If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(TorontoStar)   Funds for families of Sept. 11 victims spent elsewhere by Red Cross   (torontostar.com) divider line 137
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

6451 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Oct 2001 at 1:18 PM (13 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



137 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2001-10-29 01:21:38 PM  
Wow... that is asinine.
 
2001-10-29 01:22:14 PM  
You gotta be kidding me.
 
2001-10-29 01:24:07 PM  
I guess our good friend Tim O'Reilly was right to keep badgering them... I wonder how much of that 11 million going for "international assistance" is helping feed the Afghans?
 
2001-10-29 01:25:23 PM  
Duh.... We've known the Red Cross has done this for years.
 
2001-10-29 01:26:49 PM  
and they wonder why people are so skeptical and unwilling to give to charity.

I am ashamed of them.
 
2001-10-29 01:27:46 PM  
WHO CARES!!!!!! As if the Red Cross doesnt use their donated funds for other good causes.
 
2001-10-29 01:31:04 PM  
Maybe I was misunderstood... The article is assinine.
The RedCross is doing fine.
 
2001-10-29 01:31:21 PM  
You are right GrassHopper, the Red Cross has always been doing this. If you check out the annual salaries of their executives (I have but I don't remember $$$) you will see where the money goes.
 
2001-10-29 01:31:34 PM  
Don't ever tell a beaurucrat how to share their rice bowl The Red Cross does wonderful things but it is a monster, none the less. This will become a "super" scandel and damaged charitable giving for a generation. Unless we get another "super" beaucracy, the government to oversight it. Yeah that'll work.. Too much friggin money, wide eyes, and ricebowls to fill.
 
2001-10-29 01:33:03 PM  
That title is asinine! Did you think the red cross was gonna stop doing all the other shiat they do! So now when your house burns down the red cross should say "well screw you, there a ppl suffering in New York and Washington who
need it more than your homeless ass!"
 
2001-10-29 01:36:06 PM  
i for one am filled with mild apethetic outrage.
 
2001-10-29 01:37:32 PM  
Grasshoppers: Thank you. Another person who isn't a farking idiot.

Cmon people... the Red Cross NEVER says that they will use ANY of the funds donated to them during this time for the families of the Sept. 11th tradgedy.
 
2001-10-29 01:37:33 PM  
Liz McLaughlin did receive a cheque ...

I love that spelling.
 
2001-10-29 01:39:07 PM  
Tis better to just give blood, I guess.

By the way, the blood that was donated just after 9/11 is now no longer usable, so if you're willing and able, please donate again. I plan to.
 
2001-10-29 01:39:44 PM  
I can see this in two different ways:

1. The people who donated wanted their money to go to Sept. 11 victims' families and it is being used elsewhere. You bastards.

2. They recieved way too much money to give to just the families. It is an absurd amount. The money can do good elsewhere instead of giving ALL of it to the victims. Good job.

Take it either way...
 
2001-10-29 01:40:48 PM  
Y'all seem to be missing the point of the article. It's not the the Red Cross is speding the recently raised funds on things *in addition to* their pledge to the victims and families of Sept. 11, It's that they're spending it on shiat *instead of* their pledge to the victims and families of Sept 11. 200 million allocated for new computers and telecommunications infrastructure. 40 million distributed to victims and families, many of whom have recieved nothing at all. This from an organization that, for the last 7 weeks, has been marketing itself specifically as the place to send money to help those in need because of the Sept 11 attack.
 
2001-10-29 01:41:19 PM  
What pricks, this is why I don't donate to these idiots. I can hear their board meeting right now:

"Wow! This disaster is the best thing to ever happen to us! Now we upgrade all our shiat and give ourselves raises. But don't forget to throw a some hush money to the families that complain to the media..."
 
2001-10-29 01:44:13 PM  
I have to agree with Jebediah here. When my house burned down a couple of years ago, the Red Cross was on the scene before the fire department left. We had vouchers for food, clothes, and a hotel room. In order for everything to work, they must invest into their own "business" to allow for the best service possible. I am sure the families will get what the Red Cross promised!
 
2001-10-29 01:44:23 PM  
It seems clear that the money was dontated for the people who were directly affected by the events of 9/11. I do not think that people gave 500 million dollars so that the red cross could update their computer systems. They should of course use some of the money for other things but not half.


Gotspider-- Every commercial I saw for the red cross was direct related to the events of 9/11. "Please give whatever you can to thelp the victim of this terrible attack" Not give us money to update our IT department.
 
2001-10-29 01:44:40 PM  
An organization I'm president of raised over $1,400 to give to the Red Cross on 9/18. When I dropped the donation off at its Austin, TX office, I was specifically asked how I wanted the donation money to be used, whether for general administration, WTC relief only, Pentagon relief only, or 9/11 relief in general. So hey, they made an effort to at least ask, and acknowledge that blind donations wouldn't NECESSARILY go DIRECTLY to 9/11 relief efforts. Give 'em a break. The work they do is vital.
 
2001-10-29 01:46:52 PM  
I was turned into a widow on Sept. 11 and a single mother and now they're turning me into a beggar

I figure myself a fairly compationate person but when ppl start saying shiat like that it makes me want to become a republican.
 
