Charitable giving is ubiquitous in America, a phenomenon of the highest level.  Americans seem to have an inner feeling of always wanting to bring a better life to those around them, whether the answer is food, clothing housing, medicine, or other special services, we are perpetually called to provide these goods and services for literally anyone in need.  There is no doubt that Americans are the greatest givers in the history of mankind.  We love our work, do not mind being workaholics, and are happy to buy consumables as well as give freely to charities of all sorts.  I am quite worried though that our levels of charity are causing a great deal of harm.  There is simply too much charity today and not enough opportunities for people to take care of themselves. I hereby leap from the cliff and make the argument that most charity is bad.  I clearly risk the reader thinking that I am a horrible person but my possible reward is making people think think quite differently about what the United States truly needs.

Cancer

The money flowing into cancer charities must be spectacular by any count.   Quick Internet searches indicate that the American Cancer Society alone has put several billion dollars into cancer research through its history.  The list of cancer charities has grown much larger in recent years as people have it in their forethought to cure the mysterious illnesses classified as cancers.  However, what is the reality of cures and advancements in cancer medicine versus the dollars taken in?  The most popular treatments are radiation therapy, surgery, and chemotherapy.  According to Wikipedia, radiation therapy for cancer has been around since the late 1800′s!  Chemotherapy and surgery, while helpful, seem medieval in how they attack the human body.  For all of the donations, what has truly helped cure people of cancer?  The answer is early detection.  Yes, age-old, visit the doctor once a year, and have standard tests performed based on the patient’s gender and age. By doing so, one can catch the cancers that commonly afflict people who are similar to you.  Once a cancer is caught early, many times it is eliminated with the old barbaric cures I listed above.  There you have it in a nutshell:  Catch the cancer early, and attack the little blob before it gets out of control.  Now I want the reader to compare and contrast these treatments against the billions of dollars flowing into cancer charities and research.  If cancers overall are not being cured, where is the money going? I am certainly not new to introduce the concept of “The Inefficient Charity”:

American Cancer Society: The World’s Wealthiest “Nonprofit” Institution

One would think that charity funds, whenever possible, would be directed to research or to those individuals suffering from the affliction. This recent Wall Street Journal article points out that a great deal of charitable money may go to attorney fees atsome charities:

Charity Brawl: Nonprofits Aren’t So Generous When a Name’s at Stake

If a charity rides the coattails of another charity by infringing on a trademarked name, and collects more money as a result, does it matter to the victims of the affliction? Why would a charity be so vehement in protecting its name if it has the identical interests of helping the afflicted? I fear the answer is the same as always, “Follow the money.” The money provides salaries, jobs, and a certain lifestyle for those working for the charity. I question that charities with such selfish needs are truly charities. The major charities have overtly grown into businesses but we do not call them such.  They have a selfish interest to support themselves above any cause such as a cure for the afflicted.  Even comfort for those suffering comes secondary to many charities.

United Way

With layers upon layers of management, and six-figure salaries galore The United Way has taken its share of criticism from people like me.  I ask the average reader, do you make a six figure salary?  If not then why would you give to a charity to support its six figure salaries?  If you have read my writings you already know that I am not an anti-success or jealous person. On the contrary  I would like all hard workers and entrepreneurs to become wealthy so that they may take care of their own.  I simply find it impossible to identify large bloated organizations with huge salaries  as “charities”.  United Way is even a “pass through” charity, meaning they give money to other charities while taking a cut of the money for themselves.  This poses another question, why not give directly to the charities and leave out the middle man?  The United Way is a business.  It is supported by, among other things, coercive efforts in major corporations where employees are highly pressured to give to United Way.  Many workers find it mandatory to fill out Untied Way donor cards even if they never give to the charity, an embarrassment of a high order.  Clearly the management of major corporations makes efforts to pad the pockets of their executive friends at the United Way.  I find my personal experiences with coersion as downright repulsive and I dare call the corporate efforts “evil.”

The Bible has always set a good example as the moral examples in it always best any alternate ideas that modern man creates.  The Old Testament sets the example of a ten percent tithing to the church, and the New Testament reinforces the general idea of giving of oneself to the less fortunate.  While church hierarchies are full of politics and even abuse of funds, when I see my local church feeding and clothing people who live down the street from me, I cannot help think of the church as a worthy donee.  Church services are perpetuated mostly by volunteers and thus make an efficient charity.  There are other examples of efficient charities but I hesitate to present names as I find myself disagreeing with people over the same organization.  And debate is good as I really do not know a charity’s effectiveness without looking at the books.

What would I suggest if Americans were to pull a great deal of funding out of the non-profit segment?  The following article is the piece that helped me decide to put my overwhelming and negative thoughts about charity onto paper, or screen as it were:

Job Creation Is the Very Best Charity

I agree fully with this letter to the editor and understand that to some, this argument may sound like a hard-core right wing pro-business argument that neglects the needs of real people.  However, my dream world is one with escalating salaries, where Americans canalmost exclusively take care of themselves and their families without charity.  Americans do need to put more money into health insurance plans in order to combat the unlikely disasters that sometimes happen to loved ones.  We need to forego the iPods until we have made sure that our immediate family, include grandma, have the resources to pay for their medicines and medical treatments.  We must be responsible as individuals, and not spend all of our money on toys, then spend years worrying about grandma being able to afford her heart medication.  However, some things that are out of our control are nose-diving real wages.  Some studies show that the real wages for non-supervisory workers are one-half of what they should be when indexed against inflation over the past thirty years.  Congress and large corproations are alwya promoting H1B visas for educated workers which has turned into a proactive effort to reduce wages in America.  The deck is stacked against the average worker there is no doubt about it.

Despite overwhelming taxation which will perpetually fund Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, all of which are broke, and America’s spectacular charitable giving, the roles of those in need never, ever seem to go down.  On the contrary, in the midst of this recession the roles have increased like never before.  I would like the reader to understand that despite their giving, most diseases are not being cured.  Charitable giving at most provides comfort to people (which is great!) but at the least gets eaten up by a bureaucracy of money managers, administrative assistance, and medial researches.  To help provide something better than the American Charity Economy, I encourage you to start a business, leverage the Internet and the ease of worldwide distribution, create great wages, and promote individualism to your children.  One must plan for medical costs, retirement, and unlikely disasters.  Teach as many people to fish as you can.  These tenets will help to make the so-called “charity” a nearly extinct species.  If charity were to become extinct it would only mean that the needy are finally taken care of.  That is the goal isn’t it?