Why I won't donate to Haiti Relief...

[suzanna1066@comcast.]

I commend you for what you do to help your neighbors OP. However, most in Haiti live in abject poverty and do not have neighbors that have the means to do what you do---which is why they need help from the outside. Not saying you are wrong in your approach, just that the situation is different there.

 

[Mickey's Minion]

This isn't what the OP was saying. She was saying that she doesn't believe if she donated that $5 that it would be used to actually buy the case of water.

I'm sure it takes a lot more than $5 in donations given to the Red Cross to buy a $5 case of water. How much I don't know, but I know they have a pretty high overhead.

That is exactly what she said. She said she won't contribute to the larger charitable organizations because she said it wouldn't make a difference.

Even if the overhead was that her $100.00 donation did only buy one case of water (which is a huge exaggeration), that is still one more case of water than they had before.

All I am saying is that if the donations aren't worth it, then if she finds herself in a natural disaster herself, she should rely only on the locals that she has helped to bring her that case of water.

Since her principles mandate that a case of water took too much of an overhead to purchase, then the same prinicples would mandate not accepting that same case of water if she finds herself in a natural disaster.

You can't have your cake and eat it too - having a policy to not contribute to the larger charities because their overhead is too high but then turn around expect relief from these same first responders if you find yourself in a natural disaster and need their donated help to survive another day.

 

[Guy Incognito]

That is exactly what she said. She said she won't contribute to the larger charitable organizations because she said it wouldn't make a difference.

Even if the overhead was that her $100.00 donation did only buy one case of water (which is a huge exaggeration), that is still one more case of water than they had before.

as the old saying goes "no single raindrop believes it's responsible for the flood"

every donation makes a difference, especially when you're talking about the basic necessities of life. If my $10 can buy a case or two of water (let's go with 2 cases for example), that's 48 bottles of water, which can go to keep 48 people alive for a few days.

as far as giving locally versus globally.... it's a personal choice. Do what you feel is right. It's nobody's business but your own where you decide to donate your time/money. Just do it and keep it to yourself.

 

[gonzo76]

as the old saying goes "no single raindrop believes it's responsible for the flood"

every donation makes a difference, especially when you're talking about the basic necessities of life. If my $10 can buy a case or two of water (let's go with 2 cases for example), that's 48 bottles of water, which can go to keep 48 people alive for a few days.

as far as giving locally versus globally.... it's a personal choice. Do what you feel is right. It's nobody's business but your own where you decide to donate your time/money. Just do it and keep it to yourself.

 

[lovemygoofy]

as the old saying goes "no single raindrop believes it's responsible for the flood"

every donation makes a difference, especially when you're talking about the basic necessities of life. If my $10 can buy a case or two of water (let's go with 2 cases for example), that's 48 bottles of water, which can go to keep 48 people alive for a few days.

as far as giving locally versus globally.... it's a personal choice. Do what you feel is right. It's nobody's business but your own where you decide to donate your time/money. Just do it and keep it to yourself.

I agree with this. I'd rather give $20 and if it went to the overhead of the Red Cross to keep the Red Cross going so this person's $10 can buy the two cases of water which can potentialy save people's lives then I will give the $20 without a second thought.

For those that don't want to give to the Red Cross because of overhead or bad blood or whatever there are several other reputable charities to choose from.

P.S. I'm glad that Mother Theresa thought she could make a difference one person a time or the impact she made wouldn't be alive and going today.

 

[N.Bailey]

American red cross is one of the most well run and efficient charities.

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=3277

They get rated very well with charity navigator spending 90% of their funds on their programs. So if you send in 5 bucks to them $4.50 will go to get water. They have a very low fund raising effeciency (how much money they spend to raise a dollar) and their ceo gets paid less than 1% of their opporating cost.

Well, I am happy to read this, but the Red Cross has come under attack in the past for wasteful spending, and for a lack of transparency. It's good to see they took those issues seriously.

It still doesn't change the fact however that the OP didn't feel like her money would make it to the Haitians. That doesn't have to be a true statement for someone to believe as much.

As I said, they're the first boots on the ground, so I always give at times like these. I also always donate blood. Other than that however, I do stay local.

 

[MrsPete]

If I donate to the Red Cross, I make sure that my donation goes SPECIFICALLY to those who have suffered a house fire.

When my brother's house burned down, the Red Cross was extremely good to him. He and his roommate got out, but he literally had a pair of pajamas to his name. He couldn't drive his car -- no keys. He couldn't access his bank account -- no ID.

The Red Cross was so good to him. They gave him vouchers for several things around town: an eye exam/eyeglasses from a certain doctor (that was his biggest immediate need because his glasses were lost), a mattress from a certain store, a small amount of clothing from a certain place. I don't know what else they did for him. The family, of course, did things for him too, but the Red Cross gave him exactly the things he needed immediately to get back on his feet.

