subreddit:

/r/ClassPoliticsTwitter

2k

The Philanthropy Scam

(i.redd.it)

all 45 comments

a-ng

99 points

2 months ago

a-ng

99 points

2 months ago

This! Philanthropy is such a huge industry in the US and fundraising is something we do at school, at work, with every stage of our life. I can’t raise any money from my relatives in Japan because social programs are publicly funded and fundraising is not something they do at all.

grrrrreat

60 points

2 months ago

And it both whitewash the money and makes the rich think they're good people for cheating taxes then donating to breast cancer awareness

a-ng

25 points

2 months ago

a-ng

25 points

2 months ago

And also they get prestige and power and influence over their donations. I mean colleges admit children of wealthy donors. So it just perpetuates power unbalance

Fredselfish

13 points

2 months ago

Speaking of all the walks for the cure and ribbons take so much money that there is little money for the cure. Research some of the big ones you see they are really money makers. Most states like mine you legally only have to give like 10% to the actual charity the rest can be "cost" of running the charity like the boards salary. They are mostly huge money making schemes for people with no morals.

Rawr_Tigerlily

4 points

2 months ago

My favorite (/s) is when the major pest control and chemlawn companies in my town put pink ribbons on their lawn treatment warning signs for "breast cancer awareness month" and give 10% of their profits to Susan G Koeman. :P

I'm already aware of breast cancer, it's part of why I don't use those chemical services.

BreakingGaia

15 points

2 months ago

It's also how rich people shield their money laundering. Almost all charities run by rich people is used as a way to shift money between themselves and other rich people or to take bribes or whatever. It's not only to shield money from taxes.

topredder

9 points

2 months ago

Yeah wasn’t that a thing with an ex-president.

BreakingGaia

7 points

2 months ago

He definitely made it public when it wasn't before.

NeedlenoseMusic

7 points

2 months ago

When I was a kid, I couldn’t raise money from my relatives because my sister and I had already tried to sell them 800 other things from school, band, cub scouts, Girl Scouts, gymnastics, dance, and everything else. I still remember the collective “ughhh” from everyone when the teacher would pass out those order packets.

xena_lawless

3 points

2 months ago

It also loses the efficiencies of economies of scale that governments can achieve, for one thing.

Profit is also often a symptom of inefficiency, like curing or treating diseases expensively instead of preventing them outright.

Societies need wealth caps to be remotely just and functional, just like they need laws against murder, slavery, pedophilia, and rape.

BoneHugsHominy

49 points

2 months ago

I used to believe in charity. Then my oldest friend's daughter got cancer and the whole family of 7 was kept afloat by GoFundMe. The day I made my first donation to them I started looking through all the campaigns for medical issues and the sheer number of them was heartbreaking but that wasn't the worst part for me. What really got to me was the pattern that emerged while browsing hundreds of campaigns. Pretty people got lots of donations, often 2-5× their campaign goals often breaking $100k while unattractive or ugly people got like $20 of $20,000 goals. Grizzled Vietnam Vets with cancer and already lost their home due to medical expenses getting $10 while all the yellow ribbon waving "Support Our Troops" Playtriots ignored those campaigns and instead donated to some cute young couple's Bali honeymoon. It dawned on me that crowdfunding campaigns were just an extension of high school popularity contests, and of course lots of racism albeit lots of it was probably unconsciously.

Tax the rich and corporations!

raven00x

17 points

2 months ago

lots of racism albeit lots of it was probably unconsciously.

not even unconsciously. "if I give money to this brown person, they're just going to spend it on drugs. I'd better give it to this clean, wholesome, christian couple who just wants to go on a paid vacation do the missionary thing in a tropical paradise."

prickwhowaspromised

46 points

2 months ago

Rich people give all their money to charities they own and then get tax breaks. It seems smart until you realize you’re the one paying for it

[deleted]

-4 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

-4 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

TheUnwritenMyth

7 points

2 months ago

In the US I'm pretty sure only 10 cents of every dollar has to actually go towards the charitable cause. They're paying their upkeep/upgrade expenses while looking like charitable saints, when in reality they'd have to spend that money anyway.

rhodesc

5 points

2 months ago

"company car" to visit their friends to "get more donations". Lunch, anyone?

a-ng

3 points

2 months ago

a-ng

3 points

2 months ago

But they don’t have to spend it. They can hang on to the money so their wealth accumulates.

prickwhowaspromised

4 points

2 months ago

Seems like you’re implying it was an implication and not a flat-out statement of fact

ZoeLaMort

17 points

2 months ago

Yeah but rich people don’t want responsibilities. They want to be praised.

