- Posts: 4564
Weighing Up Charitable Causes
Attachment h7ebb8c7.jpg not found
I don't ever actually read the names or descriptions of the charities - I just put my token in the box with the least tokens. I'm not being lazy - it's a conscious choice that I made years ago because it feels to me that my token is much more valuable to a charity that is receiving less. I don't like to think that a charity that deserves money, regardless of whether or not it is a cause that happens to be close to my heart, is being overlooked. (Not that my choice, my one little token, has any real effect - especially considering that there's often a second collection box somewhere and the weightings could be totally different in that one! :pinch: )
But, uncomfortable as it may sometimes be to think about, it's natural that charities compete with each other - none of us have enough money to give to every charitable cause out there, so we have to prioritize in a way that our consciences can level with.
So, the question is - are some charitable causes inherently more deserving, or more important than others? What motivates you to choose one charity over another? Is it possible to be fair in the charity arena?
B.Div | OCP
Please Log in to join the conversation.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

I, like Marta, tend to support local charities more and charities that don't receive additional funding from the Government. This is because A: I can easily see how that money is being put to use, and B: the big multi-national charities already make a great deal without my contribution. I am a registered volunteer fundraiser for the Great North Air Ambulance Service for example (both local to me and gets sod all from the Government)
- Knight Senan'The only contest any of us should be engaged in is with ourselves, to be better than yesterday'
Please Log in to join the conversation.
The Paradox of Choice
Yesterday I watched two short presentations on the Paradox of choice after asking Maitre to point me in the right direction as to what lesson (of the many I have) I should do next. The two people recommended were Barry Swartz and Ranata Salacl. I’ll begin by explaining what I was looking for, which might then further explain why I felt they didn’t help. I was looking for someone to explain to me how to choose, by which I mean which strategy I should use when confronted with an overwhelming amount of potential choices. I felt I did not get much out of the two presentations because all they told me was that having too many choices was in fact a problem, which I understood as I was already experiencing some of the negative effects of that.
I realize that I was expecting too much out of the presenters in asking them to help me with a strategy for a couple of reasons: a strategy will never yield the right choice as there is no right choice only a choice I made and other choices I did not make. Robert Frost’s poem “Two Roads” is not about making the right choice, but making a choice. The end of that poem could have very well been “I took the road less traveled by and nearly got eaten by a zombie. I beat the crap out of him and that has made all the difference.” One of the principle issues with choice is that we are preoccupied with making the right choice. We don’t chose because we don’t know which choice is the right choice whether we are talking about marriage or a fast food choice on a menu. No matter what the choice is related to and what choice we ultimately make, we will experience some level of regret if we choose to be past minded.
The second reason I feel I may have been expecting too much was because each choice must be approached differently. I can’t necessarily choose a phone like I choose a school or whether or not I get married. Some choices have more perceived weight than others. In each of these cases, it helps to be present minded, that is not to be focused on the potentialities of the future or the regrets of the past. But we are here now! Whether we have two roads or five hundred, we can only walk down one. I take comfort in the fact that if I make a choice that doesn’t quite suit me, there will always be the potential to make another choice, but never the same choice. I further take comfort in the fact that if I make a choice, it will in most cases not be the end of the world, I needn’t put such pressure on myself to make the right choice.
I think further that some of the feeling of overwhelm is based on our expectations of how things ought to happen or our
desires which are themselves based on expectations. One time I recall ordering pasta and chicken wings for delivery from a pizza shop that is not one of my favorite for pizzas. I figured I would be in the clear if I ordered the pasta because that is the only pizza shop that I know that delivers and has pasta. I was tremendously disappointed, but I expected to be also, because I hadn’t liked the pizza before. I sort of hated the fact that I spent twenty dollars plus tip on a mediocre meal which afterwards I considered would have been very useful for a few books or a ticket to another part of the country.
I have had tremendous regret recently related to my educational pursuits because I have grown up a bit since I graduated.
Part of the issue is that I feel I have been lied to. I have done everything I was asked to do related to getting an education and I expected that a job that provided me with financial security and a sense of purpose was going to be available for me to grab as I had the credentials. I often say, “If I could do it again, I wouldn’t buy into the lie that college is the only way to get a job. I would’ve gotten an education directly related to a growing field.” But there again is the problem of expectations, and really what is stopping me now from making the choices that I have to make? I can’t go back, so worrying about what might be different had I done this or that is a rather useless expense of energy. What can I do now? What options are there now that I can see?
The last point I want to make before I move to the conclusion is that of blame. Schwartz says that when we have the choice then we also have the blame. He gives an example of buying a pair of jeans. His first pair had begun to wear really thin, but at the time of purchase they were the only kind a person could buy. Now there is a potential for several hundred styles and fits because every detail is customizable. After one hour he walked away with the best fitting pair of jeans he had ever worn, but he lamented “they could’ve been better”.
I can’t really say I didn’t learn much from the two presentations I watched, but they didn’t meet my expectations, which as I said would have been impossible, but I did recall something that I think allowed me to write this relatively long essay. Becoming aware of the paradox of choice doesn’t necessarily mean one can change it or strategize to use it the most effectively. It simply means that it is there to be explored.