2001-10-29 01:47:59 PM  
When I donate money to anyone, and I donate for a particular reason, I expect it to be spent on that reason/cause. If it's not, then I will not be giving to that group in the future...

I mean yeah the money is now technically their's to spend on what they want, but especially with a non-profit group, if they don't spend it the way I intended the donation to be spent, I was basically lied to, so I have a right to be upset if that happens.

They should expect this kind of reaction. That's always a problem with some charitable groups, who spend the money on other stuff, and not enough or less on the actual causes they raise funds for.

Hopefully this incident will make more widespread the need for these organizations to be open about what gets spent on what and more honest (or risk losing all their support from the general public), have serious reform, or shut down.
 
2001-10-29 01:50:22 PM  
Oh, and yes, I agree, money spent on "good" causes are all good, though some I would give priority, and helping people in need has definite priority over flashy advertising, cushy offices, inflated salaries, corporate profits, etc.

What I don't want is the 'charity' spending that money on themselves, rather than the people they are claiming to EXIST to help. If I want to help group X and they won't do it, I'll find somebody else to handle my donations. Logical.
 
2001-10-29 01:52:20 PM  
BaconFarker:
Damn Straight! Prostitution is a FAR better option than begging.
Or better yet, she could go out in to this wonderfully depressed economy we have, in an area that just lost a shiat-load more jobs for the very reason she lost her husband, and just get herself a job that'll cover her living and day-care needs. Yeh. That sounds good. How 'bout you give her yours.
 
2001-10-29 01:55:25 PM  
MacGabhain exactly! you wanna become a republican with me? im going down to my local republican office (or whatever) and im signing up now! screw ppl in need!
 
2001-10-29 01:55:40 PM  
Yeah, hell. I can't believe anyone who had their husband die in this attack would actually expect to receive some of the $1 bil that was donated to help them. Greedy widows.
 
2001-10-29 01:55:45 PM  
Someguy:

The money is not technically theirs. It was donated to go to the victims. Imagine if the $150+ million raised in that benefit concert instead went to build a concert hall for future benefit events?

How about I collect money for the Salvation Army and keep it for myself. I mean, what difference does it make if I spend it on a shiny new bell or if the organization buys a new copier?
 
2001-10-29 02:00:30 PM  
You can give me a job if you want. Unemployed in NYC for like 2 full weeks now. Fun fun fun.
 
2001-10-29 02:00:34 PM  
there are shiatloads of ppl trying to defraud the red cross. what the fark! should they just start giving the money to anyone who shows up and says they lost somebody? I'ld like to see any of you try to run a charity and just give money out with out spending any of it.

if you have a problem with charities spending money on administration, etc. then give money to your local homeless person. (which is what I do)
 
2001-10-29 02:01:40 PM  
It was repeated many many times on the news (at least NPR) that unless you donate to the specific Sept. 11 fund, your money goes to their general disrectionary fund. I'm sure most Americans, as usual, did not take the time to read the fine print and their money ended up in the general fund.

I mean honestly, why get worked up about the fact that your money helped the Red Cross vaccinate children in Africa or train workers in Indonesia? All their work is a good thing.

Jiggity: When you give something to someone else, it is now theirs to use as they please. That's how the whole giving thing works.
 
2001-10-29 02:03:08 PM  
They should take care of the victims FIRST. Then if there is money left over, do use it wisely. Sounds like they are getting all their new shiat first, then giving the victims what is left.(Maybe). I could see from the beginning that this was going to turn into a fiasco.
 
2001-10-29 02:03:24 PM  
You think they could, even if they wanted to spend 200 million on an incident which is already covered and over with? What do people think they would do with all that money? You cant bring people back to life...
 
2001-10-29 02:04:29 PM  
Wonder if I can get my donation back so I can give it to the firefighter's fund instead?
 
2001-10-29 02:07:33 PM  
If this scandal hits a crititcal mass, watch the back tracking and spin from a "unique" tragedy, the classic "better, improved coordination" to the ever popular ""victims first". Even a "for the children" is going to make an appearance. And my personal favorite "will have to try harder"...untill the furor eases.
Stay tuned.
 
2001-10-29 02:08:09 PM  
It is Assinine because the people who donated, did so under false pretense. They beleived their hard earned dollars were going to go to help the people of New York. Not fund the Red Cross's future.
 
2001-10-29 02:09:47 PM  
That title is asinine! Did you think the red cross was gonna stop doing all the other shiat they do!

----------
Wrong they are the asinine ones. They took advantage of that situation to get hundreds of millions of dollars. If they would have spent the money someplace else they should have comeout and said so yet did not. They are nothing but the rapest who attacks a women after she has been beaten up and left for dead.

I hope Bill O'Reilly toasts their balls over an open flame.
 
2001-10-29 02:09:48 PM  
But more than six weeks after the horrific tragedy, thousands of families have not been contacted and have not received any assistance. Red Cross officials now admit the Falls Church call centre is overwhelmed, has a shoddy records-keeping system and is awash in confusion.

you people know what america's like, there's going to be people crawling out of the woodwork with fraudulent claims. if you've got $600 million to spend, you better get organized and make sure you don't get ripped off.

and they could probably use a couple new warehouses in afghanistan, too.
 
