Poll: Money Donation
- Thread starter CODE-D
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I also go with neither. I donate it to my education.
I don't like donating money in general. I would donate time, effort, or supplies but not money. Too many fuckwads in the middle get a cut.
I don't like donating money in general. I would donate time, effort, or supplies but not money. Too many fuckwads in the middle get a cut.
Everyone here is such a philanthropist. You are asking this in the wrong place. Everyone here would rather take the money for themselves and let the world burn.
On topic, I'd donate to the kids. Human life > animal life. I don't hate animals by any stretch of the imagination, I love them. However I'd wipe out an entire species of animal to save 1 human life if I had to.
On topic, I'd donate to the kids. Human life > animal life. I don't hate animals by any stretch of the imagination, I love them. However I'd wipe out an entire species of animal to save 1 human life if I had to.
If you have to pick, pick animals. Not because they are more important, but because the money sent to third world children will likely make little difference in the long run. If we stop sending all these countries supplies, they will eventually drop back down to their natural population level.
Donate to abused animals the chain of events goes (Africa for example) we send supplies -> civs get the supplies ->civs wander off happy to have food and the like ->bandit group takes supplies -> bandit group now has food and water and we just helped them out.
or Donate to animals -> animal rights group gets it and pays for shelter for the abused animals -> said shelter cares for the animals and adopts them out to people who care. Sure there's a small chance of the animal going right back to an abusive house but generally not the case I worked at a shelter for awhile they were very careful about adopting out animals.
or Donate to animals -> animal rights group gets it and pays for shelter for the abused animals -> said shelter cares for the animals and adopts them out to people who care. Sure there's a small chance of the animal going right back to an abusive house but generally not the case I worked at a shelter for awhile they were very careful about adopting out animals.
I guess I'll go for the animals.
It's a little heartless of me not to go for the kids, but I hear far too much about humanitarian money altering the African economy for Kalashnikovs rather than food far too much of the time.
And I absolutely can't stand cruelty to animals, it makes me want to become some sort of kitty vigilante.
Edit: but then if the sum has great impact, am I a terrible person for not helping my fellow man? But I really do like small fuzzy animals and get violent urges in the pit of my stomach when confronted with cruelty to them, so I think I'd still go with the animals.
It's a little heartless of me not to go for the kids, but I hear far too much about humanitarian money altering the African economy for Kalashnikovs rather than food far too much of the time.
And I absolutely can't stand cruelty to animals, it makes me want to become some sort of kitty vigilante.
Edit: but then if the sum has great impact, am I a terrible person for not helping my fellow man? But I really do like small fuzzy animals and get violent urges in the pit of my stomach when confronted with cruelty to them, so I think I'd still go with the animals.
Abused animals. Overpopulation. And I don't like to donate to random people, I have no idea if any of them will be able to do anything with that money, or if they deserve it.
No it isn't. lack of money doesn't cause too many kids, poor decisions do.SirBryghtside said:
Wow, they cover a lot more in Geography since I did it.SirBryghtside said:
I would have done it more but I disagreed with state education and the people in it and ceased to go.
Last I checked it was just Ox Bow lakes. Which are actually a conspiracy and don't exist.
I am a little worried by the unusual callousness of some people in this thread though. I'm sure if placed in a pestilence and famine ridden African village and confronted by a mother who struggles to feed all her starving children that work in horrible conditions picking through say, a landfill (which I don't think they have in Africa but I can't really think of a different word) for junk that can be sold, they wouldn't say 'Well, it was your choice.'
Nothing right now; I'm just a student, and I have my own crap to worry about. Though, I did donate $200 to some disaster relief fund by the Red Cross awhile ago
So, donating to charities aimed at developing third world economies (giving start-up funds for small businesses, educating people, etc) is a good way to fight overpopulation.
Poverty doesn't cause overpopulation, but economic development slows population growth. Apparently, poor people like to have kids a lot.spartan231490 said:
So, donating to charities aimed at developing third world economies (giving start-up funds for small businesses, educating people, etc) is a good way to fight overpopulation.
I would donate it, but not to either of those charities. I don't really think I want to send my money to third-world kids just because I care about the people who are in poverty here. And like people above have said, it wouldn't do much anyway.
Now if I had to pick, animals, but I would much rather send it to cancer research because I know people who have it now and people who have died in the past because of it.
Now if I had to pick, animals, but I would much rather send it to cancer research because I know people who have it now and people who have died in the past because of it.
