Charities

[Eris]

What are your thoughts on charities?

I thoroughly detest every aspect of them.

First there's the sense that you "owe" it to the poor people that you are rich, that it's somehow immoral to be wealthy. It is not. Then, there's the fact that that charities most of the time have none -- or better yet ADVERSE effects on the people they try to help. A hefty cut of foreign aid money is absorbed by the local governments, and ends up financing a new solid golden swimming pool for the local dictator, so it never sees the face of whomever it was intended for. Finally, you know the old saying: Give a man a fish today and he will be hungry tomorrow, teach him how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime?

The only thing you accomplish by squandering money on charities is to buy a false sense of being a good person.

[Metronome]

The way I look at it is the same way I look at athiests really. Whether you believe they actually help people or causes or not is up to you thus if you wish to donate do so if not don't. But if you don't want to then bashing people who do and saying what they're doing is wrong isn't right and solves nothing. In the same sense I feel people shouldn't pressure you into giving to a charity because it's the right thing to do or whatever other ideal they may try and push on you. Let the person make the decision don't guilt trip someone. In the same respect also do not call someone a sucker who is wasting their money by giving it to a charity. Everyone has to be considerate to the way others live at some point. Because we have such thoughts and discrimination may make us humans yet it does not make us good ones. Those thoughts are no better than that of a racist or biggot and it's those types of things we need to erase from our future since we can't from our history. Nuff said ~de arimasu

[dragon_nataku]

Hum hum, well, I for one don't like charities much. Most of the ones I see on TV are for children that have cancer or some other deadly disease, and then I feel bad for being relatively healthy, when I shouldn't ought to, since it's not my fault they're sick.

But I agree with Eris about the "teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime" thing. Sure, it's not the same with children who are deathly ill, but why should it be up to me to save the world's children? What are their parents doing, nothing? Sheesh. If my kids were sick, I'd pay for it myself, not throw a pity party for myself and try to make other people pay for it.

Mum tried to get me to give to the same charity she does, the St. Judas children's fund or some such thing. I just ignored her.

Personally, the only charity-type thing I give to is the ASPCA (American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals). I like animals a lot better than I like people, because of that whole unconditional love thing. Plus, animals who are abused, they can't do anything about it really. They have no voice, they cannot speak up for themselves and stop the abuse. So I give the ASPCA money every month to try and help out a bit. Now, I'm not completely naive; I know my donation won't save all of the animals out there, but I believe that "Every little bit helps."

As a final note, this post is not meant to try to convince you to give to the charity I donate to. Just wanted to clarify that, in case someone thinks something weird. Everyone has a right to give or not give to whatever charity they want, and I'm not going to judge anyone just because they don't give to a specific (or any, for that matter) charity.

(why are my posts always so long? )

[Opinionated]

Eris, I see on my end that your ire is about throwing money at a charity and that charity throwing money at a foriegn nation. To that I offer a differing example: Heifer International. Instead of sending money to a family in need, they send a farm animal and then train the family in sustainable living and basic business in case the animal breeds or if they slaughter it for meat. Their end goal is that the animal gifts and sustainable training to benefit a community. They give men fish and teach them to breed fish so they can get more fish.

[sa5m]

I only like charities if you're/we're giving a huge amount of money to them to actually help make a difference. I hate the petty change ones.

[Bucky Katt]

I do not like to give to charities very much. Probably because I don't have the money myself, but even when I do...Well, I'm greedy. =)
As for the organization Opinionated mentioned, I find that more productive than simply sending money to a nation in need whose government may take the money in order to attain personal comforts that defeated the whole purpose of sending something to help the people.

[Metronome]

Well by semantics I guess i've indirectly given to a charity, that is to say I bought Rise Against Vans and of course portion of the profits goes to Rise Against since it's their shoes, but all the members are very much into animal rights and PETA so they give a portion of their profits to animal rights organizations

[KuroTan]

Well... Not all charities are aimed at giving your money straight to the poor. There are some that go through the building of schools or training centers which would then fulfill what you said about the "teach a man to fish" thing. Some give to those kids whose only fault in life was being born by irresponsible parents who leave them, in the best case scenario, at orphanages.