 

[DisTeach1]

And the point is?
Donating is a personal thing. some people are moved to help internationally. some are moved to help closer to their communities. No one area is better than the other.
Some people see disasters and are moved to do more. I've never seen any legite agency say you have to support them so no worries if you chose not to. Some people like to keep things locally.

Again, not really seeing the point but kudos to the op, if that is what she/he was going after her.

Yes, I guess there is no point to my thread, other than me expressing my opinion, but then what is the point to the Community Board? Is there a point to "What's for Dinner?" or "I ran a red light today!" No, there is no point to my thread, other than a venue for me expressing my opinion.

POINT, WELL TAKEN!

 

[MrsPete]

American red cross is one of the most well run and efficient charities.

The Red Cross certainly does do lots of good for lots of people . . . but here's an interesting piece of information for you: When Katrina hit a few years ago, the two organizations that DID MOST for the people who were suffering were the Red Cross and FEMA (I forget which was 1st and which was 2nd) . . . and the group who was third in line was the North Carolina Baptist Men's Association. Yes, two big, national organizations with donations from everyone . . . and right behind them, a group from one denomination in one state.

That's why I donate through my church. I know where it's going. I trust my pastoral staff and the Baptist organization to get those goods where they need to be. Their track record is good, and I feel sure that my donations'll get the "most bang for their buck".

 

[N.Bailey]

That is exactly what she said. She said she won't contribute to the larger charitable organizations because she said it wouldn't make a difference.

Even if the overhead was that her $100.00 donation did only buy one case of water (which is a huge exaggeration), that is still one more case of water than they had before.

All I am saying is that if the donations aren't worth it, then if she finds herself in a natural disaster herself, she should rely only on the locals that she has helped to bring her that case of water.

Since her principles mandate that a case of water took too much of an overhead to purchase, then the same prinicples would mandate not accepting that same case of water if she finds herself in a natural disaster.

You can't have your cake and eat it too - having a policy to not contribute to the larger charities because their overhead is too high but then turn around expect relief from these same first responders if you find yourself in a natural disaster and need their donated help to survive another day.

You most certainly can have your cake and eat it too. What you can't do is, eat your cat and have it too.

I never read that the OP didn't have compassion for the Haitians at all. She just did not believe her money would get to them. Just look at the billions we've given them over the years. The people surely didn't benefit from it much, did they? I agree that they are different circumstances, but I'm sure there are a lot of people out there who believe as the OP. Corruptness really has no boundaries.

All she's saying is she wants to know that her contribution made a difference. She didn't appear to be looking for a pat on the back (as she gives anonymously). I agree with that. Giving to charity should never come with bragging rights (and I'm not saying anyone feels that it does).

 

[mickeywho?]

Not sure what the intent of the OP was except maybe to cause a debate.

I think it's interesting to read others thoughts and concerns about giving. Frankly, I don't think it's anyone's business who you choose to donate to or why. Better than to give something than nothing.

But for interests sake - I generally like to be informed about who I am giving to and the reasons for the need. Whether that is the Red Cross or Salvation Army, relief in Haiti or New Orleans - the need is there so I want my $ to be worth as much as possible.

Do a bit of googling and you'll find information on how your $s are being spent. You can also see how the US has "contributed" to Haiti through the countries history. The Haitian-American relationship is a very interesting one.
On a trip a few weeks ago to Savannah, we were told about how the Haitians came to the aid of the early americans during the American Revolution. Very cool! (I guess maybe we should be glad their giving didn't begin and end a home huh?)

 

[DisTeach1]

as the old saying goes "no single raindrop believes it's responsible for the flood"

every donation makes a difference, especially when you're talking about the basic necessities of life. If my $10 can buy a case or two of water (let's go with 2 cases for example), that's 48 bottles of water, which can go to keep 48 people alive for a few days.

as far as giving locally versus globally.... it's a personal choice. Do what you feel is right. It's nobody's business but your own where you decide to donate your time/money. Just do it and keep it to yourself.

And this is what every person needs to do when deciding how to spend their money, DO WHAT YOU FEEL IS RIGHT...I just simply said how I spend my Charitable contributions...I spend where I feel it will help the most. I give to my church, and my community, and the kid who knocks at my door. Sorry if I am wrong in that.

 

[N.Bailey]

When my brother's house burned down, the Red Cross was extremely good to him. He and his roommate got out, but he literally had a pair of pajamas to his name. He couldn't drive his car -- no keys. He couldn't access his bank account -- no ID.

The Red Cross was so good to him. They gave him vouchers for several things around town: an eye exam/eyeglasses from a certain doctor (that was his biggest immediate need because his glasses were lost), a mattress from a certain store, a small amount of clothing from a certain place. I don't know what else they did for him. The family, of course, did things for him too, but the Red Cross gave him exactly the things he needed immediately to get back on his feet.

