Discussion in 'Bulletin Board' started by DEETEE, Feb 13, 2018.
Theyll be having a closing down sale soon why things are carrying on.
I never ever give to large charities such as oxfam. They spend more on infrastructure then they do on their charitable aims. Most of them have become far too political as well.
Really - and you have figures to back that up do you - I thought they spent about 10% on their infrastructure and 80% on Emergency aid and long term development aid ( the rest goes on fundraising and campaining)
I also dont quite understand the current crisis. As I understand it a few people behaved badly using prostitues when on an aid mission ( not sure if that is illegal where they were, but certainly not acceptable) and they were then fired - what am I missing?
Every organisation has a few bad apples - Oxfam is no exception
I don’t give money to bigger charities. They seem to do as much harm as they do good to me.
Bigger charities like Children in need?
I will be honest I don't give much to oxfam, other than old clothes and books etc, and have other charities I support but I think they do a lot more good than harm
Yes I wouldn’t give to CIN. It’s a personal decision not something I try to push on others.
Hope there is a sale on......I'm desperately in need of more socks and pants.
I personally find it reasonable for charities such as Oxfam to spend a certain amount of money on staff, running costs etc. It's just not feasible for a charity of that size only employing volunteers. Not sure how that equates to doing more harm than good. Everyone's personal choice though I guess.
It's all a distraction from the mess the Tories are creating with the EU and their own Parliamentary issue of Teresa May losing 140 files on alleged sex crimes amongst MPs.
It’s good hunting ground for BFC memorabilia when we playing wnak
My experience of NGOs and the bigger charities when I was in India was uniformly bad so I guess it has made me biased.
So what would you say is a fair ratio of overheads to causes?
Children in Need excluding last years dosh have over £100m sat in the kitty...
Smaller ones are just as bad.
I think it's a lot more complex than choosing one of your three options. Many factors to consider. Do you believe there should/could be no overheads for oxfam?
Never said that.
However at some point you need to draw a line at what you class as overheads and to what is classed as excessive expenditure.
If i recall correctly the Rscpa( ill check later) at one point was spending 86p in the £ on overheads.
If you ever venture into some of these organisations head offices youd be shocked at the level of oppulence that they contain.
I didn't say you had, was just asking the question to try and understand your view a bit more. I agree you need to draw a line but think that's easier said than done. For example there's also arguments around how you can recruit the best staff without competing with organisations who's sole aim is to make profit. Maybe more can be done to ensure less is spent on overheads but just think it's a very grey area.
In fairness to Oxfam it’s currently 8% which is pretty low.
THE BARNSLEY FC
BBS FANS FORUM
Separate names with a comma.