Useless Charities: Should They Support Widespread Causes?

  • Thread starter KingNothing
  • Start date
In summary, this conversation is discussing the pros and cons of donating to different charities that focus on small-spread conditions like rare diseases. Some argue that the donations are better used helping more widespread causes, while others argue that it is important to help those who are close to you.
  • #1
KingNothing
882
4
Wouldn't you think that some of the charities for smaller-spread conditions would provide a bigger benefit to the world if they were out supporting a more widespread cause?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
A lot of charities are formed for rare diseases because of the fact they are rare and not much attention or funding normally go to them because they are not profitable to pharmaceutical/research companies. The charities are often started after a loved one is stricken with the rare disease and often done in their name.
 
  • #3
yeah, why help out the small groups of hungry people. Sacrifice the one for the good of the many.
Helping someone no matter how small is benefiting the world.
 
  • #4
They really aren't out there to save the world, just the loved one they know who is afflicted with the disease. Evo is right, the reason they form charities is to fund research on things the government and industry won't fund.
 
  • #5
you want to hear about a useless charity? I probably give away 20% of my paycheck everyweek to homeless people. and 9 times out of 10 I probably just provided them means to get another rock of crack. but maybe I also provide one of them with means to get a decent meal.
I got to get out of this thread. it's making me serious
 
  • #6
Kingnothing, i agree with you to a large extend, not perfectly though.

I almost pay money to people in the street if i just sense that they may need help, even some people call me stupid. But some of them who carry alcohol bottles, wearing leather clothes, and good loddking jeans, and have athletic bodies, and they have "nice goaties" since they buy shave razors to shve...etc my answer to them will be: I will give an Axe, not money, go and cut wood and seel it and earn money, dude work!

When i was in high school, there were raising a money to fund a scholarship for a stundet which it worth 30,000 British pounds. I did not participate in a penny. i put the charity money i pay for people who needed for a more urgent need, rather than that scholarship, or at least i say thatr guy has a "media" behind him, so it is easy to him to get assessed, i will another human who only has hope on the other homo-sapiens to recognize that they share humanity with him...
 
  • #7
Some of the charities (by no means useless charities) you want to watch out for are the sponser a child charities. While this is by no means a bad thing to want to do, it can create inequalities between families or siblings when a close friend keeps receiving free support while others get nothing. It can also cause problems when the sponsered child grows up, and the support stops. That is why charities such as Oxfam don't provide child sponsership schemes. They aregue that any donationn would be better used providing for an entire village or community, on something beneficial to everyone, not just one person.
 
  • #8
Has anyone heard of things called Fair Trade?

If the WTO is controlled by the US and the WTO ****s every country up but the US, explain what the WTO/US can do to help these poor countries/people without spending a dime.
 
  • #9
People are really mentally ****ed up in USA and Canada,where hundreds of charitiess exist and giving money to them to help poor peoples all over the world, while their government is killing innocent Iraqi civilians right before our eyes.
 

1. What are some examples of "useless" charities?

There is no definitive list of "useless" charities as opinions may vary. However, some charities that have been criticized for not effectively supporting their stated cause include those that have high administrative costs, lack transparency, or have been involved in financial scandals.

2. How do you determine if a charity is "useless"?

Determining whether a charity is "useless" is subjective and can be based on various factors. Some common ways to evaluate a charity's effectiveness include looking at their financial reports, impact reports, transparency, and accountability measures.

3. Should "useless" charities be supported at all?

This is a highly debated topic. Some argue that even "useless" charities can still make a small positive impact and should be supported. Others believe that resources should be directed towards more effective charities to maximize impact. Ultimately, it is up to the individual to decide where they want to donate their money.

4. Can "useless" charities harm the causes they claim to support?

In some cases, yes. If a charity is not using their resources effectively or misusing funds, it can have a negative impact on the cause they claim to support. This is why it is important for donors to research and carefully consider which charities they choose to support.

5. What can be done to address the issue of "useless" charities?

There are a few things that can be done to address the issue. Donors can do their own research and due diligence before donating to a charity. Additionally, there are organizations that evaluate and rate charities based on their effectiveness and impact. These ratings can help donors make informed decisions about where to donate their money. Government regulations and increased transparency and accountability measures can also help address the issue of "useless" charities.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
23
Views
963
Replies
3
Views
932
  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
954
Replies
1
Views
812
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • Materials and Chemical Engineering
Replies
4
Views
697
  • General Discussion
4
Replies
107
Views
29K
  • General Discussion
Replies
21
Views
1K
Replies
18
Views
1K
Back
Top