Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

How can I contribute to haiti cause without having to give money to the bourgeoisie watch

Announcements
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I think charity just perpetuates the situation and does just enough so that governments don't actually have to get off their arses and solve problems.

    However, I do not apply this to disaster emergency appeals. It's a completely different ball park.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trigger)
    And they live in shanty towns and have nothing. So we need to help them. How can image of a dead baby not affect you?
    there are plenty of people that it wouldnt affect

    people have the choice to donate or not, they shouldnt be made to feel guilty or called names just because they choose not to donate
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rucklo)
    Since Britain has not since charity become a popular thing I cannot and you cannot prove it wrong, am I not allowed to have an opinion but you are to yours?
    Yeah sure, you can have an completely unfounded opinion not based in anything. Perfectly fine to do so.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tinktinktinkerbell)
    there are plenty of people that it wouldnt affect

    people have the choice to donate or not, they shouldnt be made to feel guilty or called names just because they choose not to donate
    I don't care if they donate, i haven't donated but to not feel empathy for these people is just beyond my comprehension.
    Offline

    11
    (Original post by Kreuzuerk)
    Yeah sure, you can have an completely unfounded opinion not based in anything. Perfectly fine to do so.
    So is yours as far as I am aware since I am not on about government donations?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Has anybody actually answered the OP's question? I want to donate some money too and UNICEF is looking good.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Notker)
    Why do you even care? A load of people far away who you have never met got killed - who cares?
    If you were in that situation wouldn't you want someone to come and save you?
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cpj1987)
    Because I don't agree with the way charities (large ones in particular) are often run.

    I, personally, would not give my money to a charity knowing full well that it might go on advertising/marketing or some other arbitrary cost. If I'm giving my money, it's because I want it to go directly to a cause, not to some attempt to make even more money.
    I'm a strong believer that if people feel strongly enough about something, they'll find a charity on their own in this day and age, provided said charity has a small web presence. I don't agree with adverts and marketing asking people to donate, nor do I want to pay for them.
    Good luck finding a charity with no paid employees, admin requirements or rationale for spending (investing) on marketing/advertising. It's all part of the package - and a lot better than no charities existing!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by umbrellasky)
    If you were in that situation wouldn't you want someone to come and save you?
    Of course I'd want them to. That has no bearing on anything though.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Notker)
    Of course I'd want them to. That has no bearing on anything though.
    I think it does. So it's ok for someone you don't even know to come and save you but you wouldn't try to save them?

    The people of Haiti are someone's Mother, Father, Son, Daughter, Brother, Sister, Aunt, Uncle, Grandparent...I could go on. And they have just had to watch everything they have ever known fall apart, everyone they have ever loved...die. Who and what have they got left besides each other and the rest of the world?

    Do you think that because they are strangers to you they do not deserve your respect, your kindness, your charity?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Donate to the red crescent. I plan on giving 50 quid.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by umbrellasky)
    I think it does. So it's ok for someone you don't even know to come and save you but you wouldn't try to save them?

    The people of Haiti are someone's Mother, Father, Son, Daughter, Brother, Sister, Aunt, Uncle, Grandparent...I could go on. And they have just had to watch everything they have ever known fall apart, everyone they have ever loved...die. Who and what have they got left besides each other and the rest of the world?

    Do you think that because they are strangers to you they do not deserve your respect, your kindness, your charity?
    I think he clearly stated that he doesn't give a toss, whether its to just annoy people or how he actually is. Why does this even matter to you. Just judge him, oh wait you already did and be happy that you have a shred of comparison.

    The world has plenty of people who feel the same way and only care about themselves and those close to them, that's not new or exclusive to him. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by umbrellasky)
    I think it does. So it's ok for someone you don't even know to come and save you but you wouldn't try to save them?

    The people of Haiti are someone's Mother, Father, Son, Daughter, Brother, Sister, Aunt, Uncle, Grandparent...I could go on. And they have just had to watch everything they have ever known fall apart, everyone they have ever loved...die. Who and what have they got left besides each other and the rest of the world?