We want to know which is the "right" choice or "more right", so we ask "is this fair?"
But so long as there is choice there will be no choice but to choose.
I rarely donate to long standing charities. I donate to individuals and I provide money during natural disasters. There is some hesitation as to whether the money will be spent correctly (read: As I like), but that hesitation must be abdicated along with the money.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
but that hesitation must be abdicated along with the money.
Yess i am with you on that , i was just thinking of that , next to the difficult choice of picking a good cause and then to have to check where the money is going can get a bit much , but i usually am not dissapointed with these little charities , as Brick said its local and easy to trace back . Not that i am overly attached to the idea that every penny has to be well spend , i know the cat charity took their volunteers for a nice dinner and there was an outrage , which then got another outrage of people saying the volunteers put in so many hours and resources why should not they have something , now we collect money for the meal once a year next to the normal contribution loll , what is left over goes back into the shelter fund
Please Log in to join the conversation.

For me choosing to give money, time or publicity to a charity is mostly about where my personal interests lie. I'm moved by homelessness, so volunteer at a shelter. I care about families being provided for, so donate to the food bank. I'm passionate about woodland, so donate to the Woodland Trust. And I am a parent and affected by the plight of children, so I donate to UNICEF. Realistically I could do more good for any one cause by focusing all my energies on it, but I feel trying to do a little good for those things we are most passionate about doesn't harm anything... who knows, my £5 a month might be all that's needed to complete an aid run, my bag of pasta might feed a family.
Like my approach to life as a Jedi I do not do any one thing with a single-minded focus, but instead try and cultivate a portfolio of "good things". I try and spread the love around, basically, because I feel that is likely to do the most good to the most people. Totally unscientific but it feels like the right thing to do, for me.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
Then I try to find out what exactly the charity does with the money. How much do the people in charge of it make? What percentage goes to them for operating costs? Have they recently had a scandal regarding improperly allocated funds? I don't want my donations going in to a millionaire's pocket while his "charity" doesn't actually do any good. The sad truth is that there are those charities out there that rip people off.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- steamboat28
-
- Offline
- Banned
-
- Si vis pacem, para bellum.
V-Tog wrote: So, the question is - are some charitable causes inherently more deserving, or more important than others? What motivates you to choose one charity over another? Is it possible to be fair in the charity arena?
I think everyone should start by judging charities on their honesty and faithfulness to their cause. For example, here in the States, PeTA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) kills a ****-ton of animals in their shelters each year that nobody wants to talk about on top of their increasingly terroristic marketing campaigns. Additionally, one of the more popular hair-donation charities (to make wigs for cancer victims) has been scrutinized once it was discovered that many donations of hair were being sold to pay for organizational costs rather than being directly donated. While both of these organizations are doing what they feel is best in the circumstances, it may be that we (as individuals) see their actions as hurting their cause rather than helping it. Our first criteria should be to determine if we feel the charities are doing what they said they would do.
After that, it's all up to our own agendas. My personal pet causes are currently cancer research, literacy, alzheimer's and dementia research, medical marijuana legalization, aid to the homeless and hungry, and underprivileged children's medical care, in no particular order. And when I can, I support those charities with what little time, effort, or money I can donate. I feel these causes are important enough to me that I need to take a stand to help them in whatever ways I can. Everyone's choices are different, but these are where my heart is because these are the ones that have touched my life.
A.Div
IP | Apprentice | Seminary | Degree
AMA | Vlog | Meditation
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- Alethea Thompson
-
- Offline
- User
-
- Posts: 2289
When I was in the military, I had a regular donation to a foundation that did research into Marfan Syndrome because it runs in my family (my sister has it). The reason isn't so much that she has it, as it is that because she has it I know how difficult it is to diagnose, and that sometimes families wouldn't find out until their kids were well into their teens. My father died from it at 32, my grandmother only survived to her 50s by virtue of being a Nurse, so any heart attacks she had, she had doctors readily available to assist her. Thing is, neither of these two (my father or grandmother) were diagnosed with Marfan, my sister was the first one. So I think families could benefit from knowing as early as possible. That's why I donated to that particular charity, and one day might be able to do so again.
Gather at the River,
Setanaoko Oceana
Please Log in to join the conversation.
So, the question is - are some charitable causes inherently more deserving, or more important than others? What motivates you to choose one charity over another? Is it possible to be fair in the charity arena?
I give to the charities whose causes I feel most strongly about.
I give money to multiple animal charities because I have homed a lot of rescue animals, a cancer charity because my godmother died of breast cancer, and the local ambulance service because it gets no funding but it's important to my area. I have also raised money for the MS society, because my friend has MS and the only options he has is one treatment with horrible side effects after another.
I tend not to put money in donation boxes/buckets ever since I found out that some people collecting get some of the cash (husband knows someone first hand who did this), so I try to give direct to the charities.
I don't shop at Waitrose, but if I was faced with such an option I'd probably just do the same as you, put the token in the least full pot.
Truth is, I don't know what constitutes 'fair' in charity. Though I can't say which charities are most important, I can think of a few causes which are definitely deserve more than they currently get (I'm thinking along the lines of prostate cancer charities here).
It won't let me have a blank signature ...
Please Log in to join the conversation.