Africa appeals
Discussion
DodgyGeezer said:
Esceptico said:
As if there weren’t enough threads in NP&E for posters to demonstrate their lack of empathy and humanity, the OP had to start this one.
TBF though what is the answer? The West is criticised for imposing our values on 3rd world countries but then will hoover up every $ sent their way. There is no question the majority here are far, FAR better off than a lot of people in Africa, but what actually is the best course of action?
In the 50s and 60s after many former colonies gained independence it was assumed by many that they would be able to go through an industrial revolution and become like the west. In a few cases that happened eg South Korea and more recently China (although not politically and not uniformly).
However pretty much all of Africa has remained under developed. There are numerous theories as to why, that range from pointing the finger of blame at Africans themselves to it all being a global conspiracy of the rich industrialised countries that have propped up local elites (providing them with Mercedes, Guns and access to Swiss bank accounts to hide all the ill-gotten gains) so that we have cheap access to African raw materials.
To me most of the theories contain some grains of truth without painting the whole picture.
I wish I had ready answers that would be both successful and politically possible. Unfortunately I don’t.
However, I don’t think this thread was started as a means of discussing why Africa has not developed. More a way of posters to feel better about themselves for not giving to charity “because it doesn’t make a difference”.
Esceptico said:
However, I don’t think this thread was started as a means of discussing why Africa has not developed. More a way of posters to feel better about themselves for not giving to charity “because it doesn’t make a difference”.
I think the Africa appeals do make a difference but they make a difference to the people they touch so it’s like throwing a pebble into the ocean in terms of impact. I think there is an expectation from lots of people that this couple of quid a month will radically change the country as a whole and bring it out of poverty but for that to happen the interventions would have to be different. Real change in Africa needs money to be spent on stuff that wouldn’t sound good in a charity advert which are designed to get the do gooders putting their hands in their pockets…….Give three pounds a month… just three pounds a month… this will sort out the government system, it’s underlying infrastructure and heal the wounds of many centuries of division whilst modernising how the country is run….
Who would buy that for their £3 a month?
A500leroy said:
Does the money that gets sent over ever reach the people they are appealing for?
Yes.Just two of many examples I could provide (which my work has been associated with).
A classroom in a school in Sierra Leone funded via UK Aid and two UK appeal charities giving education to around 800 under 11s where previously they had none. Using books and equipment also donated via UK charities.
A storm drain in Tanzania that's improved the lives of people there enormously. Funded jointly by Dutch and British charities.
shih tzu faced said:
Would certainly be interesting to know what percentage of the £3 actually reaches the desired destination
Average is around 75% of revenue spent on implementation.shih tzu faced said:
I get the feeling (with no real evidence it has to be said) that there is a lot of waste endemic in a lot of charities.
There used to be. They then started hiring top people paying them near full commercial value, the result of which was increased cost efficiencies and the value that’s delivered. UK Charities are the most tightly regulated of any on Earth. Some slip through the regulatory net but they are quicky spotted and very few in number.craigjm said:
The problem with these appeals is that they "fix" a symptom of the issue rather than the root cause. Fixing the root cause is much more difficult and takes much more money and resources upfront. Even in the most developed of African countries like South Africa there are serious issues because the government is not run properly.
Most, if not all of the main appeal charities work in partnership with International Development Institutions (Such as DiFID). These Development institutions work on the big stuff such as governance reforms and infrastructure while the charities work in parallel on things such as regional and community implementation. This provides a neat blend of OECD nation obligation on aid, boosted by the altruistic nature of the population. Somebody mentioned corruption….
It is my view that corruption is the cancer of the world. I am as near to certain as I can be that the Covid pandemic is rooted in corruption. Remove corruption from the world and you solve pretty much every single major problem that exists, up to and including terrorism. But it is an immeasurably complex issue and way, way more nuanced than the typical idea of brown envelopes and fancy cars for political leaders.
What you don’t do is use the presence of corruption as an excuse not to do something because if you’re doing something, you have the opportunity to stimulate change.
Chicken_Satay said:
The fact that I can't get a GP appointment in under two weeks and NHS walk in centres have a wait time of at least three hours means that I won't be donating any money overseas until we get our own basic health services sorted out.
