There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it seems
that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier each year.
This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual contribution. I
wonder if they realize that if I put the requests aside I will probably
forget them completely.

--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not" in Reply To.

"James Silverton" > wrote in message
...
> There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it seems
> that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier each year.
> This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual contribution. I
> wonder if they realize that if I put the requests aside I will probably
> forget them completely.
>
What annoys me is that once I give to a charity, it then pesters me to give
every few weeks after that. I gave to one charity last year, and it e-mailed
me *the following day* asking me to give again.
Graham

On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 8:34:47 PM UTC-6, graham wrote:
> "James Silverton" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it seems
>
> > that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier each year.
>
> > This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual contribution. I
>
> > wonder if they realize that if I put the requests aside I will probably
>
> > forget them completely.
>
> >
>
> What annoys me is that once I give to a charity, it then pesters me to give
>
> every few weeks after that. I gave to one charity last year, and it e-mailed
>
> me *the following day* asking me to give again.

Low income tax schemes in countries where the population is deluded by
supply-side nonsense rely on inefficient fund raising charities. That's
sad. Gross inequity has never been demonstrated to be correlated with
prosperity and happiness.
>
> Graham

--Bryan

On 19/02/2013 9:21 PM, James Silverton wrote:
> There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it seems
> that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier each year.
> This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual contribution. I
> wonder if they realize that if I put the requests aside I will probably
> forget them completely.
>


I must be jaded but I think that most of it has become about making
money for the companies contracted to do the fund raising than about
raising money for the charity. I give to the Cancer Society, and I
started getting calls from the liver cancer society, pancreatic cancer
society, skin cancer society, lymphoma society, brain cancer society......
More than 50% of my mail is beg letters. Today it was a beg letter from
one of the cancer societies and a big envelope full of cards and address
stickers from the Multiple Sclerosis Society with a recommended
donation, worth about ten times as much as the material that I got for
free because it is unsolicited.

On 19/02/2013 9:34 PM, graham wrote:

>>
> What annoys me is that once I give to a charity, it then pesters me to give
> every few weeks after that. I gave to one charity last year, and it e-mailed
> me *the following day* asking me to give again.
> Graham
>


Yep. Giving to a charity these days puts you on their sucker list. Maybe
the trick is to give anonymously. Forget about the tax receipts. Just
give them the money and let it be a one time donation.

Dave Smith wrote:
>graham wrote:
>>
>> What annoys me is that once I give to a charity, it then pesters me to give
>> every few weeks after that. I gave to one charity last year, and it e-mailed
>> me *the following day* asking me to give again.
>> Graham
>
>Yep. Giving to a charity these days puts you on their sucker list. Maybe
>the trick is to give anonymously. Forget about the tax receipts. Just
>give them the money and let it be a one time donation.

I don't have that problem, I only give for the care of animals,
animals never lie, never steal, and take only what they need, they
have no pockets. Two of my neighbors care for rescue animals, I
regularly bring much appreciated food. They prefer food to cash,
saves them a trip to the feed store. In fact I'll be going to the
feed store tomorrow, I need bird seed anyway.

On 19/02/2013 10:24 PM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
m
>>
>> Yep. Giving to a charity these days puts you on their sucker list. Maybe
>> the trick is to give anonymously. Forget about the tax receipts. Just
>> give them the money and let it be a one time donation.
>
> I don't have that problem, I only give for the care of animals,
> animals never lie, never steal, and take only what they need, they
> have no pockets. Two of my neighbors care for rescue animals, I
> regularly bring much appreciated food. They prefer food to cash,
> saves them a trip to the feed store. In fact I'll be going to the
> feed store tomorrow, I need bird seed anyway.
>


Well them be sure to let us know if you ever come down with some deadly
disease. We will chip in and send you some bird seed.

