Current Events > Charity is such a weird concept

(+) Yeah! (+)

So there are thousands, maybe millions, of charities dedicated to a lot of different causes.

Every "legitimate" cause exists because someone, somewhere has a really big, potentially life-threatening, problem, that they just can't afford to solve. Be it research/treatment of diseases, hunger, homelessness, deforestation, endangered species, etc.

Each cause literally has to sit and wait and hope that people with money to spare decide that their particular cause is worth giving to. In some cases, poor people are relying on the whims of the rich to survive.

These whims? Decided on based on maybe personal experience, maybe it's what gives the best optics to improve your brand, maybe it's just what a random PR consultant picked for a company that wants a tax break.

So, is charity a good thing?

---

to think, if we just spent money we could cure cancer, what a concept. it has nothing to do with human fatigue or unknowns. materialism be damned!

---

Philanthropy is the private allocation of stolen social wages.

---

And this is even without considering that the very rich bend over backwards to set up their own charities to make sure that when they're "giving money to charities" they're actually just moving money from one pocket to the other to avoid taxation and improve their public image.

---

I guess it raises awareness about problems at least. But yeah, it's quite a complex matter....

---

scar the 1 posted...

And this is even without considering that the very rich bend over backwards to set up their own charities to make sure that when they're "giving money to charities" they're actually just moving money from one pocket to the other to avoid taxation and improve their public image.

the air quotes make it all the more true

---

The proportion of philanthropy that goes towards already wealthy universities is a good example of this point in action.
---

PikachuMaxwell posted...

I guess it raises awareness about problems at least. But yeah, it's quite a complex matter....

Yeah that's the thing. It raises awareness about the problems that are arbitrarily deemed important enough. A good illustration of this would be the bucket challenge that happened a couple of years ago.
It raised a lot of awareness for a relatively unknown syndrome (ALS). However, it raised a disproportionate amount of money to the cause. Of course it's good that ALS research and treatment gets money, but there are illnesses that take a lot more lives every year, so if you'd want "life-saving bang for your buck" charity causes, a large portion of the proceeds would have been more efficiently placed elsewhere.

---

People shouldn't get tax breaks for donating to charity. That kinda defeats the whole "charity" aspect of it.

And rich people shouldnt have limitless loopholes to otherwise get out of taxes.

Charities shouldn't exist

---

I dunno, it seems pretty straightforward and understandable to me. What you're talking about with how philanthropy actually works doesn't seem like a conceptual issue with charity being weird to me.

I'm just nitpicking the semantics of your topic title because I agree with your post

---

this whole foods/amazon thing puts things in better persepctive

https://www.truthorfiction.com/whole-foods-holiday-food-drive-post/

---

scar the 1 posted...

Charities shouldn't exist

Organizations that donate time/resources/labor to just causes shouldn't exist?

The way people bend over backwards to justify why they don't give to charities and why charity is evil in insane ways just so they don't feel like jerks has always been puzzling to me.

It's charity, you don't have to do it, that's the entire point.

But pretending Charity is anything other than amazing just because you're too lazy to help others is madness.

There was just a huge Earthquake in Albania, many have died, thousands have lost their homes and all their poesssions.

I'm not a rich man but I helped pay for dozens of homeless people there to live in a hotel (that is overpacked for the record) until the crisis is over.

Israel is sending aid, the US is sending help, UAE is airlifting supplies, the EU is sending support and doctors.

you look at that and go "Oh this is evil, we should all just leave them to die and suffer because other causes exist too and it's a whim" WTF?

What ass backwards logic is that.

---

Yeah it is weird

---

Maze_ posted...

The way people bend over backwards to justify why they don't give to charities and why charity is evil in insane ways just so they don't feel like jerks has always been puzzling to me.

It's charity, you don't have to do it, that's the entire point.

But pretending Charity is anything other than amazing just because you're too lazy to help others is madness.

There was just a huge Earthquake in Albania, many have died, thousands have lost their homes and all their poesssions.

I'm not a rich man but I helped pay for dozens of homeless people there to live in a hotel (that is overpacked for the record) until the crisis is over.

Israel is sending aid, the US is sending help, UAE is airlifting supplies, the EU is sending support and doctors.

you look at that and go "Oh this is evil, we should all just leave them to die and suffer because other causes exist too and it's a whim" WTF?

What ass backwards logic is that.

those are not the grounds on which people generally object to private charities. read the first post

---

averagejoel posted...

those are not the grounds on which people generally object to private charities. read the first post

I did

He asked if Charity is a good thing because there are lots of worthwhile charities and who gets help can be argued to be decided on a whim.

