Most recent example: I was asked to participate/lead our team’s Movember campaign at my company.
How I politely declined: oh sorry, I’m a bit too busy with my personal life and work projects this year.
My unpopular opinion I couldn’t say: it doesn’t align with my values.
Movember raises money and promotes awareness of Men’s health. Nothing wrong with the organisation themselves, but frankly I think the paltry couple of thousand of dollars our (pretty large) company manages to raise each year is a waste of time.
If we taxed corporations a fraction of a percent more on corporate profits we would bring is orders of magnitude more money than individuals asking others, out of the kindness of the hearts, for money.
Health research shouldn’t have to beg for money, the government should just fund it with tax dollars. Taxes that you don’t get to choose to pay. Other than by voting.
I hate fun runs, and do subtly judge those who participate in them, especially because (I think) they skew towards wealthier people, and it’s their way of making themselves feel good for raising money for cancer or whatever, and then turn around and vote for tax cuts, and use accountants to make their tax liability as low as possible - something poorer people can’t afford.
I used to give money to charity when I was younger. But I honestly think it’s silly now, and it ought not have to exist.
(Mods, this is politics adjacent, but I feel is general enough to be compliant, since I’d say most people view charity organisations mostly favourably)
Any corporate sponsored charity event is 100% just a tax break for the corp paid for by others.
Not quite. It is also cost-effective marketing
Yep, if work is asking to participate in charity I just let them know I already have a couple preferred charities I already work with/donate to. If they’re interested in helping give them a link to doctors without borders, ffrf, local homeless or veterans support, etc.
I own a business, we make medical devices and send them to people in need. We are entirely funded from fundraisers right now. A paltry couple of thousands of dollars is potentially 2000 people saved from death.
If, coulda woulda, the reality is corporations aren’t taxed the way you propose they be. I agree that we probably shouldn’t need to beg for the money and it should be done “for the greater good” from taxes. But it isn’t.
Honestly I don’t really care about how people raise the money. If they like “fun runs”, do em. If it makes them feel better, whatever. They can have an evening with champagne. You can find those events distasteful, but in the end - they fund people like me. And thanks to people like me and my coworkers, kids in Gaza got polio vaccines. Hospitals got medical devices and staff.
By not giving to charity, you aren’t sticking it to “the man”, or the rich people doing a charity gala. You are taking away the possibility of someone to create something that will help people survive. The huge events that make people feel better about themselves will happen, what won’t happen is the creation of a medical device that saves a life.
More taxes and less charity
Indeed, perhaps in retrospect my title was a little click-baity
I’ve had this debate with myself a few times. In my country air ambulances (helicopters) are often funded by a charity, while normal ambulances are funded by the state. Such essential services shouldn’t be relying on charity to exist.
In work I’ve also been involved in providing services to major national charities, and I’ve often been shocked by the amount of waste and inefficiency going on behind the scenes.
That said I also know plenty of local charity groups that are well runs and make a big difference to the area. I’m not anti charity, but I think it does deserve more accountability.
I don’t donate to charity, but I do donate to the Special Olympics in my area. My little sister is an athlete in it and she is thriving now that she’s part of something. It’s a really good thing for everyone involved and I want it to continue. I’ve never seen proof in my area that charities are actually putting donations to use in a tangible way. I’ve looked into it, too, out of curiosity.
You don’t hate Charity, you hate that charity is necessary.
We should not have the problems that charities exist to try and solve. I think most would agree with that.
The problem is that people couldn’t agree on which areas we should tackle first. Is it sick kids? Cancer patients? Mental health?
We can’t do all of the things, that’s the real issue, so we end up picking and choosing the things we feel are most important. And that’s what charities really do, they give you a chance to pick the thing that matters most to you.
Yeah, perhaps my title was a little click-baity. I do hate to hat charity is necessary.
I do, however, dislike charities and people asking for money for charity, not encouraging people to vote for stronger public services.