On 2/19/2013 9:21 PM, James Silverton wrote:

> There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it seems
> that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier each year.
> This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual contribution. I
> wonder if they realize that if I put the requests aside I will probably
> forget them completely.
>
I get the same from charities I donate to, too. I give through my work
payroll so if anyone calls or asks for a donation I just explain that to
them. My allocation of donations is already figured out, maybe next
year. I also just tend to donate to animal rescue groups. My favorite
one is on the list for payroll deduction so it works out well.

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 22:27:22 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 19/02/2013 10:24 PM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
>m
>>>
>>> Yep. Giving to a charity these days puts you on their sucker list. Maybe
>>> the trick is to give anonymously. Forget about the tax receipts. Just
>>> give them the money and let it be a one time donation.
>>
>> I don't have that problem, I only give for the care of animals,
>> animals never lie, never steal, and take only what they need, they
>> have no pockets. Two of my neighbors care for rescue animals, I
>> regularly bring much appreciated food. They prefer food to cash,
>> saves them a trip to the feed store. In fact I'll be going to the
>> feed store tomorrow, I need bird seed anyway.
>
>Well them be sure to let us know if you ever come down with some deadly
>disease. We will chip in and send you some bird seed.

Cures for disease are due to animals, fortunately/unfortunately.

Dave Smith > wrote in
:

> On 19/02/2013 10:24 PM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
> m
>>>
>>> Yep. Giving to a charity these days puts you on their sucker list.
>>> Maybe the trick is to give anonymously. Forget about the tax
>>> receipts. Just give them the money and let it be a one time
>>> donation.
>>
>> I don't have that problem, I only give for the care of animals,
>> animals never lie, never steal, and take only what they need, they
>> have no pockets. Two of my neighbors care for rescue animals, I
>> regularly bring much appreciated food. They prefer food to cash,
>> saves them a trip to the feed store. In fact I'll be going to the
>> feed store tomorrow, I need bird seed anyway.
>>
>
>
> Well them be sure to let us know if you ever come down with some
> deadly disease. We will chip in and send you some bird seed.
>
>


And you think that if he did come down with a deadly disease, that the
charities that raise money for research into them would put him on their
'top ten people to be treated with the cure' list because he donates to
them??

Time to take off your rose coloured glasses.

We 'sponsor' a couple of families in Bali, who are putting their kids
through University.... and the way we do it is to send the money
*directly* to them.... no middle man to take their cut in
"administration fees" and who get paid handsome salaries out of the
donations as well.

And it doesn't get paid to the Govt of the country for "distribution",
either. Otherwise the families would see not one red cent of it.

We also collect spectacles/glasses which we take turns in taking over
(by the box load), as there are charities (Lions Australia) who collect
the same, but they are given to the "clinics" over there who then *SELL*
them to the people who need them at quite high prices. Ours are given to
local clinics, people come in, try on glasses till they get the one that
allows them to see properly, and they get them for *FREE*.

The only other charity we give to is SEDA..... because since we lost our
pooch, we thought that rather than get another, we'd just spend the
money that we would normally spend on a dog, and give it to an
organisation that uses dogs to help others. That and the fact that SEDA
is not Govt funded...... which is bloody ridiculous!!


--
Peter
Brisbane
Australia

Success isn't so difficult.
Just bite off more than you can chew,
then go do it.

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On 19/02/2013 9:34 PM, graham wrote:
>
>>>
>> What annoys me is that once I give to a charity, it then pesters me to
>> give
>> every few weeks after that. I gave to one charity last year, and it
>> e-mailed
>> me *the following day* asking me to give again.
>> Graham
>>
>
>
> Yep. Giving to a charity these days puts you on their sucker list. Maybe
> the trick is to give anonymously. Forget about the tax receipts. Just
> give them the money and let it be a one time donation.

That's what we do. Food bank, pet food donation bins. Those little bins to
help pets that are by the register in many pet stores, Toys For Tots, Giving
Trees, etc.

Captain Peter Swallows puffed herself up:

> We 'sponsor' a couple of families in Bali, who are putting their kids
> through University

Heard this from a stand-up comedian the other day:

I have a child in Africa
- that I feed
- that I clothe
- that I school
- that I inoculate

....all for only seventy-five cents a day...

....which is practically nothing....

