[q0192837465]

Shame on us, in our Christmas comfort
In B.C., only about 23 per cent make donations

Ethan Baron
The Province


Wednesday, December 16, 2009



CREDIT: Gerry Kahrmann, The Province
Salvation Army kettle hangs neglected Tuesday in a busy Vancouver shopping mall.

You see them on city sidewalks, young men and women with binders in their hands, urging passersby to donate money to Save the Children, Doctors Without Borders, Amnesty International. Now, with the season of giving upon us, a new report has revealed how tough a job these people have getting British Columbians to part with their money.

Though a trip to any jam-packed mall will show that we're not too bad at buying presents for our loved ones, just-released research by the conservative Fraser Institute reveals that the buck pretty much stops there.

Barely one in five residents of B.C. gives money to charity, the institute says, basing its conclusions on income-tax data from the Canada Revenue Agency. This prosperous province, where only about 23 per cent of tax filers document charitable contributions, even falls below the Canadian average of 24 per cent.

And British Columbians, with the rest of Canadians, lag behind Americans in giving to charity. About 27 per cent of our neighbours to the south give to charitable causes, the institute's analysis of U.S. Internal Revenue Service figures shows.

Most of us in B.C., and in the rest of the country, have it pretty good. We can buy healthy food, and plenty of it. We can walk into a medical clinic or hospital and get treated for virtually anything that ails us. We can turn on the tap and drink clean, treated water.

Not so for billions of the rest of the people with whom we share this planet, even though many live in countries where natural resources and labour are transformed into profit by Canadian companies, boosting our standard of living while leaving impoverished citizens with little or nothing.

Our cellphones, laptops and computer games contain coltan, a blood-mineral that drives war and epidemic rape in the country that produces the majority of the ore-- the Democratic Republic of Congo, where fighting and conflict-related famine and disease have killed five million people, nearly as many as the Holocaust.

We eat fruit grown on multinational companies' South American plantations, while peasant farmers scratch out a miserable living from tiny, infertile plots.

Our clothes, and our children's toys, come from sweatshops in India, Bangladesh and China. Our cars run on petroleum that propels war and suffering in Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia. And we all live on land that once produced livelihoods for native people, whom we have let fall into grotesque poverty.

Of course, we pay high taxes in Canada, and it can be tempting to hang on to the rest of our money because we're already giving a hefty share to government. But we still enjoy a remarkably high standard of living, derived in large part from the abysmal living standards of the world's poor, both afar and at home.

On Robson Street, I found Mia Internicola standing under a dripping awning, holding a Save the Children binder as dozens of shoppers passed by from one high-end shop to another. Internicola, 29, says she gets maybe four or five donations a day, but when someone does give, she's amazed at how much they care.

"There are a lot of good people out there, who are doing the best they can," she says.

Are you doing the best you can?



It's sad. I know I haven't donated a dime in years. Maybe it's time to change.

[PiuYi]

i hate articles like this that purposely try to guilt trip people
damn slant editors, just deliver the news straight up

[spoon.ek9]

i've donated before, and honestly what turns me off is the absolute lack of appreciation or even a simple thank you. but, then again donating *isn't* about the person you hand it off to.

[taylor192]

Not so for billions of the rest of the people with whom we share this planet, even though many live in countries where natural resources and labour are transformed into profit by Canadian companies, boosting our standard of living while leaving impoverished citizens with little or nothing.

Our cellphones, laptops and computer games contain coltan, a blood-mineral that drives war and epidemic rape in the country that produces the majority of the ore-- the Democratic Republic of Congo, where fighting and conflict-related famine and disease have killed five million people, nearly as many as the Holocaust.

We eat fruit grown on multinational companies' South American plantations, while peasant farmers scratch out a miserable living from tiny, infertile plots.

Our clothes, and our children's toys, come from sweatshops in India, Bangladesh and China. Our cars run on petroleum that propels war and suffering in Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia. And we all live on land that once produced livelihoods for native people, whom we have let fall into grotesque poverty.
Our standard of living would be much lower if we did not take advantage of other country's poor standard of living.

If we had to pay the true cost of all our services (ie pay 3rd world countries 1st world wages) we would have to severely cut our standard of living.

This is why if you have a "hippy" friend that complains about poor people, yet they own a cell phone, laptop, TV - tell them they are hypocrites.