My take is, a fish is still a fish and if I can give that to someone who really needs it why wouldn't I? I'll just hope that his life gets better because of it.

*edit* I thought I'd add, as long as I'm not hassled or pressed because it's "the right thing to do".

[Buruku]

Currently I'm not at a point where I have anything to give to charities, and I don't feel like I owe anything to the poor. But my mom gives to causes like poor women in mexico and stuff, but this is how I mostly see it:

People who are well off have a ton of crap that they are just going to throw away that other people can use, so it's better to recycle that stuff to the less fortunate. Your getting rid of your stuff and helping someone out.

As far as money goes, I think money should be used for more important things like...cancer research or something, not poor people. I actually think people who live in poverty benefit more from getting things like clothes, food, old furniture, rather then cash.

[overwatch]

hmm interesting point Eris, are we responcible for makeing the poor poor?
Well here is a little case study (dear no I sound like a teacher). Africa - the Sahel Belt and peanut (ground nut) oil. When these nations in the Sahel Belt were given independence from thier former Eurpean rulers, the European nations saw fit to help set the country up with a health export income in the form of ground nut export. Now this was all well and good, for during these times there was a period of 'heavier' rains than usual, (about 10-20 years) which allowed the export to flourish and most of the nations farmland was turned over to ground nut production. However this pushed the nomadic herders northwards, closer to the Sahara, but the rains meant that they were not pressured. However, once the rains dwindled and the belt entered a drought period (or realy a period of reduce rainfall) the areas closer to the Sahara suffered heavy desertification (that is not desert formation) so our nomadic herders tried to head south, as they had done in times past, but standing in thier way was not only farmers who now owned vast amounts of land and thus prevented crossing, but also national boarders with nervous young guards with AK47s. Thus these herders were stuck in an ever drier environment - whilst we in Europe still got our ground nut oils.
Now are we responcible for the starvation of those herders? I would say that we are, for it is our influence on the nations in Africa which has lead to thier problems today. Now as to arguning whether it was better or worse in those nations before we invaded that cannot be decided = but what we can say is that our influences are not currently beneficail. So there is a case for giving aid - as to its effectivness that is a huge topic, full of examples of western technologies and methods being imposed on "stupid" "poorly educated" locals, only for the western methods to fail almost totally, and then for further research to indecate that the locals were not so stupid after all/

[Sagat]

I feel the same way. The only things I donate to is the Royal Canadian Legion (which I trust, given the calibre of the people in it) and World Vision.

What I hate is being asked to donate X amt of dollars to "the world poor"
I was asked this twice this weekend alone, once at taco hell and once at walmart.

The girl at taco bell asked and I shook my head and it was the end of the story. The girl at walmart was different... I took the liberty of copying it verbatum or whatever word means ... word for word:

17 yr old idiot with too much lipstick: Would you like to donate 2 dollars to the worlds poor sir?
me: no
17 yr old working just to pay off her cell phone bills: no? why not?
lord almighty: because I dont want to
17 yr old about to die: ....thats not really that nice
king steve: I dont care about them, I dont care about Africa. If you want me to donate two dollars, take it off my damn bill and we'll call it a donation
my friend: ah man come on ..
17 yr old high school drop out: I can't do that ...
me: I donate 35 a month to keep some Thai kid and his family alive, they live because of me, I'm a hero, now give me my bill
17 yr old goth tard: .... here's your bill ... have a great day sir
(she said great in a sarcastic tone, I laughed and walked away, my friend was beet red because confrontation is a scary thing to him)

Imagine this little football team toy having the audacity to moral grandstand with me over two dollars. First of all no, no I don't care about the worlds poor. They're poor. And the whole reason is pretty much the same reason Eris doesn't like them. I may have overreacted, but it was because I was pissed that I had to pay a lot on my credit cards this payday and was not left with enough to buy my PSP, then while at Walmart I saw the PSP on for a lower price and had to decide on that or food. I chose food but only begrudgingly so she picked a bad time to get into it with me.

