Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging
adverts on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me
over 2K pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the advert
and screen it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I have a
couple of charities I support each year, and they don't spend a penny on
TV. What do others think?

On Sunday, 20 November 2016 21:10:20 UTC, Capitol wrote:
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging
adverts on TV?

I agree, and also all the charity lotteries.

"the Health Lottery - a grouping of 51 charity lotteries, known also as 'society' lotteries - gives only the minimum legal requirement of 20 per cent of takings to charity, whereas the National Lottery gives 28 per cent to good causes. "
http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/analysi...rticle/1182869

Many charity lotteries are run by 'external lottery managers' and from the above it appears that many 'external lottery managers' might be keeping nearly 80% of the income (the prizes on charity lotteries are pretty derisory with the headline £25k prize being a "superdraw" four times a year).

Owain

Capitol wrote

Is it just me,

Unlikely.

or are others fed up with the quantity of begging adverts on TV?

I'm fed up with all ads on TV but I don't watch
anything live anymore, so I can skip the ads.

If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would
cost me over 2K pounds a year. I do wonder
how much it costs to make the advert

Obviously depends on how its done.

and screen it

Ours used to screen some of the more worthy for free.

and fear that most of the doantion is wasted.

It is with any charity, even the ones that don't
advertise or have any collectors/street beggars.

I have a couple of charities I support each year, and
they don't spend a penny on TV. What do others think?

I don't give anything to any charity because I don't believe
that any of them are entirely done by volunteers who get
paid nothing and have never seen any charity that does
anything useful even if they don't pay anyone anything
to do what that charity does.

On 20/11/2016 21:30, wrote:
On Sunday, 20 November 2016 21:10:20 UTC, Capitol wrote:
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging
adverts on TV?

I agree, and also all the charity lotteries.

"the Health Lottery - a grouping of 51 charity lotteries, known also as 'society' lotteries - gives only the minimum legal requirement of 20 per cent of takings to charity, whereas the National Lottery gives 28 per cent to good causes. "
http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/analysi...rticle/1182869

Many charity lotteries are run by 'external lottery managers' and from the above it appears that many 'external lottery managers' might be keeping nearly 80% of the income (the prizes on charity lotteries are pretty derisory with the headline £25k prize being a "superdraw" four times a year).

Owain




It's the same with most charities. They outsource a lot of fund raising
to third parties who may only return a few percent of the money raised
to the charity. I doubt if of little the money raised by street
chuggers, cold calling doorstep saleman or tin rattlers outside of
supermarkets/sheds goes to the charities they claim to represent.


--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On Sun, 20 Nov 2016 21:10:53 +0000, Capitol wrote:

Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging adverts
on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me over 2K
pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the advert and
screen it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I have a couple
of charities I support each year, and they don't spend a penny on TV.
What do others think?

I fully agree. And big organised charties are mostly scams. If you want
to be charitable, do so *locally* and *directly* to those you personally
can see are in need. Don't trust intermediaries who will pass on little
or nothing on to the cause they claim to support (the Clinton Foundation
for example passed on *nothing* of the money they raised for Haiti to the
Haitians).

On 20/11/2016 22:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sun, 20 Nov 2016 21:10:53 +0000, Capitol wrote:

Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging adverts
on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me over 2K
pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the advert and
screen it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I have a couple
of charities I support each year, and they don't spend a penny on TV.
What do others think?

I fully agree. And big organised charties are mostly scams. If you want
to be charitable, do so *locally* and *directly* to those you personally
can see are in need. Don't trust intermediaries who will pass on little
or nothing on to the cause they claim to support (the Clinton Foundation
for example passed on *nothing* of the money they raised for Haiti to the
Haitians).

The only exception I make is The Salvation Army. They do a lot of good
work and fund raise by ways other than and in addition to the collection
box.


--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

Old Codger wrote
Cursitor Doom wrote
Capitol wrote

Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging adverts
on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me over 2K
pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the advert and
screen it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I have a couple
of charities I support each year, and they don't spend a penny on TV.
What do others think?

I fully agree. And big organised charties are mostly scams. If you want
to be charitable, do so *locally* and *directly* to those you personally
can see are in need. Don't trust intermediaries who will pass on little
or nothing on to the cause they claim to support (the Clinton Foundation
for example passed on *nothing* of the money they raised for Haiti to the
Haitians).

The only exception I make is The Salvation Army.

I dont make an exception for them either, and a mate of mine is one of
them.