....compared to what it cost to send him there.


Bob

James Silverton wrote:
> There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it seems
> that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier each year.
> This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual contribution. I
> wonder if they realize that if I put the requests aside I will probably
> forget them completely.
>


I like the ones from NPR that kind of look like a bill and say "Second
Notice" on the envelope. (those go straight in the trash unopened)

Bob

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 21:21:30 -0500, James Silverton
> wrote:

> There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it seems
> that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier each year.
> This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual contribution. I
> wonder if they realize that if I put the requests aside I will probably
> forget them completely.

Magazine subscriptions use the same tactic,

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 19:34:47 -0700, "graham" > wrote:

> gave to one charity last year, and it e-mailed
> me *the following day* asking me to give again.

HEY! It's an emergency.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 21:21:30 -0500, James Silverton
> > wrote:
>
>> There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it seems
>> that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier each year.
>> This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual contribution. I
>> wonder if they realize that if I put the requests aside I will probably
>> forget them completely.
>
> Magazine subscriptions use the same tactic,
>
Don't they just! I renewed a sub in December and had an e-mail offer 2 days
ago to renew!

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 23:27:53 -0600, Lucy Van Pelt
> blathered something incoherent.
>
> <deleted to spare the innocent>

So you didn't have the balls to say it as your regular self or are you
just another drive by? Either way, who cares what your opinion is?
Right! No one.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

In article >,
says...

> We 'sponsor' a couple of families in Bali, who are putting their kids
> through University.... and the way we do it is to send the money
> *directly* to them....

Do you personally know them, and if not , how do/did you check the
recipients are parents, in need, and have children at university?

Janet UK

"graham" > wrote in message
...
>
> "James Silverton" > wrote in message
> ...
>> There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it seems
>> that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier each year.
>> This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual contribution. I
>> wonder if they realize that if I put the requests aside I will probably
>> forget them completely.
>>
> What annoys me is that once I give to a charity, it then pesters me to
> give every few weeks after that. I gave to one charity last year, and it
> e-mailed me *the following day* asking me to give again.

Yes it is really aggressive here. A few years ago we had a bit of luck on
the lottery and gave a substantial amount to a charity. They have been on
our backs ever since. We do give now but we do so anonymously.
--
--
http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On 2/20/2013 6:27 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>
>
> "graham" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "James Silverton" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it
>>> seems that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier
>>> each year. This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual
>>> contribution. I wonder if they realize that if I put the requests
>>> aside I will probably forget them completely.
>>>
>> What annoys me is that once I give to a charity, it then pesters me to
>> give every few weeks after that. I gave to one charity last year, and
>> it e-mailed me *the following day* asking me to give again.
>
> Yes it is really aggressive here. A few years ago we had a bit of luck
> on the lottery and gave a substantial amount to a charity. They have
> been on our backs ever since. We do give now but we do so anonymously.

Would that be the same UK lottery I never entered yet for a couple of
years was informed (via email) I'd won? Sorry, they had to wait in line
while I helped out that poor Nigerian prince...

Jill

On 2/20/2013 6:27 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>
>
> "graham" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "James Silverton" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it
>>> seems that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier
>>> each year. This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual
>>> contribution. I wonder if they realize that if I put the requests
>>> aside I will probably forget them completely.
>>>
>> What annoys me is that once I give to a charity, it then pesters me to
>> give every few weeks after that. I gave to one charity last year, and
>> it e-mailed me *the following day* asking me to give again.
>
> Yes it is really aggressive here. A few years ago we had a bit of luck
> on the lottery and gave a substantial amount to a charity. They have
> been on our backs ever since. We do give now but we do so anonymously.

No good deed goes unpunished. I do the same as you. If a friend
solicits for a charity, I give them the money to donate. Once, a
niece didn't understand and gave my name and address to this charity
she volunteered for and it was a long time before they stopped
nagging me.

