Christmas Baskets

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
Twas 2 weeks before Christmas
and all through my phone lines
came a flurry of calls
all asking for baskets.

**Tis Christmas Basket season again**

No matter how many calls I answer, it never ceases to amaze me how many people need to put their pride aside and admit that they can't do Christmas without some help. The commercialization of Christmas is killing low-income families.

When once just getting together as a family and a few home-made gifts was what 'important'...now XboX and Walmart have taken over.

***

So...anyone give for Christmas Baskets or volunteer for deliveries, or visit children's hospitals etc..this time of year?
 

Professur

Well-Known Member
Not if I can help it, but the missus and mum have been known to sneek stuff out.

You're dead on about the commercialization, but it's far from just a Christmas issue. Everytime I see a "poor" person buying beer, cigarettes, or with cable tv or a car, it just reinforces my decision to not give them a cent. They could make their own lives better, and choose not to. Why the hell should I diminish mine for their benefit. Give me a poor person who's trying, and not wasting .... and I'll give 'til it hurts. But I'll not give a red cent if there's a chance that it's gonna make it's way to a welfare hog.
 

chcr

Too cute for words
Professur said:
Everytime I see a "poor" person buying beer, cigarettes, or with cable tv or a car, it just reinforces my decision to not give them a cent.
Damned straight.
 

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
Professur said:
Everytime I see a "poor" person buying beer, cigarettes, or with cable tv or a car,
For many, keeping the old jalopy running is the only way to get around. Public transit ain't all it's cracked up to be. You want to find a job, you'd better be mobile.

I've seen my share of welfare cheaters...but discounting all of them for the faults of a few. :shrug: I delivered a few baskets last year. All the ones I delivered to and most, if not all, of those who were delivered by those I knew needed it.

There are also plenty out there who decide not to swallow their pride and have themselves a pretty fuckin' lousy Christmas.

If you can't be bothered being generous at Christmas. :shrug:

About two thousand years ago, in the town of Nazareth, there lived a young woman named Mary. She was engaged to be married to Joseph, a carpenter. One day an angel appeared before her and told her she had been chosen to have a special baby. The baby would be God's son and she must call him Jesus.

Soon after the angel's visit, Mary and Joseph were married. Mary was due to have her baby when they were told they had to go on a long journey to Bethlehem, which was where Joseph came from.This was because they had to pay a special tax. Mary had to ride on a donkey for a few days over the hills of Gallilee.

At last Mary and Joseph arrived in Bethlehem. It was crowded with other people who needed to pay their taxes. Mary was very tired and needed a place to stay. At each inn, the story was the same. There was no room for them. Eventually, one kind innkeeper said he had a stable where he kept his animals. They were welcome to stay there.
Charity for those in need.
 

Professur

Well-Known Member
One more time for those not paying attention. I'll happily give, to any group that makes sure they don't feed welfare hogs. The simple fact is that most of the people I'd willingly give to are those you mention that don't request baskets in the first place. So where does that leave us?
 

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
Professur said:
One more time for those not paying attention. I'll happily give, to any group that makes sure they don't feed welfare hogs. The simple fact is that most of the people I'd willingly give to are those you mention that don't request baskets in the first place. So where does that leave us?
Trust that those putting out the Christmas Baskets are doing their best to weed out the welfare hogs and give.

I can't guarantee any of the others, but the one that I'm working with is fairly well organized, linked with several other groups such as Sun Youth and company and check as much as possible that those who need, get ...and those who try and take what they don't need...get caught early.

A shared list of who's getting from whom and why.

As for the conundrum...giving so that if any of those who wouldn't call or wait until the last minute but eventually call, have a basket left over for them.

The only other thing that I can think of is to go through the leg-work to find your own needy people and help them out as you can.
 

Professur

Well-Known Member
Your first point. Not good enough. I know they try their best. But my money, my rules.

Your last point. I do, as I can. I'm a little less able now that I'm locked in an office, but during my road days, I'd take an honest homeless for lunch now and then. Not one of those punks with 12 tatoos, a pierced nose and purple hair, of course.

The rest is mish-mash. Maybe it's improved over the years ..... but not to any point that convinces me to cough up.
 

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
Professur said:
Your first point. Not good enough. I know they try their best. But my money, my rules.
Well, that leaves you with two options then.
a) Help them make their system more efficient
b) Don't give and don't complain.

How effective would be effective enough anyway? 80% 90%?
 

Professur

Well-Known Member
MrBishop said:
Well, that leaves you with two options then.
a) Help them make their system more efficient
b) Don't give and don't complain.

How effective would be effective enough anyway? 80% 90%?


a)I don't actually care wether they work or not. They want something from me, not the other way around
b) don't want to hear complaints? don't ask anymore.

100%. I believe I've already said that a time or twelve.
 

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
Professur said:
100%. I believe I've already said that a time or twelve.
So...you'll never give...cause the odds of any organization, company or GVT getting anything close to 100% is somewhere close to : 1 googleplex:1
 

Professur

Well-Known Member
That's their problem, isn't it?

And no, that's not true at all. Only the mega organisations have trouble like that. My church can organize to give to it's parishoners. The minister can know each and ever receipient. Then, I know it's 100%. Then, I give.

That's not too hard to understand, is it?
 

Professur

Well-Known Member
Agency concocts phoney story to get donations

By PAM EASTON




HOUSTON (AP) - It was a heart-wrenching story: A 10-year-old boy named John, separated from his mother since the hurricane, was living with other foster children in an emergency shelter, and he had one Christmas wish - to go home.