    Do you think that because they are strangers to you they do not deserve your respect, your kindness, your charity?
    I. Don't. Care. I wasn't starting a debate; I was saying I couldn't give a toss. I'm not giving a penny to Haiti.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amii_G)
    Has anybody actually answered the OP's question? I want to donate some money too and UNICEF is looking good.
    I doubt that any of the high-profile campaigns will fund the bourgeoisie to any significant degree. Besides, we fund the bourgeoisie every day through our Western consumption (assuming that you don't live an ascetic life of meditation in a Snowdonian crag), so it's exceeedingly hypocritical to refuse to do so for the sake of others, but not for oneself. Marxism is based upon international soldiarity.

    EDIT: I've just given £10 to the Oxfam appeal.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fusion)
    Good luck finding a charity with no paid employees, admin requirements or rationale for spending (investing) on marketing/advertising. It's all part of the package - and a lot better than no charities existing!
    I know I'm not going to find one, which is why I don't donate money. :p:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince Rhyus)
    http://www.thesalesjob.com/search/jo...ingdom_job.asp

    Chuggers


    http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle6914756.ece

    Excessive salaries paid to charity chief executives are “corrupting the ethos of the voluntary sector” and causing charities to become detached from the people they help


    :mad:
    so for those "chuggers" they don't deserve pay? How do you think a charity will generate financial support? With volunteers? I'm pretty certain the numbers of chuggers will go down if that were case. Admitedly they are annoying but at the same time they are the cheapest way to generate long term financial support for a charity, in comparison with advertising for example.

    I didn't read the second one tbf but I would argue isn't it a way of keeping those in the top jobs who do important work, when in comparison they could do a similar job in the private sector and get a lot more money. It's an incentive to make charity work desirable and to keep those in the voluntary sector from going to the private. In an ideal world it would be free and those people who work their arses off would do it on a voluntary basis. But in reality it is a sector competing with vastly higher paid sectors, and also the people who work there need money to live too. And I think they deserve it as well.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Pray for them I guess..
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tinktinktinkerbell)
    there are plenty of people that it wouldnt affect

    people have the choice to donate or not, they shouldnt be made to feel guilty or called names just because they choose not to donate
    I think feeling guilty is something only you can do. They can't do it for you.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ajtiesto)
    I wish disasters like this would happen in rich nations, then people can feel the suffering that the poor go through in Africa, Asia, Haiti and other poor nations. People living in the west and rich nations in the east are doing very little to help the poor and take things for granted.
    Katrina ?

    Japan gets loads of earthquakes etc

    San Francisco gets a few earthquakes as well.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BasicMinds)
    so for those "chuggers" they don't deserve pay? How do you think a charity will generate financial support? With volunteers? I'm pretty certain the numbers of chuggers will go down if that were case. Admitedly they are annoying but at the same time they are the cheapest way to generate long term financial support for a charity, in comparison with advertising for example.
    I never said they didn't deserve pay.

    I responded to someone saying that they didn't think anyone who worked for a charitable organisation should pay themselves/be paid bonuses. I gave an example of chuggers being paid bonuses.

    Personally I find "chuggers" annoying because most of the ones who end up accosting me know so little about the charities that they are raising money for. Whereas volunteers on the other hand I find are much more knowledgeable about the charity - and the issue that they are dealing with.

    On the "executive pay" issue, it's a different call for each sector.

    In the private sector, so long as the goods or services provided by the firm concerned are to the satisfaction of the buyer, the seller can pay their executives whatever they like, so long as they can afford it and their shareholders approve.

    In the public sector, people are (rightly) concerned about some of the salaries paid at the highest level because those salaries are being funded by tax revenues that they have no choice in contributing to.

    In the charitable sector, people give money to chosen causes and want to do so in the knowledge that as much of their donations go to making a difference and that management and administration costs are kept to a minimum.

    The "traditional" view of the public and charitable sectors is that people are motivated by things other than high levels of remuneration (pay & perks). What's happened in recent decades is that high levels of pay in the public and charitable sectors have become "acceptable" - in part because at senior levels, the view of the various administrations was that they wanted to bring in private sector expertise into other parts of the economy, and that this expertise did not come cheap - hence the arguement for paying senior management more.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 23, 2010
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.