2001-10-29 02:10:18 PM  
They should take care of the victims FIRST.

true, and dont you think they should ONLY give money to the victims first? they should make sure that none of the 10 dollars you donated go to some fark who who is trying to steal the money?

A good friend of mine lost her dad in the towers, and I dont see her crying about how shes a beggar. She understands that there are some things that need to be done before money handed out.

You all would be farking up a storm if the red cross had given thousands of dollars to Johnny ScamArtist.
 
2001-10-29 02:12:27 PM  
This article points out something that ought to be obvious: when giving to charity, it's important to do some research and find out how much the charity spends on "administrative costs" such as fat salaries for its executives.
Go to give.org and check out the percentage of funds spent on actual charity for some of the big-name 'charities'. You'll be shocked.

Then there are the backroom deals. Several cancer charities are funded by companies that make cancer treatment drugs and cancer-causing pollutants. This can lead to troubling bias in their press releases and campaigning.
 
2001-10-29 02:13:56 PM  
Simpman76, did you donate money? When I donated it went to the red cross. I was DEFINITELY not under the illusion that every penny i gave was going straight into the victims pockets. FalconRed said it... unless you donated to the sept 11 fund your money was going to a charity, who can do whatever they want with the money. and even if you did dontate directly to the sept 11 fund, who ever is administering that fund could divert monies to what ever the feel is need.
 
2001-10-29 02:17:02 PM  
j davis - You forgot the widows and orphans
 
2001-10-29 02:17:37 PM  
The age-old conundrum of a non-profit agency trying to stay alive and having to operate like a money-grubbing corporation. Somewhere along the way they lost sight of their real mission. Investing in their own infrastructure and future is fine, but not with money they've obtained specifically through the 9-11 appeal. Those opportunistic bastards. Disgusting.
 
2001-10-29 02:19:05 PM  
Jebediah raises two good perspectives, but I think there's more than just those. I believe it's true that they've been overwhelmed by the amount of incoming cash, determining who/how much should receive it, and the massive task of managing its distribution is most likely taxing the organization. But now is not the time to use that money to address their business and organizational deficiencies.

I generally only donate when I know exactly how and where that donation is being used (I like Habitat for Humanity). That's why I won't give to United Way - that and the fact that one of their recipient organizations is the NRA. I have no specific problem with the NRA, but I don't think they belong as a UW recipient. I was the analyst for a payroll deduction for United Way system, where you could dial in your charitable deductions. When it came time to load the donor code table, I was appalled to see the number of questionable recipients you could choose from.
 
2001-10-29 02:21:00 PM  
name one company that isn't using 9/11 as an emotional crowbar to separate americans from their money.
 
2001-10-29 02:21:05 PM  
If they would have spent the money someplace else they should have comeout and said so yet did not.

are you really that out of it to think the red cross was going to stop everything they were doing and work on the sept. 11 tragedy? when did they EVER say "ALL the money we receive is going to help victims"? someone said previously that they made an effort to divert the funds... but if you just sent a check, then that money can be used anywhere in the charity. It is a charity, which is not stopping all of its other work because of sept 11th. Notice that NOWHERE does it say that of the 530 million dollars donated ALL of it was earmarked for sept 11th.
 
2001-10-29 02:22:05 PM  
AMEN Dude! at least the red cross is doing something (even if its .09%) right.
 
2001-10-29 02:23:02 PM  

What did everyone really think? Did everyone think they were going to take all the cash, divide it by the number of people killed in the collapse and give the survivors and windfall of cash?
Even in the best 401c3 non-profits (American Red Cross and United Way)there needs to be some administrative costs, and ARC is one of the lowest in the US.
This frequently happens in non-profits as a way to spread the wealth from "popular" causes to those that are unknown. Hey, I though that the socialist Canadian like the Robin Hoods plans. You know, "From each according to their ability to each according to their need."
They spent money on infrastructure? Oh! My God! How horrible? Have you ever seen a non-profit's telecommunication in computer infrastructure? Pitiful. No long term cash to plan over the next quarter, cast off from businesses and other sad stuff.
How do you expect them to react quickly?
They have only spent US$40 million of US$500 or so? Maybe that is because of all of that call for accountability between the several funds that have sprung up? Weren't people moaning what about "double dippers"?
 
2001-10-29 02:25:09 PM  
this is a travisty. every american should be outraged over this. this money was given to a so called trusted organization to do the right thing with it and they simply aren't doing the right thing. if anyones watched bill orielly(spelling?) lately he's been on these peoples azz about this money going to where it belongs but i don't see cnn or any other major news stations putting this as a priority simply horrible.
 
2001-10-29 02:27:27 PM  
ps. has anyone seen how low the dow jones has been today.. wow
 
2001-10-29 02:28:52 PM  
My grandfather is still pissed off at the Red Cross for selling him cigarettes during WWII when they were supposed to be free. Loves the Salvation Army. Charity are a business first, then a charitable institution.
 
Displayed 50 of 137 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report