When our house burned down when I was a teenager, it was the Salvation Army that stepped up to the plate, not the Red Cross. That's why I will ALWAYS support them no matter what. Thru the years, I've seen many other wonderful things they've done in the community too.

 

[gonzo76]

You most certainly can have your cake and eat it too. What you can't do is, eat your cat and have it too.

I never read that the OP didn't have compassion for the Haitians at all. She just did not believe her money would get to them. Just look at the billions we've given them over the years. The people surely didn't benefit from it much, did they? I agree that they are different circumstances, but I'm sure there are a lot of people out there who believe as the OP. Corruptness really has no boundaries.

All she's saying is she wants to know that her contribution made a difference. She didn't appear to be looking for a pat on the back (as she gives anonymously). I agree with that. Giving to charity should never come with bragging rights (and I'm not saying anyone feels that it does).

I can understand the OP saying I am leary of where my money is going. But to say that she was not looking for a pat on the back is laughable. She went on to tell us all the ways she is charitable. That is not what I would call anonymous.

 

[N.Bailey]

I can understand the OP saying I am leary of where my money is going. But to say that she was not looking for a pat on the back is laughable. She went on to tell us all the ways she is charitable. That is not what I would call anonymous.

I guess it depends on what you consider anonymous I suppose. We don't know her from Adam really, and she apparently never left a business card when paying electric bills, etc....

 

[DisTeach1]

Not sure what the intent of the OP was except maybe to cause a debate.

No, I guess I didn't want to start a debate...Sorry if my thread had no purpose, unlike all the other threads on the community board that have IMPORTANT purposes. I have been watching the news, and contemplating, and discussing things with my husband, and thought I would post what I was thinking.

Again, it had NO purpose, unlike all the other MEANINGFUL threads on the Community Board.

I haven't changed my stance. And I'm not looking for a pat on the back. God Knows, Haiti needs help. A LOT of help. It needed help before the Earthquake, and it will need help after it.

All I was saying, based on my personal experience, there are a LOT of people in the world who need help, more than I can help, more than anyone can help. We all need to choose where are money goes to. That's it.

I support Breast Cancer Research, but I don't support AIDS research, because my life has been touched by Breast Cancer, not AIDS, and I can't contribute to every charity out there. It's not a judgement against AIDS, it's just what is in my heart.

Other than that, I have to say, the Community Board is the most interesting cross section of opinions anywhere, and that is a good thing.

 

[N.Bailey]

You most certainly can have your cake and eat it too. What you can't do is, eat your cat and have it too.

snip

Oh geeez, I just read this again. I surely hope no one is eating their cat.

 

[Bluestars]

I think the title of the thread is what sounds a bit preachy and condescending. Why not start a thread about The Benefits of Donating Locally? OP, you said you wouldn't donate to AIDS research, but would donate to breast cancer. So, if there was something high profile going on with AIDS that prompted many people to send in donations, would you start at thread about why you wouldn't donate to AIDS research?

By titling the thread the way you did, it gives a negative impression and is subtly putting down the people who chose to give to the people helping with Haiti. That's the impression I got.

 

[Anjelica]

Haiti has been run by Communist dictators for decades. In the last 20 years, the US has sent them about 2 billion dollars. It does no good. It never does any good. The money goes to prop up the thugs in charge and the people starve. Starving, weapon-less people aren't much of a threat to the thugs with machetes. They aren't starving by accident, but by design.

Actually it's over $3 billion hat the US has sent to Haiti in the past two decades to help stabilize and assist with the needy. NO ONE has been able to identify where all that money went.

 

[Anjelica]

No, I guess I didn't want to start a debate...Sorry if my thread had no purpose, unlike all the other threads on the community board that have IMPORTANT purposes. I have been watching the news, and contemplating, and discussing things with my husband, and thought I would post what I was thinking.

Again, it had NO purpose, unlike all the other MEANINGFUL threads on the Community Board.

I haven't changed my stance. And I'm not looking for a pat on the back. God Knows, Haiti needs help. A LOT of help. It needed help before the Earthquake, and it will need help after it.

All I was saying, based on my personal experience, there are a LOT of people in the world who need help, more than I can help, more than anyone can help. We all need to choose where are money goes to. That's it.

I support Breast Cancer Research, but I don't support AIDS research, because my life has been touched by Breast Cancer, not AIDS, and I can't contribute to every charity out there. It's not a judgement against AIDS, it's just what is in my heart.

Other than that, I have to say, the Community Board is the most interesting cross section of opinions anywhere, and that is a good thing.

I think your post was fine OP. I think the Community Board, while can have a cross section of opinions, can definetly be one of the most brutual.