Which charity are you supporting with your Civ 5 purchase?
- Thread starter HamTard
- Start date
Beardy Dan
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2009
- Messages
- 150
Are there any links to info or a none option?
AlexTheTall
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2005
- Messages
- 92
I was in between room to read and building school in Africa...
Takeda
Warlord
i picked the central asia institute
That part of the world is rather poor but is often neglected by global charities. You never STOP hearing about Africa, but how often have you heard about the plight of central Asians?
so yeah, that one
That part of the world is rather poor but is often neglected by global charities. You never STOP hearing about Africa, but how often have you heard about the plight of central Asians?
so yeah, that one
Lord Arska
Chieftain
Free DLC for Civ fanatics!
Spoiler :
Kruelgor
Emperor
Between 37 to 49 million Americans are living in hunger according to various sources. I never understood why Americans want to help out other countries when we have starving children in our own.
Maniac
Apolyton Sage
Because that would be socialist.
steve1962
Chieftain
Huh? I have no idea what this means.
ZimbuTheMonkey
King
I went for scholarship for America.
I don't feel comfortable with the mightiest superpower in the world being so behind in education. More people going to college in the USA will do the whole world some good.
I'm Canadian, by the way, but I feel that much of what happens to my Ameri-bros is felt strongly on this side of the border.
I don't feel comfortable with the mightiest superpower in the world being so behind in education. More people going to college in the USA will do the whole world some good.
I'm Canadian, by the way, but I feel that much of what happens to my Ameri-bros is felt strongly on this side of the border.
Kruelgor
Emperor
The sad thing about so-called charities is only a small percentage of donated money goes to help those who you think you are helping. Usually less than 20%. This means around 80% or more goes to pay for salaries and other overhead. The American Cancer Society is terrible at this and it's why I think of them as a scam agency, but then after more research I discovered that this applies to almost every "charity" so-called non-profit organization out there.
They call themselves non-profit but they still pay themselves nice salaries.
I would much prefer just to give the money directly to someone who needs it.
They call themselves non-profit but they still pay themselves nice salaries.
I would much prefer just to give the money directly to someone who needs it.
I would agree that anyone giving to a charity should research these figures, and that there are some that are as bad as you say.
But I also think that you exaggerate in implying all charities are like that. Do some research, give in areas that you are interested in and know a little about, but don't allow the undoubted abuses of some so-called charities to tar all of them with the same brush. Many of them do valuable and essential work.
Onionsoilder
Reaver
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2007
- Messages
- 3,173
I'm a big supporter of the CAI, so of course I'm selecting them.
Here's some links to educate yourselves.
Building Schools for Africa: (Couldn't find these guys)
Room to Read: http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=10217
Central Asia Institute: http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=10217
Scholarship America: http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=3512
Building Schools for Africa: (Couldn't find these guys)
Room to Read: http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=10217
Central Asia Institute: http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=10217
Scholarship America: http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=3512
civ5crazy
Chieftain
Scholarship America all students need some help so i voted for that.
LoneWolf5050
Warlord
This is a question near and dear to my heart, since I work in the not-for-profit sector (www.freeformsolutions.ca) and provide IT consulting and support to a wide variety of charitable and not-for-profit organizations.
Some of the comments here are a little misguided. The biggest misconception people outside the not-for-profit sector have about the organizations in the sector, is the idea that paying people and incurring admin costs is somehow a bad thing. As if these organizations can carry out their work entirely through volunteer effort and good wishes!
This attitude is the most destructive force in the way of charities and not-for-profits fulfilling their missions. Much has been written about it. My favourite piece is here:
http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/the_nonprofit_starvation_cycle/
Not-for-profits are businesses that operate for a motive other than making money. That is all. They have exactly the same operational requirements for HR, IT, Finance and Admin, that similarly sized organizations have. What for-profit organization would fire their entire HR and IT department and then tell their shareholders they were being "efficient"?! The not-for-profit sector is the only part of the economy that seems to be under pressure to be extremely inefficient, and that is somehow seen as a virtue.
Real-life story...a former colleague used to be an IT manager in an African hot spot working for an international aid organization that shall remain nameless. This organization prided itself on spending a tiny fraction of its donations on "overhead" and directing the overwhelming majority to "services". Well, they didn't take my colleague's advice to buy the expensive satellite phones they needed to coordinate supplies between their home base in Europe and the places on the ground where they were operating.
The result...a shipment of food ended up queued up for the wrong time and they had to charter a plane to get it to Africa asap. It cost $40,000 to charter the plane. It would have cost $12,000 for the satellite phones they had been told they needed. They didn't want to spend the $12,000 on the phones because that wasn't going to feed anyone. And you can bet the $40,000 for the plane just got recorded as "delivering services". Afterall, it was literally delivering food to Africa.
Next time you see an organization that says they spend all their money feeding the hungry or helping do X, Y or Z...ask yourself what it is that they're NOT doing. Chances are, they're not operating sustainably or efficiently.
--Julian
Some of the comments here are a little misguided. The biggest misconception people outside the not-for-profit sector have about the organizations in the sector, is the idea that paying people and incurring admin costs is somehow a bad thing. As if these organizations can carry out their work entirely through volunteer effort and good wishes!
This attitude is the most destructive force in the way of charities and not-for-profits fulfilling their missions. Much has been written about it. My favourite piece is here:
http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/the_nonprofit_starvation_cycle/
Not-for-profits are businesses that operate for a motive other than making money. That is all. They have exactly the same operational requirements for HR, IT, Finance and Admin, that similarly sized organizations have. What for-profit organization would fire their entire HR and IT department and then tell their shareholders they were being "efficient"?! The not-for-profit sector is the only part of the economy that seems to be under pressure to be extremely inefficient, and that is somehow seen as a virtue.
Real-life story...a former colleague used to be an IT manager in an African hot spot working for an international aid organization that shall remain nameless. This organization prided itself on spending a tiny fraction of its donations on "overhead" and directing the overwhelming majority to "services". Well, they didn't take my colleague's advice to buy the expensive satellite phones they needed to coordinate supplies between their home base in Europe and the places on the ground where they were operating.
The result...a shipment of food ended up queued up for the wrong time and they had to charter a plane to get it to Africa asap. It cost $40,000 to charter the plane. It would have cost $12,000 for the satellite phones they had been told they needed. They didn't want to spend the $12,000 on the phones because that wasn't going to feed anyone. And you can bet the $40,000 for the plane just got recorded as "delivering services". Afterall, it was literally delivering food to Africa.
Next time you see an organization that says they spend all their money feeding the hungry or helping do X, Y or Z...ask yourself what it is that they're NOT doing. Chances are, they're not operating sustainably or efficiently.
--Julian
LoneWolf5050
Warlord
Thanks for the links, but you copied the Room to Read one twice. The correct link for Central Asia Institute is: http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=10411
--Julian
Similar threads
