Why we need public charities - not public administration
$900 MILLION? Heck, let me in on that action!
In the past, this is what charities would take care of. Now you can argue about charities all you want but the fact is that people do need help so the question is simply: do you want people to individually choose to donate to these activities or are you going to force people via the sword of government to fund things like this and put it into the hands of people like this?
In the past, this is what charities would take care of. Now you can argue about charities all you want but the fact is that people do need help so the question is simply: do you want people to individually choose to donate to these activities or are you going to force people via the sword of government to fund things like this and put it into the hands of people like this?
What started the demise of the true charitable organization? Your friend the Seventeenth Amendment. It is back-door speech control.
Charity from any group that can use violence to acquire the property it wants to disburse is nothing but theft.
We have seen that most of the really Big Charities, ie, Rockefeller, Carnegie,Clintonian end up doing Nothing but harm...all smoke and mirrors.
I would put this one in the same category as the latter.
Reading AJ's comment, I must agree and reiterate: NO GOVERNMENT GRANTS!!!!
Like who? Slick Willie's wife?
Somehow me dino doesn't two-tiered justice system think so.
Most of us are not Animal Farm members of the more than equal elite like she is.
On top of that, she's as black as a recent Liar-In-Chief.
Oh, no! Half the USA will now point and call me dino a racist now.
I believe charity begins at home, and I've spent tens of thousands of dollars helping family in times of serious need. As a result, those family members did not become wards of the state, draining taxpayer dollars. In return, I have been able to rely on those I helped to return the favor, now that I'm a "seasoned citizen" with health issues (mostly damage to a body no longer as athletic as I keep forgetting I'm not). Pride and self worth retained by both sides.
I have an uncle a little older than me who has Down's Syndrome. He's been a grocery store clerk (stocking shelves) in the same store for 30 years. He's maxed out his salary (which isn't enough to live on mind you even if he could take care of himself) many years ago, but the point is that he is gainfully employed according to his ability because someone (my grandparents) took the time to get him to work and back every day and a store manager was willing to take a chance.
Whether gov or private, many/most are remarkably ineffective except for one thing.
The problem is, they are set up with the spending of money as the objective, so what they do well is spend money.
There are some examples of charities knowing what they should do, getting the money, spending, measuring and noting results. This does not always work but at least the money flow can be stopped if there is no good outcome.
Comparing gov v. private- both can have the same failings and both can have good planning. Gov uses money not freely given. With gov schemes the scale is such that an industry develops to administer and perpetuate itself. The really big private foundations (as Old.. says) are much the same.
Now I should mention that, for the charity I have in mind, the 6% is the amount of funds received that go to those it is intended for.
Which charity? The one used by an internationally well known family, in a certain nation, which received money, in tranches of millions, from rulers and oligarchs across the globe.
Then where does the money go? You need to ask?
There are a few honest charities left
before I spouted off, I could have spared myself some keystrokes!
Much should obviously be a personal choice. I had posted the idea of diverting a percentage as taxes more of a compromise. A way of moving inefficient govt programs to a private sector. On a side note I do not want to post a website but there is one or two great website that rate charities not on their mission but on their finances to help determine if you want to support them
What do you expect? Prosecuting the Mayor's black wife?
There will be plenty of documented "benefit". Mental health is an issue that is a favorite of left wing politicians with no discernible benefit recorded from billions of dollars thrown at it.
Egad!