esrosedotblog

WIKIPEDIA

I go to Wikipedia a lot. I tried the others and they are, well, wanting.

I also find the editing process fascinating.

Last year, I gave them money.

They sent me this videotape, well not just me. I knew a lot of this but it was a kick to see these contributors.

Actually, this is a fundraising tape.

You can give them money too.

Now that the election is over I will have some spare cash.

I want to give to things like this.

Not a traditional charity but something like this.

Labels: charity, internet

LIFE IN THE CITY

Labels: charity, fun. music

DID YOU KNOW?

When I was a young adult, the argument about the Salvation Army was mostly about their effectiveness with the troops during WWII.

Guys would argue endlessly about them vs. The Red Cross.

Now we all know that for a long time The Red Cross had some serious problems with administration costs and may still have them.

But the Salvation Army has serious problems with bigotry and mean spirited treatment of gay people.

And others but I don't know about that. Look, they are evangelical christians with an agenda.

They are here but not as thick on the ground as in the NE.

If you have a chance to put something in their kettle, how about you spit in it. Or put in a circular about your favorite non-evangelical charity.

Labels: charity

CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME

When I get one of those charity mailers or email, I like to look up how they are doing with respect to administrative cost and other factors.

Charity Navigator Ten Lists

has been an invaluable aid.

I like the ten lists. It is charity porn. Who is and is not making it.

They have almost everyone. And I don't mean the big ones. I have found local charities on the site. For example, a local museum is a disaster so we do not do more than pay for minimum family memberships which are the equivalent of two movie tickets. Well, maybe three.

Not that we give a lot. Most of our giving would go directly to the Obama organization, not the DNC. Not a charity. Not deductible. Then there are the occasional gay initiatives, not on the site. Political.

It boils down, for us, to the humane organizations. We don't give to anyone else.

For that, it has been and still is, PetSmart Charities. Four stars (the highest rating) and a really, really low administrative cost. We give donations for friends as gifts.

You would be amazed that, when it comes to animals, there are a lot of scams and inefficiencies. Some of the biggest organizations are like that.

Well, it is not amazing. Animals are exploited, period. Why not in the charities?

Labels: charity

CHECKING IT OUT

Incidentally, I mention

Charity Navigator

in the HRCF post.

If you give money anywhere you should check the Navigator out.

We give to PetSmart Charities and Nature Conservancy; both highly rated.

We have stopped giving to a few charities that were in the basement of ratings.

Labels: charity, nature, petSmart