"...Celebrity endorsement deals lost money, too..."

Um, what? Celebrities charge charities for endorsements? Seriously?

I wonder if it hurts when you lose your soul...?

Weaver95: I wonder if it hurts when you lose your soul...?

Who says they have souls to lose?

pjabbott: "...Celebrity endorsement deals lost money, too..."

Um, what? Celebrities charge charities for endorsements? Seriously?

Bad ones.

Well, they need to make money, too.

Weaver95: I wonder if it hurts when you lose your soul...?

No. No it doesn't. Believe me, I know.

/It's actually quite freeing.
//Should I not have done that?
///I know, I'm going to hell now.

Well, at least they didn't get billed

This is a good example of how our government works...
Take heed America, and wonder no more why so many hate us.

These things take time. It's only been 7 years, folks. Just think of the paper work involved. Give them another 15 years and I'm sure they'll get started on it.

Oh, and the OVERHEAD, its KILLING them.

pjabbott,

Yes, some do...they certainly do.

It reminds me of the interview 60 Minutes had with a CEO of one of the largest charities after September 11 regarding the delay in release of funds to families.

The CEO kept making remarks about how it was an administrative issue and it was a lot of money to distribute....blah, blah, blah.

Two things stuck out at me. 1. CEOs of charities have some of the nicest suits, shoes, and watches on the market. 2. Interest, no matter how low the rates were in 2001 adds up a lot daily on a balance of that nature. That was the true reason that the money was delayed.

What a bunch of assholes.

You sound surprised...

I didn't hate humans enough today, but now I've met my quota.

/goes to look at pictures of bunnies

This shows us how careful we should all be when picking out charities. The "sick" tag has never been so fitting.

Me thinks I needs to start up a charity too.

Stories like this make me hope there really is a Hell.

Let me fix that tag for you




There ya go.

Listen to what bjmooren just said.

That is why I rarely donate to any charity other than Shriners Hospitals for Kids.

Makes me feel good, but do your research if you decide to donate.

pjabbott: "...Celebrity endorsement deals lost money, too..."

Um, what? Celebrities charge charities for endorsements? Seriously?

Some celebs do charge. Of those that do not charge fees, nearly all demand pricey travel arrangements for themselves and their entourage, plus accomodations, meals and entertainment for any function or photoshoot/video gig. Despite how well a celeb is compensated for their 'expenses', the celeb can still take a tax deduction for the money they 'would have' charged. Its quite the racket. As, clearly, is this charity.

Charity set up to benefit the families of fallen 9/11 firefighters gives almost nothing of $11 million in collected donations to the families

Sounds like MADD. 86% of $ to advertising......

Looking into the future, I can see a high office for this guy in the Republican party - maybe a VP

seminole87: That's why I don't give to charities.

I do pro bono work for a charity that I trust.

Live 8?

Any guesses on the response time if they ever have a fire?

Proud to be an American.

America, the Pitiful.

When you give to a charity, check the 'administrative' cost. This information is fairly easy to get.

The few charities I give to have a maximum of 5% administrative costs. This means that out of a dollar, 5 cents goes to run the group.

www.fh.org

Get Lost: Charity set up to benefit the families of fallen 9/11 firefighters gives almost nothing of $11 million in collected donations to the families

Sounds like MADD. 86% of $ to advertising......

Well, MADD is about advertising about drunk driving...

In college I worked at a nonprofit refurbishing old computers to create labs for the community in schools, churches, rec centers, etc. They were used for kids to do their homework outside of school, adult computer eductation, etc. We were contacted by a new church that wanted some computers to start a class so we went to check them out. After touring their facilities, in a newly renovated building with new equipment everywhere, we ended up in the pastor's office, which featured a giant mahogany desk and a salt water fish tank setup that I'd estimate cost about $6,000 (I've got a lot of aquarium experience). We didn't give them a single computer.

IdeasGuy: Get Lost: Charity set up to benefit the families of fallen 9/11 firefighters gives almost nothing of $11 million in collected donations to the families

Sounds like MADD. 86% of $ to advertising......

Well, MADD is about advertising about drunk driving...

No, MADD is trying to reinstate prohibition. farking nutballs there really DO believe that even walking near a bar will make you into a bad/dangerous driver.

But hey, Americans are the most generous people on Earth. Don't you know?