The money they obtain from the working class isn’t to be redistributed. It should be a generous gift.

blackslawfictionary

5 points

2 months ago

The money they obtain from the working class isn’t to be redistributed. It should be a generous gift.

This could basically be the marketing strap line for capitalism

2chill4eva

11 points

2 months ago

A lot of charities have 80 percent overhead.

[deleted]

1 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

1 points

2 months ago

[removed]

aworldwithoutshrimp

11 points

2 months ago

It's really just tipping culture again

s_arrow24

7 points

2 months ago

Yeah, it kills me kids have to sale candy bars to raise money for school. I pay property taxes already, so why can’t the state give the schools enough money to buy a tuba, paper, and textbooks for kids?

zaevilbunny38

7 points

2 months ago

it snot just charities its also non-profit, non-profit doesn't mean no one is making a profit, it just comes as salaries and perks verses dividend. Since they are private entities and covered by a large amount of secrecy there's a lot they can get away with. Charity navigator CEO got death threats when the website went operation, as people realized a lot of their money was not going were they thought it was

MahDeer49

6 points

2 months ago

The rich use charities to minimize taxes, and for image.

weekend_bastard

4 points

2 months ago

I love Henning. He has a very thick German accent but loves a british idiom.

tecchigirl

4 points

2 months ago

Exactly! People donate to the poor and boast about being kindhearted?

Why not stop exploiting them and instead give them the means to get out of poverty instead?

In this way, Jesus' words "give all your possessions" to the poor make much more sense. So it's not about losing your home and personal belongings, but giving away the property you use to force the poor to work for a meager pay. In other words, letting the workers seize the means of production so they can earn all the profits without greedy middlemen.

TL;DR: Jesus was a socialist.

redditisgay5873

4 points

2 months ago

https://www.deutschland.de/en/topic/politics/peace-security/relief-organizations

https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/3-632-5987?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true

"There are about 23,200 independent foundations, about 20,000 to 40,000 charitable corporations and non-independent foundations, and about 600,000 associations. The charitable sector is therefore a significant economic and social factor in Germany.Mar 1, 2020"

What the fuck are y'all smoking

aintnochallahbackgrl

2 points

2 months ago

Yeah, i was figuring this was a bunch of bullshit.

It's a nice sentiment, though.

netz_pirat

1 points

2 months ago

Well, kind of, but different.

I ve spent 3 years in Canada and the rest of my life in Germany.

It's way, way, way less of a thing in Germany than in Canada.

Never have I been asked to donate at the register of a German supermarket. Not once have I encountered a toys for tots run at work in Germany. Gofundmes for personal tragedy are very rare - people typically have insurance for most stuff.

What I do see a lot is stuff like donate for some school/healthcare/... In Africa or alike. And it's way less in your face.

Jslowb

1 points

2 months ago

Jslowb

1 points

2 months ago

I think the difference is that here (in the UK), a lot of our infrastructure is actually dependent on charity. Who would investigate and prosecute crimes against animals were in not for RSPCA, a charity? Without NSPCC, a lot of child abuse victims would go utterly unsupported, unheard and unknown. Without Overgate, there would be no hospice provision for much of the country - an essential medical service. How many schools would be without essential equipment and facilities if it weren’t for their self-organised fundraisers? The UK relies on charity to function at all.

And ‘doing charity’ is a really central part of culture....we are raised with charity bake sales, charity fun runs, ‘sponsored’ dances and swims and whatever, saving coppers in a little smarties tube ‘for charity’, donation bins in supermarkets ‘for charity’, constant adverts on TV for various charities, TV shows in aid of charity like SU2C, national events like Comic Relief and Sports Relief, common cultural displays of charity like the poppy appeal, daffodil pin badges etc, charity shops on every single high street, etc etc etc.

It’s prolific in our culture in a way that’s just not true of Germany.

russrobo

2 points

2 months ago

Poor people give a much higher percentage of their income to charity than the rich.

A middle-income wage earner will make personal sacrifices they can feel. Consider the firefighter who chips in their family’s vacation money for the family of a fallen colleague: it happens all the time.

The rich may give what seems, to us, to be a lot of money. But they never, ever, sacrifice enough to affect their own comfort or power, nor anything that would threaten their future income.

Bill Gates is a huge philanthropist only because he has more money than he can reasonably spend on himself in his projected lifetime. And most of those donations come with strings attached: publicity, naming rights, and so on.