They do a lot of good work

Nope, they're stupid wowsers who dont even do
much good for the derros they do attempt to help.

And we're just having a full royal commission which has
exposed what they have got up to in their homes for kids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sa...ex_abuse_cases

and fund raise by ways other than and in addition to the collection box.

But **** most of what they collect against the
wall on the wages they pay their employees.

On Sunday, 20 November 2016 22:47:33 UTC, Old Codger wrote:
On 20/11/2016 22:36, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sun, 20 Nov 2016 21:10:53 +0000, Capitol wrote:

Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging adverts
on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me over 2K
pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the advert and
screen it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I have a couple
of charities I support each year, and they don't spend a penny on TV.
What do others think?

I fully agree. And big organised charties are mostly scams. If you want
to be charitable, do so *locally* and *directly* to those you personally
can see are in need. Don't trust intermediaries who will pass on little
or nothing on to the cause they claim to support (the Clinton Foundation
for example passed on *nothing* of the money they raised for Haiti to the
Haitians).

The only exception I make is The Salvation Army. They do a lot of good
work and fund raise by ways other than and in addition to the collection
box.

You should google more.


NT

"Capitol" wrote in message
o.uk...
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging adverts
on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me over 2K
pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the advert and screen
it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I have a couple of
charities I support each year, and they don't spend a penny on TV. What do
others think?

most charities are just a money making fiddles and jobs for those who run
them...peanuts go to the needy .....

In article , Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

"Capitol" wrote in message
o.uk...
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging
adverts on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me
over 2K pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the
advert and screen it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I
have a couple of charities I support each year, and they don't spend a
penny on TV. What do others think?

most charities are just a money making fiddles and jobs for those who run
them...peanuts go to the needy .....

as a trustee for 3 charities, all of which are run by volunteers, I'd
disagree with you.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

On 21/11/2016 08:13, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
"Capitol" wrote in message
o.uk...
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging adverts
on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me over 2K
pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the advert and screen
it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I have a couple of
charities I support each year, and they don't spend a penny on TV. What do
others think?

most charities are just a money making fiddles and jobs for those who run
them...peanuts go to the needy .....


Chidren in need is the only charity that I donate to, simply because
*all* of the dosh goes to help the kiddies.
Oh and the once a year Poppy.

On 21/11/2016 08:24, charles wrote:
In article , Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

"Capitol" wrote in message
o.uk...
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging
adverts on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me
over 2K pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the
advert and screen it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I
have a couple of charities I support each year, and they don't spend a
penny on TV. What do others think?

most charities are just a money making fiddles and jobs for those who run
them...peanuts go to the needy .....

as a trustee for 3 charities, all of which are run by volunteers, I'd
disagree with you.

I also take exception of the excessive Children in Need on BBC TV. when
it started yonks ago it was OK, but not it takes over for days, they
even cancel scheduled programs for repeats of the blasted thing.

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article , Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

"Capitol" wrote in message
o.uk...
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging
adverts on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me
over 2K pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the
advert and screen it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I
have a couple of charities I support each year, and they don't spend a
penny on TV. What do others think?

most charities are just a money making fiddles and jobs for those who run
them...peanuts go to the needy .....

as a trustee for 3 charities, all of which are run by volunteers, I'd
disagree with you.

The technical term for that is 'pathetically inadequate sample'

I would give if the charities solved the problems then they wouldn't be
required to continuously bombard you with their crap...but they would then
be out of a job ....

On 21/11/16 08:24, charles wrote:
In article , Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

"Capitol" wrote in message
o.uk...
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging
adverts on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me
over 2K pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the
advert and screen it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I
have a couple of charities I support each year, and they don't spend a
penny on TV. What do others think?

most charities are just a money making fiddles and jobs for those who run
them...peanuts go to the needy .....

as a trustee for 3 charities, all of which are run by volunteers, I'd
disagree with you.

"Most charities" does not preclude many smaller ones which are run on a
perfectly ethical basis.


It's the main big ones with national reach that are inevitable targets
for total corruption and being taken over by professional charity milkers.


--
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace,
community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"

Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote

I would give if the charities solved the problems

Not convinced that they are actually solvable...

then they wouldn't be required to continuously
bombard you with their crap...

They would if they need continuing cash flow to solve the problem...

but they would then be out of a job ....

I have to say I do wonder this myself, especially the ones offering a cuddly
tiger or whatever and monthly reports on the animal etc. I bet they never
say it was run over by a lumber ttruck etc.