How to alienate donors: use all the money they sent you on constant
mailings and free labels. Just so you know you threw money down a
hole.

nancy

On 2/19/2013 9:54 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 19/02/2013 9:21 PM, James Silverton wrote:
>> There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it seems
>> that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier each year.
>> This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual contribution. I
>> wonder if they realize that if I put the requests aside I will probably
>> forget them completely.
>>
>
>
> I must be jaded but I think that most of it has become about making
> money for the companies contracted to do the fund raising than about
> raising money for the charity. I give to the Cancer Society, and I
> started getting calls from the liver cancer society, pancreatic cancer
> society, skin cancer society, lymphoma society, brain cancer society......
> More than 50% of my mail is beg letters. Today it was a beg letter from
> one of the cancer societies and a big envelope full of cards and address
> stickers from the Multiple Sclerosis Society with a recommended
> donation, worth about ten times as much as the material that I got for
> free because it is unsolicited.
>
>
I will never have to buy address labels again!! I receive them from
charities I've never had any dealings with. It doesn't make me want to
give them money. Seems they're spending it rather foolishly.

Jill

On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:14:38 PM UTC-6, zxcvbob wrote:
>
> I like the ones from NPR that kind of look like a bill and say "Second
>
> Notice" on the envelope. (those go straight in the trash unopened)
>
I called and had myself put on a "DO NOT CONTACT" list. My contribution to
the station is by automatic transfer. It saves them postage not to send
stuff I will certainly not respond to.
>
> Bob

--Bryan

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> I will never have to buy address labels again!! I receive them from
> charities I've never had any dealings with. It doesn't make me want to
> give them money. Seems they're spending it rather foolishly.

I used to get a lot of those and greeting cards too. But they pretty much
quit sending them. The last batch of labels I got say Ms. on them. I don't
think too many people go by Ms. these days but I could be wrong. I don't
care. I'll still use them but daughter dislikes that label. I did just
order some though. Needed some with daughter's name on them and with all of
our names on them. The ones that I have that have all of our names on them
lost their sticky. I don't know why but a lot of them do that with time.
And they're not that old. Maybe a couple of years.

On 2/19/2013 9:54 PM, Dave Smith wrote:

> I must be jaded but I think that most of it has become about making
> money for the companies contracted to do the fund raising than about
> raising money for the charity.

That's not jaded, that's a fact. The fund raising companies can legally
keep just about the whole amount. You have to donate directly to the
charity if you want to make sure you're not paying some scammy business.

nancy

In article >,
says...
>
> On 2/20/2013 6:27 AM, Ophelia wrote:
> >
> >
> > "graham" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> >> "James Silverton" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>> There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it
> >>> seems that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier
> >>> each year. This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual
> >>> contribution. I wonder if they realize that if I put the requests
> >>> aside I will probably forget them completely.
> >>>
> >> What annoys me is that once I give to a charity, it then pesters me to
> >> give every few weeks after that. I gave to one charity last year, and
> >> it e-mailed me *the following day* asking me to give again.
> >
> > Yes it is really aggressive here. A few years ago we had a bit of luck
> > on the lottery and gave a substantial amount to a charity. They have
> > been on our backs ever since. We do give now but we do so anonymously.
>
> Would that be the same UK lottery I never entered yet for a couple of
> years was informed (via email) I'd won?

No, yours is a fake scam. Too bad :-)

UK National Lottery is genuine, a cheapo taxfree gamble providing big
funding for UK charities and local groups

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...ted_Kingdom%29

http://www.lotterygoodcauses.org.uk/awards

Janet

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 2/20/2013 6:27 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>
>>
>> "graham" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "James Silverton" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it
>>>> seems that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier
>>>> each year. This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual
>>>> contribution. I wonder if they realize that if I put the requests
>>>> aside I will probably forget them completely.
>>>>
>>> What annoys me is that once I give to a charity, it then pesters me to
>>> give every few weeks after that. I gave to one charity last year, and
>>> it e-mailed me *the following day* asking me to give again.
>>
>> Yes it is really aggressive here. A few years ago we had a bit of luck
>> on the lottery and gave a substantial amount to a charity. They have
>> been on our backs ever since. We do give now but we do so anonymously.
>
> Would that be the same UK lottery I never entered yet for a couple of
> years was informed (via email) I'd won? Sorry, they had to wait in line
> while I helped out that poor Nigerian prince...

