It would help if I knew what you were complaining about.
Is that what the problem is? You aren’t actually sure what this thread is about?
No, I don’t know what the thread is about. Who exactly are we supposed to be upset about? The Girl Scouts? People who buy Girl Scout cookies? Imaginary people who equate buying Girl Scout cookies to saving the world?
Tell me what person or group of persons I need to vilify, and I’ll join in. But right now, I’m not getting what the outrage is. All I’m hearing are boring-ass vocabulary lessons that are not backed up any with cites.
Yeah, I know people who brag about how much they donate to the symphony and opera, as if that’s going to help feed hungry people.
My city gave taxpayers money to help a church to rebuild it steeple and I don’t feel good about this ! And it’s a damn shame that we have give money to our kids school , this is why we pay taxes .
Gee, thanks. Unfortunately your two facts say nothing whatever about why the community at large should subsidize your pet charity. The tax deduction is a means by which rich people can claim to be charitable while recouping their “sacrifice” from their neighbors and paying fewer taxes, reducing their contribution to the society as a whole, and all those causes democratically approved. Not to mention that morally, charity is a gift from giver to receiver, and not a complicated scam to benefit a particular private cause, cost the giver nothing, and rob everyone else.
But I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume you just left your moral compass in the pocket of your other suit.
This. What should we be outraged about? I don’t know that anyone thinks that buying Girl Scout cookies is going to charity. I buy them and take them to work so I don’t snarf them up right away.
I trap and fix feral cats. Does that help my life at all? Probably not, but it makes me feel good.
I buy livestock for Heifer International, which certainly doesn’t impact my life. It does make me feel good.
Should I stop doing all of these things because its all self-serving feel-good stuff?
Snipped, but this is really outrageous to me as well. A well educated population is to all of our best interests. We should pay more in property taxes so that everyone is “donating” to the schools. I really do wish this could be fixed. When I’m in a nursing home, I want the people tending to me to know which end to put the diaper on!
It’s going to feed hungry musicians. What, you think the people who devote their entire professional lives to staging symphonies and operas can afford to do so without grants and donations?
The hungry musicians, their paychecks secure, are now free to feed our souls with art and music. It’s a fair exchange.
OTOH, I’ve never thought of buying girl scout cookies as anything but a nakedly capitalistic exchange. I give them money. They give me cookies. Everyone goes home happy. That’s why we say, “buying” girl scout cookies.
I bought some Samoas, this year, and those lemon cookies. I like the latter, but the lemons aren’t as good as my Mom makes. No regrets about buying them, though. I never regret buying cookies.
Well, except rich people generally don’t get to deduct charity - they usually hit AMT where their charitable deductions disappear - along with other “lets help control behavior via the tax system” middle class deductions - like mortgage interest.
This sounds a whole lot like the Ayn Rand definition of charity.
Plenty of charities sell you things. But you pay more than you would have for the item directly. I mean, you can even get equivalents to Girl Scout cookies for cheaper. But you pay more to support them.
If you pay more than you have to, and it’s to a non-profit organization, it’s charity. A donation to NPR is charity, because you didn’t have to give to NPR to keep getting what you got from it. You went above and beyond.
And, yes, business deals aren’t charity. So what? It’s only because we treat them like they are charity that they keep getting made. If giving to “charity” ever stops making a business look good, they’ll stop doing it.
Last fall I donated a few bucks to the local SPCA. In December, I adopted one of their cats to bring joy and mirth into my quiet spinster home. I thought I was doing a good deed by giving them some money, but no. Apparently, I caused a rip in the space-time continuum of charitable giving.
Usually you cant. To be honest most of the time you are just interacting with the parents and not the actual girl. Like the parent bringing her daughters list to work or even in front of the grocery store its mostly the parents with a couple of cute girls sitting behind them.
This is another reason I like Boy Scouts better. Yes, they have their popcorn sales. But they also do other fundraisers like last week when the boys ran a concession stand at a school fair. Thats experience in dealing with the public, handing out food, counting money, cooking, setup, cleanup, etc… Its more hands on than just selling stuff people dont want anyways.
At some point it occurred to me that rather than going out with my friends and buying drinks at a bar, we could form a non-profit club, and then make tax-deductible contributions to said club. The club would then use those donations to buy beer for its members.
I agree with the OP in spirit if not in execution.
A tax deduction does not mean that it costs you nothing. What it means is that you are donating a portion of your gross income to the charity, and your income tax is calculated based on what you didn’t donate. If you donate $100,000 and your marginal tax rate is 30% then your tax is only reduced by $30,000, not $100,000. You are still $70,000 worse off even though you’re paying less tax.
