an economic sense.
This is NOT eugenics.
This is not the bastardized version of SD that Hitler practiecd.

Unless somebody's had a bomb dropped on them or encountered a mine underfoot, I don't care. If they live in an undesireable environment, then I say, "Let the migration begin!"

And I am nearing a dangerous public conniption due to the phrase "Giving Back."
Nobody gave me anything, so if I give to a charity (a rare event) I see it as giving. Notice that my phrase conspicuously lack the word "back."
If someone won the lottery and then decided to send some of their winnings back to the government, that would be giving back.

In many of these problem countries in the third world, the problem is not poverty, but rather poverty brought on by deranged governments and constant warfare. It would likely do more good in the long run for these nations' governments to be ousted militarily. They're already under martial law in most of these nations, so it wouldn't be too terribly altered in that sense, but perhaps then at least they could eat.

You can rant at me if you want, I don't care.

I second that with only one thine to add. If smeone get's blown up it's their own damn fault, for risking it. So why bother?

[OminousCloud]

I give to scientific and medical charities like Doctors Without Borders but I don't really give to Oxfam or anything like that.

[Bragi]

Charity is good if it reaches its intended purpose. The “golden swimming pool” is not charity that is theft. I give to charity, the ones I know my help will reach its destination.


I also believe in the saying, “teach a man to fish…”, but why do I still give to charity… Because I may not be physically available or have the capabilities to actually teach a man how to fish. That is why I give to those who really have the time and means to lend a hand and reach out. Also, the notions of people say charity is just about giving money, With the sweat in our brows and the strength of our backs we also give charity.

[dragon_nataku]

Bone-marrow transplants, a commonly used leukemia treatment, cost around $260,000.

I suppose that's when I'd get a mortgage on my house.