Does charity actually help?

[melty]

More and more, I'm coming to the opinion that charity doesn't really help people. I think we can all see instances where shoveling money at a problem has not really resulted in anything except digging a deeper money pit that needs more and more money to "help". It's kicking the can down the road to help people that won't help themselves, and often creates a worse situation than the one it was meant to help.
Charity might be helpful for animals or the environment, but I don't think it actually helps people. Thoughts?

 

[Chilson]

No, but very rarely Yes. Yes, because LOCAL charities for LOCAL issues can really benefit from charitable contributions and mind you everything I am about to find fault in charities still applies to local charities, its just far less common due to them being more accountable as they are in close proximity to a community. Unfortunately those are the smallest charities that get the least amount of money.

Anything that goes beyond a small town, yeah its 99% of the time a scam and it always has been. Charities of that scale are used for money laundering, tax evasion, bribery and simple grifting from idiots who give them money.

Its also not helpful for dick all, be it animals or the environment. I believe its anywhere from 3-10% of any charitable contribution will ever reach those you are trying to help through charity. Even charities that are not scams, which is again rare, are so poorly managed that they might as well be scams with how much money is wasted due to mismanagement.

The charity itself also isn't guaranteed to help even if its not corrupt and or mismanaged, which again is SUPER rare. For example, Africa has a massive problem with their local textile industries because the west floods them with so many "free" clothes that its incredibly difficult for any textile business to actually compete because you can't really beat the price of "free". This is just one example, there are many MANY industries that simply can't exist or can't become larger in Africa because charities flood their markets with "free" goods. Meaning that jobs and wealth generation is neutered in a lot of industries that would generate a lot of jobs and create stability within the nations. Which is one of the reasons African nations are in the garbage states they are in and completely reliant on western charities.

The reality is that most people who know this fact still give to charities though. Because giving to charity is not about making a difference, its about making it look like your making a difference without putting in any real effort.

 

[Karen of Human Resources]

Define charity.

No really. I'm not trying to be smug.

Vainglory is a type of charity. The wealthy throw money at elaborate public works which may benefit some, but are done for the glory of the donor. Any philanthropy is secondary or a side effect. Vainglory traditionally helped the great, and academics via libraries to fly higher, but did little for the poorest.

Caritas is also charity. The divine demands/expects the great to tend to the weak as a Roman Patrician would mind his lessers. The Patron must keep his minions alive, but how well is a matter of personal choice and capacity. Recipients of Caritas in history were not generally distinct from serfs, they owed their sustenance to their Lord; but the limits of said charity ensured they could never separate and become independent. Recipients of Caritas in modern times generally do so knowing their vote is owed to their master, or else.

Social security is a type of charity. The idea is we put into a common pool and draw as necessary. The problem is, we have few ways to ensure the money is only drawn upon by those who need it, and not by charlatans who are able to work but choose not to.

Charity does work. There are people who owe their roof, food, warmth and clothing solely to the labor and good nature of their fellow humans. Charity can also be misused. By both the giver and the taker. The taker can pretend to need more than they do, and the giver can similarly use it to babify and ensnare their recipients.

It's a broad question. There are many benefits scroungers in the west but there are many people across the world who owe their lives to the generosity of others.

 

[Shig O'nella]

There are people who charity helps.

They're not the ones who get noticed though.

 

[tetraterezi]

no. i gives people a reason to not help. churches near me saw tehy do charity but they make you convert, so its not charity. and catholic charities are even stricter on who they help.
st judes allows rich people to suck up free cash from sad poors, and deny then healthcare.
everycharity would work better if it was replaced with goverment run programs that help with less hoops.
(make a wish is whole thing im not going near, the amout of devestation caused by theme parksm covered up by a fun 4 hours with a kid who will be dead soon)
im anti charity and would rather do direct action or goverment welfare anyday of the week.
and ive live in american poverty my entire life.
even food banks blow ass, food you dont want? food thats gonna expire soon? hand it over. i love 4 bags of almonds, a can of cran berries and a pack of 100 calories energydrink. random food i cant make a meal of.
i want like modernized rations i can opt into. i get a selection of products my country makes or imports, and me and the country dont include the grocery store in our gambit. and if they do get to be a aprt of it they get little to no money and can do it for community service after decades of slave wages and selling absolute trash instead of focusing on solie useful food stuffs.
and why does no grocery store have a rentable kitchenm you can cook your food in and leave it a mess. this way you can cook and eat and not clean lmao

 

[Fascist Frederick]

It helps the person giving money feel good about themselves.

 

[SwanSwanson]

A bit off topic, but I've always wondered, why don't billionaires just adopt a city and just work on fixing all the problems within that city? A million dollars to wherever isn't gonna help.

 

[Joe Swanson]

A bit off topic, but I've always wondered, why don't billionaires just adopt a city and just work on fixing all the problems within that city? A million dollars to wherever isn't gonna help.

