MisterFrog @ MisterFrog @lemmy.world

Posts

9

Comments

919

Joined

2 yr. ago

Fair enough, my more nuanced opinion is that there is a large number of people who do give to charity, feel good about it, spread the opinion that it's a feel good thing, and do indirectly cause voters to feel like they already give enough money to charity and higher taxes are unfair. I am aware this opinion is unpopular, hence the post to get it off my chest haha

People participating in charity aren't wrong, just the perception that it's something to advocate people giving to, without also advocating for stronger public services in the same breath.

My title was perhaps a little click-baity.

I don't dislike charity, I dislike people (and charities) encouraging others to give money to charity, without also advocating for better public services via taxation. And many, many charities don't do this, which I don't understand since many charities also get public funding (at least in my state of Victoria, Australia, they do)

This opinion is also subject to the relative stability of the government you live under. In my case, very stable, and totally doable.

When I say strong, I mean that a trend is it dominates and defines as decade. All those things you mentioned are trends that you associate with different times, but there are far fewer things you can dress up as and people will think: ohhhh are you "from the 2000s".

They exist, just I'd argue it's not as strong as the 90s

People should lie about as much as possible to most companies they interact with online anyway (obviously don't lie to your bank, or doctor, or whatever). Do always, without fail, lie randomly about your age, gender, address (if it's not relevant) or anything else that's not actually needed to provide the service.

I'm only just now realising fads/trends seem to be way less strong these days.

Like, there's a 00's vibe, sort of, 10's vibe??? Maybe?

But nowhere near as strong as practically every decade before that.

Perhaps it's just there's way more variety to bandwagon now that every niche is connected around the globe.

My random thoughts for your reading.

I'm not sure if you meant it this way, but this came across quite caring about my wellbeing, and I really appreciate that friend.

I get a bit grumpy, but overall I'm not too angry at the world.

Well, not all the time anyway ;)

Have a good one mate.

I'm not advocating for doing nothing (and appreciate the way you phrased your criticism giving me the benefit of the doubt)

I think specifically my position is that the solution is political, and a better motivated voting base, who understands the value of not reducing taxes and public funding.

I don't think (all) charities are a waste, and think many orgs do a decent job.

However, I think I didn't make it clear that I find people feeling good about giving to charity, and encouraging others to do so by framing it as a "feel good" thing, rubs me the wrong way because I believe charities who perform core functions are a symptom of the fact we're underfunding vital services.

I'm not telling people to not donate to charity, but I think it's high time people stop believing that they've done their part for society, when voting to fix the system (absolutely, 100% possible where I'm from, which is Australia, one of the wealthiest countries in the world) would be much, much, more impactful that giving some money to a charity.

Yeah it's better than nothing, and I'm not entirely against giving to charity. I'm mostly mad that people (most) seem to have the opinion that the act of donating to a charity is something to feel good about.

Because it's not good. And often I would argue people giving to charity makes them feel good in a way that's actually unhelpful if they then vote for parties who minimise tax and defund the services that then the charities need to do even more of.

If someone has money to donate, I'd argue this is money much better spent on advocacy groups to fight for those systematic changes, rather than the service itself.

The ones who do both, yeah, that's also great.

I take your point, and do agree charities do good, and that in a society where it's not fixed, giving something to charity can do good. Just that I'm sick of people feeling too good about it.

Yeah, and again, I will reiterate that many organisations do good work. However, my specific unpopular opinion is that I dislike that people think charity isn't a symptom of a failed system.

I dislike that people feel good about it. Rather than question why we're raising money for men's health in the first place.

Charity for the purposes of fundraising for things which ought to be provided by the state, isn't just not perfect, I'd even say it's bad. It perpetuates the status quo of underfunding vital publically funded good. Because people feel good about it, then go about their day and vote for fuckers who promise them tax cuts.

And trust me, I live in a country that could absolutely afford to fund a more universal public health system and research (per capita).

My favourite was when I was donating to a environmental advocacy organisation, I specially requested they don't mail me anything. Called up and everything.

Guess what showed up, and then showed up 1 last time after I cancelled my regular donation 👍👍

Not to say they were a bad organisation, just I thought it was pretty funny considering the topic.

I should clarify, that I'm specifically talking about charity events/organisations to raise money for something that really ought to be publicly funded, or perform work that ought to be provided by the government.

I donate blood, I think people getting together to help others is fantastic, and of course not every bit of community support needs to be provided by the government.

But I think things like healthcare, homelessness, research etc shouldn't need to beg for money. It should be taken out of people's taxes

This is honestly the biggest joke of them all.

Get ready for way, way more election interference.

Unless you're at a company using Microsoft services, where you have no choice, other than chrome (at my company), which hot take, is worse than edge.

This may be Australia specific, but do job postings not spell out what they want in other countries?

Like, job postings in Australia (these days) are: this is the job, here are the key selection criteria, please provide us a resume and cover letter (or just a resume, or cover letter optional, etc). Even down to maximum number of pages sometimes.

They just tell you, and part of the way they weed people out is if they fail to follow what's written (simple way to weed out anyone paying no attention).

Do other countries just have to GUESS what the recruitment managers want at each company?

Is this an indicator or straight up ADHD specific? Because this is me constantly

You lucky bastard. Where I live it's basically monthly or fortnightly. I've never heard of anyone being paid weekly.

"With YouTube Premium, enjoy ad-free access, downloads, and background play on YouTube and YouTube Music."

In Australia, if they reneg on this headline promise, doesn't matter what's in the fine print, this would be refundable under Australian Consumer Law (not a lawyer).

What bullshit, and how silly on their part, since it's just so much more convenient to block ads instead of paying

This is a solved problem in Australia. You put the parties next to the candidates names to assist where people don't want to learn about the individual candidates in their location, and people hand out "how to vote" cards at the polling places for how their party prefers the others parties.

People who don't have their own opinion on anything but their first choice use that as a cheat sheet.

There are solutions for the lazy and disengaged.

You are aware of first past the post right? That really needs to be the first thing on your agenda to get fixed. Until then, the USA will ALWAYS be a two-party system (with brief blips in change over).

It hurts me that people don't realise you know where the sun rises and sets (roughly), anywhere, by looking up and roughly knowing what time it is. Other than midday, then fair enough.

I don't like the overall message society gives that men need to be "good at sex" instead of people mutually enjoying the experience.

To me it's akin to someone calling you boring to talk with, while they contribute nothing to the conversation other than showing up.