Samaritan’s Purse is more reputable and trustworthy, IMHO.
When the Red Cross agreed to hide its logo when aiding Muslims - that was the end of them, as far as I was concerned.
Your money is just as likely to go for supplies for terrorists somewhere as for our neighbors in the US.
And they will tell you that donations cannot be "earmarked" for any particular purpose. Oh, sure, they will raise money off of a local disaster, but you give them money and they will spend it based on their own agenda, their own priorities. Red Crescent, for instance.
Christians giving through their churches, going directly to Christian churches in affected areas would be the most direct and honest venue, IMO. Our church loaded up trucks and drove them to other churches, who distributed needed supplies. NO overhead needed.
I would never give money to the Red Cross. You’d be lucky if 2% of it went to the right place.
One group of honest helpers, who use the money well, is the Salvation Army.
I thought when you gave to the Red Cross they used the money for whatever they damn well pleased and there was no guarantee they would use it for the disaster at hand. Maybe they changed that policy.... but I still think they are all about the money and less about the helping.
I seem to recall that this issue arose in a previous but similar situation where the Red Cross was providing disaster relief and asking for donations.
Their response was that money donated when they ask for donations is not earmarked for that specific disaster relief effort.
Basically their position was that money is fungible.
People may be motivated to donate to the Red Cross when they see photos of disaster victims but that doesn’t mean their donations will be dedicated by the Red Cross to that specific disaster.
I never give to national or inter-national charities anymore. Its not that I stopped giving. I just don’t trust those guys. If I don’t know exactly where the money is going, I am not giving.
The reason I stopped trusting large charities is because I live in a wealthy suburb and I belong to executive business clubs. Everyone there is wealthy. But there are lots of people who live near me and go to these clubs in very expensive cars. The presidents of many of the top charities are pulling down million dollar salaries, living in multi-million dollar houses. My money is not adding to their salary. And I think universities are the same. I don’t give to them either.
I had two uncles in the Battle of the Bulge and they would tell (both are gone now) how the Red Cross would charge the soldiers for coffee and doughnuts when they came off the line.
Our property in Harbison Canyon burned. Churches and the Salvation Army were there with us. We had many private citizens just drive up with donations, food or offers to help. You had to go find the red cross and make an appointment.
Good. The armed Cross is a fraudulent money gathering scheme
Give to Samaritans Purse or JJ Watt or Salvation Army
Red Cross starts providing relief BEFORE one penny is raised. Things like: pre-positioning trucks, fuel supplies, food, hot meals. There are thousands of local disasters, those that affect folks right in your town that benefit from Red Cross services, for which ZERO is raised.
“Disaster Relief” is a big bucket.
And YES, they can and do accept targeted donations, for existing funds. “US Disaster Relief” or something else. You can’t give money to Red Cross for “John Smith & Family” unless that is for a unique and targeted relief effort. The Smith Family house burns down and local efforts are underway. The Smith Family Fire fund is created and money flows to that for relief efforts.
Targeted donations for major disasters are in bigger fund buckets. So “Hurricane X” or “Flood Y”.
Red Cross has problems, and some public relations issues no doubt.
Top heavy at HQ. Re-alignment of blood services after 911. The whole paying for donuts thing. Red Cross/Red Crescent/Magen David Adom etc . . .
“But the Red Cross is a Christian symbol” (no it isn’t, it’s a Swiss flag cross with even arms, not a crucifix) Israel has a Red “star of david” and Islam has the Red Crescent is response to this issue.
What they DON”T do is raise money for individuals. They provide immediate help so folks can get up and running again. Pay for hotel/motel rooms until more appropriate housing can be found. Clothes to go to work and school, furnishings like beds and dressers. Rental assistance like deposits and first months rent. Most of the help comes through vouchers to be used at local businesses (Helps to energize a local economy by increasing the velocity of the local money supply).
One of the things that lots of folks in disasters really appreciate is a little spending money. $10 for a pack of cigarettes, or a box of tampons, or a birthday cake. They don’t get that from Red Cross. Local Disaster Volunteers often give a few dollars of their own money.
Red Cross works out arrangements in advance with local providers to accept non-cash vouchers from People, to be paid from Red Cross funds. Good faith and lots of tracking on both sides.
Like many things, it’s not all bad. there are some Red Cross Chapters that are terrible. Then, there are some that help put people’s lives back together.
If your local Red Cross is a mess, join and help fix it.
Kick out the old guard and re-invigorate it. Put it on a better path.
It can be done.
I know, we’ve done it.
Never thought much of them. Heads are waaaaaay overpaid. And after the cr** they pulled on 9-11....they’ll never get a dime from me.
When money gets big
People get hurt.
Samaritan’s Purse, Texas Baptist Men, Salvation Army, et al. are MUCH better organizations than the Red Cross. More money goes where the donors intended it to go!
Salvation Army and USO are the two I contribute to. Samaritan’s Purse is another good one.
Never to the Red Cross. Remember the controversy after 9/11? They collected about $1 BILLION but were caught only distributing about $150 million.
Red Cross apologise for losing $5m of Ebola funds to fraud
BBC ^ | 11/3/17
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-41861552