Charity begins at home. It's an understandable point of view. However, consider this analogy.Take the world as the house in which we all live. Countries are the rooms. Some rooms are kept nice and tidy and clean, others; less so. The nice tidy rooms can't ignore the untidy ones. People in those rooms may try to live in another room. They may start arguing with another untidy room. Because they're not clean, disease may emerge from them and spread through the whole house. And because of their presence, it costs everyone more money than it should to maintain the whole house. So it makes sense to send a few people from those nice tidy and clean rooms to help those in other rooms sort their s
t out because then, everyone benefits.So when thinking in terms of Charity beginning at home, it's sometimes worth thinking about what you actually mean by home - the house or the room?
daddy cool said:
You'd think by now they'd have learnt to live closer to the water, so they don't have to do a daily hike of 10 miles carrying buckets of it...
Aged 10, I got told off for making this point at school. We were raising money to provide water pumps or something.The week before our teacher had explained to us how the small town we lived in had developed because of the river it was built on. I suggested the water starved folks would be better off spending the money raised on building homes closer to the water.
It didn't go down well.
I wouldn’t argue Africa is more or less deserving of your time and money than any other. It is an awesome place though, I challenge anyone to travel there and not feel just a bit more alive.
As one previous poster noted though, Africa is a continent not a country, so huge range of economies and situations. There have been massive changes, we just rarely get a positive picture from our media.
Ethiopia is a good example: two thirds of it is some of the most fertile land in Africa, with bustling towns and truly stunning scenery, really should be a major tourist destination. What tends to get featured is the desert plane, which is poor and sparsely populated. In their case, the long running war with Eritrea was the key problem for the economy (ended in 2018).
Re charities relating to Africa, I suspect most use funds wisely but if you’re concerned, you can get involved in ones with specific projects where you can meet the people involved and see results. I prefer to myself, it’s more satisfying and enables you to add value beyond cash, such as skills and contacts.
Certainly not a continent to write off though. Many tremendously positive things happening there, and really doesn’t deserve the image we have of it.
As one previous poster noted though, Africa is a continent not a country, so huge range of economies and situations. There have been massive changes, we just rarely get a positive picture from our media.
Ethiopia is a good example: two thirds of it is some of the most fertile land in Africa, with bustling towns and truly stunning scenery, really should be a major tourist destination. What tends to get featured is the desert plane, which is poor and sparsely populated. In their case, the long running war with Eritrea was the key problem for the economy (ended in 2018).
Re charities relating to Africa, I suspect most use funds wisely but if you’re concerned, you can get involved in ones with specific projects where you can meet the people involved and see results. I prefer to myself, it’s more satisfying and enables you to add value beyond cash, such as skills and contacts.
Certainly not a continent to write off though. Many tremendously positive things happening there, and really doesn’t deserve the image we have of it.
Wildcat45 said:
daddy cool said:
You'd think by now they'd have learnt to live closer to the water, so they don't have to do a daily hike of 10 miles carrying buckets of it...
Aged 10, I got told off for making this point at school. We were raising money to provide water pumps or something.The week before our teacher had explained to us how the small town we lived in had developed because of the river it was built on. I suggested the water starved folks would be better off spending the money raised on building homes closer to the water.
It didn't go down well.
The land close to the water source may be unsuitable for human habitation.
There maybe disputed tribal factors that forbid habitation there.
It could be where the people live is better for trade and trade often tips the balance.
It could also be that where a town exists there was once a water supply but that dried up - it's not that quick or easy to simply uproot an entire village particularly if the new water source ends up drying up too...which is often the case.
So you often find villages and settlements central to several water sources so that if one dries up, they have options.
I get the joke but you have to remember that these are human beings with the same capacity of logical thought as you or I. If there was a more suitable solution available to them, they'd take it. But there rarely is.
Whenever a charity asks for donation, always ask what % the company retain, and then make a choice. It is surprising.
