sdfsaf

I understand where you are coming from, but I've come to find it horrible to put judgments on a donation. Am I better than the panhandler that I know what he should receive?

What should I give a panhandler?

A sandwich? Maybe he's has celliac's. Or diabetes.

A gift card to the coffee shop? Maybe he needs gloves.

Money to buy gloves and a sugar free lunch? Maybe he's an alcoholic.

Instead, just donate. Just help. Just see the person lying on the floor as a fellow human being fully deserving in dignity. If you're Christian, see Christ sprawled on the floor and make sure your right hand doesn't see your left hand.

This article is BS, and the NP does have an editorial stance I sometimes find annoying (their anti-Trudeau stance, while understandable, is becoming pathological).

But it is not ""newspaper" filled with misleading articles and half-truths." any more than any other leading Canadian newspaper.

He doesn't it at all! He, acknowledges that this is a problem, but doesn't resolve the point -that there would be less donation- against his argument.

To do that he would either have to prove that money donations would increase in lieu of canned goods and/or that the administrative costs are higher than the value of the canned goods (which maybe true for very specialized and/or very corrupt charities, but not for your local volunteer run pantry)

I donate money, food and my wife's time (time I would otherwise enjoy for myself instead of babysitting two kids)

The food is part of my pantry management. We don't eat too many canned goods, so we regularly donate it after a few months (well before expiration). We keep canned food for, among other reasons, emergencies.

Also, we buy - and therefore donate - very high quality food. Mr. NationalPost might not taste the difference, but in our family, we do. Am I any better than the poor that I get to eat the fancy stuff?

The donation of food has an aesthetic appeal - I'm literally giving sustenance and therefore life to the less fortunate. When I donate money I give the mere possibility of sustenance. Assuming the charity is honest.

I would not donate more money if I didn't donate food. I'm not homo economicus and the increased money signal from purchasing less canned goods doesn't tug on my donation levers. I.e. I don't take partial derivatives of my (woe me, undefined!) elasticity and demand functions.

I even keep wool Costco socks in my car to give out to panhandlers in the winter. Surely the $15/pack could have been put to better use! But imagine the joy of a panhandler receiving a small package from a more fortunate.

Hopper was full of it when he posted this a few years ago. He's full of it today.

" Because you can't democratize management and organization like you can with donation of individual goods and small amounts of money."

Sure you can, by volunteering on the board of directors of said charity. Like my wife does, helping organize a charity large enough that it runs a free hospital, a dental clinic and home for otherwise homeless people in a major US city.

And they've been economically dying for almost 30 years.

A quarter? Dream on. We're living in the Midwest with an East coast salary (remote).

I have no idea how other ppl here afford kids and manage to save. We spend $30k on day care and another $12k on health premiums alone.

Yeah, in theory. In practice H1B abuse is rife. You can look at HN's previous discussion on this.