The next time you're sad because you can't afford the latest iPod...

[physics]

agree with enwiabe, though darlok does have a point; in some cases peoples' "altruism" is merely a false front for getting on their high horses.

I don't think true altruism actually exists...

Really? You think no one helps others without thinking of their own benefit?

oxfam in this case ...when we help we get something in return.
but i admit i am a quite a stand o fish person because i'm greedy.
well i do donate to help people but sometimes because we get a certificate and it looks good on my resume :3

[m@tty]

Yes, I think humans are innately selfish. Even for those who don't expect any recognition/tangible reward for what they do for charity, part of their motivation is still the fact that they'll feel better about themselves.

I'm not saying that's wrong. I think people like that are amazing. But I don't think we are capable of completely ignoring our own needs.

Okay.

[ninwa]

Following on from periwinkle's article:

Charity Is Selfish: The economic case against philanthropy

[m@tty]

Interesting read, and it does cover most people's motives, I believe.
Though I don't agree with this:

With charity, the logic is different, and a truly selfless donor would bite the bullet and put his entire donation behind one cause.

One organisation for one field; not one fullstop.

[QuantumJG]

Interesting read, and it does cover most people's motives, I believe.
Though I don't agree with this:

With charity, the logic is different, and a truly selfless donor would bite the bullet and put his entire donation behind one cause.

One organisation for one field; not one fullstop.

I agreed with that statement because it's true, investors will NOT put their money in one basket. It probably sounds weird to talk about  and investments but the thing they have in common is how people use their funds. If you think about it, it probably sounds better to say I donated $10 to place A, $10 to place B and so on instead of saying I donated $100 to place A.

I also think that we are much more likely to donate to places that have some significance in our lives. For example being a uni student and donating to places that are trying fix issues that most students will face (say housing) or programs that are trying to find a cure to cancer and you lost your grandfather to it. That in itself is selfish because we are more likely to help out programs we can benefit from.

I personally don't mind people being selfish, but when people go so over the top - like a kid trying to do something good infront of his mum to get her to buy something for him over the top - that drives me insane because it's mearly just to make sure people know your a 'good' person or the people who attack people for not following their cause (or simply people who try to guilt someone into donating). 

[m@tty]

I agreed with that statement because it's true, investors will NOT put their money in one basket. It probably sounds weird to talk about and investments but the thing they have in common is how people use their funds. If you think about it, it probably sounds better to say I donated $10 to place A, $10 to place B and so on instead of saying I donated $100 to place A.

It probably would sound better, and if that was what you gave for, you would give to multiple. But to say that a "truly selfless" donor should only give to one organisation is wrong. What if there are two worthy causes? Certainly this warrants even a "selfless" donor to give to both.

What I meant before with "one field" was one area of need, there are many areas which require donation, who are we to say one is worthy and another is not. I(edit: not to say I am selfless) definitely cannot rule which of aids research or cancer research is more deserving. One must decide of course what one will give to, but deciding not to give to an organisation certainly does not void them of worth. What can be judged, though, is which organisation out of those servicing one area of need will best utilise the donation.

[QuantumJG]

i don't donate. If i want to give my money to help someone id do it directly. To say that the only way to help eradicate poverty is to donate to certain charities is bs, personally i'd rather go there myself and help communities build maintain a higher quality of life if i had that sort of money. I can never see the results of charities, only the constant need for more money. Now i know that's not the case with all of them, but i still have yet to see a decline in poverty rates due to the help of charities. Please prove me wrong however.

I definately agree with you, despite all the charities we have seen basically no improvement in the global poverty situation. It makes you wonder what those charities are doing with the money.

I'm not a person who gives to charity, but at uni I decided to donate because it was dealing with student housing (a HUGE problem) plus the uni was contributing an equal amount. Living life as a uni student is hard financially for students who leave home (through word of mouth, I haven't actually experienced it) and just learning about some of the conditions students have to go through to make ends meet.

[ninwa]

i don't donate. If i want to give my money to help someone id do it directly. To say that the only way to help eradicate poverty is to donate to certain charities is bs, personally i'd rather go there myself and help communities build maintain a higher quality of life if i had that sort of money. I can never see the results of charities, only the constant need for more money. Now i know that's not the case with all of them, but i still have yet to see a decline in poverty rates due to the help of charities. Please prove me wrong however.

Have you considered sponsoring a child?

[chem-nerd]

An excellent read for exactly this thread
 "The life you can save. Acting now to end world poverty" Peter Singer

[ninwa]

Try Plan Australia - $43 / month doesn't just go to the child, it benefits the entire community.

The difference you make is improving the quality of life for a child and providing him/her with opportunities he/she might not ever have had access to.

I do see what you are saying. But making a difference to one life, however small, is better than making no difference at all.

[chem-nerd]

Most of those 'sponsor a child' type charities no longer give your donation to just one child. They found that more could be done by spreading the donation among the community than only one child benefitting. However, people are more likely to donate/sponsor when they feel they are helping one 'real' person rather than a vague 'village' of people.

If you'd like to know more about the charities you are donating to, check out this site http://www.givewell.com.au/
GiveWell offers grants to charities to research the effectiveness of their programs.

[periwinkle]

   there's this (somewhat mawkish) story:

"A young girl was walking along a beach upon which thousands of starfish had been washed up during a terrible storm. When she came to each starfish, she would pick it up, and throw it back into the ocean. People watched her with amusement.
 
She had been doing this for some time when a man approached her and said, “Little girl, why are you doing this? Look at this beach! You can’t save all these starfish. You can’t begin to make a difference!”
 
The girl seemed crushed, suddenly deflated. But after a few moments, she bent down, picked up another starfish, and hurled it as far as she could into the ocean. Then she looked up at the man and replied,
 
“Well, I made a difference to that one!”