Category: Charity

Today, many families across the globe continue living below the poverty line and cannot meet their basic needs like food, health, or even sleep. At the same time, millions of people may be defined as rich. They spend money on luxuries and do not find it necessary to share or help other individuals. Charity organizations like the United Nations International Childrens Emergency Fund, the American Red Cross, and United Way create donorship, employment, and stability conditions. Although their contributions are recognizable and helpful, their activities are not enough to end global poverty. Thus, offering luxury money to charity has become a trend associated with multiple controversies. One of Singers characters, Bob, proves that personal benefits and financial stability may be more important than the readiness to scarify someones life. Still, I think there is a great moral difference between the decision not to give money to charity and Bobs preference to save his car, not the child. Such issues as the current moment, clarity of choices, and inevitable evidence can be used to explain the instability of the moral line between what Bob and I did or did not do.

Giving money to charity seems to be a good idea, but when a person wants to clarify the conditions of this activity, many concerns and misunderstandings emerge regarding a final destination. According to Singer, practical uncertainties cannot be ignored because charitable donors do not have much information about if their aid reaches the people in need. It is hard to predict if all organizations follow fair and honest policies. In addition, much information remains unclear if charity money is divided between people and if they are enough to cover basic needs. In Bobs case, his charitable decision would immediately affect and literary save human life. This difference explains why my decision not to give some luxury money to charity is not as morally wrong and unacceptable as Bobs situation due to the moment of action and clarity of outcomes.

Another important aspect of charity and immediate property sacrifice is evidence and expected material and spiritual values. When I decide to donate some money, I want to believe that it would help a person or a group of people improve life quality. However, I do not observe the results of my aid, and everything I can is to believe that my decision would be helpful. I face some material loss, obtain some spiritual satisfaction, and no evidence of real benefits. Bob faced another situation: he could lose his car, but the awareness that he saved a child would be of great moral satisfaction with strong evidence. Not saving a child for personal financial benefit seems amoral and might affect the mans mental health with time.

In general, when basic human needs are met and some luxury money is present, thoughts about spending them on charity emerge. On the one hand, it is normal for people with extra money to offer them to those who actually need material help. Poverty is a public problem, and its solution is determined by human decisions and cooperation. On the other hand, each person is responsible for his/her life and does not expect that someone could help. Therefore, charity should be voluntary and free from moral obligations and burdens. Bobs situation has nothing in common with charity because of the moment, the immediate impact on human life, and the clarity of events. It is impossible for even the most professional organizations to control donation outcomes and charity processes fairly, which explains my unwillingness to donate my money. Bobs choice was clear and definite, and his material preferences overcoming a living opportunity cannot be approved.

Work Cited

Singer, Peter. The Singer Solution to World Poverty. The New York Times Magazine, 1999.

Winthrops A Model of Christian Charity described the formation of a new society by Puritan settlers. The work is often used to demonstrate the status of the United States as the leading nation. Winthrop demonstrates that Puritan made a covenant with God to establish a true Christian community, in which wealthy population do charity and not exploit the poor. This essay argues that in Winthrops A Model of Christian Charity, religious references are used to demonstrate social relationship between people and the role of charity in a true Christian community.

Winthrop begins his work with proclamation about social inequality and why God allows such inequality to exist. In a Christian community, there should be difference in population. He states that some must be rich, some poore, some highe and eminent in power and dignity as with social inequality God holds conformity (173). God does not provide miracles, such as feeding the poor and providing shelter for homeless people. This is why Winthrop writes that every am might have need of other, and form hence they might be all knitt more nearly together in the Bonds of brotherly affection (173). Here, Winthrop refers to brotherhood notion of Christian society that every man should be kind to each other and not harm. Moreover, he states that There is a time when a Christian must sell all and give to the poor, as they did in the Apostles times (178). By such religious references Winthrop shows the importance of charity and compassion in the Christian community. He could effectively link exhibition of charity and Gods blessing by saying that If thy brother be in want and thou canst help him, thou needst not make doubt of what thou shouldst do; if thou lovest God thou must help him (174). If an individual practice charity he will be benefited from Gods service and also provide good for the general population.

