"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Actually the AMA is run by doctors and the AARP is run by retired people.


Dave wrote:
And the tooth fairy comes to replace a kid's tooth under the pillow with
money.


So, having MD after the name just means the guy likes the sound of it,
right?


A number of years ago, I represented an association manager. She ran I
don't
know how many associations, most of them created by her, made good money
at
it, and had a great kitty, funded by dues, to push what she wanted in a
whole variety of newsletters of the various associations. It was an
enlightening experience.

And it doesn't apply across the board to every single association.

DSK


Doug you should see what those companies that collect for charities pull in.
85% of the solicited gifts to the charity is not uncommon.

Gilligan wrote:
Doug you should see what those companies that collect for charities pull in.
85% of the solicited gifts to the charity is not uncommon.


Yes, I know. Sometimes more.

But that certainly does not mean that all charities are
cynical, crooked shills. It just means that if you want your
money to go towards a good cause, you have to be interested
enough to find out which charities are actually *doing*
something.

Many charities spend large sums on lobbying. Is Congress a
poverty case now? I don't give money to those charities,
either (the Sierra Club for example.

DSK

"Gilligan" wrote in message
. ..

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Actually the AMA is run by doctors and the AARP is run by retired
people.


Dave wrote:
And the tooth fairy comes to replace a kid's tooth under the pillow with
money.


So, having MD after the name just means the guy likes the sound of it,
right?


A number of years ago, I represented an association manager. She ran I
don't
know how many associations, most of them created by her, made good money
at
it, and had a great kitty, funded by dues, to push what she wanted in a
whole variety of newsletters of the various associations. It was an
enlightening experience.

And it doesn't apply across the board to every single association.

DSK


Doug you should see what those companies that collect for charities pull
in. 85% of the solicited gifts to the charity is not uncommon.

It's practically the rule rather than the exception. The United Way has
such a deplorable pass-through rate (that amount that makes it to the
targeted end-users) as to be a joke. At times it's been less than 10%.

Max

Maxprop wrote:


It's practically the rule rather than the exception. The United Way has
such a deplorable pass-through rate (that amount that makes it to the
targeted end-users) as to be a joke. At times it's been less than 10%.

Perhaps this just a US problem,
http://www1.unitedway.ca/sites/Porta...orm.aspx?ID=20 ,

Or did you you just make up that 10% figure?

Cheers
Marty

"Martin Baxter" wrote in message
...
Maxprop wrote:


It's practically the rule rather than the exception. The United Way has
such a deplorable pass-through rate (that amount that makes it to the
targeted end-users) as to be a joke. At times it's been less than 10%.

Perhaps this just a US problem,
http://www1.unitedway.ca/sites/Porta...orm.aspx?ID=20 ,

Or did you you just make up that 10% figure?

First: The Canadian rule that 80% must be spent on the target charities
does not take into account the amount of money those individual charities
extract before funding the endpoint users.

Second: This is the USA, not Canada, and we have no such law that I'm aware
of. Rather we have, at times, had Congressional oversight on charitable
giving and expenses. This sometimes results in improvements in the
pass-through rate, but when Congress' back is turned the old ways likely
resume. Last figures I saw on the United Way is that about 70% of their
monies are passed through to individual charities, but only about 70% of
those monies are passed through to the endpoints. That makes the United Way
ultimately about 50% efficient. I suspect your United Way is somewhat more
efficient in the ultimate pass-through rate.

Third: The 10% figure was accurate for the mid to late Seventies. Thanks
to a Congressional investigation in the early 80s, the situation has
improved.

Fourth: Why would I make something like that up?

Max

Maxprop wrote:


All reasonable points Max, I don't give to the United Way, simply
because I don't believe in all of their causes, the YM/YWCA is one that
comes to mind.





Fourth: Why would I make something like that up?

Good point, one liar in the group is enough. ;-o

Cheers
Marty


Max