Yeah, I can’t agree with this platonic ideal of “charity,” where the donor must not receive nor derive any benefit from the gift. Even the large-donation-to-name-a-building example. I’ve worked in a few different nonprofits’ fundraising departments, and the money people gave to support various projects far outweighed whatever perk they received.
At Carnegie Hall in the late 1990s, we were raising funds to reclaim and rebuild the building’s old third performance space, which although it was the site of CH’s first concert, hadn’t been in CH’s possession for decades and had been closed off or partially blocked due to subway work (sorry, this is fuzzy–it’s been 20 years or so!). The cost for excavating and reconstruction was, IIRC, about $75 million.
The purpose of the proposed new space was that it would be devoted to presenting new, experimental and educational music programs, which are often underfunded and less publicized than the entrenched classics. Having such a venue under the Carnegie Hall aegis would help alleviate both these problems tremendously.
Anyway, not everyone was a huge supporter of this project, since new music is a hard sell for many old-school donors. But we at last secured a donation of… er, something like $10 million (again, fuzzy memory here) from one of our board members and his wife, and cost CH nothing to name the new performance space after the donors. Now the Judy and Arthur Zankel Hall is an established arts venue and has achieved its intended goals. Mr. Zankel died only two years after it opened, I believe. (And CH got $20 million in his estate, too, among many other nonprofits and charities. The guy was a generous philanthropist.)
Point is, that $10 million helped tremendously, and the fact that it was public support of this project helped give the hall a boost in fundraising publicity, which spurred others to donate too. And, obviously, it alleviated quite a lot of the building costs.
Did the Zankels get some naches* from having their names on one of Carnegie Hall’s public spaces? I’m sure. Does this make their gift less charitable? I don’t think so. IMHO the benefit to artists and CH over the last 13 years or so since it opened far outweighs what the Zankels received out of gratitude for their generosity.
When I donated to WQXR/NPR and, for my $60, got a $5 mug in return, that doesn’t turn my donation into a selfish gesture. (Even though it is a damn cute mug. Pianos turn into NYC taxicabs in an M.C. Escher-type design.)
- No, not nachos, although that would’ve been an interesting donation perk. Naches is Yiddish for pleasure, happiness.
Giving and receiving (charity) to me has to do with motivation of the heart and personal strengths and weaknesses (or one’s blessings or ‘gifts’). Also recognition of one’s strengths. It has nothing to do with charitable organizations (that is a worldly corruption of charity solely so others can (incorrectly judge your heart and intentions). As such charity is between you and God, and no man should judge.
You could give charity to a millionaire and by doing so transform his life. You could give charity to a homeless and likewise do the same. The the transformational energy is the love of God flowing from giving heart to a heart that is willing to receive God’s gift. It is also not only money, actually rarely it is money, but gifting, our strengths are given to us to bless others with. Giving from our strengths helps others receive to their weaknesses. For those blessed with money, it is given to them for them to bless others with. Others give in other ways, and as we give from where we are strong, it allows God to give and bless through strength. And likewise we are to receive to points we are week, to have God fill those parts of our lives though the charity of others (willingness to receive from God).
Not saying not to give money, but far better to go personally and see how you can help, heart to heart, then to just leave it to someone else with a donation.
So giving to the girl scouts, the homeless, the Donald, etc all goes to the motivation of the heart and no one should judge less they are God.
Okay, not nothing, I oversimplified. But your choice to make this use of your money cost the community $30K, and I just think that’s wrong. Also wrong was my moral compass remark, it was rude and unjustified and I apologize.
Why can’t you? You are supposed to be interacting with the girls, the parents are there to supervise (depending on the age of the girls, there may be a lot of supervision). Look for older elementary or middle school girl scouts and insist on interacting with the girls, not the mothers. If the girls are no where to be found, call Council - cookie booth spots are COMPETITIVE - they are hard to get. And the rule is the GIRLS need to be selling cookies.
If you can’t find girls who are selling cookies and are working to some cause you don’t care about, then either don’t care and make it a strictly capitalist transaction - or buy from the Keebler elves.
And Girl Scout troops do all those things as well - run school concessions, hold other fundraisers.
Once again, not if you hit AMT, which with a $100k donation, you probably are hitting AMT.
Well, theoretically it might be the difference between paying just the AMT, or paying a larger amount.
Still,
But, in the example, you’re adding $100K to the community somewhere else! Who’s to say which is the greater good.