Comments on: Lessons for New Philanthropists (and old ones) http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/12/lessons-for-new-philanthropists-and-old-ones Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:46:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Tom Canavan http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/12/lessons-for-new-philanthropists-and-old-ones#comment-2238 Tom Canavan Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:31:07 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/12/lessons-for-new-philanthropists-and-old-ones#comment-2238 First, let me insult your intelligence. You guys are still thinking last century about philanthropy. If you can't find a philanthropy that does what you want it to, the way you want to do it, then MAKE ONE. You all know what's wrong with Philanthropy. You know it's entrenched in 'that's how we have always done it and it's what your supposed to do' and yet you continue to do it. All this talk is a waste of time and energy. Can't you invent a group that help others and supports itself? Does what you want it to do and has all finances open to the public? Or does everyone involved in any charitable "philanthropic" work only do it to make money or for attention to themselves and isn't accountable to you, the social investor? Do you really think it's wise or necessary to pay someone $150,000.00 a year to give away your money to help others and have to use a microscope to see what they are doing? If you are interested in using your money to help others and want 100% of your money to go to those you want to help and become self supporting by design, visit my website. I give you a way to do what you're all complaining about on my site. Take it, do it. Tom Canavan The Benefactor Project First, let me insult your intelligence.

You guys are still thinking last century about philanthropy. If you can’t find a philanthropy that does what you want it to, the way you want to do it, then MAKE ONE.

You all know what’s wrong with Philanthropy. You know it’s entrenched in ‘that’s how we have always done it and it’s what your supposed to do’ and yet you continue to do it. All this talk is a waste of time and energy.

Can’t you invent a group that help others and supports itself? Does what you want it to do and has all finances open to the public? Or does everyone involved in any charitable “philanthropic” work only do it to make money or for attention to themselves and isn’t accountable to you, the social investor?

Do you really think it’s wise or necessary to pay someone $150,000.00 a year to give away your money to help others and have to use a microscope to see what they are doing?

If you are interested in using your money to help others and want 100% of your money to go to those you want to help and become self supporting by design, visit my website. I give you a way to do what you’re all complaining about on my site. Take it, do it.

Tom Canavan
The Benefactor Project

]]> By: Sean Stannard-Stockton http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/12/lessons-for-new-philanthropists-and-old-ones#comment-2210 Sean Stannard-Stockton Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:08:59 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/12/lessons-for-new-philanthropists-and-old-ones#comment-2210 Thanks for the comment. I'm actually not too surprised, although it seems crazy to think a nonprofit employee would be against overhead (excessive overhead maybe, but no one in the for-profit sector sits around saying that the money they spend on computers, employees and marketing is a problem!). I think the root of this problem is the steady drumbeat of media reinforcing overhead expense as the problem. Someone needs to send the media a different message... Thanks for the comment. I’m actually not too surprised, although it seems crazy to think a nonprofit employee would be against overhead (excessive overhead maybe, but no one in the for-profit sector sits around saying that the money they spend on computers, employees and marketing is a problem!).

I think the root of this problem is the steady drumbeat of media reinforcing overhead expense as the problem. Someone needs to send the media a different message…

]]> By: Tidy Sum http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/12/lessons-for-new-philanthropists-and-old-ones#comment-2206 Tidy Sum Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:11:55 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/12/lessons-for-new-philanthropists-and-old-ones#comment-2206 Alas, it is not only philanthropoids that are hypersensitive and boneheaded when it comes to overhead and administrative costs. I had the eye-opening experience of facilitating a group of nonprofit leaders in a proposal review and grantmaking process. Surely, I thought, they of all people would be sensitive to the dynamics of nonprofit capitalization and the burdens of fiscal management. But no! They too squawked like silly geese about overhead and its roots in all that is evil. You would think that the applicants were allocating funds to support the manufacturing of weapons-grade plutonium. Here at the Center for Further Research we hope to isolate the neurochemical action that activates the gene responsible for what we call the overhead knee-jerk response mechanism. When we do, the readers of Tactical Philanthropy will be the first to know. Alas, it is not only philanthropoids that are hypersensitive and boneheaded when it comes to overhead and administrative costs.

I had the eye-opening experience of facilitating a group of nonprofit leaders in a proposal review and grantmaking process.

Surely, I thought, they of all people would be sensitive to the dynamics of nonprofit capitalization and the burdens of fiscal management.

But no! They too squawked like silly geese about overhead and its roots in all that is evil. You would think that the applicants were allocating funds to support the manufacturing of weapons-grade plutonium.

Here at the Center for Further Research we hope to isolate the neurochemical action that activates the gene responsible for what we call the overhead knee-jerk response mechanism.

When we do, the readers of Tactical Philanthropy will be the first to know.

]]>