It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
The cash raised... that's another matter. I never heard much about it.
What I do think (if it's true) is that these victims have been treat abysmally. Then again, I'm relying on the media for my info...
• Youtube - https://www.youtube.com/@Goldeneraguitars
I suspect that with Grenfell Tower its just too much coming too quickly. The distribution needs to be coordinated, the stuff needs to be stored and sorted and help needs to be provided that is appropriate. That can only happen following a full assessment of everyones needs so that prioritisation can take place. And who does this assessment for for the charity. They don't have staff just sitting on their arses waiting for a tragedy to happen. They will have been busy doing other work. People will have to be pulled from multiple areas, some will need some training and induction, they will need somewhere work from, ways of communicating and sharing information (with all the data protection crap that goes with it) all to ensure that help gets where its most needed.
Charities do a massive amount of invisible work, especially so over the past 8 years of austerity where other support services have been cut back. Give those of us working at the coal face a bit of a break.
I think there needs to be some steps to try and ensure it goes to the right people.
Instagram
What about future support needs. Some of these people will need lifelong counselling and help. Their will be cases of PTSD for years. Some funds need to be set aside to cover this
Its not just about handing over a wedge of cash and walking away.
Maybe we should have just given each of the Grenfell survivors a container full of unsorted, unwashed donated clothing to sort through and tidy up themselves.
I make donations to the local charity of my choice, rather than to central office. That way it gets to where I want it.
Chuggers are a pain up the town, but they're not the only ones, though. The aggressive ambulance chasers are usually camped out there, too. One day, I'm going to deliberately fall over one of their awning legs to see how I do with a claim.
Charity is complex, very often the charities are working in situations with corrupt and beurocratic governments, and you want to help in a way which genuinely improves people's lives/lifts them out of poverty.
Often I'll support projects that are practical, eg provide a village with clean water, pay for a child's education, buy a family a pair of goats etc.
Even then things can get complicated. Fairtrade coffee for instance makes life worse for growers and workers who aren't in the Fairtrade cooperative.
This leads to a fall in the price of coffee, which the Fairtrade growers don't suffer from, but anyone else growing coffee does. It also tends not to be the poorest growers in Fairtrade schemes.
A very interesting insight into charity fundraising which I'll share with you perhaps against my better judgement...
Signing someone up for a couple of quid a week would earn the rep £35, £20 up front and the remaining £15 six months later if the customer, which is what they were, had kept their DD running. This ensured profit for the charity, if the customer had cancelled their DD in this time then there was clawback and the amount taken back from the rep. Worked out as a minimum £8.50 a month for the charity before gift aid. Average DD ran for three years which with gift aid meant the average sign up was about £450 (or possibly £350, can't remember or be arsed to do the maths) to the charity. £450 average return for £70 investment (other £35 accounted for in a bit) with a guarantee not to be out of pocket makes absolute sense for anyone so it's not really fair to chastise the charity too much. Prime time TV adds cost ridiculous amounts and the return is minimal.
I've always enjoyed chatting shit so took to it pretty well and could make £100 a day pretty often (5 sign ups). Did the maths when I left and that meant that, being conservative in my estimates, I'd generated over 100k in predicted revenue for the charities I'd represented. If nothing else looked good on my CV.
The company actually received about £70 for each sign up, £35 going into my mates pocket. Very very high turnover of staff but a lot of them with no shortage of new prospects. You wouldn't find out what you were doing until you had the job, other than being promised high OTE's. 95% of people couldn't do it and if you couldn't then it's no income. Close to 80 hours a week so pretty soul destroying if you can't sell. It's f-ing hard work too, so spare a thought for the next charity cold caller who knocks on your door. Trust me when I say a bit of kindness goes a long way when you've been making no money for 5 hours in freezing rain whilst having the odd bit of abuse. Don't feel obliged to sign up, just be nice about it.
Part of keeping everyone enthusiastic enough was the promise of riches if they climbed the pyramid. Very very few people do, but trust me when I say those riches are absolutely absurd for those that do manage it. Take running costs for the business out of the equation and the boss/friend made (if memory serves) around 100k in his first year as a managing director with pretty much exponential increases for the next couple of years (lost touch since then). It wasn't bollocks either, saw the proof of the pudding. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he's on close to or more than 500k a year now, he'll certainly have hit millionaire status a while ago and before he hit 30 to boot. He'll have promoted a few people to manage their own branches which he gets cash from as well as 20k a year flat rate from above for each. They'll do the same, more money for next to no more work, and so on. A pyramid. I got wrapped up in chasing the carrot for a while, at the time I thought it was unfair if the outside world looked harshly upon such a noble cause. After all, what does it matter how much you are earning as long as the charity is receiving substantially more? They would be worse off without my help I reasoned.
A boast which may well rile a few of you further is that a clever accountant meant that at least while I was there he was paying zero tax. Essentially paid himself a tiny salary and kept his winnings tied up in the business, don't know the finer details of how that element worked.
It's a real moral dilemma for the charity as it's by far the most cost effective way of raising cash but it's impossible to really justify the ludicrous money people like my old mate are getting for it. For me the villain of the opera are the MDs of the companies raising the cash, being indispensable does not mean you should take more than you need to survive if it's from a charity. It does mean charities generally allocate a large amount of money raised towards future fundraising which accounts for a decent bit of sterling not going where the punter would romanticise it going to.
The people towards the top of the tree are rich beyond anyone's wildest dreams, paying themselves bonuses (saw the cheques 'presented' at a yearly motivational type event) which bankers would be jealous of. I chased cash excessively when I was a bit younger and one job in the financial services I had paid very very well (made well over 4k in a single day once without being too vulgar about it) but I'd be delusional to think I'll ever make as much.
I've just reread my post and I'm going to submit it as a reply (if you're reading this then that much is obvious) but I'm currently on the cusp of deleting the whole thing. Nothing I've said is false but, and I'm going to sound like I'm wearing a tinfoil hat here, the press have a history of trying to get dirt on this pyramid scheme and I've said more about its workings here than I've read about in any redtop articles. The guy I worked for was a mate while I was there, although the cynic in me questions his motives retrospectively. Regardless, I don't want this to somehow make waves for him *takes off tinfoil hat*.
TL:DR: Maybe for the best.
They seem to adopt a mob mentality that makes them extra pushy. I have had a few that actually became offensive when I have refused. Even the nice ones act like you have just kicked a puppy.
you hear an army of them coming down the street. I don't even open the door for them now.
Instagram
No. Nothing personal against you, and I have a monthly DD to a charity, but I never, EVER respond to charity people on the doorstep.
(Just saying.)
I'm certain that the majority of donors thought "The money I'm giving will go straight into the pockets of the survivors who lived there". But no, it has to get stuck in red tape, and processes, and assessments, and overheads will whittle it down to three-fifths of buggerall in the end. And in 5 years there will be calls for a judicial inquiry into what happened to all the money.
Overseas charities do just the same and the local community leaders nick Bob Geldof's line "Just give us the effing money". Charities have the arrogance of "We know what's best for people" and then spend the majority of the donations paying their OWN salaries while they decide 'what's best'.