Charities.

[joe-90]

We pay twice for charities. What you give by choice and what you give without choice. I didn't know that.
Did you know that charities are government funded?


"Charities Minister Nick Hurd said he recognised the short-term difficulties faced by some charities, but insisted that £600m would be made available to ease the pressure."





http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18245690

 

[AronSearle]

We pay twice for charities. What you give by choice and what you give without choice. I didn't know that.
Did you know that charities are government funded?

What rock you been living under?

 

[streaker99]

Anyone can set up a Charity.
Back in the recession of 1994 I proposed setting up the Business Benevolent Fund. An industry led Charity where contributions would help Directors of failed companies with assistance.

Here's the thing. A Charity cannot make a profit. They must be Not for Profit organisations.

Should the Charity raise £150,000 then the staff can takes £149,000 in wages and donates £1000 to Charity.

There is no set ratio of the amount that has to be given or the amount that can be used for wages and business expenses.

The people you see in the street asking you to sign up to £2 a month on a standing order. The company employing these canvassers get £120 for every person they get to sign up.

Do the maths - at £2 a month you would need to have paid for 5 yrs before the Charity you supported gets back its 'introducers' fee.

and in the meantime none of your money will be supporting the people you thought it was for.

 

[libby lou lou]

I find that sad, if true but if it took 5 yrs to get through, then it worked

 

[joe-90]

Then it goes on big fat salaries. The top charity bosses earn more than the PM.

 

[libby lou lou]

If i offered you a post would you take it joe?

 

[AronSearle]

Do the maths - at £2 a month you would need to have paid for 5 yrs before the Charity you supported gets back its 'introducers' fee.

I saw a different report that said it was less, and that the first years payment went to pay for the chugger, can't be arsed to source it.

But as to the OP, I bet 90% of you voted lib/lab/con, so don't complain, you voted for this.

 

[sooey]

But as to the OP, I bet 90% of you voted lib/lab/con, so don't complain, you voted for this.

I bet you you're wrong. I certainly didn't, and what percentage of people vote at all in general elections? well below 70%.

 

[LastMagicBean]

can't be a***d to source it

Typical.

 

[streaker99]

Do the maths - at £2 a month you would need to have paid for 5 yrs before the Charity you supported gets back its 'introducers' fee.

I saw a different report that said it was less, and that the first years payment went to pay for the chugger, can't be a***d to source it.

But as to the OP, I bet 90% of you voted lib/lab/con, so don't complain, you voted for this.

http://www.pfra.org.uk/face-to-face...bject_to_chuggers/money_doesnt_go_to_charity/

 

[Nige F]

We pay twice for charities. What you give by choice and what you give without choice. I didn't know that.
Did you know that charities are government funded?

What rock you been living under?

Rock of ages

 

[Nige F]

Anyone can set up a Charity.
There is no set ratio of the amount that has to be given or the amount that can be used for wages and business expenses.

The people you see in the street asking you to sign up to £2 a month on a standing order. The company employing these canvassers get £120 for every person they get to sign up.

.

Chuggers = Charity Muggers I carry the verbal equivalent of a Victorian swordstick to protect myself from these vagabonds

 

[trollmaster2000]

Chuggers are scum, casting a driftnet of harrasment accross the street, and coercing not just a donation, but a recurring financial commitment out of people for their own profit.
I personally blacklist any charity that employs chuggers.
A charity's job is to raise funds for their chosen cause. If they can't even be arsed to do their own fundraising - instead, outsourcing it to profiteering chugging agencies - then what is the point of their existence?
They should be shut down, and it should be legal to use violence against chuggers.

 

[AronSearle]

But as to the OP, I bet 90% of you voted lib/lab/con, so don't complain, you voted for this.

I bet you you're wrong. I certainly didn't, and what percentage of people vote at all in general elections? well below 70%.

Well, statistically about 90% of people did vote lib/lab/con.

Those who didn't bother to vote don't count and their views don't matter, they had the option to vote for, support or stand as independents, they just couldn't be bothered and whine like little children how "voting doesnt mater, whaaaaaa".

 

[D_Hailsham]

Then it goes on big fat salaries. The top charity bosses earn more than the PM.

Really? Here are two examples.

Oxfam

Annual Income to march 2011 - £367.5 million
Annual Expenditure - £361.1 million
This includes staff costs - £96.5 million (2,000 employees in the UK, 3,000 overseas). There are 22,000 volunteers.

The Chief Executive's total pay £107k

Save the Children

Annual Income - £291 million
Expenditure - £266.5 million
This includes staff costs - £76.5 million (5,000 employees, 9,000 volunteers)

Chief Executive's total pay £134k

The Prime Minister currently gets £142.5k, although he is entitled to £193K
The President of the USA gets £273k