lol no It was the National Lottery that we pay for The only charities
we fund now, are the one in my sig, and the Dog's Trust. They are left
money in our wills too.
--
--
http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On 2/20/2013 7:20 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
> ...
>> I will never have to buy address labels again!! I receive them from
>> charities I've never had any dealings with. It doesn't make me want to
>> give them money. Seems they're spending it rather foolishly.
>
> I used to get a lot of those and greeting cards too. But they pretty much
> quit sending them. The last batch of labels I got say Ms. on them. I don't
> think too many people go by Ms. these days but I could be wrong. I don't
> care. I'll still use them but daughter dislikes that label.
(snip)
>
>
How silly. They were free. Why does it matter if your daughter doesn't
like the address labels?

Jill

On 2/20/2013 6:27 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>
>
> "graham" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "James Silverton" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it
>>> seems that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier
>>> each year. This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual
>>> contribution. I wonder if they realize that if I put the requests
>>> aside I will probably forget them completely.
>>>
>> What annoys me is that once I give to a charity, it then pesters me
>> to give every few weeks after that. I gave to one charity last year,
>> and it e-mailed me *the following day* asking me to give again.
>
> Yes it is really aggressive here. A few years ago we had a bit of
> luck on the lottery and gave a substantial amount to a charity. They
> have been on our backs ever since. We do give now but we do so
> anonymously.
Yes, that bugs me too! /I have a working *p*/rinciple that if I notice
that I am getting frequent solicicitations, I count them. Once they
reach six I send the charity a letter informing them that I will not
contribute the next year. Sometimes it seems to work.

--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not" in Reply To.

On 2/20/2013 7:26 AM, Nancy Young wrote:
> On 2/19/2013 9:54 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>
>> I must be jaded but I think that most of it has become about making
>> money for the companies contracted to do the fund raising than about
>> raising money for the charity.
>
> That's not jaded, that's a fact. The fund raising companies can legally
> keep just about the whole amount. You have to donate directly to the
> charity if you want to make sure you're not paying some scammy business.
>
> nancy
>
There is an organization called Charity Watch that tracks the amount
that actually goes to the real work of charities and publishes the
results in a newsletter three times a year. I think the survey is quite
reliable. An interesting thing is that putative Native American
charities are a class that often get bad marks.

--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not" in Reply To.

On 2/20/2013 8:44 AM, James Silverton wrote:
> There is an organization called Charity Watch that tracks the amount
> that actually goes to the real work of charities and publishes the
> results in a newsletter three times a year. I think the survey is quite
> reliable. An interesting thing is that putative Native American
> charities are a class that often get bad marks.
>
Not a charity, but have you seen the television ads for people who want
quick loans? A Native American company, Western Sky: "We can put up to
$5,000 in your bank account the very next day!" Sure they can. Read
the very fast, very fine print at the bottom of the screen. The
interest rate on the payback amounts to what used to be called usury.

Jill

On 20/02/2013 12:09 AM, sf wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 21:21:30 -0500, James Silverton
> > wrote:
>
>> There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it seems
>> that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier each year.
>> This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual contribution. I
>> wonder if they realize that if I put the requests aside I will probably
>> forget them completely.
>
> Magazine subscriptions use the same tactic,
>
My very conservative arranged for a trial subscription to a very right
wing magazine for my wife. He wisely gave them our address and her
maiden name. They send us bills and renewal letters for more close to a
year. She had send him a subscription to another magazine for Christmas
and that magazine started sending renewal notices within a couple months.

