Should we need to pay charity?

Uh_huh_him · Nov 28, 2016

Goldstone1976 said:
A couple of things to consider.

Total earned income for charities in England and Wales raising £10k or more pa is a tad over £70Bn pa.

1p in the £ increases in all bands of Income Tax, or VAT, or NI each raise ~£5Bn pa.

Thus, a 14p in the £ increase in Income Tax would remove the need for charities to do any fund raising in England and Wales. If you wanted to include Scotland and NI in your scheme, you'd need to raise taxes more still. And more again if you wanted to cover tiny charities too.

Wow that is interesting. That is a colossal amount of money.

Do you happen to know the breakdown of this revenue?
Is it all from donations,or are there other revenue streams available to charities? (investments, Government grants, etc.)
I would be surprised if the bulk of this is from donations from the general public.
I assume corporate giving is the largest contributor.

Brovion · Nov 28, 2016

Sussex Nomad said:
Every year I fork out a lot of money to charity, mainly animal welfare foundations. But, as a country, should we be having to pay towards charity? Or should the state be funding it? It always seems to be the working class that pay that bit extra, on top of our taxes and VAT. Is it time that we said enough and asked the Government to actually fund charity? After all, it is our money.

Why not scrap taxes and have everything funded by charity? That way you can choose where your money goes. Personally I don't want to see my taxes funding, say, donkey sanctuaries. Other people might feel the same about the Dogs' Trust or Raystede (which my wife and I support).

DavidinSouthampton · Nov 28, 2016

The one area I really object to is the whole range of things for ex-servicemen, like the British Legion, Help for Heroes etc.

This is very definitely not because I object to the work they do - far from it. It is because I feel that if people are maimed or in any way adversely affected through something that happened while they were serving their country, the state should finance the best of care for them to make sure they can lead as normal a life as possible.

Hastings gull · Nov 28, 2016

Sussex Nomad said:
Every year I fork out a lot of money to charity, mainly animal welfare foundations. But, as a country, should we be having to pay towards charity? Or should the state be funding it? It always seems to be the working class that pay that bit extra, on top of our taxes and VAT. Is it time that we said enough and asked the Government to actually fund charity? After all, it is our money.

Where is your evidence for such a statement?

seagullsslimjim · Nov 28, 2016

And what exactly would the Government do with their 100 adopted snow leopards ?

Titanic · Nov 28, 2016

DavidinSouthampton said:
The one area I really object to is the whole range of things for ex-servicemen, like the British Legion, Help for Heroes etc.

This is very definitely not because I object to the work they do - far from it. It is because I feel that if people are maimed or in any way adversely affected through something that happened while they were serving their country, the state should finance the best of care for them to make sure they can lead as normal a life as possible.

Would you rather it was a govt department? something like social services? I think they get far better support from the charity organisations than they ever would from a govt organisation.

Would all the people who volunteer to work in the charities become employees of a govt department? I just don't see how it would deliver the same quality of personal care and attention.

Megazone · Nov 28, 2016

Guinness Boy said:
Which is precisely why I gave you the examples of Cancer Research (who, wait for it, do research in to cancer causes), the NCT (who campaign for better maternity services for all women and offer course discounts close to 100% for the poorest) and the RNLI who do loads of work on water safety awareness. Or, take your example. homelessness. Shelter are targeting safe, secure, affordable housing for EVERYONE (http://england.shelter.org.uk/our_work). By contrast you'd be helping a symptom by inviting in a homeless person for the night.

But yet there is still no charity for people who suffer from condescending personality disorder. These people need help ASAP!

Guinness Boy · Nov 28, 2016

Megazone said:
But yet there is still no charity for people who suffer from condescending personality disorder. These people need help ASAP!

Or multiple personality disorder. Those who invent a Spanish girlfriend for example.

Megazone · Nov 28, 2016

Guinness Boy said:
Or multiple personality disorder. Those who invent a Spanish girlfriend for example.

'Trapped in time syndrome' also needs a lot more attention. These people must live very boring and uneventful lives. God bless them!

Thunder Bolt · Nov 28, 2016

DavidinSouthampton said:
The one area I really object to is the whole range of things for ex-servicemen, like the British Legion, Help for Heroes etc.

This is very definitely not because I object to the work they do - far from it. It is because I feel that if people are maimed or in any way adversely affected through something that happened while they were serving their country, the state should finance the best of care for them to make sure they can lead as normal a life as possible.

