High commission for fundraisers

[skyguy918]

I love how evrey thread goes of topic so fast...

Imho a fundraiser is part of an organizations expense, the way how the donor has to view it is that since there is someone reaching out to him there is an expense to the organization.

Finally, you are helping out giving another jew parnasa.

P.s. the organization CEO= no worse then fundraiser.

The problem with this is that in the marketplace, a business where expenses run wild will go broke. Charity organization by and large don't have market forces (or shareholders, etc.) acting on them in the same way.

If in fact the only way for organizations to bring in a lot of money is to spend a lot of money, that's a terrible indictment of society as a whole. And if there are organizations where I know there is little-to-no overhead, I personally am more likely to give there then a place that spends a lot of money outside their primary purpose.

[Myccrabbi]

The problem with this is that in the marketplace, a business where expenses run wild will go broke. Charity organization by and large don't have market forces (or shareholders, etc.) acting on them in the same way.

If in fact the only way for organizations to bring in a lot of money is to spend a lot of money, that's a terrible indictment of society as a whole. And if there are organizations where I know there is little-to-no overhead, I personally am more likely to give there then a place that spends a lot of money outside their primary purpose.

-1
1. if the business expense is automatically filled by the expense itself then they are likely not to go broke.

2. This is not a market place, it's an organization with an agenda of helping/benefiting others. (Big difference)

[menachem_m]

but if I pledge $1000 and find out later that the organization only got half of my donation it would make me feel like I was robbed,

but when it comes to every single donation they are lechatchila getting half that just rubs me the wrong way.

So give the collector $20, then go online and give the other $980 direct.

[YOSEF]

So I'm homophobic for trying to understand someone's point of view?

Or you guys are really the intoleant ones?

[Tankchucker]

So give the collector $20, then go online and give the other $980 direct.

The thing is I don't know when the fundraiser comes over to me if he gets an outrages commission, if I know that he does I would send him off, and not give that particular org anymore because they are irresponsible with their money.

[Achas Veachas]

So I'm homophobic for trying to understand someone's point of view?

No, the person who's views you are trying to understand is...

[YOSEF]

So you probably wouldn't do business with someone who was gay or take a loan from that person, or allow your elderly mother to be helped cross the street by someone who was gay, right?

1. My opinions are not being discussed. Simply the thoughts of the OP.

2. I would prefer not to. But if they are the only bank, I might. Watching a video of a guy isn't nearly the same level as turning down a mortgage.

Or perhaps, you would, which seems to imply your radar for "moral depravity" is only switched on when it doesn't suit you. How convenient.

At least some people still have a compass and still manage to turn it on at some point.

[AJK]

1. My opinions are not being discussed. Simply the thoughts of the OP.

2. I would prefer not to. But if they are the only bank, I might. Watching a video of a guy isn't nearly the same level as turning down a mortgage.At least some people still have a compass and still manage to turn it on at some point.

You stepped into defend the OPs thoughts; it's a bit disingenuous to then simply deflect with "well, I'm not the person saying that."

This guy, gay or not, is the one who gave the very insightful talk at TED... not the non-gay imaginary man you seem to wish it was. You deal with what you're dealt, not with what you wish you had.

Again, I fail to see the correlation between the opinions on fundraising and how one's sexual preferences would affect those opinions.

[Aaaron]

AJK, I don't know you, but I'd love to buy you a beer one day.   

[Tankchucker]

This guy's approach to fundraising is unique, enlightening, and spot on. Has nothing do with being gay or liberal. This is more akin to a plumber than a social worker.

Step out of your box and stop being so judgmental, especially until you spend the time to watch it.

Love those who criticize first, ask questions later.

Now that I watched the video, I hear his point, but I don't think that it applies to more than %10 of frum organizations.

 Nevertheless my original question in this thread is about collectors talking half of every donation, not how much of my donation goes to overhead.

He says in this video that his foundation was using %40 for overhead and got bad press for that which led to it's closing. Why should orgs give a %50 commission on top of the rest of their overhead? so I doubt even this speaker would approve of a %50 commission.

[Achas Veachas]

At least some people still have a compass and still manage to turn it on at some point.

Yeah, there's a name for this type of malfunctioning compass that only turns on in response to certain stimuli, it's called hypocrisy...

[AJK]

Now that I watched it, I don't believe that this applies to more than %10 of frum orgs, maybe he has a point about the non Jewish orgs that most of their contributors don't follow any commandment to give %10 of their earnings and only give after they see an advertisement that strikes a chord in their heart, compared to us where we give maaser there isn't that much room for more growth by spending %40 as opposed to %20 on overhead and advertising if you are only targeting frum yidden because the mass advertisements won't get you that much more because everybody hopefully gives their share anyway, but Kars for kids for example if not for their advertising would only get %5 of the donations that they get if not for their overhead, so that wouldn't stop me from giving to oorah

TLDR.

Honestly, though, I did try. Perhaps break out your points into discrete sentences.

[Tankchucker]

TLDR.

Honestly, though, I did try. Perhaps break out your points into discrete sentences.

sorry but I'm not familiar with the acronym TLDR can you tell me what it is?

[Shmelly]

Now that I watched it, I don't believe that this applies to more than %10 of frum orgs, maybe he has a point about the non Jewish orgs that most of their contributors don't follow any commandment to give %10 of their earnings and only give after they see an advertisement that strikes a chord in their heart, compared to us where we give maaser there isn't that much room for more growth by spending %40 as opposed to %20 on overhead and advertising if you are only targeting frum yidden because the mass advertisements won't get you that much more because everybody hopefully gives their share anyway, but Kars for kids for example if not for their advertising would only get %5 of the donations that they get if not for their overhead, so that wouldn't stop me from giving to oorah

That's a pretty broad generalization of frum people. While I truly intend to always give maaser, I'm only human and I forget sometimes. Then an organiation spends money on a fundraising effort which reminds me to give maaser. That's money well spent by them.

(I don't need suggestions of ways to automatically give maaser, thanks.)

[AJK]

sorry but I'm not familiar with the acronym TLDR can you tell me what it is?

Too long; didn't read.

But in any event, I did try to read. It was just very hard to understand your points in one very long run-on sentence.

[Tankchucker]

Too long; didn't read.

But in any event, I did try to read. It was just very hard to understand your points in one very long run-on sentence.

Thanks. I revised it.

[AJK]

AJK, I don't know you, but I'd love to buy you a beer one day.   

Free beer? Where do I sign? 

[YOSEF]

You stepped into defend the OPs thoughts; it's a bit disingenuous to then simply deflect with "well, I'm not the person saying that."

Incorrect.

I defended his right to express them and that there is a "leg on which to stand".

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." - Voltaire

[AJK]

Incorrect.

I defended his right to express them and that there is a "leg on which to stand".

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." - Voltaire

This is America; people well before you stepped into defend and establish the freedoms of speech and expression. That's already been done. Though I applaud your effort.

But what you have yet to do, and have repeatedly avoided, is to establish any sort of "leg on which to stand."  What you have done, though, is bandy about terms like "moral depravity" and insinuate that I had no moral compass, and stating that OPs approach to gay people and their opinions on fundraising was "reasonable."

Feel free to clarify if I've somehow misrepresented your position.

[Achas Veachas]

Incorrect.

I defended his right to express them and that there is a "leg on which to stand".

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." - Voltaire

No one said he doesn't have the right to say it, but if he has the right to say it we definitely have the right to say it sounds ridiculous...