On 20/02/2013 8:26 AM, jmcquown wrote:
> On 2/20/2013 7:20 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> I will never have to buy address labels again!! I receive them from
>>> charities I've never had any dealings with. It doesn't make me want to
>>> give them money. Seems they're spending it rather foolishly.
>>
>> I used to get a lot of those and greeting cards too. But they pretty
>> much
>> quit sending them. The last batch of labels I got say Ms. on them. I
>> don't
>> think too many people go by Ms. these days but I could be wrong. I don't
>> care. I'll still use them but daughter dislikes that label.
> (snip)
>>
>>
> How silly. They were free. Why does it matter if your daughter doesn't
> like the address labels?


Poor Jill, You fell for it. That was Julie's opportunity to make it
about her dysfunctional daughter's dislikes.

On 19/02/2013 9:21 PM, James Silverton wrote:
> There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it seems
> that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier each year.
> This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual contribution. I
> wonder if they realize that if I put the requests aside I will probably
> forget them completely.
>



I am seeing a new and disturbing trend..... checking out in a grocery
store or at the liquor store and being asked if you want to donate to
XYZ charity. When it first started it was $1, then they started asking
if you want to donate $2. A couple weeks ago I was at the grocery store
and the cashier asked the person ahead of me if he wanted to donate $5.
I was not at all surprised that he said no. She did not ask me, but I
was left wondering if it was a legitimate charity or a sociological or
marketing experiment and they were looking for the cut off point, the
point where being pass from being intimidated by being asked directly
and being outraged by the amount demanded.

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On 19/02/2013 9:34 PM, graham wrote:
>
>>>
>> What annoys me is that once I give to a charity, it then pesters me to
>> give
>> every few weeks after that. I gave to one charity last year, and it
>> e-mailed
>> me *the following day* asking me to give again.
>> Graham
>>
>
>
> Yep. Giving to a charity these days puts you on their sucker list. Maybe
> the trick is to give anonymously. Forget about the tax receipts. Just
> give them the money and let it be a one time donation.
>
Have you noticed that some charities have Provincial as well as a National
fund raisers? Not only that but I get demands from Heart & Stroke and then
later they separate and I get demands from the Heart fund and then the
Stroke Fund or whatever.
Graham

On 2/20/2013 9:18 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 20/02/2013 8:26 AM, jmcquown wrote:
>> On 2/20/2013 7:20 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> I will never have to buy address labels again!! I receive them from
>>>> charities I've never had any dealings with. It doesn't make me want to
>>>> give them money. Seems they're spending it rather foolishly.
>>>
>>> I used to get a lot of those and greeting cards too. But they pretty
>>> much
>>> quit sending them. The last batch of labels I got say Ms. on them. I
>>> don't
>>> think too many people go by Ms. these days but I could be wrong. I
>>> don't
>>> care. I'll still use them but daughter dislikes that label.
>> (snip)
>>>
>>>
>> How silly. They were free. Why does it matter if your daughter doesn't
>> like the address labels?
>
>
> Poor Jill, You fell for it. That was Julie's opportunity to make it
> about her dysfunctional daughter's dislikes.
>
>
Mea culpa! Apparently it's also extremely important *everyone* in the
household have their name on the labels. It couldn't possibly be as
simple as last name + address.

Jill

On 20/02/2013 8:44 AM, James Silverton wrote:

>>
> There is an organization called Charity Watch that tracks the amount
> that actually goes to the real work of charities and publishes the
> results in a newsletter three times a year. I think the survey is quite
> reliable. An interesting thing is that putative Native American
> charities are a class that often get bad marks.
>


We have a government web site that you can check and see how much of the
registered charity's money goes into programs. I checked on the one that
I used to be involved with and was disappointed to see that the way it
is reported, that charity looked inefficient. We did therapeutic
horseback riding for he physically and mentally disabled. We got various
government grants and had to raise most of our money through fund
raising activities. Our operating expenses were substantial. We had
four horses and boarding in a facility with an indoor arena to which we
had exclusive access three nights a week was over $1500. Then there was
the cost of specialized tack, vet bills, farrier bills. There was only
one person who was paid, and that was our trained instructor. She got
only $10 per one hour lesson. It was more of an honorarium.