Moreover, Winthrop emphasizes specific rules for a community that lives together through using religious references. He points out that the Christian community is a single body in which every individual serves to the benefit of the whole. This can be seen in his writing that about parts of the community, mutually participate with each other, both in strength and infirmity, in pleasure and pain (179). Here, the members of a community should be focused to accomplish a common goal which is to serve God. Furthermore, Winthrop uses Adam and Eve biblical reference to illustrate how the Christian community serve as a single system that is connected by a ligament of love (180). Being a good Christian is associated with the success of the whole community. Winthrop applies many quotes from the Bible to show the bonds that link Christians to each other, illustrating how religion influence the relationship among the society.

Following the rules for the new society that strictly holds Christian traditions and Gods will, Winthrop writes the expectations from the community regarding its function. He showed how individuals should approach each other. Christian community should be united by bond of love despite of peoples difference in socioeconomic conditions. Due to such bond and a common goal of serving God, Winthrop proposes that the Christian community should have high standards for its members when following established rules and laws. He provides the example of Sauls commission to destroy Amaleck to show that the community has a special commission of God (182). Rules and laws of the community should be strictly followed, if not, God will severely punish the community. Winthrop clearly demonstrates that the role of laws in a newly established society is vital to sustain its function. For example, he wrote that the Lord will surely break out in wrath against us, and be revenged of such a people, and make us know the price of the breach of such a covenant (180). Furthermore, Winthrop also points out that not only God monitors the new society but the rest of the world by saying that the society will stand out as a city upon a hill (183). As such, through religious references, Winthrop demonstrates how a community that serves God should act and function upon their rules and laws.

To conclude, A Model of Christian Charity written by Winthrop provides a look on a true Christian community. The new society established by Puritan serves God and acts upon the interests of God. Winthrop uses various religious references, such as biblical tales and quotes from verses to show how a Christian society should act to reach a greater good. He addresses the question of social inequality, examining why God does not give miracles for all people. Moreover, Winthrop writes the expectations from a true Christian community and its members in their interaction with each other, Specifically, the themes charity and compassion are presented as means for getting Gods blessing. Winthrop also proclaims that a true Christian society should act as a single body in which every part work upon the benefit of the whole.

Work Cited

Winthrop, John. A Modell of Christian Charity (1630). From the Collections of the MA Historical Society (Boston, 1838), 3rd series 7:31-48).

Charity will be a great topic for sermons in the church to talk about the good virtues of helping the poor. However, the topic, charity, may seem to be out of range for science except if the preacher happens to be a “preacher scientist”. Although people have to work for their money, but it is not unusual to find out that people often give out part of what they earn.

We can assume that this is out of good will or desire to help others who are less privileged. But science don’t believe in assumptions. In science, assumptions are modified into hypotheses. These hypotheses then become the questions that science hope to find answers to. This will then be followed by experiments to test the hypothesis; making observation and collecting necessary data to make sensible judgment rather than assumptions.

A research article titled “Why do people spend money to help vulnerable people?” seeks to find out this answer. It is known that people will always defend their own interest first. But why would someone want to give?

For example, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation by the Microsoft giant, Bill Gates, and his wife, Melinda is popular for contributing greatly in charity. Their activity range from funding of science research to donations to the developing countries. Bill and Melinda are said to have donated to the foundation more than $35.8 billion source.

The richest man in Africa, Aliko Dangote, is not left out of this. His foundation, Aliko Dangote Foundation, focuses its charity on health, children education and economic empowerment through creation of employment. Charity is not limited to the world richest people. People who earn lesser amount of money still contribute to charity. This list may also include you so let’s find out why you or other people give to charity.

Prosocial Behaviour

It will be important to understand the concept of prosocial behavior to have a basic background on this topic. This concept explain the act helping others either in the form of giving to charity or even other actions such as donating blood or volunteering in various social services. This behavior is not new in human history and it is also observed among animals that live in social group [3]. However, it is important to know the motivation for this behavior.

Why do people engage in prosocial behavior?

The researchers were curious to know the reason why people engage in prosocial behaviour, especially giving to less vulnerable people. Is this prosocial spending is as a result of previous exposure to donation? In other words, if people were made to donate the first time will they be willing to donate again? Also, will people be willing to donate more if their first donation was of a free will without being required to donate a specified amount?

