Charity....As you open your pockets for yet another natural disaster

Once you become high on the food chain with in an organization, your pay is also determined on keeping you loyal and honest. In theory anyways. A well paid CEO is less likely to leave and take their little black books of donors with them, or embezzle funds, or be caught in a scandal that could potentially ruin the whole organization. That generalizes it a lot, since greed is a very powerful thing, but usually the intentions are good and it isn't someone just appointing themselves a giant chunk of money.

Now there have been issues with small time charities or non-profits being lopsided in pay versus actual aid, and embezzlement of donations, or other misuse of funds. There's always a scandal in the making somewhere, within all types of work related to money. Accountants, politicians, wall street, charities, you name it, wrong doing is every where.

As someone who donates, it's your job to choose your cause and choose your charity within that cause wisely. My last donation, I took right to my vet office, and put it into a fund for a local animal rescue. Dollar for dollar, 100% of that donation was going to help rescued animals. It went into their care account, could be used for any animal that they needed to bring in. Surgery, medication, treatments, anything they would have had to pay the vet to do. They also get a discount on the care through that vet, so that money could be of more use in their hands than in someone who had to pay full price.

That donation did nothing to help with fund raising, or transportation costs, or any other costs associated with operating the rescue. Medical care is the highest cost they had, so I put my money right into the vet's account for them to use.
 
Therer are lots of different ways to give. When I was working, I gave money and time. I'm retired so I mostly give time now. I really don't care what or how you give. We all have different capabilities. I do think it is important to give what you can.

I'm not going to defend the executive's salaries. Others have done an admirable job on that.

Would you prefer an executive that makes $800,000 a year and runs an organization that gets 90% of the money they bring in to the people that need it or would you prefer an executive that makes $32,000 a year and runs an organization that gets 5% of the money they bring in to the people that need it? Some people can see the big picture. Some people can't see the hand in front of their face. It is a personal choice.
 
Quote:
And don't forget Ronald McDonald House next door to St. Jude where parents of the children can stay to be with their children during numerous treatments states away from home! Thanks to donations, much of the services in and around St. Jude make it MUCH more comfortable for these children to WIN THEIR FIGHT with cancer!! Could you imagine NOT being there every step of the way while your child fights? RMH makes it possible for parents to stay close to the children who need them so much.
 
Quote:
That is my thoughts exactly.

I understand not everyone feel this way and that is fine, but I can tell you that you aren't going to change my mind by saying "400,000 per year isn't rich in some part of this country so get over it" (my own words added to expess how certian posts sounded to me. Correct me if that is NOT how they are intented.). I am from Maine and from my perspective, that is rich. Heck 60,000 per year is upper middle class.

Look, I am not trying to change anyone's mind either; I am just stating that I prefer local donations because I guess I like to see the results. It also doesn't help the larger charities cause when they don't do much work in my area. I see so many people in need - Maine has one of the highest unemployment rate, and is among the heaviest taxed - and yet Salvation Army shut it's doors, GoodWill only operates as a resale store, heck even food banks are being shut down because they can't get the federal funding they need. We have no choice but to rely on each other and LOCAL charities because there are so few large ones that are willing to help us here. (Yes I do know there are some, such as the ronald mcdonald house down in portland).

So in conclusion, I donate local to help my neighbors that I see in need that can't get help from "the big boys". Most of my local donations are not even money, I give food to soup kitchens, local food banks and I am trying to plan it out so I can provide farm fresh food to those in need, but can't get the help to get food (for whatever reason). I make toys and crochet for the local hospitals to give to kids and babies. Also the prayer shawls. I know it's not much but I do what I can.

In the end, Donate to what you believe in, what you are passionate about, and what you feel lead to give to. Don't let anyone make you feel guilty or "stupid" for donating how you chose, whether it is local or national charities.
 
Quote:
I think, MAYBE, the point is that if you take a job at a charity your primary goal is supposed to be helping others, not yourself. The point isn't to drive a Jag, the point is to dedicate your life (sic career sic spare time) to helping others. For those who volunteer they are helping just being there obviously, but they are also effecting the charity's "profits" as well because that is one less person they are required to pay cash to out of their donation box. So, even if you can't donate cash, goods, etc. just being there is still a huge help. Whether that would have been a min wage sorting job that now isn't, or whether you could have gotten paid half a million+ a year if you CEO'd another company is a moot point because THE point is to help.

If that's not why you're there, then maybe you should take a trip up to Wall Street and live alongside the other sharks and vultures.

Least I think maybe that's how some view it... *shrug*
 
Quote:
I think, MAYBE, the point is that if you take a job at a charity your primary goal is supposed to be helping others, not yourself. The point isn't to drive a Jag, the point is to dedicate your life (sic career sic spare time) to helping others. For those who volunteer they are helping just being there obviously, but they are also effecting the charity's "profits" as well because that is one less person they are required to pay cash to out of their donation box. So, even if you can't donate cash, goods, etc. just being there is still a huge help. Whether that would have been a min wage sorting job that now isn't, or whether you could have gotten paid half a million+ a year if you CEO'd another company is a moot point because THE point is to help.

If that's not why you're there, then maybe you should take a trip up to Wall Street and live alongside the other sharks and vultures.

Least I think maybe that's how some view it... *shrug*


Ditto!
bow.gif
 
Quote:
I think, MAYBE, the point is that if you take a job at a charity your primary goal is supposed to be helping others, not yourself. The point isn't to drive a Jag, the point is to dedicate your life (sic career sic spare time) to helping others. For those who volunteer they are helping just being there obviously, but they are also effecting the charity's "profits" as well because that is one less person they are required to pay cash to out of their donation box. So, even if you can't donate cash, goods, etc. just being there is still a huge help. Whether that would have been a min wage sorting job that now isn't, or whether you could have gotten paid half a million+ a year if you CEO'd another company is a moot point because THE point is to help.

If that's not why you're there, then maybe you should take a trip up to Wall Street and live alongside the other sharks and vultures.

Least I think maybe that's how some view it... *shrug*


Exactly!
 
"I wonder how much they donate back"

For a very long time, statistics in America have indicated that the people who make the highest salaries donate the highest percentage of their income to charity.
 
For a very long time, statistics in America have indicated that the people who make the highest salaries donate the highest percentage of their income to charity.

No, actually it is the poor.

"The second myth is that the people with the most money are the most generous. You'd think they'd be. After all, the rich should have the most to spare and households with incomes exceeding $1 million (about 7 percent of the population) make 50 percent of all charitable donations. But while the rich do give more in overall dollars, according to the Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey, people at the lower end of the income scale give almost 30 percent more of their income. "
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2682730&page=2
 

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom