Say what? Are you serious? Of course, under the broadest of definitions, ANY non-profit "can always use money" -- wow! what a passive way of still-saying- something-technically-correct-but-for-your-argument-to-work-you-REALLY-mean-NEED-the-$-elsewise-your-argument-falls-flat-'cause-you-don't-want-to-REALLY-come-out-and-say-something-stupid-like-the-LDS Church-NEEDS-$.
(Try again)
I’ll try to make the argument more clear.
Suppose I have a thousand people ready to go on a relief mission, and I have the means to deliver those thousand people.
Suppose you have a thousand people ready to go, and the means to deliver those people.
There would be no value in us trying to organize together, adding a layer of complexity — we are both perfectly capable of doing the relief work.
Now, suppose a 3rd group has money. Both your group and my group would benefit from hooking up with the group with money, because we could use the money to pay for our relief, to buy extra supplies, to pay for transportation.
So, by “organization” I mean the ability to put boots on the ground, and an organized structure that can efficiently do so.
IR-USA has suppplies to be delivered, and the LDS has the means to deliver them. SArmy has the means to deliver things, they don’t need to hook up with LDS, it would be redundant.
Without an organization to hook up with, IR-USA supplies would sit in warehouses, not get to people who can use them.
By “use” I didn’t mean in the sense that “I could sure use some money”, but in the sense that “they can put the money (and the supplies purchased by that money) to good use quickly and efficiently.
I hope this explains the point.
BTW, I imagine that the LDS relief work requires money, and that they don’t have an infinite supply of it. After all, they aren’t the federal government, they can’t just print it up. :-)