Giving to Charity.
Author
Discussion

WD*

Original Poster:

4,045 posts

281 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
I'm sat watching the news, with an article about the earthquake in Pakistan.

Apparenty, following the Tsunami, Britain alone gave/pledged £330m, while following the earthquake, they have only had £40m pledged/given.

So for those two appeals alone, brits have given £370m, yet the aid agencies are saying this isn't enough.

The question is, where does it stop? When do you draw the line and say enough is enough, charity begins at home, etc?

There is a mass of debt, homelessness etc, in this country, yet we can give that much for people in other countries - why can't we do it for our own pople?

goo-goo-gjoob

812 posts

285 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
People may be more willing to give to victims of disasters than to people in their own country because they percieve the disaster (tsunami) victims as victims of an act of nature that could not be helped, as opposed to the poor people in their own country, who are most likely poor for some other reason.

DennisTheMenace

15,605 posts

298 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
good isnt it , we are seen as a bottomless pit of cash , and then slated if we dont give enough , its like those ads on sky ,"just £3 a month" yeah right and how much of it goes to the charity , no thanks i think im old enough to decide when and where i will give money to charity , the bleeding hearts shite on tv aint going to make me cough up .

GavinPearson

5,715 posts

281 months

Tuesday 20th December 2005
quotequote all
It's simple. If you support the cause and can afford to give money, then do. If you can't don't.

I like to give my money to Cancer and Deafness research, and time volunteering at a Food Bank.

Do whatever you think is right. But don't support the cause to your own detriment in the process.

Eric Mc

125,768 posts

295 months

Tuesday 20th December 2005
quotequote all
Charity is voluntary - it's up to each individual to decide what causes they want to support.

Don

28,378 posts

314 months

Tuesday 20th December 2005
quotequote all
And people MUCH prefer to give money to save animals that are cute and fluffy than almost anything else - in my experience. Like the Mrs, for example.

I don't trust Charities. I've read the accounts. I've also read too much about what they say they do and what they actually do. Once you've given them your money you have less control over what they do with it than when you pay your taxes!

Instead I volunteer my time to do work to improve Road Safety. The best charitable gift you can give is your time. It cannot be used in any way that you are not in control of and therefore it cannot easily be misused. (At least you get the chance to work out if it is or not!)

CommanderJameson

22,096 posts

256 months

Tuesday 20th December 2005
quotequote all
It's worth bearing in mind that of all the money pledged after a disaster, only a fraction ever actually arrives.

About half just never materialises.

The cynic in me says that governments around the world know this and use it in order to pledge twice as much as they intend to deliver.

Piglet

6,250 posts

285 months

Tuesday 20th December 2005
quotequote all
There was an interesting article in last weekend's Times magazine about children who were orphaned after the Tsunami and revisiting the orphanages nearly one year on. They made some very interesting points about the concept of just throwing money at areas that have suffered some form of disaster without the infrastructure of support to enable those given money to be able to rebuild their lives fully. The very sad thing is that a lot of the children in the orphanages have a surviving parent - but the culture frowns upon a single father bringing up children. In one case, the father has a new properly built house, but his children are in an orphanage and the village elders have found him a new wife and he'll have a new family.
I'm not seeking to judge in any way but I'm not sure it's what many people had in mind when they donated money.

I give money to charities that our close to my own heart and I give my time and expertise in other situations where I feel that I can add value.

Personally in the UK I'd like to see a reduction in the number of charities - I can see why a parent etc. would want a fund in the memory of their child (for example) but in a lot of cases there are charities already looking at the same issues and I think it makes more sense for them to be combined to save the costs and overheads.

JoolzB

3,549 posts

279 months

Tuesday 20th December 2005
quotequote all
Don said:
And people MUCH prefer to give money to save animals that are cute and fluffy than almost anything else - in my experience. Like the Mrs, for example.

She must be well loaded.

I'm not really a great charity contributor mainly because alot of the time the money raised has very little or no effect, the government is in a much better position to help out and we've already paid for that. I do however contribute to many UK charities, blind, cancer etc.