[orange7]

There needs to be some changes in those charity organizations before I start to donate again. Also, Vancouver needs to lower some of its prices otherwise those donation is meaningless

[Qmx323]

i've donated before, and honestly what turns me off is the absolute lack of appreciation or even a simple thank you. but, then again donating is about the person you hand it off to.


thats cuz the money ur giving ain't going to the guy standing there with bells in his hands, why would they care, probably just volunteers

[jackmeister]

IMO the worst are those that call you and harrass/guilt trip you.

One time I donated to the firefighters burn fund via telephone call and I havent stopped receiving calls from various organizations ever since. Those fuckers keep sharing info.

How do I know? I purposely gave them the wrong address, and they keep repeating it each time.

[q0192837465]

thats cuz the money ur giving ain't going to the guy standing there with bells in his hands, why would they care, probably just volunteers

That's true. There's absolutely no incentives in going the extra mile. Most of the volunteers just want to accrue their hours for wutever they'r pursuing. They couldnt care less where that money is going. Sure there r some who genuinely care, but they'r few & far between.

IMO the worst are those that call you and harrass/guilt trip you.

One time I donated to the firefighters burn fund via telephone call and I havent stopped receiving calls from various organizations ever since. Those fuckers keep sharing info.

How do I know? I purposely gave them the wrong address, and they keep repeating it each time.

Lol, speaking of which, they guilt trip my mom to make donations all the time. 1 of them said even said that if u dun donate, they will draw up a "bad client list" and if something is to happen, their "service" will not be as prompt. And the fucked up part is that they ask for donations all the fucking time. Like every month or 2 months. One day I just said fuck it & ripped up my mom's cheque

[skyxx]

There's too many different causes to donate to, plus I'm not even sure if all of our money(only 20% has to be donated) is going towards the cause. Nonetheless I still donate.

[twitchyzero]

IMO the worst are those that call you and harrass/guilt trip you.

One time I donated to the firefighters burn fund via telephone call and I havent stopped receiving calls from various organizations ever since..

just say no thanks, please take me off the list.

how hard is that?

[skyxx]

^ How many are you suppose to tell? All of them which is like a billion different causes.

[orange7]

thats cuz the money ur giving ain't going to the guy standing there with bells in his hands, why would they care, probably just volunteers

that is what you think.

[shenmecar]

that is what you think.

How do you know they pocket the money?

[orange7]

How do you know they pocket the money?

I don't, but how do you know they don't use a bit of the money on a party for themselves?

[spoon.ek9]

thats cuz the money ur giving ain't going to the guy standing there with bells in his hands, why would they care, probably just volunteers

i pointed that out in my original post, fixed the typo

[!SG]

hmm, didnt see many of you that posted in here complaining at the RS Cares event we held. Many volunteered their time for both days...

[tool001]

they make donation and then go to food bank to get it all back and more...

PS. they dont share ur info,,, they sell it... they make $ of every name they give to other org.

[q0192837465]

they make donation and then go to food bank to get it all back and more...

PS. they dont share ur info,,, they sell it... they make $ of every name they give to other org.

These contact lists are like GMO food. Once ur name is up there, there's no going back. :cry:

[hotjoint]

my "donation" money is going to the hike in downtown parking :lol

[johny]

donating just promotes people to sit on their asses. if homeless people on the street never made a dime. they would no longer be there, and would be forced to actully get a job.

[murd0c]

I honestly don't donate money, I personally don't like to because where does the money go too? I have heard a number of storys about how only 30% of the donations go to the cause the rest pay employees rent etc MADD being one of them!!!

What I do donate is if I see a homeless guy out side a mcdonalds I will get him a combo. Old winter clothes I will go to amsterdam cafe get cook and hand the stuff out to the homless people who need it. I just don't trust charity's there are way too many scams out these days especially this time of year.

[Hondaracer]

23% sounds pretty good to me

[dachinesedude]

i donate clothes all the time, does that count?

[asian_XL]

23% sounds pretty good to me

I'm sure it will be under 10% outside north america

[lol]

ewwwww who's the guilt tripping tree hugging hippy who wrote this article? holy fuck. I think 23% of the population is pretty good. I think the average joe isn't going to donate money because he is probably living paycheque to paycheque and can't afford to donate his hard earned money. Even though he has amazing luxuries such as a pre paid fido phone and a 89 toyota tercel which causes rape and slave labour in other countries.