On 20/02/2013 9:39 AM, graham wrote:
> "Dave Smith" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 19/02/2013 9:34 PM, graham wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>> What annoys me is that once I give to a charity, it then pesters me to
>>> give
>>> every few weeks after that. I gave to one charity last year, and it
>>> e-mailed
>>> me *the following day* asking me to give again.
>>> Graham
>>>
>>
>>
>> Yep. Giving to a charity these days puts you on their sucker list. Maybe
>> the trick is to give anonymously. Forget about the tax receipts. Just
>> give them the money and let it be a one time donation.
>>
> Have you noticed that some charities have Provincial as well as a National
> fund raisers? Not only that but I get demands from Heart & Stroke and then
> later they separate and I get demands from the Heart fund and then the
> Stroke Fund or whatever.
> Graham
>


Yep. The names change just a little. They are close enough that they
sound like something you might be inclined to donate to. It is obvious
that someone is selling their sucker list.

A couple weeks ago I had a call from someone from an organization that
my wife had given a fairly generous donation. Their thing is recording
the stories of our war veterans. They started off by thanking me for
the generous donation a couple months ago and then wanted me to hear him
out........ but i cut him off as soon as it was obvious that he was
trying to hit us up for another donation. I told him that they got the
donation, but that my wife and I have decided that we really resent
having our donations taken as an invitation to be solicited over and
over. We will give if we want, when we want, when and how much we think
we can afford.... and if you call us looking for more you won't get any.

On Wed, 20 Feb 2013 01:18:22 -0600, Lucy Van Pelt
> wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 22:00:31 -0800, sf wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 23:27:53 -0600, Lucy Van Pelt
> > > blathered something incoherent.
> >>
> >> <deleted to spare the innocent>
> >
> > So you didn't have the balls to say it as your regular self or are you
> > just another drive by? Either way, who cares what your opinion is?
> > Right! No one.
>
> Are you on the rag again, Barbara? Or are you trying to be Paul's
> Night in Shining Armor?
>
> Apparently you don't know who Lucy Van Pelt is (was). She ran a
> Sarcasm booth and listened to people's worthless thoughts for a mere
> $.05.

Apparently I do and Lucy had you written all over it, worthless
nymshiftrer that you are.
>
> And all my posts clearly indicate that I posted them if you bother to
> take 3 seconds to read the headers. And all the clues were there even
> if you didn't read the headers. You're just not very bright.
>
> -sw (for -lvp)

Oh, yeah - stupid me. You nymshift to escape kill files, say lots of
shit you don't have the balls to post under your regular name, put a
cutesy sw at the end to say gotcha and then play blame the victim;
proving one again what a spineless coward you really are. You never
consider that it makes you a point of derision and the butt of jokes?
It must be killing you to have to be "nice" on the Facebook rfc group.
I laugh every time I think about it, like right now. Oh, and don't
think no one has noticed that the king of snooping uses x-no archive
because he doesn't want to be caught in one of his usual lies...
because that's what habitual liars do.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Wed, 20 Feb 2013 09:23:49 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> On 19/02/2013 9:21 PM, James Silverton wrote:
> > There are a lot of worthy charities to which I contribute but it seems
> > that the requests for money tend to come earlier and earlier each year.
> > This amounts to a sneaky attempt to get a larger annual contribution. I
> > wonder if they realize that if I put the requests aside I will probably
> > forget them completely.
> >
>
> I am seeing a new and disturbing trend..... checking out in a grocery
> store or at the liquor store and being asked if you want to donate to
> XYZ charity. When it first started it was $1, then they started asking
> if you want to donate $2. A couple weeks ago I was at the grocery store
> and the cashier asked the person ahead of me if he wanted to donate $5.
> I was not at all surprised that he said no. She did not ask me, but I
> was left wondering if it was a legitimate charity or a sociological or
> marketing experiment and they were looking for the cut off point, the
> point where being pass from being intimidated by being asked directly
> and being outraged by the amount demanded.

One grocery store here gives 10¢ off if you bring your own bag and
they're smart enough to just ask if you want to donate that 10¢ to
whatever charity it is. Dimes do add up.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.