Slashdot Mirror

http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/10150/does-unicef-use-less-than-14-of-the-donated-money-for-the-advertised-causes

and

https://www.unicefusa.org/about/finances

This and many other examples like - PETA euthanizing more animals than they shelter - UNICEF expenses of 52 million dollars (pdf) in expenses related to management and fundraising (out of a 600 million dollars budget, and that's one of the best managed ones out there) show that it is much more efficient to donate time or money locally instead of to big organizations. Donate to your local food bank, soup kitchen, volunteer some time in the retirement home, the satisfaction will be the same and the effects will be much more efficient. Or, at the very least, don't screw people over, it is more than enough if you can do that. Why should you donate anything to help someone in the other side of the world while people needs your help in your own neighbourhood?

Agree. Local charities aren't big enough to mismanage the funds, and the people are close enough that they will probably volunteer their time as well and not need a half million dollar salary.
There is too much graft and corruption in all of the big charities. Red cross makes $2 billion a year selling your blood and not giving you any tax credit for it, but claiming it on their taxes as a donation.
United Way and March of Dimes encourages quotas, threat of firing and ostracizing to force people in organizations to take part in fund raising for organizations which donate to causes which they don't necessarily agree with.
All of these big organizations spend more than 10 cents out of every dollar on actual humanitarian causes, and as you can see often cannot even tell you how they spent the other 80-some cents, and neither can they people that the organizations claim to have benefited.

This and many other examples like

- PETA euthanizing more animals than they shelter
- UNICEF expenses of 52 million dollars (pdf) in expenses related to management and fundraising (out of a 600 million dollars budget, and that's one of the best managed ones out there)

show that it is much more efficient to donate time or money locally instead of to big organizations.

Donate to your local food bank, soup kitchen, volunteer some time in the retirement home, the satisfaction will be the same and the effects will be much more efficient. Or, at the very least, don't screw people over, it is more than enough if you can do that.

Why should you donate anything to help someone in the other side of the world while people needs your help in your own neighbourhood?

Efficiency is generally measured by administrative costs vs program costs, and can be found on Charity Navigator. But I would say pick a cause that really matters to you, then take the time to do your research into what the best solutions are out there, and then pick the charity that focuses on those solutions.

For me, I am passionate about poverty relief. Specifically, clean water and feeding starving human beings. I like Thirst Relief International for clean water. And for feeding starving people, I did some research and found one of the biggest problems was that for many years programs used a dry-milk based food that required mixing with water, which going back to the need for clean water, is hard to come by in these parts of the world.

Turns out there was a breakthrough in France, that eliminated the need for this. The new treatment called Plumpy Nut, is a peanut butter based RUTF (Ready to Use Therapeutic Food) for children who are suffering from Severe Acute Malnutrition, that literally saves kids who are on the brink of death. There is a powerful video that rocked my world reported by Anderson Cooper for 60 minutes.
Story:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/19/60minutes/main3386661.shtml
Video:
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4201082n

In addition to other poverty relief charities like Feeding America, my local food bank, and Heifer International, I give now to charities that specifically distribute peanut-butter based RUTFs. These include:

UNICEF (Niger)
You can buy the PB RUTFs specifically:
https://secure.unicefusa.org/site/Ecommerce/1369610601?VIEW_PRODUCT=true&product_id=2320&store_id=4221

Project Peanut Butter (Malawi, Sierra Leone)
http://www.projectpeanutbutter.org/

Meds and Food for Kids (Haiti)
http://www.mfkhaiti.org/

TPB is not impressing me as much as they were.

Would someone tell me why TPB doesn't put up a Unicef tip jar. I would donate. Then we would see a game changer. TPB-shutdown == kids-starving.

Bioengineering is dangerous because of unintended consequenses. A lot of times the food proves safe but it takes a lot of time to arrive at that conclusion.

Besides Oral Rehydrations Salts already provide an effective and inexpensive treatment for the problem. Many Humanitarian organizations like UNICEF already use them extensively.

...there are more important things, like curing/controlling AIDS, building infrastructure, and enabling access to clean water.

Five years ago, the Gates foundation recieved accolades for donating $100 million to AIDS prevention and research.

Four years ago, the Gates foundation pledged another $100 million to the fight against AIDS through an entirely different agency.

Two years ago, the Gates foundation put up an additional $50 million.

I could go on, but I'll just summarize: in the last 5 years, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has given more than $600 million to an assortment of AIDS research and prevention projects. It is pretty damn clear that Gates would gladly have given more, if the research and prevention programs could have absorbed any more.

Compare this to the $29 million being devoted to developing an education instrument. The cost of the $100 laptop is a pittance compared to the costs of fighting AIDS or the other major problems of our times. Yet this $29 million, small as it is, could be of critical importance in helping the children who have been orphaned by AIDS to grow up to be literate, educated contributors to their societies and cultures.

Both Gates and Negroponte have earned high honors for their charitable works. Each is contributing from his unique strengths to making this world a better place. Neither would be able to do what the other one is doing: it is simply not in their natures. We should honor them both.

And I think we in turn should be charitable, and not pay too much attention to the all too human verbal sniping that is going on between these persons.

It is no wonder the USA is so opposed to the International War Crimes Court, the international ban on land mines, and joins somalia as one of the only nations *not* to ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Subverting emerging democracies, funding, training and arming terrorists, providing safe havens for the world's worst criminals, running drugs, raping children, defrauding pension funds, bombing prisoners, 'dissapearing' many thousands of people within the US and many tens of thousands of people outside of the US. is all part of a days work for the new emerging world order.

• their plan seems to be:
• control the oil (duh!) - ie control of at least iraq, iran, colombia, venezuala.
• control the water
• control all media, both by force, and by stupid laws like DCMA and their ilk, and using force establish their own international courts under some sort of pax americana regime.
• kill all superfluous human biomass with weapns grade small pox
• murder anyone who dares mess with your evil plans.

To me it's hardly a sustainable plan, but then maybe they know things I don't know.

maybe i am just too prepared to think the unthinkable.

It is not necessary to go abroad to make something useful for the world.

As you live in a democracy, you can encourage the people you voted for to change some politics that the USA have and that are the source of a lot of pain in the poor countries.

The first things that come to my mind are the number of international treaties that the USA have not signed :

1. the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)

2. the Convention on the Rights of Children (CRC). All countries except for the United States and Somalia have ratified it.

3. the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty

4. the ban on antipersonnel landmines (the Ottawa Treaty)

5. the Kyoto Protocol

6. the Law of the Sea Treaty

All those treaties, if signed and applied, can make the world a better place for poor citizens of poor countries.

There are also a number of treaties thatthe US has stripped to signe them.

NOTE : Don't get me wrong, I am not your basic anti-US socialist european. In the numerous talks I had with people after the 11th september, I was always blaming those who said "It's their fault ! Good for them". I was (am) also defending the action against the taliban (except for the use of some nasty bombs).
But, being a supporter of the US must not hide that it's a BIG SHAME to have not signed, ratified and applied those treaties at least !

PS : sorry if some info is outdated, do not hesitate to notify me.