[Greenstoner]

i rather donate my own time than money .........why is people donating ? for a good cause? to help the poor ? to help a homeless guy on the street? All of the above... but im pretty sure many people who donate are because of the tax deduction
Not saying its a good thing, hell... i rather donate to people then send it all back to government... but the whole donating ideal is twisted

[lol]

Yea I am pretty sure the reason there are more "giving" ppl in the US is because there are far more millionaires in the US who are doing it for tax purposes. I mean I am not saying that's the only reason they do it, but statistically speaking it makes us look bad.

[LiquidTurbo]

Donate Blood. Its free, and at least you know exactly where your donation goes.

[Amuse]

How hard is it to donate some of your pocket change?
Donate some of your change and let the volunteers go home earlier.
Donation = good karma

[orange7]

I wonder how they got the 23%.. seems kinda made up.

[Ulic Qel-Droma]

if i donate anything it'll be to wikipedia.

[azzurro32]

What bugs me is I saw a giant truck outside of safeway accepting food donations. Walk into safeway and the first thing you see are prepackaged donation kits for $10. You are a big corporation, donate the fucking things yourselves.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[SkinnyPupp]

I donate when there's a chance I'll win something

[StylinRed]

I'm not surprised only 23% donate, just reading the posts on RS from all the cold hearted, stuck up, ignorant assholes is proof enough that most ppl don't care

[orange7]

I'm not surprised only 23% donate, just reading the posts on RS from all the cold hearted, stuck up, ignorant assholes is proof enough that most ppl don't care

I don't get it. What's wrong with having a 23% donation rate? How about you tell us what is a suitable percentage??

If you think about it, 23% is quite high for an expensive living city. You do realized that not everyone is baller like you StylinRed.

You make me sick by calling people who aren't baller like you and aren't living on the street cold hearted, stuck up, ignorant assholes.

[Vansterdam]

you guys should help donate to this thing , its for a good cause + chicks dig this shit.


for 11$ at any BC LIQUOR STORE you can purchase a bear in which another bear identical to it will be donated to needy kids

i have bought these bears for my exs/gfs/hot chicks and they totally love them :D + you tell them its for charity and its a win-win situation :D


Each year, during the holiday season, BC Liquor Stores invite customers to Share A Bear to support a good cause. For $11, customers choose one bear to take home while its twin is donated to a shelter, hospital or other worthwhile charity to brighten the holiday season for a child.

The 2009-10 bears each wear a tartan scarf - one is a black bear and the other, a white bear - each as cuddly and soft as can be.

Last year, thanks to BC Liquor Store customers, more than 30,000 bears were donated to children in various hospitals, shelters and special homes throughout the province. Since the program began in 1989, more than 288,000 bears have been donated to British Columbia charities.

Share A Bear this year and help brighten the holiday season for a child!



http://www.bcliquorstores.com/share-bear-program

[StylinRed]

I don't get it. What's wrong with having a 23% donation rate? How about you tell us what is a suitable percentage??

If you think about it, 23% is quite high for an expensive living city. You do realized that not everyone is baller like you StylinRed.

You make me sick by calling people who aren't baller like you and aren't living on the street cold hearted, stuck up, ignorant assholes.

what are you stupid??

it says only 23% of THE POPULATION that means 77% of PPL DONT GIVE SHIT not they're only giving 23% of their money away...

get it... out of 100 people only 23 people donated anything the other 77 just keep walking


edit: not Don't give a shit but dont give anything read what it says "ppl dont give shit" and as i siad in my prior post im sure its because MOST of them are assholes

[quasi]

If I do donate I do it anonymously. Nothing worse then making donations then having that agency hound you nonstop for more money. I'll donate when I want to when I have extra money not because you called me and harassed me into it.

[taylor192]

30-40% of Canadians pay zero income tax cause they don't make enough $$$. So realistically, the 23% is of 60-70% and about 1 out of 3 people that have enough money to donate.