/off to see my tax lawyer about setting up a charity fund for the victims of "The Big One™" due to hit San Francisco any day now

What's sad is *most* CEOs/presidents of various charities out there average above $100,000 a year for salary.. you really should check out *where* your money is going in the scheme of things. I check out all charities on this awesome site: http://www.charitynavigator.org/

EvilAvatar: This is a good example of how our government works...
Take heed America, and wonder no more why so many hate us.

What does any of this have to do with the government?

This was a privately-run charity.

Hope these weasels get prosecuted & then what they deserve in prison.

As an alternative to MADD, I prefer DAMM (Drunks Against Mad Mothers)

louiedog: "In college I worked at a nonprofit refurbishing old computers to create labs for the community in schools, churches, rec centers, etc. They were used for kids to do their homework outside of school, adult computer eductation, etc. We were contacted by a new church that wanted some computers to start a class so we went to check them out. After touring their facilities, in a newly renovated building with new equipment everywhere, we ended up in the pastor's office, which featured a giant mahogany desk and a salt water fish tank setup that I'd estimate cost about $6,000 (I've got a lot of aquarium experience). We didn't give them a single computer."

Hey, good on you.

worlddan: "Who says they have souls to lose?"

None of us do, really. But that doesn't mean we can't lose our humanity.

Vylette: "Stories like this make me hope there really is a Hell."

Why wait for them to go to Hell when we've got a system of justice in place to bring it to them in the here and now? =]

Obvious tag surrenders. Know thy charities. Previous posts beat me to it - to find out what the administrative costs are. Don't give to those you don't know, and don't have kneejerk reactions to disasters. Get your wits about you, and if you feel compelled to give to charity, then do so. I have my charities that I know and trust (and get reports from).

This is why forced compassion and charity, through taxation, is even worse.

Whatever happened to all that money that was raised for tsunami victims? And why are there so many lawsuits involving the billions raised right after the 9/11 attacks?

Americans are generous. We give to those truly in need. Things like this sting hard, though, and make you think twice about giving the next time.

happydude45: Hope these weasels get prosecuted & then what they deserve in prison.

As an alternative to MADD, I prefer DAMM (Drunks Against Mad Mothers)

I'll do ya one better: DEDDD - Demand Execution of Deadly Drunk Drivers

Good idea, really. Kill someone while driving drunk? You die.

there's a lot of charities that I like giving to. the ones that spring up right after a disaster are not on my list. I really dislike throwing money at an organization and not seeing what the constructive results are.

Please consider donating to the Feal Good Foundation

camaroash: happydude45: Hope these weasels get prosecuted & then what they deserve in prison.

As an alternative to MADD, I prefer DAMM (Drunks Against Mad Mothers)

I'll do ya one better: DEDDD - Demand Execution of Deadly Drunk Drivers

Good idea, really. Kill someone while driving drunk? You die.

What if they kill someone drunker?

Stop the presses. People exploit 9/11 in order to line their pockets.

Didn't Rudy Giuliani already run this one into the ground?

camaroash: Kill someone while driving drunk? You die.

I would be able to understand this if it weren't for the fact that they are trying to push the definition of "drunk" down further and further down the sliding scale.

I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.

I run a NPO called Save The Trilobite. Your donations can help bring this noble creature back from the point of extinction.

Weaver95: No, MADD is trying to reinstate prohibition. farking nutballs there really DO believe that even walking near a bar will make you into a bad/dangerous driver.

Don't knock it, there's a LOT of money to be made off of prohibition.

When it comes to graft, I guess private enterprise is also better at it than the government.

Name names of these scumbags. shiat deserves to be able to stink properly.

Never give to the Shriners. Only like 5 percent, iirc, of the money taken in actually is given to charity.

Never give to a charity you don't know anything about or can't research. There's a LOT of scams out there like this.

Revolting.

As if my faith in humanity needed another blow.

Scum. Lower than scum. They must survive trillions more years to evolve near to the level at which scum exists.

Don't just make an example, set a precedent. Make any asshole like this pay dearly. Make them live in a homeless shelter and work pro bono to support other charities.

It seems only fitting.

This is why I won't donate to charities until I'm rich and can be in charge of what I give away. I consider any donations to charity to be flushing $5 down into the wallet of some guy who thinks I'm a shmuck.