To be fair, anyone who is disabled, or adversely affected, as a result of combat is awarded a war pension. The forces charities like the RBL, etc do so much more than that.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...heme/war-pension-scheme-what-you-need-to-know

rippleman · Nov 28, 2016

I agree it is ridiculous for organisations like the RNLI and Air Ambulance services to require charitable support just to survive. They are what we pay our taxes for surely?

I contribute to nearly every cause at the Amex but did find myself thinking when it came to the recent REMF minibus that if the players and top executives at the club gave up just 5% of their pay for a week REMF could have had their minibus in a week! As someone pointed out earlier in the thread it does tend to be those who have the least who contribute the most to charities.

Goldstone1976 · Nov 28, 2016

Uh_huh_him said:
Wow that is interesting. That is a colossal amount of money.

Do you happen to know the breakdown of this revenue?
Is it all from donations,or are there other revenue streams available to charities? (investments, Government grants, etc.)
I would be surprised if the bulk of this is from donations from the general public.
I assume corporate giving is the largest contributor.

~£20Bn in personal donations
~£25Bn selling stuff to the public/rent from property(not sure of this split, but last time I looked it was 70/30 selling stuff)
~£8Bn grants
~£8Bn corporate donations
~£6Bn investment income (I excluded capital gains)
~£4Bn Others

seagullhoop · Nov 28, 2016

Quite a few people have said that the wealthy give more than the poor, which may be true, However as a proportion of income it appears there is a different perspective and it is the poor who actually give more relative to their income.

View attachment 79801

http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/poores...harity-says-study/fundraising/article/1176810

Sussex Nomad · Nov 28, 2016

Brovion said:
Why not scrap taxes and have everything funded by charity? That way you can choose where your money goes. Personally I don't want to see my taxes funding, say, donkey sanctuaries. Other people might feel the same about the Dogs' Trust or Raystede (which my wife and I support).

I actually do pay to a donkey sanctuary!!

Sussex Nomad · Nov 28, 2016

Hastings gull said:
Where is your evidence for such a statement?

Sorry, this has been asked, you need to read, or not, whatever floats yer boat.

studio150 · Nov 28, 2016

Sussex Nomad said:
Do we not pay a fair rate of tax based on our earnings?

Don't answer the question then that's your privilege but it says volumes about your inability to understand the issue

Sussex Nomad · Nov 28, 2016

Normski1989 said:
Keeping up with your ever changing story is impossible.

You want a tax hike to make it fair, yet a huge proportion of our population don't actually pay tax. That's not fair.

You want the government to fund charity work, which would require an endless supply of money. A lot more than a 5% tax increase. But then decide that the government should only fund 'vital' charity work. A few posts earlier, you clearly said 'animals over people'. So is the RSPCA more vital than cancer research or the air ambulance?

You seem to have a lovely idea but have yet to put forward one decent proposal as to how or why it should happen.

I think I have made myself perfectly clear, forgive me if I haven't. I am actually open to suggestions and have read a few very good defining emails against the idea. You will notice, because I have 'liked' the comments. At no point have I said animals above humans, I have said that that is my preference. I have not put words into anyone's mouth. I do want the state to fund critical needs yes. Is that wrong? I don't want them relying on handouts to support those needs. Is that wrong? We are. allegedly, a first world nation, but we do not treat our citizens as such. Is that wrong? I'm not trying to get into some binfest here.

Sussex Nomad · Nov 28, 2016

seagullsslimjim said:
And what exactly would the Government do with their 100 adopted snow leopards ?

I support snow leopards too!

studio150 · Nov 28, 2016

seagullhoop said:
Quite a few people have said that the wealthy give more than the poor, which may be true, However as a proportion of income it appears there is a different perspective and it is the poor who actually give more relative to their income.

View attachment 79801

http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/poores...harity-says-study/fundraising/article/1176810

But its not just giving its also volunteering where the study showed more by the wealthier.

Also if I am reading it correctly the findings only relate to a 4 week period prior to the questionnaire which would skew results towards monthly contributions as opposed to the annual amount and time given

Exile · Nov 28, 2016

seagullsslimjim said:
And what exactly would the Government do with their 100 adopted snow leopards ?

Theresa May could keep a couple on chains, like the baddy with the tiger(s) in Game of Thrones.

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Should we need to pay charity?

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Super Moderator

On his last warning

Tofu eating wokerati

On his last warning

Silly old bat

Well-known member

We Got Calde in!!

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Objective but passionate

Share this page