[Mugen EvOlutioN]

pfff i barely have enough for myself, forget about the donation


if ppl cant even help themself, how can they help others

[hotjoint]

pfff i barely have enough for myself, forget about the donation


if ppl cant even help themself, how can they help others

:thumbsup:

[Mkhun]

There's too many different causes to donate to, plus I'm not even sure if all of our money(only 20% has to be donated) is going towards the cause. Nonetheless I still donate.

+1....

[Chuck Norris]

Before I go on a rant, I have always donated money to organizations and also volunteered my time. Some of you might think it means very little since I have an abundance of free time now but I used to do this even when I was working a full time job and had the stresses of the average person.

One thing that I do not donate to are large organizations such as United Way etc. I am not suggesting they are bad, or it is bad to donate to them but when I learned how much of my money was REALLY getting to the end user I decided I was going to find another way. Now, I donate about 10% of my earned income to churches that actually donate their time to help others. If I give them $10,000, I know that every penny of that is going towards helping people. I volunteer my time to these organizations to buy the food and clothes etc so I know where every cent is going plus I'm giving my time, which is the most precious thing that anyone can give.

The fact that BC donates what they donate does not surprise me considering the cost of living vs. income is highest in the lower mainland versus most other places worldwide.

A recent stat suggests that over 70% of the average family income is used to pay for their own home. We have an all time low savings rate and in Vancouver specifically, a negative savings rate (which means we spend more than we take in).

Here is the problem. Many of us claim to care because we simply look like total assholes if we outright say we don't give a shit. It's actually trendy to give to the poor because it makes us look socially responsible. "Wow, look how civilized we are." "I care about other people and I'm a good person."

Then, we vote for events and statues of law that clearly do NOT help those less fortunate. Then we think that putting a couple cans of food and an old sweater is going to solve the problem. Before I go on, YES it is our problem. If you don't think so, why has there been projects that our tax dollars have funded to get the homeless people out of sight during the Olympics? When vandalism and crime increase it's an effect on our high homeless population as well.

On that note, lets use the Olympics as an example. The day it was announced, the first thing that crossed my mind was, "how much over budget are we going to be." The cost overruns of the Olympics alone would help a significant number of working class families AND poor/homeless people.

Of course, we were told it would make money which is absolute bullshit. Look at this province's track record! We have not done a thing that has not ended up resulting in increased taxes due to overspending.

I'd like to see someone care enough to give up their cars or stop paying $300 for a pair of jeans. I think deep down people care, but they say they care a lot more than they do because it's the 'right' thing to do. There is nothing wrong with this but so many people like to play the humanitarian roll while sucking on their parents trust fund.

[orange7]

what are you stupid??

it says only 23% of THE POPULATION that means 77% of the PPL DONT GIVE SHIT not they're only giving 23% of their money away...

get it... out of 100 people only 23 people donated anything the other 77 just keep walking

No, you are dumb. Get your facts straight. I never said ppl gave away 23% of their total wealth. I completely understood that it was 23 / 100 people who donated anything at all.

I don't see a problem with only 23 / 100 ppl actually donating anything at all. I said this city is expensive as hell to live in. In other words, you should expect 77 / 100 ppl feeding their family on their pay cheques. Also, you need to take note that many ppl have cars and houses mortgaged. Not everyone is rich like you, so I would appreciate it if you don't call poor ppl assholes just because they have no spare money to donate. Also, have you considered those poor people who provide weekly free service to this city and don't donate? I'm pretty sure those amazingly wonderful people belong in the 77%, and I really don't think you should be calling them assholes because that is mean.

YOU NEED TO REMEMBER that this reported 77% of not donating includes everyone such as homeless bums, single moms with 7 children, ppl with no left over money at the end of each month, etc.. I don't like ppl who call single moms living on their pay-cheques assholes. Hence, you sicken me.

So if you take all that into consideration, 23% is about right.
Obviously this article wants more ppl to donate, therefore instead of only having the rich population it takes into an account of the poor ppl. In that case, I don't see a problem with 23%. I would agree with you if they neglected the bums and homeless, but they didn't.

Come'on man.. I know you're a smart guy since you've been around RS for such a long time, but can you seriously not let that article manipulate your thinking?
Think about what it wants. It wants ppl to feel guilty and donate, so obviously the 23% is calculated by (ppl who donated)/(total population). 23% isn't bad, and I don't see why you are complaining and being mean to the hardworking poor.

