Is it charity?

Is it charity? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

HunterCA -> Is it charity? (5/4/2015 10:00:41 AM)
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/04/30/is-the-clinton-foundation-really-a-charity/ According to this article/author, is this a charity to you?

tj444 -> RE: Is it charity? (5/4/2015 10:17:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/04/30/is-the-clinton-foundation-really-a-charity/ I think there are few charities/non-profits that are really a charity, say the word "charity" today and more and more people hear the word "scam".. Unfortunately few people do any in-depth research on the charities they give to..

HunterCA -> RE: Is it charity? (5/4/2015 10:26:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/04/30/is-the-clinton-foundation-really-a-charity/ I think there are few charities/non-profits that are really a charity, say the word "charity" today and more and more people hear the word "scam".. Unfortunately few people do any in-depth research on the charities they give to.. My question was, is this a scam, not your general charity. Deflecting the question to generality doesn't respond specifically.

HunterCA -> RE: Is it charity? (5/4/2015 10:28:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/04/30/is-the-clinton-foundation-really-a-charity/ I think there are few charities/non-profits that are really a charity, say the word "charity" today and more and more people hear the word "scam".. Unfortunately few people do any in-depth research on the charities they give to.. My question was, is this a scam, not your general charity. Deflecting the question to generality doesn't respond specifically. Opps, I apologize. I left off the question and your response was totally reasonable in that regard. Ed: question now added to first post.

tj444 -> RE: Is it charity? (5/4/2015 11:02:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/04/30/is-the-clinton-foundation-really-a-charity/ I think there are few charities/non-profits that are really a charity, say the word "charity" today and more and more people hear the word "scam".. Unfortunately few people do any in-depth research on the charities they give to.. My question was, is this a scam, not your general charity. Deflecting the question to generality doesn't respond specifically. Opps, I apologize. I left off the question and your response was totally reasonable in that regard. Ed: question now added to first post. to me, no its not a charity.. but then i am anti-Hillary and think she/the Clintons are just as bad/crooked as all the other politicians.. and charities that do "work" or give money outside the US are super-scams, imo.. here is another one.. *"HSUS Has Quietly Sent $26 Million to the Caribbean"* http://www.humanewatch.org/hsus-has-quietly-sent-26-million-to-the-caribbean/

MistressDREAD -> RE: Is it charity? (5/4/2015 12:06:35 PM)
quote: RE: Is it charity? Greetings Thread. The short answer would be, NO. But to expand a bit and give an insight into the difference from a foundation and a charity I am providing a bit of information below. This data is easier to get from a private foundation, which must disclose all grantees and grant amounts in its IRS Form 990-PF. However, a grant making public charity isn't subject to this disclosure requirement, so access to its grants data will depend on how much the funder is willing to share with the public, via its Form 990, website, or other communication channels. If a grant making public charity doesn't provide a grants list in its Form 990, explore its website or search the Internet for the funder's name to find any related news or press releases, some of which may be about grants that it made. A word about "foundation" Don't assume that an organization with "foundation" in its name is a grant maker. (Example: Foundation Center.) The word "foundation" has no legal definition unlike a charity that has many rigid rules and regulations. What is the difference between a private foundation and a public charity? Private foundations Foundation Center defines a private foundation as a nongovernmental, nonprofit organization having a principal fund managed by its own trustees or directors. Private foundations maintain or aid charitable, educational, religious, or other activities serving the public good, primarily through the making of grants to other nonprofit organizations. Every U.S. and foreign foundation that qualifies under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Service Code as tax-exempt is a "private foundation" unless it demonstrates to the IRS that it has met the public support test. Broadly speaking, organizations that are not private foundations are public charities as described in the Internal Revenue Service Code. Public charities Public charities generally derive their funding or support primarily from the general public, receiving grants from individuals, government, and private foundations. Although some public charities engage in grant making activities, most conduct direct service or other tax-exempt activities. A private foundation, on the other hand, usually derives its principal fund from a single source, such as an individual, family, or corporation, and more often than not is a grant maker. A private foundation does not solicit funds from the public. Why should grant seekers know the difference? Examining a funder's giving history is an important part of researching foundation prospects. Past grants can reveal the funder's preferred subjects, organization types, and ranges of grant amounts.

