Mister M Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 I know from working in this field there is so many corrupt agencies, charity workers, CEO’s bonuses, admin costs, training providers, end of year celebration events, literature promotional packs, advertising etc etc and god knows how many other people with their fingers in the pie to pay for, rarely does any of the money donated reaches the people it is intended to help. And helping a charitable cause isn’t always about giving money, eg you can donate your time, give blood or simply find a person in need, help a neighbour, there is always someone worse off than yourself and you never have to look that far either. In nearly all cases you will always do a better job of helping someone yourself than donating to charity, so should we now stop donating our money to charities and do the good deeds ourselves? I always prefer to volunteer my time rather than my money, simply because I have more time than money. And volunteering is more fulfilling than simply putting money in a bucket or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Either way, you can easily look at company accounts online. Or any charity's accounts, in fact, esp. as most aren't companies at all. Use https://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/showcharity/registerofcharities/registerhomepage.aspx?&=& Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Web Posted March 9, 2013 Author Share Posted March 9, 2013 If people stopped giving money to charity who do you think is going to pay for all the scientific research that go's towards the various disease related charitys. not everyone is about giving bottled water to the poor in Africa. It would not be in Cancer Research's interest to cure cancer as they're too big a business now with indirect shares in drug companies, it would be financially disastrous to cure cancer, it's always best to treat the symptoms than to cure the disease. ---------- Post added 09-03-2013 at 01:49 ---------- I understand your issues but you should be aware that some charities abide by quality rules and are inspected annually accross 12 aspects of their operations, check out PQASSO quality mark on Charity Evaluation Services website. Like big businesses it's so easy to find loopholes and juggle the books to please the auditors, even easier for big charities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vague_Boy Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 They also give work to people that would struggle to find employment. I thought that's what the public sector was for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabitter Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 green web worked for a charity for a year and made a considerable amount of money for them.the amount the administers spent on expenses shocked me,it included many boozy dinners when they met me to hand over the money.so i agree with you.ireckon the charity got about 40% of money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medusa Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 I usually give time rather than money, mostly because I don't have money to give. The only exception to that at the moment are Macmillan (who do an awful lot of good things for me and lots of other people living with the effects of cancer, and who no matter how much money I give them would still be able to bill me more for compression garments that they buy etc). None of the animal rescues I've ever worked for pay anybody (even paid staff) more than a basic living wage. Several of them have no paid staff and are run entirely by volunteers, and costs are basic things like vet bills and kennel costs. I think that if you look at a large national charity then you have to expect to see organisation costs as well as paid staff, and for some of the charities then advertising and education are part of their overall aims and therefore you can choose whether you give money based upon whether you agree with those aims. I'm not naively believing that there is no fraud, deception or misleading happening in the world of charities BTW, I just have links with a lot of charities that do so much good in their own field that it would be hard to argue against their existence, and without donated money they surely would cease to exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 It would not be in Cancer Research's interest to cure cancer as they're too big a business now with indirect shares in drug companies, it would be financially disastrous to cure cancer, it's always best to treat the symptoms than to cure the disease. Like big businesses it's so easy to find loopholes and juggle the books to please the auditors, even easier for big charities. Wow, some real CT nonesense here As if there was just one cancer to cure.......and that another degenerative disease wouldn't take its place as a significant killer.... Oh, and it's great to have an accounting expert on the forum...so explain how a charities books are more complex than a big companies that will have the best accountants and tax lawyers a money can buy to minimise corporation tax (something a charity doesn't pay). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairyloon Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 They also give work to people that would struggle to find employment. Speaking of which, there is quite a big kick off at the moment about some charities participation in the Workfare programme. What are opinions here about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodnreeluk Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 I know from working in this field there is so many corrupt agencies, charity workers, CEO’s bonuses, admin costs, training providers, end of year celebration events, literature promotional packs, advertising etc etc and god knows how many other people with their fingers in the pie to pay for, rarely does any of the money donated reaches the people it is intended to help. And helping a charitable cause isn’t always about giving money, eg you can donate your time, give blood or simply find a person in need, help a neighbour, there is always someone worse off than yourself and you never have to look that far either. In nearly all cases you will always do a better job of helping someone yourself than donating to charity, so should we now stop donating our money to charities and do the good deeds ourselves? I used to work for an "outsourcing" company. Big, well known charities used to outsource their appeals to us. We would send out the begging letters, free pens, etc, then count the money. We made much more out of it than the so-called charities. Many charities are now little more than big business, with big overheads, and a pittance going to the "good cause" which justifies its charitable, and therefore tax-free, status. Why was Branson so interested in running the national lottery? He is a businessman and it was to make money! Look at Camelot's profits! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Speaking of which, there is quite a big kick off at the moment about some charities participation in the Workfare programme. What are opinions here about that? I agree with the principles, I think, but the workless should be given work by local councils; perhaps Labour are right on that one. The level of unemployment allowances should be set so that people want to work. At the start of being given these allowances it should be made clear that the allowances are for short term help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.