Donate Unrestricted • Hacker News Board

Re: Donate Unrestricted

#241

Post by hanniabu » Sun, Mar 07, 2021, 10:25 PM UTC

rossdavidh wrote: post #59

I worked in Accounting (the dept that did it, not the one that taught it) IT at a major public university for several years. Something like half of the software complexity was in keeping track of each dollar's origin, and making sure that it was spent on only what the source approved it to be spent on. Whether the source was the federal government, the state, corporate donors, or wealthy individuals, they all had str…

> keeping track of each dollar's origin, and making sure that it was spent on only what the source approved it to be spent on

Why not just keep a separate fund for each purpose and as these donations come in you route out the portions to the desired fund? If that is what's done then what's the difficult part that I'm missing?

Re: Donate Unrestricted

#242

Post by rossdavidh » Sun, Mar 07, 2021, 10:28 PM UTC

hanniabu wrote: post #241

rossdavidh wrote: post #59

I worked in Accounting (the dept that did it, not the one that taught it) IT at a major public university for several years. Something like half of the software complexity was in keeping track of each dollar's origin, and making sure that it was spent on only what the source approved it to be spent on. Whether the source was the federal government, the state, corporate donors, or wealthy individuals, they all had str…

> keeping track of each dollar's origin, and making sure that it was spent on only what the source approved it to be spent on Why not just keep a separate fund for each purpose and as these donations come in you route out the portions to the desired fund? If that is what's done then what's the difficult part that I'm missing?

Part of it was that each source wanted to be able to audit _their_ money, and have traceability. So in some sense it was just what you say, but that roughly doubles the amount of work done for accounting software. It also meant that most private-sector software was insufficient for the task.

Re: Donate Unrestricted

#243

Post by temp8964 » Sun, Mar 07, 2021, 10:30 PM UTC

sjg007 wrote: post #206

temp8964 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe a good idea, if combined with vouchers / education savings credit.

What do vouchers and education savings credit do?

Give money back to families to spend on education, but how to spend it is their own choice.

Re: Donate Unrestricted

#244

Post by rossdavidh » Sun, Mar 07, 2021, 10:31 PM UTC

bradleyjg wrote: post #179

xirbeosbwo1234 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with that is, in part, that they ignored the spirit of the donation, but also that the proper amount for a university to spend on a scoreboard is twelve dollars and thirty-seven cents. OK, that's a bit unrealistic. I could build them one for a few hundred, though, and they could pay a student $50 to flip over the numbers during the game.

The proper amount to spend is zero. There’s no reason for universities to be running minor league football teams with unpaid labor. On the contrary that’s the exact opposite of “charitable”.

Fundamentally, you're correct. However, when working for a university, I was well aware that private sector donations (and maybe even state funds) went up or down depending on how well the football team did. A losing record for the football team ought not to result in lower private sector donations towards scientific research or scholarships at that university, but apparently at most universities it does. Universities that ignore this fact do so at their peril.

Re: Donate Unrestricted

#245

Post by ojnabieoot » Sun, Mar 07, 2021, 10:37 PM UTC

a1369209993 wrote: post #234

joshuamorton wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replace "teachers" with "police" and you do get a reasonable argument. In a situation where someone has outsized authority and influence, even a baseline level of is worse than normal. If you're looking to affect outcomes most significantly, reducing "racism" amongst teachers is probably going to be more impactful per $ than reducing it amongst the general population.

> Replace "teachers" with "police" and you do get a reasonable argument. Not really. I'm fine with a baseline level murder by police (at least to the extent that I'm fine with where that baseline is in the first place, which is admittedly not a given), provided there is also a baseline level of punishment for said murder. The problems with police tend be either that there is a higher level of murder by police than th…

joshuamorton,

Anyone who says things like “social justice warriors believe one race is inherently better than the other” is just a toxic racist troll and not worth engaging with. It’s stupid and deliberately dishonest, not some good-faith misconception.

Re: Donate Unrestricted

#246

Post by bradleyjg » Sun, Mar 07, 2021, 10:44 PM UTC

rossdavidh wrote: post #244

bradleyjg wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The proper amount to spend is zero. There’s no reason for universities to be running minor league football teams with unpaid labor. On the contrary that’s the exact opposite of “charitable”.

Fundamentally, you're correct. However, when working for a university, I was well aware that private sector donations (and maybe even state funds) went up or down depending on how well the football team did. A losing record for the football team ought not to result in lower private sector donations towards scientific research or scholarships at that university, but apparently at most universities it does. Universitie…

I don’t expect universities to spontaneously do the right thing. I’m hoping the courts force them to at least stop exploiting the pro athletes that make them so much money.

Re: Donate Unrestricted

#247

Post by temuze » Sun, Mar 07, 2021, 10:46 PM UTC

Also important: donate regularly.

Ad-hoc donations make it difficult for a nonprofit to plan their budget. It forces them to spend a lot of that money to solicit more donations.

My friend made a tool to donate anonymously and regularly to non-profits: https://sublimefund.org/

Less spam, better for the non-profits. It's a good combination.

Re: Donate Unrestricted

#248

Post by akiselev » Sun, Mar 07, 2021, 10:50 PM UTC

Kye wrote: post #237

rsj_hn wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is you have a huge principle-agent problem with these non-profits. In a standard corporate structure, shareholders elect members of the board who can replace the management. But who elects the board of a non-profit? Why not those who donate to them? There has to be some reliable mechanism to impose accountability by those who give funds. Now lacking a mechanism for accountability, people give funds with a…

Having access to money doesn't qualify someone to help do whatever the organization does.

In any sizable nonprofit, the vast majority of the board is not involved in actually carrying out the work of the organization. They are there for oversight and political capital.

Re: Donate Unrestricted

#249

Post by cambalache » Sun, Mar 07, 2021, 10:57 PM UTC

ralmidani wrote: post #167

furyofantares wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I wanted to donate a large amount of money to a non-profit, I would structure it as a zero-interest loan, and would just keep deferring the repayment of the loan as long as the org stays true to its mission, compensates executives in reasonable proportion to regular employees, etc. Not sure if I'm missing something, but this sounds totally ridiculous to me. You give 1M to someone you think is going to spend it w…

There could be sunset provisions (e.g. if a loan is deferred for 10 consecutive years, it is cancelled), this would encourage continued giving rather than massive one-off donations.

Year 5 the president embezzled 800k and ran away leaving the non-profit effectively broken, now you are pissed and want your 1 MM back. I think you should go for a walk and meditate this better.

Re: Donate Unrestricted

#250

Post by colinmhayes » Sun, Mar 07, 2021, 10:59 PM UTC

muti wrote: post #221

colinmhayes wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the alternative is more taxes or worse service isn't taxing gambling a good option?

The lottery is effectively a regressive tax. I would prefer increasing taxes in a progressive or at least proportional scheme.

The lottery is a choice. No one is forcing anyone to play. People are going to gamble though, so the state might as well take a cut as a way to discourage it.