MercTech -> RE: Is it charity? (5/4/2015 2:04:13 PM)
It is a tax deduction for the uber wealthy and crooked.

Lucylastic -> RE: Is it charity? (5/4/2015 7:38:48 PM)
Given that the "clinton cash" expose flopped like a bunch of floppy things flopping sadly, I would say its a bogus question, but for the record, no I dont think its a charity..... But the right wont be happy until they know what colour jockstrap the janitor wears in the damn headquarters. the irony is increasingly amusing

CreativeDominant -> RE: Is it charity? (5/4/2015 8:15:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Given that the "clinton cash" expose flopped like a bunch of floppy things flopping sadly, I would say its a bogus question, but for the record, no I dont think its a charity..... But the right wont be happy until they know what colour jockstrap the janitor wears in the damn headquarters. the irony is increasingly amusing Why? Because they want to know how much of the Clinton's foundation..if it is a charity...actually gives to charity. Sites like Charity Navigator are very helpful in showing you what percentage of your giving goes to support the mission of the nonprofit, as opposed to administrative expenses. Some nonprofits may have quite a bit of overhead, but according to the charity ratings site, if they are spending more than 33.3% of their total budget on overhead, the organization is simply not meeting its mission. http://charity.lovetoknow.com/What_Percentage_of_Donations_Go_to_Charity That would mean the Clinton Foundation is not meeting their mission as only 10% went towards charitable grants in 2013. http://thefederalist.com/2015/04/27/in-2013-the-clinton-foundation-only-spent-10-percent-of-its-budget-on-charitable-grants/ Of course, there are other groups that dont do well on overhead either: The following charities spend at least 30 cents or more for every donated dollar on things like overhead, administrative costs, and fundraising. George Bush Presidential Library Foundation Alzheimer's Foundation of America The Cable Center Jewish Guild for the Blind American Printing House for the Blind http://charity.lovetoknow.com/What_Percentage_of_Donations_Go_to_Charity Of course that means they're still spending 60 - 70 percent...versus 10...on their cause.

slvemike4u -> RE: Is it charity? (5/4/2015 8:48:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Given that the "clinton cash" expose flopped like a bunch of floppy things flopping sadly, I would say its a bogus question, but for the record, no I dont think its a charity..... But the right wont be happy until they know what colour jockstrap the janitor wears in the damn headquarters. the irony is increasingly amusing Why? Because they want to know how much of the Clinton's foundation..if it is a charity...actually gives to charity. Sites like Charity Navigator are very helpful in showing you what percentage of your giving goes to support the mission of the nonprofit, as opposed to administrative expenses. Some nonprofits may have quite a bit of overhead, but according to the charity ratings site, if they are spending more than 33.3% of their total budget on overhead, the organization is simply not meeting its mission. http://charity.lovetoknow.com/What_Percentage_of_Donations_Go_to_Charity That would mean the Clinton Foundation is not meeting their mission as only 10% went towards charitable grants in 2013. http://thefederalist.com/2015/04/27/in-2013-the-clinton-foundation-only-spent-10-percent-of-its-budget-on-charitable-grants/ Of course, there are other groups that dont do well on overhead either: The following charities spend at least 30 cents or more for every donated dollar on things like overhead, administrative costs, and fundraising. George Bush Presidential Library Foundation Alzheimer's Foundation of America The Cable Center Jewish Guild for the Blind American Printing House for the Blind http://charity.lovetoknow.com/What_Percentage_of_Donations_Go_to_Charity Of course that means they're still spending 60 - 70 percent...versus 10...on their cause. So don't donate.....try the United Way if you prefer

