This has always been a dilemma for me. I remember back in Richmond, VA, a plea by social services agents of some sort that street people not be given handouts because there were programs to help them and that the handouts only perpetuated their living on the street. I don't know if that's true or not. Other charities spend a lot of the money on fundraising, their own bureaucracy, and CEO salaries, so not as much of the money makes it to the intended recipients. Others have social, religious, or political agendas that I do not agree with. Instead of sorting this all out and going through a lot of angst about it, I have been donating money and volunteer time to the local Food Bank. The benefits go directly to the recipients who qualify and every dollar that is donated to my Food Bank (and probably all the other ones, too) is used to buy five dollars worth of food through their supply and distribution channels. There are no political, religious, or social agendas; only the goal of providing food to hungry people who need it. I feel very comfortable about this decision and I don't need to feel guilt when I walk past the Salvation Army kettle, for instance, because I have already contributed my part to help others.
On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 8:56:36 AM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote: > > *We (RIV) have a charity fund every year, doled out whether we’re doing OK > or not. * > > It's admirable that they give when they can, not only when it's easy. > > The question whether to give directly or through a "qualified" > intermediary is being debated here in Albuquerque about panhandlers who beg > at traffic intersections. I am happy to give a bit of cash to these people, > preferring to be a sucker instead of a cynic. The city though has started a > law to ban such panhandling (either still being debated or, if on the > books, ignored) and a program to accept such donations in a fund for the > beggars. But one wants to give to a person, not a bureaucracy. > > But I understand the dilemma. Years ago I gave $20 to such a person with a > sign saying "Stranded, looking for work," and asked my boss to give the man > work. Boss tracked him down to a motel, offered him work, but the man was > too comfortable with the results of his panhandling and closed the door on > boss. > > My own worry is less the crazy and unstable as such, as it is the > alcoholic or drug addict: $10 or a $100 sweater might just go to something > that will make their situation worse, not better. If I could be sure that > the recipient would use the gift for food or warmth, I'd give much more > readily. > > But, beyond all the practical questions (which obviously determine the > particulars of giving), there is compassion, the principal Buddhist virtue > and one wonderfully illustrated in the Islamic *hadith* of the prostitute > whom God forgave because she took pity on a thirsty dog and gave it a > drink; or the wonderful lines (paraphrased) from the story of the > excommunicated Manfred in the *Purgatorio*: "The Divine Mercy has arms so > wide/It takes to Itself everything that turns to it." In this respect, > giving benefits the giver as much as the recipient. > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
