10 Reasons Why People Do Not Donate to Charities
1. I gave enough. I prefer to invest in my own community
Although we have a natural desire to support our local communities, there is a great imbalance between the national shipment and the international expedition. Ninety-five% of the $ 240 billion that people in the United States give beneficial organizations each year are attributed to national organizations, while only 5% are given internationally.
The Americans represent twice as many people in other rich countries, but only a fraction will help the neediest people and where more of a dollar is. Simple interventions can save lives and reduce unnecessary suffering with donations to effective charities working in developing countries.
2. I need to save for myself and for my family
Expense money on ourselves and family members now, or save future education and retirement needs, do not prevent you from donating to very effective charities. There are two ways to help without hurting your family now or in the future. First, you can change some of what you currently give beneficial organizations that have a dramatic impact. Second, slightly increase the general amount you give to charity and lend this increase to this very effective charity.
3. My donation is too small to make a difference
In fact, a small donation can make a big difference. For example, an anti-malaria mosquito net costs $ 2.50 and protects two people for up to three years. Costs related to the satisfaction of fundamental human needs in developing countries are often cheaper than the costs of the same services and supplies in developed countries.
4. Poverty can not be resolved
The World Bank establishes an extreme poverty standard at USD 1.90 per day (October 2015). Currently, 702 million people, or 9.6% of the world's population fall into this category, in difficulty to survive this number or, often less. That is to say, what is the equivalent of what I would buy $ 1.90 in local currency.
Although sustainable development is the basis of the elimination of extreme poverty, individual delivery plays a vital role in the fight against extreme poverty. For example, malaria is the greatest resistance to the African economy (source: AMF). The financing of anti-malaria mosquito nets plays an important role in reducing the incidence of malaria and infant mortality. In addition, helping to finance medicine to fight the disease could mean that a child can stay at school or that parents can continue to support the family. Donations can help provide an essential resource for a better standard of living.
5. Poverty is not the problem, it's a symptom
Extreme poverty is the result of many factors, historical and current economic, economic and social causes. But in fact, helping people today, not only reduces unnecessary suffering and avoids lives but also contributes to creating conditions that support extreme poverty and the many factors that protect it.
The best health allows people who live in poverty to have a much stronger contribution to their own success: they can work, they can go to school, they can contribute to their family income, and do not use time and the ability of others to work. This requires meticulous care. A disabled person in the family, as a grandfather with avoidable blindness, can deprive a child of education to care for family members.
6. Donation does not help people who need more help
There are thousands of non-profit organizations that may choose to give and the process of choosing that support organizations may experience a discouraging task. Fortunately, several organizations conduct in-depth research to determine which charities can more effectively use their money to help the neediest people in the world.
Thanks to their contacts with Wiswell, who provide what we can and others, Peter Singer has developed a list of the most effective charities in the world to obtain funds for those who need support and are effective at the time. Use of larger funds to form sustainable poverty relief.
7. Poverty relief is the responsibility of the government
When asked whether the United States provides more, less, or approximately the same amount of aid abroad than other developed countries, only 1 on 20 were defined properly. Most are surprised to know that the United States is located near the Fund of developed countries in the percentage of national revenues for foreign aid. In 2006, the United States was ranked second to last, behind Portugal and Italy, and that before Greece. During this year, the United States provided only 18 cents of $ 100 profits, ie 0.18% of aid abroad.
Although most Americans believe that the United States provides too much foreign aid, most estimate that, between 5 and 10% of government spending, should go abroad! In other words, most people want to "reduce" the distribution of foreign aid at a rate of about 5 to 10 times greater than it actually spends in the United States (see Peter Singer, life can save, p. 33-35).
The United Nations Millennium Development Goals encourage all developed countries to award 0.7% of their gross national income to foreign development assistance or 70 cents per $ 100. In comparison, this is less than the cost of a credit card, many consumers are almost no attention when you pay purchases abroad.
So far, only five countries have achieved the goal of 0.7%: Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden, with the United Kingdom and Finland near success. Other countries, such as Germany or Australia, are already halfway, but their efforts are increasing to achieve this goal.
For more, see Non-Ethical Help Cut in the Trump column of Peter Singer.
8. People must solve their own problems
The winner of the Nobel Prize, Herbert Simon, estimates that about 90% of what people earn is based on their capital stock, places, networks, and opportunities that shape their current circumstances. Without stable institutions, such as efficient banks, reliable police forces, work schools, and fair criminal justice systems, it is very difficult to compete on a global scale.
The American investor and philanthropist Warren Buffett admitted that he will not make his own fortune without the necessary conditions: "If you hit me in the middle of Bangladesh or Peru, you will discover how many talents will happen. The wrong type of floor". Without a stable infrastructure, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to get out of poverty, whatever the difficulty of working or talented, you are (see Peter Singer, life can save, p. 26).
He added that the fact that people in poverty are much more likely to be disabled by the disease and its side effects, and may see that their initial conditions accumulate significantly against them. Around the world, four out of five blind people suffer from treatable blindness, but lack of access to treatment prevents them from working and fully involved in social life as a result of deterioration.
The situation is very serious for visually disabled children: in developing countries, more than half die in the blind years, either because of a disease that causes blindness in the first place, either because poverty prevents their family to be busy with children with disabilities.
In addition, the inhabitants of the Third World countries have to work very hard to meet their essential needs: for example, women around the world make up 200 million hours of work every day that collects water for their families. , the equivalent to the construction of 28 of the building. imperial state.
This will give you an idea of the amount of time and effort, people in developing countries should only spend to survive, before reaching the point where they can start surviving any type.
9. Provide assistance makes developing countries depend on foreign resources and funding
Provide food brochures directly for people living in extreme poverty has the potential to interrupt the local economy, for example, to compete with local farmers with their crops. Except in the case of natural disasters, diseases, diseases, and other emergencies, brochures are not a sustainable way to combat problems related to extreme poverty.
However, many other types of interventions can revitalize and strengthen local economies by providing the basis for long-term medical care, agricultural solutions, and education of developing countries.
For example, for organizations such as Schistosomiasis and Deworm control initiatives, the world is working directly with governments in sub-Saharan Africa to create and strengthen elimination programs. SCI and DEWORM, the world seeks to provide funds for the programs implemented by the government. When creating effective health systems, these organizations have announced the way for pilot programs to become long-term matches in the national health system. This resulted in a reduction in dependence on foreign aid.
10. Give him an overpopulation
Each of us will support that the value of human life is enormous. In fact, international standards for private health and government care organizations grant the value of a year of human life to $ 129,000.
Nobody would support only medical interventions in developed countries result in overcrowding. This statement would suggest that some people should be allowed to die, simply by controlling population growth. This idea will undermine our established belief that every human life deserves to be saved, even at a cost of $ 129,000 a year.
More importantly, it is incorrect that the interventions that save life lead to the growth of the unsustainable population. Mortality rates, in fact, have nothing to do with the decrease in the population. Conversely, a lower birth rate is the most important contributory factor for a viable and stable population.
The best predictor of female fertility is the level of education. Increased access to education and access to essential needs that help girls in developing countries register and stay at school are the best forms of population planning.
Better access to contraception gives women more control of their fertility and low infant mortality rates encourage families to have fewer children. Similarly, the greatest access to economic and educational opportunities means that parents do not think they need to have such a big family because they will not believe their children work to complete family income. And better medical care means fewer children who die, leading to the selection of smaller families.
Belum ada Komentar untuk "10 Reasons Why People Do Not Donate to Charities"
Posting Komentar