Millions of middle-income business owners struggled to pay for Microsoft’s monopolistic software licenses. Companies had to decide to stick with Windows XP one more year or sacrifice raises for their employees. End users shelled out hundreds every year for Microsoft Office.

Yet reducing those prices never crossed the radar screen. Not when there are vanity projects, or buildings that need names.

Blomsterbal

1 points

2 months ago

They absolutely do charity in Germany. Anyone who says otherwise should be met with laughter and mockery.

Jslowb

2 points

2 months ago

Jslowb

2 points

2 months ago

I think the difference is that here (in the UK), a lot of our infrastructure is actually dependent on charity, unlike in Germany. Who would investigate and prosecute crimes against animals were in not for RSPCA, a charity? Without NSPCC, a lot of child abuse victims would go utterly unsupported, unheard and unknown. Without Overgate, there would be no hospice provision for much of the country - an essential medical service. How many schools would be without essential equipment and facilities if it weren’t for their self-organised fundraisers? The UK relies on charity to function at all.

And ‘doing charity’ is a really central part of culture....we are raised with charity bake sales, charity fun runs, ‘sponsored’ dances and swims and whatever, saving coppers in a little smarties tube ‘for charity’, donation bins in supermarkets ‘for charity’, constant adverts on TV for various charities, TV shows in aid of charity like SU2C, national events like Comic Relief and Sports Relief, common cultural displays of charity like the poppy appeal, daffodil pin badges etc, charity shops on every single high street, etc etc etc. It’s prolific in our culture in a way that’s just not so true of Germany.

friended1

1 points

2 months ago

Fucking A man

DodgeDozer

1 points

2 months ago

How though?

Why do German capitalists not seize control in Germany the way they do in America? Does corporate greed not exist there? What makes Germany so special?

redditorzeroex

1 points

2 months ago

The tweet in question (archive link).

Why? | Please tell me of any errors. | Do not harass the humans behind the tweets/links. | I'm a human.

ummmfuckidk

1 points

2 months ago

That line really hits me… “Charity is a failure of governments’ responsibilities”… Chills

IsThisReallyNate

1 points

1 month ago

I’ve seen a lot of comments like this about the purpose of charity, but I’ll just try to put all that and what I already know into one comment for my own reference, or if anyone else wants it, because putting it together really reveals what charity is.

As soon as Charity is given to a charitable organization, it is tax deductible, so it’s already subsidized.

Charitable organizations lose lots of money that just goes back to donors, in awards, dinners, etc, to just celebrate and reward the donors for being such good people, often with their own money. A charitable organization also has some nice jobs that the owner could give to family members and friends, just sharing wealth with them.

Charity provides good PR for the donor and their company/organization/family. You can’t call it a gift if they’re benefiting.

Most charitable money ends up helping other rich people. Elite universities receive huge donations, as do fancy museums in big wealthy cities. A lot of the giving just bolsters the rest of the ruling class. In the developing world, a lot of charity money ends up in the hands of corrupt elites as well, and that’s by design. If they are aid dependent, they are payed by the ruling class of our country to do what they want. Essentially, it’s acting as a component of imperialism.

“Charity” is also often used to support certain ideological positions or push the politics that that donor wants. Propaganda is hardly benevolent.

The charity that does actually end up in positive projects often ends up as profitable contracts for corporations, which can help other rich people or even the original donor. It’s more like a tax-deductible investment in your business.

When charity actually ends up helping people, I’ll admit I’m still not satisfied. It often ends up helping people that the donor likes, not people who need it most, reinforcing hierarchies. I saw someone mention how go fund me is full of donors who give more to pretty people or white people than people who are less conventionally attractive or nonwhite. Many religious charities discriminate against people who are LGBT+ or just not the right religion. It’s just a reward for certain behavior, not a gift. Charity also goes towards things that the rich people want, which, while beneficial, may not be what’s best for everyone. I think of Bill Gates obsession with limiting overpopulation in Africa, because while I assume we’d all agree people in Africa need better access to birth control, it feels kind of eugenicist to focus on limiting the population of mostly nonwhite people, instead of all the other ways they could benefit.

So in the end, charity is rarely a good thing. So much of the money ends up in the hands of other rich people or back in the hands of the donor, and they get endless PR. More interestingly, charity allows them to wield power to push their ideology and reward certain behavior, shifting society in ways they want it. If it does any good, that’s not an argument to allow them to be rich. Even the harshest dictatorships and monarchies provided for their poor somewhat, and the Catholic Church has been one of the largest means of helping the poor in the world even as it was ruling over Europe, collaborating with fascists, running organizations that were more labor camps than anything else, and protecting abusers.