"But there's no way I'll get gifts for Christmas. I don't even believe in Santa anymore," he was quoted as saying. The Brazosport Facts ran the profile on its front page Nov. 29 as part of its Fill-a-Stocking series, which features a different foster child each day from Thanksgiving through Christmas and solicits donations for a local charity to help fulfil the child's holiday wish.

But the story was a work of fiction.

State caseworkers apparently made it up to tug at readers' heartstrings.

Dan Lauck, a reporter with KHOU-TV in Houston, discovered the story was phoney after calling state officials to request an interview with the child. He believed that if the boy's story was told on television, the youngster might find his mother.

Lauck said his requests were repeatedly denied because of what he was told were privacy concerns. Eventually he was told that the boy was living with relatives. Finally, an agency spokesman told him the profile had been made up.

Caseworkers with state Child Protective Services in Brazoria County, outside Houston, were responsible for writing the profiles for the newspaper's charity drive, which has been a holiday fixture in the 19,000-circulation paper since 1982.

CPS has apologized to the paper, which immediately suspended its series and returned the $1,070 US collected so far this year from donors.

Bill Cornwell, publisher of The Facts, said the newspaper trusted the agency to present accurate stories, and believed only minor changes such as names and ages were made to protect the children's privacy. Given privacy issues related to foster children, Cornwell said there was only so much verification the newspaper could do.

CPS is investigating how it all happened, spokesman Patrick Crimmins said.

Lauck said it does not appear the CPS caseworkers had any bad intentions.

"They were just trying to tell stories that would clearly tug at the heart, capture the emotions of the readers and inspire them to give more money," the TV reporter said. "But they did it in a way that misled the public."

Bob Steele, a former TV news director who teaches ethics at the Poynter Institute, a school for journalists, said the problem could have been averted if the profiles had been done by reporters rather than caseworkers.

"The integrity of the paper is damaged, the good cause that was intended is eroded and those in need are then not served as they should be," Steele said.

Cornwell said his newspaper is now trying to determine whether previous stories were falsified, too. He said he does not understand why a caseworker would resort to fiction, since foster children's real stories are compelling enough.

Meanwhile, he said some readers are frustrated with the newspaper for cancelling the series and think The Facts abandoned the children.

"We are not going to walk away from the kids' needs monetarily," Cornwell said. But he said: "We are out to get to the bottom of the situation so people can trust what they read."

source
 

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
...another excuse for not giving?

Show me how what this person did makes the kids they were raising funds for any less deserving.
 

Professur

Well-Known Member
MrBishop said:
...another excuse for not giving?

Show me how what this person did makes the kids they were raising funds for any less deserving.


Ah, Bish. Once again, you clearly show the difference in the mental process between conservative and liberal. You look at it as needing an excuse or reason to NOT do something. I want a reason FOR doing it.

But the article was neither. The article was to show that even state run agencies aren't to by unilaterally trusted. And that was my point, and my stand from the very top of this thread.



But, rather than just cut you off, let's look at something you said. I invite you to expand on it.

Show me how what this person did makes the kids they were raising funds for any less deserving.

Explain this to me, if you will. Explain how some kid that I don't even know is deserving of the fruits of my labour.
 

Gato_Solo

Out-freaking-standing OTC member
You know...when I was young, and I needed some scratch, I did odd-jobs for folks in the neighborhood. Mowing lawns in the summer, raking leaves in the fall, shoveling snow in the winter, etc. I did those things because my father, bless his heart, always told me stories for every dollar he gave me about hard work being a reward in itself. I'm sure you've heard the stories about walking to school in knee-deep snow in -5000F weather while fighting off polar bears with a loose-leaf binder. Most kids don't get those stories (which is a good thing), and their parents just cave in to every demand (which is a bad thing). We have poor who are unable to work, poor who are unwilling to work, poor who work but don't want to advance, poor who are only poor because of bad finances, etc, etc, etc. I do what I can for those who I named first, but the rest can get stuffed. They chose wrong, and they should do what they can for themselves before even thinking about asking for help. Want to get ahead? Drop that crack, put down that bottle, cut up those credit cards, and stop thinking about what you don't have. I refuse to help anyone who gave up because they gave up.
 

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
Professur said:
Explain this to me, if you will. Explain how some kid that I don't even know is deserving of the fruits of my labour.
Prof said:
My church can organize to give to it's parishoners. The minister can know each and ever receipient. Then, I know it's 100%. Then, I give.
Why would these people deserve the fruits of your labour? The minister knows who gets the stuff...you don't (unless the minister breaks privacy). You may never have met them at all...but they deserve it. Why/ because you think that you know them? He may be giving outside of the parish-list. To another church. To a neighbour.

By your rules...unless you personally know who's getting your charity, and you know that they have no other choice and aren't fooling with the system, you don't give.

Why not just say "I don't give to charity" and leave it at that.
 

Professur

Well-Known Member
MrBishop said:
It's my money..mine!

Me, me, me!

:rofl2:

As opposed to .....?


And perhaps you should go back and reread my posts, but this time let the little voice in your head sound like me instead of you .... just for a change. I trust my minister to spend well the money I entrust to him. I trust his judgement in matters. I don't need to trust the hand that receives ... when I trust the hand that gives. But then, we've seen your definition of trust in the trust thread, didn't we.

And for the record. The people who receive from my minister are all people who've done, or do now, work for my parish. They deserve it .... because they've earned it through their actions. I asked you to show why your "deserving kid" deserves anything from my pocket. I notice that you chose to attack my statements instead of posting a single example. Thank you from proving my point so eloquently.
 
Top