[orange7]

77% of the PPL DONT GIVE SHIT


Think outside the bun. Just because they don't donate money doesn't mean they don't give a shit. Come'on StylinRed.. use your head and try to realize what I'm trying to say here. YOU CAN DO IT!!!


oh ya.. my objective here is not to get into a war with you but to help you realized that you shouldn't stereotype everyone who doesn't donate as assholes. Obviously, you're right to some degree. In that 77% there are way more actual assholes than non assholes, but should you be stereotyping them all??????

[PiuYi]

:drama: :haha::haha:

[fishing666]

me too i hate bandwagon jumpsters

in multiple threads i've seen just 1 individual with a herd of sheep behind.
i'd be scared to meet some of uguys in life

i think 23% is pretty good. people donate to other places too
they aren't really donating but buying happiness in giving.
not everybodys' happiness is in giving

[J____]

It's sad. I know I haven't donated a dime in years. Maybe it's time to change.

actually 100% of british columbians make donations... by force... to the government..

[The_AK]

i'll usually donate to the salvation army,
they help families in need, and its family that helps us stay together

[StylinRed]

No, you are dumb. Get your facts straight. I never said ppl gave away 23% of their total wealth. I completely understood that it was 23 / 100 people who donated anything at all.

I don't see a problem with only 23 / 100 ppl actually donating anything at all. I said this city is expensive as hell to live in. In other words, you should expect 77 / 100 ppl feeding their family on their pay cheques. Also, you need to take note that many ppl have cars and houses mortgaged. Not everyone is rich like you, so I would appreciate it if you don't call poor ppl assholes just because they have no spare money to donate. Also, have you considered those poor people who provide weekly free service to this city and don't donate? I'm pretty sure those amazingly wonderful people belong in the 77%, and I really don't think you should be calling them assholes because that is mean.

YOU NEED TO REMEMBER that this reported 77% of not donating includes everyone such as homeless bums, single moms with 7 children, ppl with no left over money at the end of each month, etc.. I don't like ppl who call single moms living on their pay-cheques assholes. Hence, you sicken me.

So if you take all that into consideration, 23% is about right.
Obviously this article wants more ppl to donate, therefore instead of only having the rich population it takes into an account of the poor ppl. In that case, I don't see a problem with 23%. I would agree with you if they neglected the bums and homeless, but they didn't.

Come'on man.. I know you're a smart guy since you've been around RS for such a long time, but can you seriously not let that article manipulate your thinking?
Think about what it wants. It wants ppl to feel guilty and donate, so obviously the 23% is calculated by (ppl who donated)/(total population). 23% isn't bad, and I don't see why you are complaining and being mean to the hardworking poor.

i may have been confused by your english

I don't get it. What's wrong with having a 23% donation rate? How about you tell us what is a suitable percentage??^^^ reading that to me says a 23% donation rate = percentage of funds and then "what is a suitable percentage??" = how much money should people be giving

but your new reply is saying something different

which doesn't make sense as to why you'd harp on me... as my original message was harping on people who post in RS in threads about the homeless where they clearly don't give a shit about the homeless and have a mentality that people who need help deserve no help because they got in that position themselves.

for some reason you're confusing "just reading the posts on RS from all the cold hearted, stuck up, ignorant assholes is proof enough that most ppl don't care " as being directed to people who can't afford to donate.

are you saying the cold hearted, stuck up ignorant assholes on RS are all poor? i still don't get how you made your association with people who couldn't afford to donate


you're clearly either stupid (well not stupid but inadequate english/comprehension?) or trying to put words in my mouth









Think outside the bun. Just because they don't donate money doesn't mean they don't give a shit. Come'on StylinRed.. use your head and try to realize what I'm trying to say here. YOU CAN DO IT!!!


oh ya.. my objective here is not to get into a war with you but to help you realized that you shouldn't stereotype everyone who doesn't donate as assholes. Obviously, you're right to some degree. In that 77% there are way more actual assholes than non assholes, but should you be stereotyping them all??????

i said 77% of the rest of "ppl don't give shit" i didnt say they dont give A shit and i clearly used the word "MOST" in my original post as i've underlined for you above

[hk20000]

what are you stupid??

it says only 23% of THE POPULATION that means 77% of the PPL DONT GIVE SHIT not they're only giving 23% of their money away...

get it... out of 100 people only 23 people donated anything the other 77 just keep walking

dude, picture that in your head, that's a fucking lot of people who DO donate.

almost 1 in 4 people hand shit out to you for free. Holy shit I wish I could get that kind of treatment.