Some of them are made cheaply by like minded agencies who use them as kind
of loss leaders to get more business.
However the bottom really has dropped out of advertising generally. We are
all far too savvy nowadays so ignore most of them entirely.
This is why we have the growth of subscription services I suppose but
people are so used to a free lunch its hard to re educate the public that
somebody somewhere needs to be paid to do things.

Maybe the channels should run a sponsor your local dross producing tv
channel kind of advert.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Capitol" wrote in message
o.uk...
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging adverts
on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me over 2K
pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the advert and screen
it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I have a couple of
charities I support each year, and they don't spend a penny on TV. What do
others think?

What does the RNIB lottery do i wonder?

Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
wrote in message
...
On Sunday, 20 November 2016 21:10:20 UTC, Capitol wrote:
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging
adverts on TV?

I agree, and also all the charity lotteries.

"the Health Lottery - a grouping of 51 charity lotteries, known also as
'society' lotteries - gives only the minimum legal requirement of 20 per
cent of takings to charity, whereas the National Lottery gives 28 per cent
to good causes. "
http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/analysi...rticle/1182869

Many charity lotteries are run by 'external lottery managers' and from the
above it appears that many 'external lottery managers' might be keeping
nearly 80% of the income (the prizes on charity lotteries are pretty
derisory with the headline £25k prize being a "superdraw" four times a
year).

Owain

In article ,
alan_m writes:
It's the same with most charities. They outsource a lot of fund raising
to third parties who may only return a few percent of the money raised
to the charity. I doubt if of little the money raised by street
chuggers, cold calling doorstep saleman or tin rattlers outside of
supermarkets/sheds goes to the charities they claim to represent.

If you want to give to charity, do so by standing order directly to
their account, and not in response to chuggers, who will often take
all of the first year's contribution as their fee.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On 21/11/16 08:24, charles wrote:
In article , Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

"Capitol" wrote in message
o.uk...
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging
adverts on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me
over 2K pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the
advert and screen it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I
have a couple of charities I support each year, and they don't spend a
penny on TV. What do others think?

most charities are just a money making fiddles and jobs for those who run
them...peanuts go to the needy .....

as a trustee for 3 charities, all of which are run by volunteers, I'd
disagree with you.


Can you name them - so I can add them mentally to my "not a scam" list?

I too am pretty jaundiced by so called charities. You have the RSPCA who
used to do good work, but now seem to be acting more like "police" -
usually against random individuals, but I never hear of them taking on
some random "travellers" who have manky mistreated old nags, nor do I
hear them speaking out against halal and kosher slaughter without pre
stunning.

Any charity that I see using a chugger goes onto my "ban" list too.

As does any charity that posts any gimmicks through my door that
probably cost more than someone puts in the tin if they stood outside
Sainsburys.

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote
I would give if the charities solved the problems

Not convinced that they are actually solvable...

well we should all stop giving the problem might go away ....it's like
benefits the more that is available the more uptake there is .....

On Monday, 21 November 2016 09:41:08 UTC, Brian Gaff wrote:
What does the RNIB lottery do i wonder?

The raffles used to be run by RNIB. I know because I pulled the numbers out of a bin-bag once.

The postcode SN14 6NG for the RNIB lottery leads to Woods Group which run "charity raffles, weekly lotteries, payment processing & direct debit management" and "charity gaming consultancy".

A quick search suggests other clients, including lotteries, include Guide Dogs, Action for Blind People, Sight Savers, Great Ormond Street, National Trust, Cancer Research, Royal Star and Garter.

Owain

Broadback posted
I also take exception of the excessive Children in Need on BBC TV. when
it started yonks ago it was OK, but not it takes over for days, they
even cancel scheduled programs for repeats of the blasted thing.

Same here. My wife and I always buy a boxed CD set in preparation for
it, so that we don't have to watch any TV at all.

--
Jack

Tim Watts posted
On 21/11/16 08:24, charles wrote:
In article , Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

"Capitol" wrote in message
o.uk...
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging
adverts on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me
over 2K pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the
advert and screen it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I
have a couple of charities I support each year, and they don't spend a
penny on TV. What do others think?

most charities are just a money making fiddles and jobs for those who run
them...peanuts go to the needy .....

as a trustee for 3 charities, all of which are run by volunteers, I'd
disagree with you.


Can you name them - so I can add them mentally to my "not a scam" list?