joether -> RE: Is it charity? (5/4/2015 9:26:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/04/30/is-the-clinton-foundation-really-a-charity/ According to this article/author, is this a charity to you? You want to cut down the Clintons? Fine, I'll cut down the Koch brother's 'charity and research groups'. Who do you think has more corruption and 'money laundering operations' in use right now? A good source I agree in the viewpoint that every organization, be it liberal, moderate, or conservative is properly investigated. That the information is known and the acounting of every dollar solid and verifiable. Right now, there are many more conservative groups that masquerade as something innocent and honest, when they are not. You agree that these too should all be properly investigated just like the Clinton Foundation? An those that are found guilty of lying to the public are dissolved and removed; possibly charging its owners for fraud if its really bad.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Is it charity? (5/4/2015 9:27:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Given that the "clinton cash" expose flopped like a bunch of floppy things flopping sadly, I would say its a bogus question, but for the record, no I dont think its a charity..... But the right wont be happy until they know what colour jockstrap the janitor wears in the damn headquarters. the irony is increasingly amusing Why? Because they want to know how much of the Clinton's foundation..if it is a charity...actually gives to charity. Sites like Charity Navigator are very helpful in showing you what percentage of your giving goes to support the mission of the nonprofit, as opposed to administrative expenses. Some nonprofits may have quite a bit of overhead, but according to the charity ratings site, if they are spending more than 33.3% of their total budget on overhead, the organization is simply not meeting its mission. http://charity.lovetoknow.com/What_Percentage_of_Donations_Go_to_Charity That would mean the Clinton Foundation is not meeting their mission as only 10% went towards charitable grants in 2013. http://thefederalist.com/2015/04/27/in-2013-the-clinton-foundation-only-spent-10-percent-of-its-budget-on-charitable-grants/ Of course, there are other groups that dont do well on overhead either: The following charities spend at least 30 cents or more for every donated dollar on things like overhead, administrative costs, and fundraising. George Bush Presidential Library Foundation Alzheimer's Foundation of America The Cable Center Jewish Guild for the Blind American Printing House for the Blind http://charity.lovetoknow.com/What_Percentage_of_Donations_Go_to_Charity Of course that means they're still spending 60 - 70 percent...versus 10...on their cause. So don't donate.....try the United Way if you prefer Actually, I give to M.S....sister-in-law...and Diabetes...daughter, mother, aunt. Time I give to Battered Women's and Children's shelters.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Is it charity? (5/4/2015 11:09:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/04/30/is-the-clinton-foundation-really-a-charity/ According to this article/author, is this a charity to you? You want to cut down the Clintons? Fine, I'll cut down the Koch brother's 'charity and research groups'. Who do you think has more corruption and 'money laundering operations' in use right now? A good source I agree in the viewpoint that every organization, be it liberal, moderate, or conservative is properly investigated. That the information is known and the acounting of every dollar solid and verifiable. Right now, there are many more conservative groups that masquerade as something innocent and honest, when they are not. You agree that these too should all be properly investigated just like the Clinton Foundation? An those that are found guilty of lying to the public are dissolved and removed; possibly charging its owners for fraud if its really bad. If they're claiming to be charities and giving only 10% to charitable causes, yes...they do.

thishereboi -> RE: Is it charity? (5/5/2015 10:02:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/04/30/is-the-clinton-foundation-really-a-charity/ According to this article/author, is this a charity to you? You want to cut down the Clintons? Fine, I'll cut down the Koch brother's 'charity and research groups'. Who do you think has more corruption and 'money laundering operations' in use right now? A good source I agree in the viewpoint that every organization, be it liberal, moderate, or conservative is properly investigated. That the information is known and the acounting of every dollar solid and verifiable. Right now, there are many more conservative groups that masquerade as something innocent and honest, when they are not. You agree that these too should all be properly investigated just like the Clinton Foundation? An those that are found guilty of lying to the public are dissolved and removed; possibly charging its owners for fraud if its really bad. If they're claiming to be charities and giving only 10% to charitable causes, yes...they do. With all the guidelines floating around it seems pretty easy to determine if it's a charity or not. As your post already showed But it is amusing to watch some of the posters getting so worked up because someone implied something bad about one of their own. I guess anything is ok as long as someone on the right did it too.

