Earlier quoted context omitted.
The structure of the international red cross movement is a bit confusing. There are completely independent national societies in most countries (E.g. The American Red Cross), as well international organisations based in Geneva (The ICRC and the IFCR). In the US, the phrase "Red Cross" often is used to refer to " American Red Cross ", which is the national society who deliver blood services and local disaster response…
> They've come under some criticism for apparent lack of transparency around how donations are spent, and for allegedly having very high overheads. They are also borderline abusive with how often they will call you and harass you if you miss an opportunity to donate blood. They apparently have unlimited funds to pay phone operators.
In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)
81–90 of 182 posts
Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They've come under some criticism for apparent lack of transparency around how donations are spent, and for allegedly having very high overheads. They are also borderline abusive with how often they will call you and harass you if you miss an opportunity to donate blood. They apparently have unlimited funds to pay phone operators.
How is this possible? I simply asked to never be called again, and was called perhaps once more where I reiterated this. Then I was simply never called again.
Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)
#83"The point is that the concern we should have is not just about the $500,000,000 donated for Haiti for which the good hearted donors received just six $400 shacks. The concern is about billions of donated dollars intended to help people all over the world. The Haiti data demonstrates that for each billion donated to the Red Cross we get a total of 12 each $400 shacks which we wouldn't put our lawn mower in. The great…
I think there is a social effect, but more likely because the people working at Red Cross has better reach to the big organizations and media outlet, despite the backlashes.
The same with World Health Organization (WHO). Top officials still buy luxury first-class ticket and hotel room. Why? Whatnis wrong with an econ seat?
Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)
#84Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They've come under some criticism for apparent lack of transparency around how donations are spent, and for allegedly having very high overheads. They are also borderline abusive with how often they will call you and harass you if you miss an opportunity to donate blood. They apparently have unlimited funds to pay phone operators.
Not borderline abusive, they are straight up abusive with their phone calls. If you ever decide to give blood do NOT give them your phone number. I tried to give blood ONCE and found out that I was ineligible. For the next five years or so they harassed me non stop about giving blood. I told them I was ineligible they just said "ok" but I still got phonecalls. I asked them to stop calling me but they didn't stop. Aft…
Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)
#86Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)
#87"The point is that the concern we should have is not just about the $500,000,000 donated for Haiti for which the good hearted donors received just six $400 shacks. The concern is about billions of donated dollars intended to help people all over the world. The Haiti data demonstrates that for each billion donated to the Red Cross we get a total of 12 each $400 shacks which we wouldn't put our lawn mower in. The great…
Who?
And yes, I did look it up. It's a tiny private foundation about which almost nothing is known, and the quoted articles are basically trash talking based on a couple of news stories and saying basically "see how much better it is to give to us?" except (in theory) they don't accept donations they want people to go in person to disaster sites and help on site.
Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)
#88Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks, Trevor. Hi all, I'm the ceo and co-founder at New Story. We're proud of the work we've done in Haiti as we've also used all local material and local labor to build the homes. What's more transparent than just the "100%" promise, is that we prove to donors via family profile pages and move-in videos the exact results of their donation. If someone donated $6k on our site now, 100% of that goes towards local mat…
What's the biggest challenge your organization faces? My kneejerk reaction is: local labor!? local materials!? So inefficient! But I'm wrong. You're doing exactly what's needed; bootstrapping skills and contributing towards the local economy. I'm curious how much housing is still needed in Haiti, how much more money into the pipeline would fix the problem, etc. Would you be able to scale beyond Haiti? Sorry to ramble…
Re: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500M In Haiti Relief (2015)
#90"The point is that the concern we should have is not just about the $500,000,000 donated for Haiti for which the good hearted donors received just six $400 shacks. The concern is about billions of donated dollars intended to help people all over the world. The Haiti data demonstrates that for each billion donated to the Red Cross we get a total of 12 each $400 shacks which we wouldn't put our lawn mower in. The great…
Text ##### to donate $5 to GiveWell, which will channel your funds to the charity measurably best equipped to alleviate human suffering like (but not exactly like) the suffering caused by this disaster.
On the other hand, there was outrage after 9/11 when donated blood was diverted to other needs. Some donors apparently wanted all 475,000 units of donated blood to be used specifically to treat 9/11 victims (who required in total something like 200-300 units of blood, which was available in existing stocks).
One of the best things we could do would be to convince people that suffering is suffering and helping is fungible.