He's talking about village hall charities and the like, which do tend to
be run by unpaid volunteers, barring the odd thieving scumbag.

--
Jack

On 20/11/2016 21:10, Capitol wrote:
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging
adverts on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me
over 2K pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the advert
and screen it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I have a
couple of charities I support each year, and they don't spend a penny on
TV. What do others think?

I am in two minds about professional fund raisers...

People often complain that only a small proportion of the money raised
goes to the charity in question. However in many cases they are also
very good at raising much much more than the charity itself would
typically raise on its own - so their small percentage is still in
absolute terms significantly more than they would have received otherwise.

Hence you can see what it in it for the charity.

From the donors POV however its less desirable (although I expect they
can find a way to make direct donations that skip the fund raisers if
they look carefully)


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In article ,
writes:
On Monday, 21 November 2016 09:41:08 UTC, Brian Gaff wrote:
What does the RNIB lottery do i wonder?

The raffles used to be run by RNIB. I know because I pulled the numbers out of a bin-bag once.

The postcode SN14 6NG for the RNIB lottery leads to Woods Group which run "charity raffles, weekly lotteries, payment processing & direct debit management" and "charity gaming consultancy".

A quick search suggests other clients, including lotteries, include Guide Dogs, Action for Blind People, Sight Savers, Great Ormond Street, National Trust, Cancer Research, Royal Star and Garter.

The RNIB (or their agents) call me every year for the raffle.
I always refuse. I have an RNIB collection box at home which
collects all my coppers (and 5/10/20p coins which I generally
don't take back out either). They got £59 in July from that,
which is probably about the fouth time I've banked all the coins
and sent them the money.

I happen to think that is a good fundraising idea and solved my
problem of collecting coppers I wasn't prepared to take back out
and use again.

http://www.rnib.org.uk/donations-and...onate/home-box

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

wrote in message
...
On Sunday, 20 November 2016 21:10:20 UTC, Capitol wrote:
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging
adverts on TV?

I agree, and also all the charity lotteries.

The charity lotteries are a business predating upon charities

they are not set up by the charities

tim

Haven't read the whole thread, but IMHO there are several 000% too many
charities in this country: all fiddling *our* taxes!

And I'm afraid that when I see most "bucket collectors" these days -- at
the supermarket, in the street, or wherever, I think "bloody hell: more
beggars".

This does not mean that I am against charities per se: I have supported
some charities all my life, and continue to do so.

J.

Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote

I would give if the charities solved the problems

Not convinced that they are actually solvable...

well we should all stop giving

Not convinced that is even possible either, too many are a soft touch.

the problem might go away ....

Not a chance IMO.

it's like benefits the more that is available the more uptake there is
.....

Yep, and we now have the situation where its now generous
enough that some decide that its quite an acceptable lifestyle
and don’t bother to work at all. Some even like lots of kids and
are quite happy to be paid by the state to have lots of kids.

I'm not convinced that that is solvable either.

John Rumm wrote
Capitol wrote

Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging
adverts on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me
over 2K pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the advert
and screen it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I have a
couple of charities I support each year, and they don't spend a penny on
TV. What do others think?

I am in two minds about professional fund raisers...

I'm not and will never give them anything.

If I ever do find a worthy cause that can be relied on to only spend
donations on that cause and nothing else, I will work out how to
send them the money in a way that wont cost them anything.

People often complain that only a small proportion of the money raised
goes to the charity in question. However in many cases they are also very
good at raising much much more than the charity itself would typically
raise on its own - so their small percentage is still in absolute terms
significantly more than they would have received otherwise.

That last is very arguable indeed. And still sees vast amounts of
money ending up in the hands of those doing the collecting.

Hence you can see what it in it for the charity.

Yes, but not something I will ever get involved in even
in areas where the unemployment rate is significant.

From the donors POV however its less desirable (although I expect they can
find a way to make direct donations that skip the fund raisers if they
look carefully)

You don’t even have to look carefully, they all have to have
a formal address money can be sent to directly to qualify as
a charity. The problem is its much harder to see what they do
with donated money, even if they are purely unpaid volunteers
involved.

We've just seen these arseholes paying themselves quite literally millions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return...dent_Rod_White

In article , Handsome Jack
wrote:
Tim Watts posted
On 21/11/16 08:24, charles wrote:
In article , Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

"Capitol" wrote in message
o.uk...
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging
adverts on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost
me over 2K pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the
advert and screen it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I
have a couple of charities I support each year, and they don't spend
a penny on TV. What do others think?

most charities are just a money making fiddles and jobs for those who
run them...peanuts go to the needy .....

as a trustee for 3 charities, all of which are run by volunteers, I'd
disagree with you.


