Metropol

Sput wrote:I could poke holes in your ignorance in a much more scathing way but it's Christmas...

Thank you Sput. It wasn't intended as a well-researched thesis, simply an ill-informed and biggotted spur of the moment comment.

Feel free to poke though, in a seasonal way of course!

StuartPlymouth wrote: simply an ill-informed and biggotted spur of the moment comment.

Just your conservative heart shining through, eh?

miss hellfire wrote:

rts wrote:With some people around the world likely to get fuck all over Christmas, I say quit your winging and be happy with what you get.

I was thinking of sponsering a child or a dog this year.

perhaps you could purchase one of the amazing Tesco gift packs. Which cost £40 with £21 going to charity, you getting a shitty £2 gift and the rest for "administration"

I've got a mate who clipboards for greenpeace. He's one away from a target which gets him a bonus, so if he signs himself up he'll probably wind up richer!

StuartPlymouth wrote:Neither does sponsoring children of parents in Africa (or elsewhere) whose culture encouraging them to knock out 15 kids despite knowing they have little enough food for themselves. UNICEF handouts don'd help to change that, it simply perpetuates it.

The same attitude exists in developed countries where those least able to afford to bring up children have the most, and expect others to pay!

I really am stunned when people come out with such drivel. UNICEF handouts do a wealth of good worth in a concatenation of countries around the world. UNICEF have even been known to get "days of rest" in civil conflict to allow their workers to go in, give food, inoculate children; not just against HIV but also diseases you and I are protected from automatically at birth. Such luxuries of automatic protection against diseases and other nasties aren't enjoyed by millions of others.

I'm not saying it's a perfect system, but for someone who has worked with UNICEF, seen and been involved in their work first hand, thousands, if not millions of children's lives are being saved. We can't choose where we are born and what culture we are born in to. How on Earth can you expect a country to improve if you sit back and allow a generation to be wiped out. It's a brain drain on unimaginable scale.

This is 0.1% of an argument I could have, and I don't intend on using up any of my strength on this matter. I've had to learn that there remain ignorant individuals in our society, and no matter how hard we may try, some stubbornly remain blinded from the reality and bury their heads further into the arms of the Daily Mail.

I did however receive an envelope from a charity which included a few pennies in it, I believe to encourage me to give more back. Now that is a cheek!

Sput wrote:

StuartPlymouth wrote: simply an ill-informed and biggotted spur of the moment comment.

Just your conservative heart shining through, eh?

I have been known to wear it on my sleeve!

What is it with these charities. If i'm gonna sponsor a child or dog, i don't want to correspond with them. I mean a dog sending me cards and letters with what he's been getting upto, same with the kid. I'll contribute to their upkeep and education but please don't expect me to become a pen pal.

The magic of sponsering is doing all the good stuff with out the aggro of having kids for real.

miss hellfire wrote:What is it with these charities. If i'm gonna sponsor a child or dog, i don't want to correspond with them. I mean a dog sending me cards and letters with what he's been getting upto, same with the kid. I'll contribute to their upkeep and education but please don't expect me to become a pen pal.

The magic of sponsering is doing all the good stuff with out the aggro of having kids for real.

I'm just surprised they've not managed to capitalise on a dog that can write! It should be a millionaire by now!

I don't agree with child sponsoring because it's human interest charity - most people probably only do it for the grateful letters back. I feel sponsoring one child is irresponsible (and breeds inequality). General charity is superior - i.e. giving to build infrastructure in these regions.

(Actually, the way I give to charity is by using my coin sorter machine - I empty my change into it at the end of every day when the 1p and 2p tubes fill up they are all donated. It's a very painless way to do it, especially since spending them at shops is a bigger hassle than it's worth).

cdd wrote:(Actually, the way I give to charity is by using my coin sorter machine - I empty my change into it at the end of every day when the 1p and 2p tubes fill up they are all donated. It's a very painless way to do it, especially since spending them at shops is a bigger hassle than it's worth).

Oh no I take the cash. Its my reward for sorting my change when I get home at night.

I've never had less than £30 back. Once it was over £90.

I'm not giving all that money away.

Sput wrote:

miss hellfire wrote:What is it with these charities. If i'm gonna sponsor a child or dog, i don't want to correspond with them. I mean a dog sending me cards and letters with what he's been getting upto, same with the kid. I'll contribute to their upkeep and education but please don't expect me to become a pen pal.

The magic of sponsering is doing all the good stuff with out the aggro of having kids for real.

I'm just surprised they've not managed to capitalise on a dog that can write! It should be a millionaire by now!

Thats because dogs are dumb. Mouse likes the FT to read whille on the loo. He's also a bit of a dab hand with a qwerty keypad.