HunterCA -> RE: Is it charity? (5/5/2015 8:14:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Given that the "clinton cash" expose flopped like a bunch of floppy things flopping sadly, I would say its a bogus question, but for the record, no I dont think its a charity..... But the right wont be happy until they know what colour jockstrap the janitor wears in the damn headquarters. the irony is increasingly amusing Actually, I'm curious why you'll vote for her regardless of facts. I'm fascinated by that. In previous posts Martin O'Malley was described, by a liberal, as a racist and someone they'd vote for if he's the democratic nominee. I'm trying to understand why you'll vote for a corrupt racist.

HunterCA -> RE: Is it charity? (5/5/2015 8:16:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Given that the "clinton cash" expose flopped like a bunch of floppy things flopping sadly, I would say its a bogus question, but for the record, no I dont think its a charity..... But the right wont be happy until they know what colour jockstrap the janitor wears in the damn headquarters. the irony is increasingly amusing Why? Because they want to know how much of the Clinton's foundation..if it is a charity...actually gives to charity. Sites like Charity Navigator are very helpful in showing you what percentage of your giving goes to support the mission of the nonprofit, as opposed to administrative expenses. Some nonprofits may have quite a bit of overhead, but according to the charity ratings site, if they are spending more than 33.3% of their total budget on overhead, the organization is simply not meeting its mission. http://charity.lovetoknow.com/What_Percentage_of_Donations_Go_to_Charity That would mean the Clinton Foundation is not meeting their mission as only 10% went towards charitable grants in 2013. http://thefederalist.com/2015/04/27/in-2013-the-clinton-foundation-only-spent-10-percent-of-its-budget-on-charitable-grants/ Of course, there are other groups that dont do well on overhead either: The following charities spend at least 30 cents or more for every donated dollar on things like overhead, administrative costs, and fundraising. George Bush Presidential Library Foundation Alzheimer's Foundation of America The Cable Center Jewish Guild for the Blind American Printing House for the Blind http://charity.lovetoknow.com/What_Percentage_of_Donations_Go_to_Charity Of course that means they're still spending 60 - 70 percent...versus 10...on their cause. So don't donate.....try the United Way if you prefer I don't give to the United Way since they excluded giving to the Boy Scouts.

HunterCA -> RE: Is it charity? (5/5/2015 8:18:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/04/30/is-the-clinton-foundation-really-a-charity/ According to this article/author, is this a charity to you? You want to cut down the Clintons? Fine, I'll cut down the Koch brother's 'charity and research groups'. Who do you think has more corruption and 'money laundering operations' in use right now? A good source I agree in the viewpoint that every organization, be it liberal, moderate, or conservative is properly investigated. That the information is known and the acounting of every dollar solid and verifiable. Right now, there are many more conservative groups that masquerade as something innocent and honest, when they are not. You agree that these too should all be properly investigated just like the Clinton Foundation? An those that are found guilty of lying to the public are dissolved and removed; possibly charging its owners for fraud if its really bad. So you stipulate that they're corrupt and laundering money? Are you going to vote for Hillary anyway?