All I know is 10 in 10 purchase I make I have to pay stupid tax
10 in 10 employers I know will not give you freebies for fun

grow the fuck up. We live in the most expensive to live in city with the lowest minimum wage of all provinces. Just shut up already. If any province needs donation we should get donation from Albertans.

[StylinRed]

i've got no issues with people who can't afford to donate.... engrish much?


as i've stated... most comments in RS threads about the needy are about how the needy deserve to be needy because they got themselves into that situation

so im not surprised if most people in bc have the same mentality

my comments have NOTHING, NOTHING to do with people who can't afford to donate

[taylor192]

Here is the problem. Many of us claim to care because we simply look like total assholes if we outright say we don't give a shit. It's actually trendy to give to the poor because it makes us look socially responsible. "Wow, look how civilized we are." "I care about other people and I'm a good person."
Have you read Freakanomics or Super Freakanomics?

The sequel has an entire chapter about how generous people are. The books looks at various studies, real world and lab, of how people handle giving money away. It was very interesting to see that:
- If you gave someone $20 and asked them to give another person some of it, they would give some money away.
- If you gave 2 people $20, and told one that they could give or take money from the other then some people gave yet more people took
- If you gave 2 people $20, and told one that they could give or take money from the other, yet the other worked hard and earned it, then most people didn't exchange any money

Basically it comes down to:
- if you have extra money, you'll give some away
- if you see others have the same money, you'll likely find a way to take their money
- if you see others earned their money, then life is good

My biggest problem with charities is I don't think most who get the support of the charity need it. Charities that sponsor medical research I completely agree with, yet food/clothing/homeless charities tend to get abused by those who aren't really needy. Sure some are needy, yet those who aren't trigger my "you didn't earn it" mentality and I don't donate.

Does anyone here donate blood?

[Greenstoner]

this thread is getting outta control... i will donate these 2 videos into this thread


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO0Q2yu1pzk&feature=fvw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1Ufv65L39s

[LiquidTurbo]

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Appeal/en?utm_source=2009_Jimmy_Appeal1&utm_medium=sitenotice&utm_campaign=fundraiser2009&referrer=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hangul&target=Appeal

[q0192837465]

I guess 1 of the biggest problem about charity organizations is their lack of transparency. No 1 really knows how much of their proceeds are put towards their actual cause. In fact, no 1 really ask them to show the world how they allocate their money. I think people will be more comfortable at donating their hard earned cash if charity organizations are more transparent.

And the other thing that really gets me is who are really in need? I believe people who are genuinely unfortunate deserves our help. But what about those who fucked up their own lives themselves. Those single moms who had 10 kids with 10 different men and are now having trouble supporting her "family". Are they really in need? Why do we have to pay for their mistakes? Why is it that these ppl can screw themselves over but those of us to lead a good life have to be suck with the bill?

[SlySi]

I still dont see anything wrong with a 23% donatation percentage.

[q0192837465]

I still dont see anything wrong with a 23% donatation percentage.

Exactly, 23% of the entire population doesnt mean anything cuz bums & ppl living in poverty are not capable of donating and should not be counted.

[The_AK]

I guess 1 of the biggest problem about charity organizations is their lack of transparency. No 1 really knows how much of their proceeds are put towards their actual cause. In fact, no 1 really ask them to show the world how they allocate their money. I think people will be more comfortable at donating their hard earned cash if charity organizations are more transparent.

And the other thing that really gets me is who are really in need? I believe people who are genuinely unfortunate deserves our help. But what about those who fucked up their own lives themselves. Those single moms who had 10 kids with 10 different men and are now having trouble supporting her "family". Are they really in need? Why do we have to pay for their mistakes? Why is it that these ppl can screw themselves over but those of us to lead a good life have to be suck with the bill?

