We're all Terrible People

[Bellvedere]

Local (by which I mean within the same country) charities are much more... I don't know the right word so I'm just going to say reliable than international charities that spend their money overseas.

Also saying that someone is terrible for choosing to help train guide dogs over save starving children is wrong. People who are indifferent to any sort of philanthropy are terrible. People who can't afford too are not. People that care about problems in their own country that they see everyday are not worse than people that care about problems overseas that they see on the news or internet or hassled into supporting but volunteers on the street.

Just a quick note here, I think the word you were looking for was real? I very much doubt that local charities use money more wisely than internationals, probably less so. I will colour code your statements for clarity. Red=disagree, blue=agree, yellow=in a way agree.

With respect to green, what does it mean afford to? Does it mean homeless, uni student, saving for tv? Perhaps by buying no-name food products for a month you could save a life, I'm sure most people could do that. But they don't. Because they are terrible people.

Your last statement seems to imply that if the problem is in their country, it automatically elevates it up the moral scale.
"Hey Billy, lets go save some starving kids"
"Piss off Jimmy, my fingernail is hurting"
"Did I mention they are living in our country?"
"Well why didn't you say so, right away"

No real isn't the word I was looking for. I mean so long as a charity is reliable to begin with it's much easier to ensure that the money goes to the right place if it's local rather than international. Even if international charities mean well it takes more effort to get the money where it should be going.

I'm not saying it's better to be concerned about something that's happening in your own country, I'm just saying that's what you see or what has a direct affect on you. You see homeless people. You know of families that can only afford to stay in the city with their sick child who is in hospital because of certain charities. Caring about that is no less important than caring about anything else happening.

 

[Markness]

You see homeless people. You know of families that can only afford to stay in the city with their sick child who is in hospital because of certain charities. Caring about that is no less important than caring about anything else happening.

Yes it is. I've said this argument so many times. Blah blah blah, for the price of 1 kid, save like 50 blah blah blah. Unless you're saying the life of 1 kid from your country is worth 50 africans?

 

[Kamaitachi]

I don't give to charities, I give to homeless people though.
Don't ask me why, I don't really know. Maybe the ads just piss me off.

I remember a Skit regarding that in some random comedy show awhile back, the guy bassicly ranted about why you shouldn't give your money to people who say they are going to give it to homeless people when you can just give it to homeless people face to face.

 

[Valksy]

Yes it would be nice to save starving children - I was surprised to see that the current trend for critically malnourished kids is a kind of peanut butter. Apparently it is awesome for energy and nutrients.

The thing is this - unless there is a major change of beliefs and the actions of the people in countries where starvation is a real risk, providing food for some meals won't help. Not in the long run. If more children are being born in an area that cannot hope to sustain them in terms of available water and food then something is going very wrong indeed. When we talk about starving children we are talking about Africa and the recent revelations of the some of the original "Live Aid" cash being siphoned off and misused for weapons etc did not surprise me in the slightest. I guess I am not convinced that providing food is a long term solution to a much larger problem.

And yes I'm afraid that I will donate to animal charities before some human ones. I wonder if there is some sort of cultural influence there given that our RSPCA was first founded almost 200 years ago. Although I don't support the RSPCA myself because I don't approve of how they use emotional manipulation to get money. I have never liked to see animals suffer and while suffering humans receive a lot of help - including from our Government - all animal charities exist purely on donation.

My favourite charity is Macmillan Cancer Support. Some years ago a family friend was diagnosed with a brain tumour and they were amazing with how they directly and efficiently made an influence in to making her life easier and more comfortable - the home visits, the emotional support etc were critical to making Joannes life more comfortable. I saw for myself, up close and personal, what good they did and bloody hell does that make difference in how you view a charity.

 

[SUPA FRANKY]

As Pimppeter would say:

Yes we are all terrible people. Especially this guy.

Hey, I resent that! I'm not that terrible!...most of the time.


Anyway, back to the topic. Even though its hard to face facts, nobody really gives a shit about people they don't know. Look at the thing going on in Haiti! After one week of coverage, it was pretty much flushed out of stations. Also, children starving is nothing new, charities are corrupt little bastards, using some of the money for the children, and the rest for themselves. Also, simply giving them food won't really do them good. Just because they had at least one extra serving of rice doesn't mean that the rape,murder,genocide going on in their countries to worry about.

Finally, I just have to mention something about the title. We all are terrible people...well by the look of all the shit that goes on, that isn't really to far of. Besides, animals ( Ya know..besides the guns and technology and stuff) act exactly like us. The difference is that we have a will of our own while they don't. This can lead to things going down the toilet from hell.

 

[bluepilot]

We all give plenty to charity. Billions and billions each year. Charity is a major source of corruption, theft and general bad doings.

Schools are built in Africa, hospitals e.t.c. and they burn them down.

The brilliant part about guide dogs, is that they teach the blind to help themselves

All we have taught the countries we give charity to is, how to help themselves to the pot

Look at Haiti, they charged tax to let a charity used land rovers in the aid effort, then bought a private jet

If I donate a couple of quid to save a starving child, they will still be starving.

 

[Booze Zombie]

These charities have been trying for ages with little success and some of them actually create "have and have not" cultures in the areas they "help".

I thought it was supposed to be simple?
You give the people a well, some farming tools, maybe a brick building for the village to store the food and water in and they all don't die of simple little things... why haven't these charities fixed this apparently simple problem?

Well, they're either not giving it their all or they're doing it wrong.
I am willing to bet that quite a few are doing it wrong, just chucking all their cash at the effect and wondering why they can't cure the cause when all the money is gone.