"People may need charity and not get it!" to me is an argument for more charity, not an argument opposing it.

---

This is why we need taxes

---

Charity is good. More people should be part of organizations in their community that do charitable fundraising and giving.

---

thrashmetal14 posted...

Organizations that donate time/resources/labor to just causes shouldn't exist?

My point is they shouldn't need to. There shouldn't be starvation when the most developed part of the world is throwing away more food than we're eating.
There shouldn't be homelessness when developers are intentionally waiting to build housing until it's profitable enough.
There shouldn't be bankruptcy due to medical bills when most of the bill goes straight into the pocket of someone who had no part in your medical care. Etc.

And I shouldn't have to be labeled a communist to be thinking this.

---

And, people in Albania shouldn't have to rely on the whims of strangers to get relief aid

---

idk, this is kind of a weird topic! you think there shouldn't be any material hardship in the world, but you don't want to embrace communism. So are you just saying something like "it would be better if there weren't suffering" which every one would agree with, or do you have a specific mechanism to ensure there isn't material hardship that also isnt communism?

---

Balrog0 posted...

idk, this is kind of a weird topic! you think there shouldn't be any material hardship in the world, but you don't want to embrace communism. So are you just saying something like "it would be better if there weren't suffering" which every one would agree with, or do you have a specific mechanism to ensure there isn't material hardship that also isnt communism?

I don't have a fix-all solution to a really really complex set of problems, no. But that doesn't stop me from getting continuously more irked with the way things are now.

I don't know very much about communism other than the basic idea of workers owning the means of production, and I wouldn't embrace an ideology I know very superficially. But there does seem to be a whole lot of criticism of capitalism and imperialism from the left that is on the mark.

---

bull****, the left is pro war. look at wwi, wwii, vietnam, and korea.

---

Wewillrocku posted...

bull****, the left is pro war. look at wwi, wwii, vietnam, and korea.

With "the left" here, are you actually talking about Soviet Russia, the Democrats, or somebody else?

---

Oh boy

Here come all the people who have never held down a consistent job much less contributed something meaningful to the world with all the solutions everyone else is to stupid to see

---

Just give directly to people in need.

scar the 1 posted...

There shouldn't be homelessness when developers are intentionally waiting to build housing until it's profitable enough.

What's your solution? Should people be forced to lose money building housing that isn't profitable?
---

I feel like this is an issue that is relatively easily solved by doing your research before donating to a specific charity/cause >_>

Yes, in an ideal world no one would need charitable help, but until the world becomes Muslim and people donate 2.5% of their wealth as Zakat, there will be people requiring help, help that they should get imo.
---

Manocheese posted...

What's your solution? Should people be forced to lose money building housing that isn't profitable?

Like I mentioned above, I don't have quick fix-all solutions to complex problems. One could imagine different regulations, or one could imagine development being done by people who aren't on it for the profit.
I don't think it should fall on my shoulders to have the answer just because I'm able to see that the current situation is fucked up.

---

teepan95 posted...

I feel like this is an issue that is relatively easily solved by doing your research before donating to a specific charity/cause >_>

What? The issue isn't that people are just giving to bad charities. Me doing my research before I donate doesn't change anything

---

Eh, better than nothing.

---

scar the 1 posted...

And this is even without considering that the very rich bend over backwards to set up their own charities to make sure that when they're "giving money to charities" they're actually just moving money from one pocket to the other to avoid taxation and improve their public image.

I was referring to this

My bad for not making it clearer, it's cold and early
---

Charity is voluntary and self directed, which just perplexes and infuriates leftists, as illustrated this very thread.

scar the 1 posted...

Each cause literally has to sit and wait and hope that people with money to spare decide that their particular cause is worth giving to. In some cases, poor people are relying on the whims of the rich to survive.

As opposed to what - relying on the whims of lobbyists and politicians, or "benevolent" dictators?

[...]or one could imagine development being done by people who aren't on it for the profit.

So... altruism, huh?

Questionmarktarius posted...

As opposed to what - relying on the whims of lobbyists and politicians, or "benevolent" dictators?

I guess, yeah! Maybe I'm authoritarian but I'd rather rely on a government whose explicit purpose is to care for its citizens than rely on hope that a celebrity suffers from the same illness as me and decides to raise money. That doesn't mean I think governments are perfect or that it's necessarily the best solution.

---

scar the 1 posted...

I guess, yeah! Maybe I'm authoritarian but I'd rather rely on a government whose explicit purpose is to care for its citizens than rely on hope that a celebrity suffers from the same illness as me and decides to raise money. That doesn't mean I think governments are perfect or that it's necessarily the best solution.

What do you do when the wealth just leaves?
Sure, you could have a world-wide socialist utopia, but all you'd get out of that is Mars quickly becoming a gated planet.

"Donate a dollar to the orphans, sir?"

"So there are thousands, maybe millions, of charities dedicated to a lot of different causes.

Every "legitimate" cause exists because someone, somewhere has a really big, potentially life-threatening, problem, that they just can't afford to solve. Be it research/treatment of diseases, hunger, homelessness, deforestation, endangered species, etc.

Each cause literally has to sit and wait and hope that people with money to spare decide that their particular cause is worth giving to. In some cases, poor people are relying on the whims of the rich to survive.

These whims? Decided on based on maybe personal experience, maybe it's what gives the best optics to improve your brand, maybe it's just what a random PR consultant picked for a company that wants a tax break.

So, is charity a good thing?"

---

Oh shit, is this all just a copypasta?

scar the 1 posted...

And I shouldn't have to be labeled a communist to be thinking this.

You shouldn't, but the only reason the US can't essentially do away with hunger is because the farming industry has been socialized for a century for the sake of "capitalism." There was a point where we were doing this to keep prices from bottoming out, but now it's essentially corporate welfare. Similarly, we don't have to wait for people to build to house the homeless-- there are already 6 empty residences to every homeless individual in the US.

I'd argue, though, that there are a lot of problems that get addressed by "charitable" organizations that might be impossible to address otherwise. I've been a volunteer with the American Literacy Council for about 10 years, and the people that come to us aren't likely to get the help they need elsewhere. They need one-on-one training that's typically tailored to their specific issues. Many have learning disorders. Most professional teachers wash out in the first 5 years, and Special Ed teachers are in astoundingly high demand. We have 20 volunteers in rotation at any given time, and most of us only have one or two pupils at a time. I suppose throwing a completely unrealistic amount of money at the problem could solve it, but these individuals only receive a couple hours of tutoring a week. It's not a situation you could formalize into a proper "job."

---

Questionmarktarius posted...

What do you do when the wealth just leaves?
Sure, you could have a world-wide socialist utopia, but all you'd get out of that is Mars quickly becoming a gated planet.

Why do you keep demanding answers to questions I've already said I don't have answers to? Is it deflections?
Although, I wouldn't mind it if all the mega rich went to Mars. I hope they find happiness there

---

Questionmarktarius posted...

Oh shit, is this all just a copypasta?

No, it isn't.

---

vigorm0rtis posted...

I'd argue, though, that there are a lot of problems that get addressed by "charitable" organizations that might be impossible to address otherwise. I've been a volunteer with the American Literacy Council for about 10 years, and the people that come to us aren't likely to get the help they need elsewhere. They need one-on-one training that's typically tailored to their specific issues. Many have learning disorders. Most professional teachers wash out in the first 5 years, and Special Ed teachers are in astoundingly high demand. We have 20 volunteers in rotation at any given time, and most of us only have one or two pupils at a time. I suppose throwing a completely unrealistic amount of money at the problem could solve it, but these individuals only receive a couple hours of tutoring a week. It's not a situation you could formalize into a proper "job."

Absolutely! Don't misunderstand, I'm not laying the blame at individual charities. In the current system, they're sorely needed, sadly. And like I said, it's an incredibly complex set of problems. I'm sure there are edge cases where charity/philanthropy or whatever you want to call it is the most optimal solution with regards to efficiency. Maybe even under paradigms other than capitalism.

---

scar the 1 posted...

Like I mentioned above, I don't have quick fix-all solutions to complex problems. One could imagine different regulations, or one could imagine development being done by people who aren't on it for the profit.

People spending their time and money helping others for reasons other than profit? You mean charity?

https://i.imgur.com/eao31EU.gif
---

Manocheese posted...

People spending their time and money helping others for reasons other than profit? You mean charity?

do you really think those wealthy people are donating all that money out of the goodness of their hearts?

---

In a world where Bezos could fix everything in the country, charity is a joke.

---

Every hour I work, my pay is taxed to pay into the programs that should be taking care of the people who need help. If I gave a dollar to every person, group, or cause that asked, then I would be broke.

Oh, also, I would be more likely to donate if the cost of living wasnt so sadistically high.

---

Manocheese posted...

People spending their time and money helping others for reasons other than profit? You mean charity?

...no. Let's be clear, when I'm talking about charity here, I'm talking about organizations being funded by charitable donations.

What I said "without profit" in the post your quoting, I didn't mean volunteer work. One example of work without profit could be public sector work.

---