Worst example I found was a charity competition at a golf hole, nearest the pin / hole in one challenge. £20 to enter with the winner getting a holiday. (It was running for 3 months).This was being run by two young girls who looked like they came straight off an f1 grid enticing all the old boys to sign up. They were successful. Signage was on trailers being pulled around by a new land rover. After their costs were met, salaries, vehicles, lunch etc, zip up pvc clothing, surplus was guaranteed go through to their good cause after an admin fee at a significant %, it was something overseas but cannot remember what.
Some see this as a business opportunity, charity be damned. They should have just provided mobile lap dancing at £20 a go, would have been more honest and a better business model.
Worst example I found was a charity competition at a golf hole, nearest the pin / hole in one challenge. £20 to enter with the winner getting a holiday. (It was running for 3 months).This was being run by two young girls who looked like they came straight off an f1 grid enticing all the old boys to sign up. They were successful. Signage was on trailers being pulled around by a new land rover. After their costs were met, salaries, vehicles, lunch etc, zip up pvc clothing, surplus was guaranteed go through to their good cause after an admin fee at a significant %, it was something overseas but cannot remember what.
Some see this as a business opportunity, charity be damned. They should have just provided mobile lap dancing at £20 a go, would have been more honest and a better business model.
The important figure is the percentage of the donation that gets to the end user as charitable activities so income minus running costs. All charities will calculate this figure and have it available. If we look at some of the top UK charities the variance is staggering. The Charity Commission suggest the figure going to charitable activities should be 65% or higher with an aim for 75%. St Johns Ambulance and MacMillan very good then BUT look at the British heart foundation!
St. John Ambulance: for every £1 spent, 87.3p goes on charitable activities, 10p is spent on fundraising, and 2.7p is spent on generating income.
Macmillan Cancer Support: 73p charitable activities, 24.4p fundraising, and 2.6p generating income.
Alzheimer’s Research UK: 66.1p charitable activities, 33.9p fundraising, and 0p generating income.
Marie Curie: 63p charitable activities, 27.9p fundraising, and 9.1p generating income.
Cancer Research UK: 60.7p charitable activities, 24p on fundraising, and 15.3p generating income.
Guide Dogs: 56p charitable activities, 40.2p fundraising, and 3.8p generating income.
British Heart Foundation: 26.2p charitable activities, 40.6p fundraising, and 33.2p generating income.
St. John Ambulance: for every £1 spent, 87.3p goes on charitable activities, 10p is spent on fundraising, and 2.7p is spent on generating income.
Macmillan Cancer Support: 73p charitable activities, 24.4p fundraising, and 2.6p generating income.
Alzheimer’s Research UK: 66.1p charitable activities, 33.9p fundraising, and 0p generating income.
Marie Curie: 63p charitable activities, 27.9p fundraising, and 9.1p generating income.
Cancer Research UK: 60.7p charitable activities, 24p on fundraising, and 15.3p generating income.
Guide Dogs: 56p charitable activities, 40.2p fundraising, and 3.8p generating income.
British Heart Foundation: 26.2p charitable activities, 40.6p fundraising, and 33.2p generating income.
Ice_blue_tvr said:
There is a certain irony to African countries needing so much aid when beneath them are some of the richest precious metal mines, diamonds and oil.
It's OK, China is now raping Africa of all these resources in exchange for small amounts of infrastructure being built (by Chinese workers shipped in, not locals). Thebaggers said:
Whenever a charity asks for donation, always ask what % the company retain, and then make a choice. It is surprising.
Worst example I found was a charity competition at a golf hole, nearest the pin / hole in one challenge. £20 to enter with the winner getting a holiday. (It was running for 3 months).This was being run by two young girls who looked like they came straight off an f1 grid enticing all the old boys to sign up. They were successful. Signage was on trailers being pulled around by a new land rover. After their costs were met, salaries, vehicles, lunch etc, zip up pvc clothing, surplus was guaranteed go through to their good cause after an admin fee at a significant %, it was something overseas but cannot remember what.
Some see this as a business opportunity, charity be damned. They should have just provided mobile lap dancing at £20 a go, would have been more honest and a better business model.
There's a line that divides people across a spectrum of topics including some big political stuff, and thats the unquestionable reverence accorded to people who say they're doing things for others. If I had lower morals and was motivated to make a packet I'd certainly use an opportunity that shrouded myself in this protective cloak, and know for a fact some actually do.Worst example I found was a charity competition at a golf hole, nearest the pin / hole in one challenge. £20 to enter with the winner getting a holiday. (It was running for 3 months).This was being run by two young girls who looked like they came straight off an f1 grid enticing all the old boys to sign up. They were successful. Signage was on trailers being pulled around by a new land rover. After their costs were met, salaries, vehicles, lunch etc, zip up pvc clothing, surplus was guaranteed go through to their good cause after an admin fee at a significant %, it was something overseas but cannot remember what.
Some see this as a business opportunity, charity be damned. They should have just provided mobile lap dancing at £20 a go, would have been more honest and a better business model.
Thebaggers said:
Whenever a charity asks for donation, always ask what % the company retain, and then make a choice. It is surprising.
Worst example I found was a charity competition at a golf hole, nearest the pin / hole in one challenge. £20 to enter with the winner getting a holiday. (It was running for 3 months).This was being run by two young girls who looked like they came straight off an f1 grid enticing all the old boys to sign up. They were successful. Signage was on trailers being pulled around by a new land rover. After their costs were met, salaries, vehicles, lunch etc, zip up pvc clothing, surplus was guaranteed go through to their good cause after an admin fee at a significant %, it was something overseas but cannot remember what.
Some see this as a business opportunity, charity be damned. They should have just provided mobile lap dancing at £20 a go, would have been more honest and a better business model.
Happy to be corrected, but if registered as a charity, then there won't be any corporation tax to pay...20% up already...Worst example I found was a charity competition at a golf hole, nearest the pin / hole in one challenge. £20 to enter with the winner getting a holiday. (It was running for 3 months).This was being run by two young girls who looked like they came straight off an f1 grid enticing all the old boys to sign up. They were successful. Signage was on trailers being pulled around by a new land rover. After their costs were met, salaries, vehicles, lunch etc, zip up pvc clothing, surplus was guaranteed go through to their good cause after an admin fee at a significant %, it was something overseas but cannot remember what.
Some see this as a business opportunity, charity be damned. They should have just provided mobile lap dancing at £20 a go, would have been more honest and a better business model.
StevieBee said:
Charity begins at home. It's an understandable point of view. However, consider this analogy.
Take the world as the house in which we all live. Countries are the rooms. Some rooms are kept nice and tidy and clean, others; less so. The nice tidy rooms can't ignore the untidy ones. People in those rooms may try to live in another room. They may start arguing with another untidy room. Because they're not clean, disease may emerge from them and spread through the whole house. And because of their presence, it costs everyone more money than it should to maintain the whole house. So it makes sense to send a few people from those nice tidy and clean rooms to help those in other rooms sort their st out because then, everyone benefits.
So when thinking in terms of Charity beginning at home, it's sometimes worth thinking about what you actually mean by home - the house or the room?
The UK, and in particular, the NHS, is not a tidy room at all. In fact, the NHS is a complete and utter shambles from what I've experienced. Until they get hospitals, schools, police, and other vital services up to scratch then any organisation outside of the UK looking for my money will be politely given the finger.Take the world as the house in which we all live. Countries are the rooms. Some rooms are kept nice and tidy and clean, others; less so. The nice tidy rooms can't ignore the untidy ones. People in those rooms may try to live in another room. They may start arguing with another untidy room. Because they're not clean, disease may emerge from them and spread through the whole house. And because of their presence, it costs everyone more money than it should to maintain the whole house. So it makes sense to send a few people from those nice tidy and clean rooms to help those in other rooms sort their s
t out because then, everyone benefits.So when thinking in terms of Charity beginning at home, it's sometimes worth thinking about what you actually mean by home - the house or the room?
Chicken_Satay said:
The UK, and in particular, the NHS, is not a tidy room at all. In fact, the NHS is a complete and utter shambles from what I've experienced. Until they get hospitals, schools, police, and other vital services up to scratch then any organisation outside of the UK looking for my money will be politely given the finger.
So you're paying the £2 a month of post-tax income that you were sending to Africa to the NHS?What has one got to do with the other?
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff