Government force charity upon us

[denislawsbackheel]

Nice work if you can get it...
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1264596/Just-25p-pound-taken-London-Marathon-organisers-paid-charity.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... arity.html</a>

<a class="postlink" href="http://society.guardian.co.uk/salarysurvey/table/0,12406,1042677,00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://society.guardian.co.uk/salarysur ... 77,00.html</a>

How very glib.

You saying that giving to charity is bad? Or just that those administering charitable bodies shouldn't be paid (even though they often are trying to run mutil-million pound budgets etc like a large company and it is a full time job)

It isn't bad. But I decide who I give to. Eg I won't give a farthing to children in need. They fund the Royal Exchange. What has running theatre workshops for inner city Mancs got to do with need?

And the execs are creaming it in however you look at it.

I don't think it glib to point out to posters on here how little of their contribution could be ending up doing what they thought it would.

 

[SWP's back]

This is called a choice but I guess choice is not an option in your world.

But who decides what choices you have ? It's wide open to corruption. Charity is big business and there's usually a few people at the top creaming off a good wedge for themselves.
How soon before the banks hold auctions for the privilege of being 'a choice' ?
Nothing so crass as asking for payment but it wouldn't surprise me one bit to find that the banks will only recommend charities that actually bank with them.

You scratch my back and all that.

Even if you only have the option between charity A, B & C or none, then you still have more choice than you curently have.

An increase in money going to charitable causes can only be a good thing surely? Even if it is not in your make up to personally give.

 

[SWP's back]

How very glib.

You saying that giving to charity is bad? Or just that those administering charitable bodies shouldn't be paid (even though they often are trying to run mutil-million pound budgets etc like a large company and it is a full time job)

It isn't bad. But I decide who I give to. Eg I won't give a farthing to children in need. They fund the Royal Exchange. What has running theatre workshops for inner city Mancs got to do with need?

And the execs are creaming it in however you look at it.

I don't think it glib to point out to posters on here how little of their contribution could be ending up doing what they thought it would.

And again - fair play to you for sticking to your principles. No one should ever be forced to be charitable and that should always be the case.

However, making it easier to give, for those that wish to is a good thing is it not?

Execs creaming it in? You mean they get the market wage for the job they do, yes probably, but organisations tend to want the best candidate for any job they have going. It is the way of life that the best candidates would be offered the same wage somewhere else etc.

I did think it quite glib to remark it was nice work if you can get it without actually knowing how hard the work may be.

 

[stony]

Even if you only have the option between charity A, B & C or none, then you still have more choice than you curently have.

lol, I currently have a choice of any charity in the world I deem worthy. If people choose A B or C at the cashpoint then they are unlikely to donate to another charity. People like the easy option and if you've already salved your conscience by donating at the bank you'd be unlikely to donate further.

 

[SWP's back]

Even if you only have the option between charity A, B & C or none, then you still have more choice than you curently have.

lol, I currently have a choice of any charity in the world I deem worthy. If people choose A B or C at the cashpoint then they are unlikely to donate to another charity. People like the easy option and if you've already salved your conscience by donating at the bank you'd be unlikely to donate further.

You're quite the optimist aren't you.

So you don't think that the amount "given" overall will increase?

Most people don't donate anything, despite the current choice of "any charity in the world" and you know it. But when the bill comes to £3.78, they may well think, yeah I'll round it to £4.

If they do that often enough, multiplied by millions, the outcome could be fantastic.

If you give to salve your conscience then I feel a bit sorry for you.

 

[Skashion]

I think this is a good idea and I'm not buying the arguments being made by those who appear to be against. I can't be the only one who chucks pounds of coppers away every year at carefully selected targets; rags; cats; gay couples looking to adopt etc.

 

[stony]

If you give to salve your conscience then I feel a bit sorry for you.

I can assure you there's no need.

 

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

Any National Lottery winners who donated part of their windfall to good causes would be publicised on television.

Great, if I win a tenner, I'll donate £5 and get on the telly!!

 

[SWP's back]

I think this is a good idea and I'm not buying the arguments being made by those who appear to be against. I can't be the only one who chucks pounds of coppers away every year at carefully selected targets; rags; cats; gay couples looking to adopt etc.

Made me lol

 

[stony]

lol, I currently have a choice of any charity in the world I deem worthy. If people choose A B or C at the cashpoint then they are unlikely to donate to another charity. People like the easy option and if you've already salved your conscience by donating at the bank you'd be unlikely to donate further.

You're quite the optimist aren't you.

So you don't think that the amount "given" overall will increase?

Most people don't donate anything, despite the current choice of "any charity in the world" and you know it. But when the bill comes to £3.78, they may well think, yeah I'll round it to £4.

If they do that often enough, multiplied by millions, the outcome could be fantastic.

If you give to salve your conscience then I feel a bit sorry for you.

A few pence matters, if it didn't then the supermarket petrol stations wouldn't be so busy. Like I've already said if you've donated once then in this day and age with money as tight as it is, you're unlikely to donate again.

I don't donate to any of the big charities. Too much of the money is creamed off by the wankers running them.
I do dip into my pocket for local charities though. Hospices, local kids footy teams etc. Charities that you know that 100% of the money you give is going to where it's supposed to go.