Thinking the other day, how when we are giving to many of these big corporate charities, are we in fact making our self's richer?

when it should be about giving back what we have taken, to the poorer countries.

where we have treated their peoples as slaves in the past and now we give 5£/$ and thinks it is saving the world.

Strange isn't? it if you understand what I am going on about, that when we are the ones who deceived these people in places such as Africa to begin and then tortured, stole and turned them into slaves.

So anyways that bit first, and then we give money to a big major company, that does what with it?


One we have managing director in many of these charities, that have long been established and now have vast amounts of money, as much as many of our major companies do.

So making them an authority you would think?

we could use that to finally once and for all, give back and make all straight.

Yet how do they give, I am not putting down charity in its giving, yet the end effects of partially giving and people not learning it for them self's.

which now many charities are getting to gripes with that it is no use just giving grain, without showing how to develop crops and orchards more importantly.
To then fix the irrigation system of a broken heart, as is Africa which should really be tropical, as should the Middle East.

So when we give in charity should it be to fix all of that, so after the many battles and wars, we have all fought; should it be about getting all of it repaired?


Now I don't know about you with Tax's also, yet we give them to have a better life, well if that be the case shouldn't that funding be for charity?
There are wars going on and military exercises, which none of us real people actual want, other then military (games) etc.
And instead make these people care workers of the land and other peoples, as all we really want, is true Charity to begin.
That is by example as the other post is saying about, not just action that wins peace and makes the world a better place.

So imagine a true charity, where it takes what has been given and gives all of it, and isn't about some big corporate building, yet the people and the reality of helping.

Not all charities are false, yet many are and to gain more sales, (as I will call them) where they send you a pen and paper through the door; in the hopes of getting more vast revenue.

This happened to me from one and won't say the name; yet phoned straight after and asked if they could remove our mailing address; as we saw it as a vast waste of money and not a good use of charity resources, if we were to give.

so they replied how everyone got one of these...
so now, not only is the charity not doing it's job; yet costing pens, paper and the resources of a mass pressed pamphlets and flier; costing us more trees and the vast resources to produce all of that.

So I ask you is charity really about the poorer getting richer or the richer getting richer?
As we donate to our own charities in our own countries, shouldn't these charities be in the country that needs the help?
That would help us, mess up all the political money changing around the world; as it would encourage more growth in the poorer countries, through the vast amount of revenue that is being wasted in our own countries, giving to already rich charities.

As was stated, this is not a case of all or none.

When someone takes on a new employee, one can only assess, through the course of time whether or not the individual carries out his or her duties in a responsable, professional manner.

Charities, like individuals, must be assessed as being responsable, honest and practical in their efforts.

Some are, some are not.

Yeh understand, yet within writing that by chance i came up with that idea, of if the charities were based in poorer countries to begin with; then all funding would be invested in the place it was going too, not in our banks.
Money is currency and so flows or at least use to from one place to the next.

So by allowing poorer people to work in their own charities, we also give a source of income, to then finance that village or place out of poverty and into equality.

Else do you see if a rich person goes and helps a poor village whom have nothing, after the rich volunteer has gone, where is the money? Where is the care? It went when the volunteer does...
yes we can build a road and a well for them, yet without constant funding how are they meant to maintain it, with out said volunteers?

Everyone needs independence and acceptance of their own ability to survive, so the pity and victimization of people only leaves them feeling more helpless then they were before.

So let put the tools and money they need in their own hands and then all is more balanced.

Like you say assessments of said charities are needed, yet when our own governments and the mess of the Tsunami, were funding didn't get to where it was needed.
Do you think their own people would have let the money not get to where it was needed? when they can see first hand where and what it is needed on and how to best spend it.

So when a charity is trying to help finance something, how many times will they know the current situation, as well as the people who live there??

Not many..

Do you see what this is getting at, that by giving the money to them, we are indeed giving the money to them, yet when we give to our self's, we are giving to our self's.

Like church roofs, does collection box money go to helping the poor? Nope it goes to making a new church roof?
Same principle....So when will the currency flow?
When we let it and I don't believe we are doing purposely in many cases, as some are controlling that flow of money to make more money.

You realize also if you take English currency to a poor country, it is worth 15x the amount, and then change that again and double it etc....you make a lot of money, if you have money!