I agree with this,
In one of my marketing classes our instructor told us how some charities really waste their money. She used to donate to a specific charity but stopped because she wasn't able to do so. She told the charity she would no longer donate. However, the charity tried so hard to get her back as a "donor" (if thats a word) that they kept sending this marketing collateral to her like t-shirts, mugs, etc. with the charity's name on it for several years now. The moral of this is that some charities don't know how to allocate their budget. Some spend too much of their donations trying to retrieve "donors" and ultimately hinder the amount of money they give to the people that need it.
The problem is that some of them don't have properly trained people in economics that see the equalibrium between spending marketing dollars and receiving donations. :rolleyes:

[dna82]

I'm not surprised only 23% donate, just reading the posts on RS from all the cold hearted, stuck up, ignorant assholes is proof enough that most ppl don't care


yeah i don't care, am i supposed to?

its your money, you spend it the way you want to.

doesn't mean your cold hearted, stuck up, or ignorant.

do you have trouble relating to people? it must be hard to make friends with that high horse you're always on top of.

[StylinRed]

yeah i don't care, am i supposed to?

doesn't mean your cold hearted, stuck up, or ignorant.

do you have trouble relating to people? it must be hard to make friends with that high horse you're always on top of.

you're sort of missing the point :P

and no ive got no trouble, thx :)

[orange7]

i may have been confused by your english

^^^ reading that to me says a 23% donation rate = percentage of funds and then "what is a suitable percentage??" = how much money should people be giving

but your new reply is saying something different


i said 77% of the rest of "ppl don't give shit" i didnt say they dont give A shit and i clearly used the word "MOST" in my original post as i've underlined for you above

You have good English skill so you shouldn't have been confused if you actually read the original article prior to reading my post. Didn't you see any relationship between the 23% I stated and the 23% stated in the original article? Obviously I meant 23% of all ppl actually donated to the ppl in need. Fine, I may have been a little unclear there since I was in a hurry, but you have great English so you should've figured it out.

BTW for all those rs members reading this, becareful of StylinRed word tricks. Like I said, he has good English Skill. He is able to use "Logical Fallacies" in the stuff he writes. The one he used in the above quote is called "Slippery Slope."
23% donation rate != how much money should people be giving.
Please don't get fooled by StylinRed's definition.


which doesn't make sense as to why you'd harp on me... as my original message was harping on people who post in RS in threads about the homeless where they clearly don't give a shit about the homeless and have a mentality that people who need help deserve no help because they got in that position themselves.


You got the wrong idea bro. I too dislike those ppl who have mountains of money but don't donate.
In my original post I don't recall harping on you. I only said you sicken me and said you are stupid after you called me stupid first. In fact, I think i said more good things about you than negative things. I called you a baller + smart, and said you have good English skill.


for some reason you're confusing "just reading the posts on RS from all the cold hearted, stuck up, ignorant assholes is proof enough that most ppl don't care " as being directed to people who can't afford to donate.


Originally, I failed you because you thought 23% (23/100ppl) was not good enough for expensive-living Vancouver. Again, I seriously don't see what's wrong with 23%. In fact, I'm quite happy to hear this news. So you still haven't answered my original question. What is an acceptable percentage?

You understood half of my point earlier.
Your previous post told me these things: you didn't think 23% was acceptable, you jumped to a conclusion for most ppl in vancouver based on a few negative posts in RS, and the "most ppl" includes ppl who have money but don't donate as well as people who don't have money and don't donate. I was defending those people who don't have money and don't donate.


are you saying the cold hearted, stuck up ignorant assholes on RS are all poor? i still don't get how you made your association with people who couldn't afford to donate


Thank you for double checking with me before you make an ass out of you and me. I did not mean to say anyone on RS is poor. Your post originally told me that the "most ppl" includes both rich and poor. Hence, I included bums in my post. You should've figured this out since you're smart.


you're clearly either stupid (well not stupid but inadequate english/comprehension?) or trying to put words in my mouth


Why would you say something like this to anyone? You really do sicken me. You know, I think I've said more good things about you than bad things. Why are you acting like this?
Also, stop using logical fallacies. You just used "False Dilemma - Either/Or." In other words, you just characterized me in the above quote with two options when reality there are more.


I think you're a nice guy in real life, but you need to bullying me. This is a debate, not a fight where you kill the other person and win.

[StylinRed]

rofl ok ok im sorry orange7

i just become a big ass when im bored and my postings of late should show im really bored


and i think the logical answer for an acceptable rate would be 100% of ppl donate even if you're poor (as long as you're not homeless) you can still offer some change