Is Giving Directly to the Needy or Through a Charity the Best Option?

  • Thread starter Thread starter drankin
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the ethics and effectiveness of giving directly to individuals in need versus donating to charities. Participants share personal experiences and opinions regarding their interactions with beggars and their approaches to charitable giving, exploring moral implications and societal responsibilities.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express a willingness to give money directly to individuals in need, while others share experiences that led them to stop giving cash.
  • Several participants recount personal anecdotes about encounters with beggars, highlighting feelings of guilt, skepticism, or frustration.
  • Some argue that providing cash may not be the best option, suggesting that donations to shelters and soup kitchens are more effective ways to help those in need.
  • There are differing views on the motivations of beggars, with some participants questioning the honesty of their requests and others advocating for direct assistance when possible.
  • A few participants mention alternative methods of assistance, such as offering food instead of money or engaging beggars in physical challenges to earn cash.
  • Some participants reflect on their past experiences with charitable giving and how those experiences have shaped their current attitudes towards panhandling.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best approach to helping those in need. Multiple competing views remain regarding the effectiveness and morality of direct giving versus charitable donations.

Contextual Notes

Participants express various assumptions about the motivations and needs of beggars, as well as their own past experiences with poverty and charity. The discussion reflects a range of personal values and societal observations that influence their perspectives.

  • #31
Moonbear said:
I ignore them and keep walking. If they don't have money for food, they can go to the soup kitchen. If they need a place to sleep with a roof over their head, they can go to the shelter. I'll more than gladly donate to soup kitchens and shelters where I know the money is going to feed the homeless and hungry or give them a roof over their head to sleep at night, but I will not give cash handouts to beggars.
Moonbear's badass.

The longer you've lived in say, India, the sooner you start to learn you can't give money to every beggar.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Moonbear said:
Wow, I've never heard of a charity refusing an anonymous donation before. Usually the only reason to give your name is if you need a receipt for a tax deduction. That's sad that they would do that.

I could hardly believe it! Clearly this is a racket. But it is supposed to be one of the most respected institutions of its kind, in Oregon.
 
Last edited:
  • #33
turbo-1 said:
That is a bit strange, but if they can sell the names of names of people who make large donations, and sell them multiple times, that's probably a big source of income.

Yes, which I see as being more than a little disingenuous; in fact it is pretty slimy in my book. I certainly regretted my donation, for months!
 
  • #34
Ivan Seeking said:
Yes, which I see as being more than a little disingenuous; in fact it is pretty slimy in my book. I certainly regretted my donation, for months!
So did my wife and myself after the Katrina donation. It can take a long time to make these outfits purge you from their mailing lists, and I'm sure that some of those outfits sold our names, too. Thankfully, the begging has settled down to a more tolerable level.
 
  • #35
Mk said:
The longer you've lived in say, India, the sooner you start to learn you can't give money to every beggar.

Okay, so give to every other one. :biggrin:
 
  • #36
I will give $ to the person almost always( if I do not have any $ but I have some food then I give food) after all I have clothes on my back , people who love me, and a home to go too.
 
  • #37
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- More than 25 percent of the homeless population in the United States are war veterans, although they represent only 11 percent of the civilian adult population, according to a report to be released Thursday. [continued]
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/11/08/homeless.veterans/index.html
 
  • #38
It's hard to know whether it is better to give aid directly to the needy or via an organised charity.

Giving directly is open to abuse both in distinguishing between the genuinely needy and the professional beggar and in how the recipient spends the donation - drink, substance abuse etc.

Giving via a recognised charity however also has it's pitfalls with much of the donated money being skimmed off in 'expenses'. eg

MADD's `exorbitant costs' anger charity's volunteers

Kevin Donovan
staff reporter

People who donate to Mothers Against Drunk Driving are told by the charity that most of the $12 million it raises annually is spent on good works — stopping drunk driving and helping families traumatized by fatal crashes.

But a Star investigation reveals most of the high-profile charity's money is spent on fundraising and administration, leaving only about 19 cents of each donor dollar for charitable works.
Perhaps gov't ran programs are a better option.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K