The biggest problem with that is the pr issues when the billionaire stops funding the city, I mean just look at what happens when big companies cut their dei hires

 

[DumbDude43]

if you want your money to do good, you have to actually do it yourself.
giving it to some organisation just enriches the people in that organisation.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

It does, but I don't really trust big organizations. If you want to donate to help people it's better to do so via smaller organizations, local charities, or direct contributions (in-person/GoFundMe). There's a lot of charity scams, so the more direct the better, no middleman skimming off the top.

 

[Butterschmalz]

if you want your money to do good, you have to actually do it yourself.
giving it to some organisation just enriches the people in that organisation.

100%! Same with refugees. No problem to let them into the country, but not on the tax payers expense. You should be ready to take them into your private home and vet for them. Abd go to jail if they break the law. Question is do you trust foreign strangers?

 

[reptile baht spaniard rid]

Charity action can help - but it’s best when money isn’t involved.

Much has been written about charity fucking over Africa for example

Keep it local

 

[Jason Wynn]

Hardly. Call me cynical but the vast majority of charities seem to be scams run by hook nosed kikes (oh sure goyim! All proceeds and profits go directly to our cause! How do you make change for a penny again?)

If you’re feeling charitable, directly donate to the person or event (after investigating they themselves are legitimate of course) instead of giving your money to a non profit that will practically be guaranteed to hoard it for themselves.

 

[pot of sneed]

Charity doesn't help. Whatever people need, the government already takes from us in taxes - social housing shit, foreign aid, benefits, even jail for the worthless people who exist to function as parasites amongst society. Charities are a big con where almost all the money goes straight to the top to feather the nests of CEO's, the rest of that money goes to making glossy magazines and posters so they can get even more idiots to give them money and maybe 1 penny or cent for every pound that goes in might actually go to the cause it was intended for. The biggest concern of charity is how many yachts and big houses the top CEO's can get that year, so yeah, it only helps duplicious 'humanitarians' who've found a great grift. Want to know how I'm right? Go donate to one and give them your details, and then you'll get a million begging letters from a bunch of other 'charities' employing similar emotional blackmail - they're all in the grift together.

 

[Lobster Cult High Priest]

Charity doesn't help. Whatever people need, the government already takes from us in taxes - social housing shit, foreign aid, benefits, even jail for the worthless people who exist to function as parasites amongst society. Charities are a big con where almost all the money goes straight to the top to feather the nests of CEO's, the rest of that money goes to making glossy magazines and posters so they can get even more idiots to give them money and maybe 1 penny or cent for every pound that goes in might actually go to the cause it was intended for. The biggest concern of charity is how many yachts and big houses the top CEO's can get that year, so yeah, it only helps duplicious 'humanitarians' who've found a great grift. Want to know how I'm right? Go donate to one and give them your details, and then you'll get a million begging letters from a bunch of other 'charities' employing similar emotional blackmail - they're all in the grift together.

NGOs and Charities are where the elite stick their Failsons and set them up for life.

 

[Otterly]

Charity as an act? Yes. Someone you know is having a hard time financially and you go round with a few bags of shoes clothes and outdoor gear for the kids - that is direct, targeted and you can see it works.
Charity as a multinational behemoth? No. Just look at oxfam.

 

[FamicomGorby]

Depends, for one off events/disaster relief the answer is definitely yes. For regular ole poverty, still yes but since I don't think anyone can really ever "solve" poverty it's obviously going to be an ongoing thing.

Extremely large scale NGO's though, usually no and they only make the problem worse over time. Take Africa for example, several countries receive massive amounts of food aid from the US and other western nations. This food to local population is basically free which does two things, one encourages the population to grow even though the country doesn't have the economic output to sustain it, and it kills off the agricultural base since how is a local farmer going to compete with a food aid that's flooding into the country?

 

[Super Guido]

Depends, for one off events/disaster relief the answer is definitely yes

Assuming the money and products actually gets appropriately distributed, unlike what happened in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria.

 

[XANA]

Anything that goes beyond a small town, yeah its 99% of the time a scam and it always has been.

Agreed. I only recently found out that the Saint Jude charity forces people under their care to get private insurance (so that St. Jude will not have to pay out as much) and will sue people if they were promised a sum in a will but didn't receive it due to the will-maker changing his/her mind at the last moment. Meanwhile, they added several billion to their reserves in the previous year, meaning they could have directly paid for all of the ~200 people under their care while still having money left.

I used to use CharityWatch and Charity Navigator as shortcuts to verify the legitimacy of charities. I realized that while it is a good way to look at the financials of a charity and how transparent the charity is with how the money is spent, it tells nothing about what the charity does in private.

Foreign Aid is also sort of a charity in some way, in that we send food and supplies over to impoverished countries. In a somewhat-similar vein to your textiles examples, donated food/supplies gets intercepted and used by warlords to solidify their power, or incentivizes the locals/natives not to improve themselves. Why learn proper farming techniques, when we can beg for food and get it from overseas? Excluding situations involving natural disasters, I think foreign aid should have a strict time limit and come with conditions (eg: Foreign aid will only be given for X years, but country Y must improve in Z aspect (farming, etc.) within the timeframe, otherwise the aid will be reduced or terminated early).

 

[Demon King]

No, the moment any charity gets any traction it becomes a corrupt money laundering business. If you want to help, then help people yourself.