Besides, I'm a freaking Private paying for bills, my awesome car and a retardedly high priced apartment, I'm close enough to poor as it is without worrying about the rest of em. Here's a question:

Why should we have to pay for the rest of the worlds mistakes? Screw them. We don't owe anybody anything by virtue of being born/living in great countries, that's just how the dice fell. Not my fault. I'm not going to feel bad that I complain about gas being high while little Mobutu can't afford a tire for his bike.

[dragon_nataku]

One of my pet peeve charities is the whole "stop AIDS in Africa" thing. I used to work for the US government in the Dominican Republic, and had the eye-opening experience to be allowed into a task force meeting. At one point in this meeting, they were discussing the AIDS in Africa problem, and this is what they said:

"They cannot take their AIDS medication because they have no clocks/watches/way to tell time in order to know when to take their medication, so they just don't take it." (muchly paraphrased)

I call this eye-opening because a lot of people (like I used to be) are naive and think that throwing money at this sort of problem will make it go away. This meeting made me realize that the AIDS problem in Africa is pretty much a hopeless case. Some might say "So just give them clocks!" Well, there are no convenience stores there to buy batteries, and no power outlets to plug in clocks.

I suppose this viewpoint can be applied to many such problems in the world. There are a lot of things that we take for granted that we just don't realize that these poor countries don't have. But this isn't our fault, like Sagat said, so how is it our responsibility?

I figure if a US government agency can't solve the problem, a charity won't be able to either.

[TheAsterisk!]

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.

[bug]

Well, I don't have that big of a problem with charities, well, as long as I don't have to give a way money. Personally, I'm poor enough as it is, so I don't have the luxury to give away money. I feel sorry for the poor people, but come on, every one has problems.

[____]

Sounds a bit harsh, but I have no interest in giving to charities...or rather I really don't wish to. Partially because I won't know what happens to the money that the charities get and whether it will be used for the purpose of what they say or not. I don't know if the charity claims to be legit or not so I just avoid them.

[╬Karami Mew~Meow]

I love giving charities, but we don't give much money, cuz some may use it not the right way.
My family's quite a charitable family ^_^

[Cless Alvein]

What are their parents doing, nothing? Sheesh. If my kids were sick, I'd pay for it myself, not throw a pity party for myself and try to make other people pay for it.

Mum tried to get me to give to the same charity she does, the St. Judas children's fund or some such thing. I just ignored her.

I bet your attitude would change quickly if you had a four-year-old child with Leukemia. Especially if you think you could afford to pay for their treatment without any assistance.

St. Jude's Children's Hospital is a -great- charity for those who may be so inclined to give an innocent child a second chance at life.

[Meyrin]

Charrity would be a good thing if only it would go to the right people but it dosent. The gouverment takes it all. Just for an exemple,the town's people of my home raised a lot of money to build a better areana for hockey, etc... but when they were done, the gouverment said that it was againts the law and confiscated the money and used it on the shopping mall

[Eris]

Ever notice how, when they advertise charities, always use face-shots of starving yet adorable children wallowing in the mud? They always appeal to emotions, and never to reason, that alone is a good reason not to donate as much as a shirt button.

[Guerrera]

I've never felt that I "owe" it to the poor to give them anything. If I give to someone, honestly it's just cause I feel like it. I like helping people (to this day, I don't know why. I tried to get rid of that, but it doesn't work. It'd be nice if someone could explain that to me)

If I'm rich, I think "well, I got a lot leftover! Lemme give it to someone who needs it more". Sadly, I'm nowhere near rich.

But I'd be an idiot if I thought that the poor get themselves into that condition. Things like that happen. Children are born into unfortunate circumstances. People lose jobs/houses/etc. because of tragedy or natural disasters. Ain't their fault.

