Define Non-Profit

[*_ash_*]

Surely it's more effective for the people to give their £5 a month or whatever directly to the people in need? They get the whole £5 instead of just a fraction of it.

 

But who would organise it?

 

If I want to divide my £100 amongst various people, how would I go about it?

 

Say £30 to poor children somewhere in Africa

£30 to poor adults somewhere in America

and £40 to poor adults in Dover, then how would I/you do that?

[Hairyloon]

Surely it's more effective for the people to give their £5 a month or whatever directly to the people in need? They get the whole £5 instead of just a fraction of it.

 

Ah, if we are talking about those subscription schemes, be very careful about what money is going where.

Many of these things are administered by fund-raising companies, and their costs eat up the lions share of your donation.

Fodgy as duck IMO, but apparently entirely legal.

[Anna B]

The world is awash with money and charities.

 

It's been said before, but so much money has gone into Africa, for example, its problems should have been solved many times over.

 

If these guys were so good how come it isn't so?

[*_ash_*]

The world is awash with money and charities.

 

It's been said before, but so much money has gone into Africa, for example, its problems should have been solved many times over.

 

If these guys were so good how come it isn't so?

 

What do you mean?

 

---------- Post added 26-05-2013 at 02:52 ----------

 

The world is awash with money and charities.

 

It's been said before, but so much money has gone into Africa, for example, its problems should have been solved many times over.

 

If these guys were so good how come it isn't so?

 

If you mean that it should be ok in some places, then you have to get some perspective.

 

Population of England 60,000,000 people ish.

Population of the continent Africa 1,000,000,000 ish.

 

One of the big charities is of course Oxfam.

 

Last year they handed out £286,000,000 worldwide (7,000,000,000 people) -a large portion goes to Africa. (£0.04 per person on planet/ or £0.29 per African [if it ALL went there, which it doesn't])

 

Last year we spent £104,000,000,000 alone on the NHS for 60 million people. (£1,733 for every single person)

 

Imagine that we took every SINGLE penny that Oxfam raised last year (£385m) it would only run the entire NHS for just over 1 day.

[El Cid]

 

Population of England 60,000,000 people ish.

Population of the continent Africa 1,000,000,000 ish.

 

One of the big charities is of course Oxfam.

 

Last year they handed out £286,000,000 worldwide (7,000,000,000 people) -a large portion goes to Africa. (£0.04 per person on planet/ or £0.29 per African [if it ALL went there, which it doesn't])

 

 

Are you saying that there is a need for charity, but we are too small and dont make any difference?

[Cyclone]

The world is awash with money and charities.

 

It's been said before, but so much money has gone into Africa, for example, its problems should have been solved many times over.

 

If these guys were so good how come it isn't so?

 

Given that we spend huge amounts more locally, there should be no hunger, poverty or need in the UK... But there still is. And we don't have decade long droughts, massive food crop failures, civil war and ethnic cleansing.

 

So how is that you expect a few pence per person in Africa to have magically solved all need there?

[El Cid]

It is immoral not to try to help those in need.

 

But in many cases charity is just making things worse. What will a alcoholic spend money on if helped, a gambler or a drug adict?

Even in Africa, there are too many people for the scorched land to support, and we just help more children survive.

 

It is immoral not to try to help those in need. But are we making it worse, but helping them in the wrong way?

[Cyclone]

Charity doesn't have to be in the form of money, give an alcoholic treatment, or food. Not that an alcoholic necessarily needs charity.

In Africa giving food seems to be a last resort when people are actually starving to death, in slightly better times charities concentrate on things like providing permanent clean drinking water (through the digging of wells for example), or running education campaigns.

 

Charity should aim to remove the need for charity, not just help people limp along, and I think most do aim for this, it's a difficult goal though.

[GLASGOWOODS]

And for 30k you wouldn't get anyone with anywhere near the level of skills or experience required. I'd rather give to charity knowing they've got someone at the top that isn't going to fritter my money away through lack of ability - even if that means some of my money is going on their 80k salary.

 

Like the taxes I pay, that the government fritter away abroad.

 

---------- Post added 26-05-2013 at 10:05 ----------

 

You said 'Fat cat directors are the reason I will never give to charity. Far better to give directly to the people they are supposed to be helping.'

 

That implies that all charities are paying £80k as the link suggests. This list is just the big ones. And CE on £80k still aren't necessarily fat cats as you said. It's been pointed out a few times, that these are charities with incomes of up to and over £300,000,000/yr. Do you think that someone who isn't suited to a position, should be in charge of so much money?! If they are poorly ran, and exposure to this was open information, it could finish an organisation in an instant. Using that line as a reason to never give to charity is illlogical as it isn't true (in most cases*).

 

If you don't like charities and don't want to give money to them then fair enough, but without showing decent evidence rather than the information given in this Guardian link, it's unreasonable/unfair to put ideas out that fat cats swallow up charity money rather than it going directly to the cause.

 

The best way to judge a charity is to look it up online, it only takes a few seconds.

 

As already said, this link doesn't show reflective stats/percentage of how much of the charity income goes on total staff costs.

 

Saying all this, I think you one of the people that said you would never change your mind about anything on this forum anyway, so it's almost pointless responding.

 

*There are of course dodgy ones, that are used to filter out taxes, but I've never seen one openly advertising for extra money.

 

 

Given the way that thread went I thought it might be distasteful to continue. I like to get responses to my questions, and I do the same when someone has spent their writing something to me.

 

Can you dig up how much they spend on expenses? Such as top hotels/first class air travel etc:

 

---------- Post added 26-05-2013 at 10:09 ----------

 

Yeah, but how do you access those people ?

Not every homeless person sits begging, and how do you find someone sat starving at home to donate food to them ?

 

Local food banks/soup kitchens etc: Go buy the food and give directly to them.

 

---------- Post added 26-05-2013 at 10:17 ----------

 

The world is awash with money and charities.

 

It's been said before, but so much money has gone into Africa, for example, its problems should have been solved many times over.

 

If these guys were so good how come it isn't so?

 

I agree. It's all too much and sometimes a bit aggressive.

 

You put the tv on in a morning and charities are straight in your face.

Then the letterbox rattles (charity bags)

You go into town to the sound of tins shaking and chuggers harassing folk.

You purchase a product in a store and sometimes asked if you would like to donate.

You use an ATM with the option of donating.

And it goes on and on.

 

I give to charities. But never in any of the above ways..

[*_ash_*]

Are you saying that there is a need for charity, but we are too small and dont make any difference?

 

I was answering the point where Anna seems to think that they in Africa should be ok, with all the money people have given to them.

 

 

Can you dig up how much they spend on expenses? Such as top hotels/first class air travel etc:

 

The accounts that I look up are quite comprehensive in detail. I don't understand why you've brought first-class travel into a charity staff costings. Unless you know of some unethical behaviour that you could share.

 

---------- Post added 26-05-2013 at 23:13 ----------

 

Surely it's more effective for the people to give their £5 a month or whatever directly to the people in need? They get the whole £5 instead of just a fraction of it.

 

But who would organise it?

 

If I want to divide my £100 amongst various people, how would I go about it?

 

Say £30 to poor children somewhere in Africa

£30 to poor adults somewhere in America

and £40 to poor adults in Dover, then how would I/you do that?

 

Any answer to this yet Happ?