Bogans are the most generous givers

G says:

07:54am | 05/08/09

Surprising? - not.  You could ask the same of other organisations and you’d get the same results - people on average incomes do more for aid and support than the wealthy.  Why - well it could have something to do with their arrogance, greed, and self entitlement.  While they’re busy looking for tax loopholes and denigrating those ‘beneath’ them others are out there with experience of tough times and a desire to help those less fortunate.

concernedabout charityskimming says:

08:22am | 05/08/09

Tim - how much of this money ever makes it to the kids you claim to support???

Dom says:

09:32am | 05/08/09

G’day concerned about skimming - I’m Dom, I work at World Vision.

In answer to your question, none of the money goes directly to children. It is pooled with other child sponsorship pledges to fund projects that benefit the whole community - education facilities, health training, agricultural training etc.

In terms of how much makes it to the field, in 2008 field programs made up 83.7% of our disbursements. Annual reports and fully audited accounts are available here: http://bit.ly/13MEmk

AFR says:

10:07am | 05/08/09

Dom, thanks for your comments. I appreciate people are concerned with where the money goes - but too often that’s used as a poor excuse for doing nothing.

R.E.L. says:

12:52pm | 05/08/09

G is correct, this is neither new nor surprising news from Tim Costello.
It is often the case that those on the lower income and lower class levels are more generous than the bourgeois, inner-city, latte-sipping, armchair socialists who vote Left. These bogans are frowned upon because they vote conservative, but are often very compassionate as they know what it’s like to do it tough and so are willing to help out those even less fortunate than them. It the case in many societies in Europe also.
It was prevalent in the Soviet bloc countries where their hardline dictators received much support from the battlers they oppressed, but who were also the most kind and hospitable people around.

RT says:

01:17pm | 05/08/09

R.E.L - I suppose you have the stats to support your claims about the habits of ‘the bourgeois, inner-city, latte-sipping, armchair socialists who vote Left.’  I’m sure that wouldn’t be just a blind swipe at a perceived group of people that you are prejudiced against and have summarised in cliched terms. Not at all.

Mr Subramanian says:

02:35pm | 05/08/09

There are other organisations that have a greater % of funds going into their eventual work than World Vision - but such organisations are much more heavily dependent on volunteer labour, don’t have the same sort of scale that World Vision has, don’t provide as much ease of use and support of sponsors through their written & electronic communication, and certainly don’t raise awareness of the issues through advertising like World Vision does. But both of the organisations my family sponsors children / supports community through are thoroughly committed ot providing open and transparent accounts. Look through the links.

Stereotype says:

03:29pm | 05/08/09

“inner-city, latte-sipping, armchair socialists who vote Left. “

Hmm, I live within 5km of the Sydney GPO, I *love* lattes (soy lattes to be precise) and I vote left.

Yet I also sponsor a child through World Vision.

Could it be (shock, horror) that stereotypes are unhelpful and do not add anything to the debate around how to encourage charitable donations?

Just for fun, I’m also going to note that I’m a vegetarian, motorcycle-riding lesbian with a cat, tattoos and many piercings.

davo franga says:

10:06pm | 05/08/09

yes but franga has a much bigger population, they are dumb, poor with money management and usually drunk

Crizza says:

09:11am | 06/08/09

That rings true for me. Having to collect for charity once I noticed the suits would cross the road to avoid you…the ordinary woman or man would give you some spare change…it’s partly to do with trust and knowledge I imagine - the well-off simply don’t trust you or want you to interfere with their business in any way; while many ordinary people have possibly experienced hard times themselves, and realise a few bob might help someone else.

G says:

11:56am | 06/08/09

R.E.L - thanks for agreeing with me however I don’t agree with you.  In my experience the people I spoke of who are generous with donations are actually left leaning (and socialist is not a dirty word - it’s an aspect of people caring for others).  It’s the conservatives who are generally greedy with their wealth - that’s why they vote liberal so their top end interests are protected.

Ken says:

05:14pm | 11/06/10

News Flash for “G”.
Socialist IS a dirty word. That’s why most of the communist regimes throughout history marched to the drum of socialism, and they didn’t give a damn for others.