You're right though. Better than handing out goods, it's smarter to teach them "to fish" for themselves... and even that still requires money. An education, medical facilities and factories are expensive.

[dragon_nataku]

I bet your attitude would change quickly if you had a four-year-old child with Leukemia. Especially if you think you could afford to pay for their treatment without any assistance.

St. Jude's Children's Hospital is a -great- charity for those who may be so inclined to give an innocent child a second chance at life.

... wot? If I "think I could afford to pay for their treatment without any assistance," then why would my attitude change? Or did you mean "think I couldn't etc., etc."? Possible typos aside, I am going into the medical field, which pays a lot of money, just so I will be able to have enough money to pay for things if my kids get sick. Unlike some parents out there, I plan ahead. Their lack of foresight is not my problem.

My main issue stems from this: I watch a lot of vet shows and a lot of the owners would rather put their pets to sleep than pay for life-saving surgery. Since you can't very well put your kid to sleep just cause you can't pay for their treatment, these people would rather beg for money from people rather than, oh I dunno, get a second mortgage or not have a brand new car or some such nonsense. Most people are inherantly selfish and would rather beg and plead for a handout than maybe live a tad uncomfortably for awhile in order to pay for their own child's care. Back home, we don't usually have these sorts of charities (they are definately not charities run by our goverments, at least, only charities from the outside), so individual families make do to pay for their children's treatment. Sure, the healtcare may suck in my country, but that's besides the point. And anyway, the families that can afford it fly their kids here to Miami to be treated. The poor families do what they can. Their kids may not always survive, but a lot of them do and like I said, not because of a charity.

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. I give what I can to the ASPCA and that's enough for me, since animals have a lot less rights than children do in this world.

[Memento Mori]

I bet your attitude would change quickly if you had a four-year-old child with Leukemia. Especially if you think you could afford to pay for their treatment without any assistance.

St. Jude's Children's Hospital is a -great- charity for those who may be so inclined to give an innocent child a second chance at life.

Exactly. You say you hate charities, but if you were forced to look at a child with a deadly diease, your attitude would change instantly.

I used to think charity was a waste of money myself, until my teacher's daughter died of cancer. Now when I get older, I want to donate to St. Jude's or something that is trying to cure something. It wouldn't kill you to give alittle to HELP someone. If they were saying you owe it to them because you're rich, do you think that the money would be used to cure a diease? If you had it and couldn't pay for it, wouldn't you want any help at all? I'm sure I would.

[Ami~chan]

I bet your attitude would change quickly if you had a four-year-old child with Leukemia. Especially if you think you could afford to pay for their treatment without any assistance.

St. Jude's Children's Hospital is a -great- charity for those who may be so inclined to give an innocent child a second chance at life.

Wondered when someone would bring St. Jude's up.

When my mother had cancer at the age of fourteen, my grandparents took her to St. Jude's. She needed treatment fast, but my grandparents were dirt poor. Their insurance wouldn't cover them. It wasn't that they didn't work hard. Both of my grandparents worked their butts off for what little money they had. But it still wasn't enough. St. Jude's stepped in and helped. Because of that, she survived that round, and went on to raise three children and finish her education.

All thanks to a charity. I don't care about what other charities may say, do, or say they will do, but I'll stand by St. Jude's.

[Sagat]

Ever notice how, when they advertise charities, always use face-shots of starving yet adorable children wallowing in the mud? They always appeal to emotions, and never to reason, that alone is a good reason not to donate as much as a shirt button.

Reason is in short supply in this world, while even the lowest intellectual common denominator is capable of getting the gist of a commercial like that.

[KuroTan]

Ever notice how, when they advertise charities, always use face-shots of starving yet adorable children wallowing in the mud? They always appeal to emotions, and never to reason, that alone is a good reason not to donate as much as a shirt button.

I always thought that that'd end up hurting the people who would be given the charity more. I remember that all the way to my thirteenth birthday, I had this image of the countries in Africa as being all huts and the children all ran around naked. It was only when I took an interest in world affairs that I realized how wrong I was.