joether -> RE: Is it charity? (5/6/2015 2:45:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/04/30/is-the-clinton-foundation-really-a-charity/ According to this article/author, is this a charity to you? You want to cut down the Clintons? Fine, I'll cut down the Koch brother's 'charity and research groups'. Who do you think has more corruption and 'money laundering operations' in use right now? A good source I agree in the viewpoint that every organization, be it liberal, moderate, or conservative is properly investigated. That the information is known and the acounting of every dollar solid and verifiable. Right now, there are many more conservative groups that masquerade as something innocent and honest, when they are not. You agree that these too should all be properly investigated just like the Clinton Foundation? An those that are found guilty of lying to the public are dissolved and removed; possibly charging its owners for fraud if its really bad. If they're claiming to be charities and giving only 10% to charitable causes, yes...they do. With all the guidelines floating around it seems pretty easy to determine if it's a charity or not. As your post already showed But it is amusing to watch some of the posters getting so worked up because someone implied something bad about one of their own. I guess anything is ok as long as someone on the right did it too. Usually pushed by people that leap at stuff due to LACK OF EVIDENCE. Like Benghazi? Or any of the other issues that have plagued the Clintons over the years. That if some issue were to come up, folks like you, leap at the chance to attack the Clinton. The evidence and facts be damn! Haven't see a thread started by you stating your sorry for attacking the Clintons over Benghazi yet.... What is madding to conservatives and libertarians is they dont have one half decent candidate whom is a serious challenge to Hillary right now. All of them have bags of baggage. That they are joining the Clown Car should say to conservatives and libertarians that this new candidate is not a serious person for the job. They their problems are numerous and destructive. We already had one of them in the White House; his name was George W. Bush. Hillary is the next President. You want a decent shot at the White House? Start planning for 2024......

joether -> RE: Is it charity? (5/6/2015 3:02:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/04/30/is-the-clinton-foundation-really-a-charity/ According to this article/author, is this a charity to you? You want to cut down the Clintons? Fine, I'll cut down the Koch brother's 'charity and research groups'. Who do you think has more corruption and 'money laundering operations' in use right now? A good source I agree in the viewpoint that every organization, be it liberal, moderate, or conservative is properly investigated. That the information is known and the acounting of every dollar solid and verifiable. Right now, there are many more conservative groups that masquerade as something innocent and honest, when they are not. You agree that these too should all be properly investigated just like the Clinton Foundation? An those that are found guilty of lying to the public are dissolved and removed; possibly charging its owners for fraud if its really bad. So you stipulate that they're corrupt and laundering money? Are you going to vote for Hillary anyway? I stipulate that if....ANYONE....in America could create a system of shifting money around quickly and quietly with so many 'dummy' organizations, its the Koch brothers. That they an organization that is listed in fifty difference names; but all of them operate the same exact way. The names change often, but the infrastructure does not change. If those two were honest with their political viewpoints; why all the 'fly-by-night' operations? Why do these organizations change in name? Why all the money being shifted around so often? It really feels unscrupulous and dishonest. So far the list of conservative and libertarian candidates for the job really do not impress me. Each of them have many problems, the most is just the appeal towards anyone non-conservative/libertarian-ish (like 70% of America). I disagree with many of their political views. Ben Carson is the most insane of the bunch. Rand Paul is the most 'flip flopping'. Any one of them do not have 'all their ducks in a row'. Hillary is more a man then all of them combined. She has the qualifications. She is tough as nails. Has been in the White House as a First Lady and Secretary of State. She is intelligent, educated, and mature. Yes, I disagree on some of her views here and there. I would vote for Warren in an instant; but she's not running.... Maybe a Clinton/Warren ticket?

epiphiny43 -> RE: Is it charity? (5/6/2015 3:19:51 AM)
Presidential elections are about picking the least worst. Right now Hillary is in a walk-over. Not that she is in any way my idea of what the nation and times need. Look at the opposition? An abundance of national embarrassment!* All she has to do is not trip over her own feet or have a major PR disaster. The Foundation isn't that, unless something totally novel emerges. Too many ambitious journalists have been looking for much to stay hidden? *eg, today Huckabee pointedly said the Bible out ranks the Supreme Court and has the final say on US law and social mores. (He gets to pick among the conflicting sections and interpretations??) That plays well outside the Religious Right!

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875