Useless Charities: Should They Support Widespread Causes?

  • Thread starter Thread starter KingNothing
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the effectiveness and ethics of charitable giving, particularly regarding rare diseases versus more widespread causes. Participants debate whether charities for rare conditions might be better directed toward broader issues that affect larger populations. Many charities arise from personal experiences with rare diseases, often initiated by individuals wanting to support loved ones. The conversation also touches on the complexities of giving, such as the potential ineffectiveness of donations to homeless individuals, where funds may not always lead to positive outcomes. Some argue that supporting broader initiatives, like community development rather than individual sponsorships, may yield more significant benefits. Concerns are raised about the inequalities created by child sponsorship programs, with suggestions that funds might be better allocated to support entire communities. The discussion concludes with a critique of the role of Western charities and governments in addressing global poverty, highlighting perceived contradictions in their actions.
KingNothing
Messages
880
Reaction score
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
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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
 
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...
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Back
Top