 

[Dramatic Flare]

1. $100 towards the seeing eye dog foundation. Your money pays for a fraction of the training of 1 dog that would slightly improve the quality of life of a blind person.
2. $100 towards starving children. You probably save the lives of multiple children and vastly increase their quality of life.

The first option helps solve a problem permanently. Well. mostly permanently. It makes it possible for a blind person to be much more reliant on something they can take care of, and not another person.
The second option is throwing a bandaid on a broken corpse. Africa is screwed until everyone else agrees to just go back and fix it. Europe did rape Africa of most of its resources, after all.

 

[Zannah]

I don't have the money to give to charity, and lack even the slightest ambition to become a "good" person - It is however quite obvious, that many people would rather give for charities that effect things like homeless in the neighbourhood, where they can relate to, than giving for something, that's going to happen half the globe away.

 

[Davrel]

We're all awful people. If this is true, then being 'awful' is the average state of being.

Therefore, there is nothing wrong with being awful, its normal. But just because everybody does something doesn't make it right...actually yes it does; normalisation of activities creates acceptability.

I shall proceed to be awful.

*Divisive Comment time*

Charity only feeds the weak and continues to perpetuate poverty. It solves nothing.

Europe did rape Africa of most of its resources, after all.

Well thats just incorrect - colonisation was certainly a big kick in the balls for African stability and prosperity but not an irrevocable one: Africa is still disgustingly wealthy in natural resources, the Cold War superpowers played their part in screwing Africa too, and there are plenty of conflicts in Africa that have nothing to do with colonialism (re: Sierra Leone). As for tribal conflicts in Africa, there has been no real peaceful attempt, run by Africans (as it should be), to change the inherited colonial boundaries into something more sensible and less likely to promote conflict (the selfish reasons for this stagnation are endless).

 

[Legendsmith]

Honestly you can't trust anyone.

Anyone? So we can't trust that you were telling the truth with this statement. So if that statement is indeed a lie, then you are telling the truth, which makes the statement false, so you lied and we shouldn't trust you which contradicts the previous assertion that you are telling the truth... Etc etc. We've gotta stop somewhere.

Spoiler

This post is not to be taken seriously. But does that include this statement? If it does, then we can ignore this statement and take this post seriously, however if we include this statement in taking the post seriously then we find ourselves in another logic circle.

 

[Bellvedere]

You see homeless people. You know of families that can only afford to stay in the city with their sick child who is in hospital because of certain charities. Caring about that is no less important than caring about anything else happening.

Yes it is. I've said this argument so many times. Blah blah blah, for the price of 1 kid, save like 50 blah blah blah. Unless you're saying the life of 1 kid from your country is worth 50 africans?

So your saying saving Africans is more worthwhile because it's better value for money? Is that what you look for in a charity?

I'm not saying supporting one thing is any better than supporting another thing. I just think that you are incorrect in saying that people who donate to charities you don't feel strongly about are terrible. Just appreciate that some people feel something and are willing to try and make a difference instead of presuming your a better person than everyone else.

 

[Fappy]

1. $100 towards the seeing eye dog foundation. Your money pays for a fraction of the training of 1 dog that would slightly improve the quality of life of a blind person.
2. $100 towards starving children. You probably save the lives of multiple children and vastly increase their quality of life.

Why, when presented with these two options, would anyone choose the dog?

So you're really criticizing people for donating to certain charities instead of other ones?

I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. You should be glad that people are being charitable in the first place.

Amen. This is a democracy. I don't need to donate shit. Its nice if I do.

 

[Xojins]

I don't like giving to charities, mostly because the heads of those charities take some of your donation and stick it right into their wallet. They're usually millionaires too, but they don't mention that in their commercials/ads. I'm not going to give free money to someone who makes millions for the sake of "charity".

 

[xDHxD148L0]

I don't think I'm a bad person just because I don't give to charities, like a man once said "I don't believe in tipping".

 

[Quaxar]

Dogs aren't overpopulating and killing the planet. People are. I'd donate to an animal charity first. The only time I have give money for humans was the Bungie Be A Hero T-Shirt, which ALL of the money from went to the Red Cross to help Haiti. I did it for the (cool looking) shirt.

Damn you, ninja! I was going to say that!
In fact, human population is far too much. During the last 100 years we have gone from 2 billion to 8 billion thanks to improved medical care and hygiene. Yes, it's nice that people can be saved from millions of diseases that were a real threat 100 years ago.
Helping Africa to reach a level similar to europe may sound like a good idea now, but take into consideration how additional billions of people will affect the world. I'm sorry but I just don't think it's a good idea.
Not to forget the aforementioned arguments against donating to big companys that I support.

 

[Songbird-O]

I just want to say that I really hate it when people use "We are all" in threads like this. It's a huge pet peeve. Stop trying to guilt people up and do something if you think everything is so bad.

Most people never put things into perspective like that. I know I never have. I've never given to an animal charity. Only food drives and the salvation army. And Unicef.
Also, don't forget that not everyone has money to spare. Not everyone likes giving to charity, even if they do have money to spare. Not giving money doesn't make you a bad person. There is lots of gray area and wiggle room.

 

[The Rockerfly]

Maybe I don't believe in charity.
Maybe I believe that you should make your own way and whatever faults are only a hiccup in your life and people have overcome worse to do greater things then you could ever accomplish even with help and support
Maybe I don't care about a small child dying in Africa and I am capitalist pig with no heart but boo hoo, it's not my problem and it doesn't affect me