Can you name them - so I can add them mentally to my "not a scam" list?

He's talking about village hall charities and the like, which do tend to
be run by unpaid volunteers, barring the odd thieving scumbag.

That's one of them.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

On Mon, 21 Nov 2016 08:34:44 +0000, Broadback wrote:

as a trustee for 3 charities, all of which are run by volunteers, I'd
disagree with you.

You're an arsehole so **** off.

I also take exception of the excessive Children in Need on BBC TV. when
it started yonks ago it was OK, but not it takes over for days, they
even cancel scheduled programs for repeats of the blasted thing.

Ironic, too, considering they're the biggest bunch of paedos in world
history (with the sole possible exception of the ancient Greeks).

On Mon, 21 Nov 2016 19:42:04 +1100, Rod Speed wrote:

"charles" wrote in message

as a trustee for 3 charities, all of which are run by volunteers, I'd
disagree with you.

The technical term for that is 'pathetically inadequate sample'

Yeah, from Charles the pathetic inadequate.

On Mon, 21 Nov 2016 08:55:47 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

It's the main big ones with national reach that are inevitable targets
for total corruption and being taken over by professional charity
milkers.

And the biggest crooks of the lot: the Charities Aid Foundation.

On Mon, 21 Nov 2016 09:40:03 +0000, Brian Gaff wrote:

I have to say I do wonder this myself, especially the ones offering a
cuddly tiger or whatever and monthly reports on the animal etc. I bet
they never say it was run over by a lumber ttruck etc.

"So sorry, we just found out your snow leopard actually died 6 weeks ago
so we're re-imbursing you for your last 6 weeks' subs." Yeah, like that's
going to happen!

On Monday, 21 November 2016 23:51:35 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Mon, 21 Nov 2016 09:40:03 +0000, Brian Gaff wrote:

I have to say I do wonder this myself, especially the ones offering a
cuddly tiger or whatever and monthly reports on the animal etc. I bet
they never say it was run over by a lumber ttruck etc.

"So sorry, we just found out your snow leopard actually died 6 weeks ago
so we're re-imbursing you for your last 6 weeks' subs." Yeah, like that's
going to happen!

I've seen where an individual animal sponsorship has been switched from one animal to another, since the original no longer needed the funds, for a few possible reasons.


NT

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote

I would give if the charities solved the problems

Not convinced that they are actually solvable...

well we should all stop giving

Not convinced that is even possible either, too many are a soft touch.

the problem might go away ....

Not a chance IMO.

it's like benefits the more that is available the more uptake there is
.....

Yep, and we now have the situation where its now generous
enough that some decide that its quite an acceptable lifestyle
and don’t bother to work at all. Some even like lots of kids and
are quite happy to be paid by the state to have lots of kids.

I'm not convinced that that is solvable either.
starve the *******s

"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
news

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote

I would give if the charities solved the problems

Not convinced that they are actually solvable...

well we should all stop giving

Not convinced that is even possible either, too many are a soft touch.

the problem might go away ....

Not a chance IMO.

it's like benefits the more that is available the more uptake there is
.....

Yep, and we now have the situation where its now generous
enough that some decide that its quite an acceptable lifestyle
and don’t bother to work at all. Some even like lots of kids and
are quite happy to be paid by the state to have lots of kids.

I'm not convinced that that is solvable either.
starve the *******s

Even workhouses didn’t do that.

In article ,
Chris wrote:
On Mon, 21 Nov 2016 08:55:47 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

It's the main big ones with national reach that are inevitable targets
for total corruption and being taken over by professional charity
milkers.

And the biggest crooks of the lot: the Charities Aid Foundation.

please explain your reasoning. They provide a good banking service.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

On Sunday, 20 November 2016 21:10:20 UTC, Capitol wrote:
Is it just me, or are others fed up with the quantity of begging
adverts on TV? If I resonded to all of the, I reckon it would cost me
over 2K pounds a year. I do wonder how much it costs to make the advert
and screen it and fear that most of the doantion is wasted. I have a
couple of charities I support each year, and they don't spend a penny on
TV. What do others think?

Not only this but "foreign aid" which often seems to be misspent/stolen.
Including via the EUSSR.