bsharmastl wrote:I will also look at the historical restoration charity. that may be something I would like to support.
I give money to The National Trust every year.
bsharmastl wrote:I will also look at the historical restoration charity. that may be something I would like to support.
Bastiat wrote:Expat wrote:^Please don't assume that if a charity is 'sexy' or popular that it doesn't need the money or has high overhead. That is an unfair, blanket statement. Have you researched the 5 charities you mentioned? And just because a charity has an ad on TV, that doesn't mean it is wasting your donations. Sometimes you have to spend money to make money. They wouldn't run those ads if they were not effective, therefore, giving them an opportunity to serve more of their intended target. And just because a charity is small, doesn't mean they are good stewards.
Don't get me wrong, I REALLY like the idea of supporting small charities, but don't assume that bigger charities are not reaching their intended targets or are squandering their donations. And please don't make unfair blanket statements about charities and then list some by name.
Well, I can vouch for his statement on Red Cross. Their mishandling of the 9/11 donations is notorious
DeBaliviere wrote:I support the Animal House Fund: http://www.animalhousefund.org/
The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Personally, I support The Human Fund.