The researchers postulated some hypotheses to be allow them come to a conclusion. The hypotheses as postulated by the researchers are as follow:

• Hypothesis 1: People spend more money on helping vulnerable people if they have been exposed to a prosocial donation situation than if they have not had this exposure. [4]
• Hypothesis 2: People spend more money on helping vulnerable people after being exposed to an autonomous donation situation than after being forced to donate a certain amount to others. [4]
• Hypothesis 3: Initial prosocial spending characterized by a compulsory fixed amount biases subsequent voluntary prosocial donations. [4]
• Hypothesis 4: Eudaimonic well-being beliefs (contribution-to-others and self-development) are positively related to prosocial spending. [4]
• Hypothesis 5: Autonomy moderates he relationship between eudaimonic well-being beliefs and prosocial spending, such that this relationship is stronger after an autonomous donation situation than after individuals are forced to donate a fixed amount to others. [4]

I promise I don’t want to bore you with all the procedure but it is necessary I explain the little way I can. I will keep it brief and easy to understand.

The participants for this experiment were undergraduate students and they were divided into five groups to test for these hypotheses. The procedure for participation was divided into five steps which involve signing of consent document, filling the questionnaire, prior exposure (or no exposure) to NGO donation, a few minute break and the final decision to use the free voucher that will be given to every participant.

Actual money was not given but this voucher could be used for the following:

• a) personal use at the university store
• b) personal use at the cafeteria
• c) donation to the NGO

Two out of these five groups were designed to be control. This means that they did not have a prior exposure to donating to any NGO. The other three groups have a prior exposure to NGO donation. Out of these three groups, two groups were obligated to donate to NGO. One group will donate a fixed amount while the other can donate any amount of their choice. The last group, however, have the liberty to either donate to NGO or not. The amount that each group donated was used to evaluate the prosocial spending of the group.

Enough with the procedure. I promised not bore you with these details. Let’s conclude already by talking about what they found out. Do people spend more money on charity if they have been exposed to a prosocial donation? The answer is yes. The researchers found out that people will react positively to similar stimulus that they’ve been exposed to before. And this is also true in the situation where there is prior exposure to donation.

Another hypothesis seek to confirm if people will donate money to vulnerable people if their first exposure was out of free will or a fixed amount was to be contributed. To this they find out that there is no relationship with the willingness to give at the first exposure. The result shows that people who have been exposed to prior donation will still give more than those who have not been.

However, the third hypothesis was confirmed which means that people who gave a compulsory fixed amount in their first exposure will give less in subsequent times. And finally, the result shows that there is a positive relationship between Eudamonic beliefs and prosocial spending. What this means is that people feel more positive that they have been able to contribute to the well-being of others. This feeling becomes more positive when people are allowed to decide the amount they were willing to donate than when a fixed amount is required.

So in conclusion, people who have been exposed to charity donation will be willing to give more than people who have not been. Also, people who believe that they are contributing to the well-being of others through their donations will generously give more

Reference

1. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – FAQ Aliko Dangote Foundation
2. Cronin, K.A. (2012). Prosocial behaviour in animals: the influence of social relationships, communication and rewards.
3. Pătraș, L. et al. (2019) Why do people spend money to help vulnerable people?

“It is the apathetic person that sees the cause while the charitable person sees the need.”

There are two types of people in this world, ones that help others because of need and ones that do it to help themselves. Charity is the voluntary giving of help to those in need as a humanitarian act. As we develop through time, we begin to understand that we all are capable of helping others across the spectrum. Some do it simply for the feel-good factor, while others consider it a religious obligation. There is however, a minority of people who seize any opportunity to carry acts of goodness for monetary gains. (your two examples – feel-good and religious obligation aren’t about monetary gain so this sentence doesn’t really fit here) This injurious behaviour can cause significant damage to society, thus it is fundamental that we prioritise the safeguarding of every human being whether they are the chief beneficiary or the benevolent benefactor helping those out of empathy.

Due to the continuing economic divide in our society, more and more people are witnessing the benefits of humanitarianism. Children as young as five in developed countries are being taught to help others; similarly children of the same age but in third world countries are already carrying out the act in itself. In recent years, charity has been the forefront of the media, with publicity showing all acts in a positive light. Evidently, we are noticing a difference in the quality of life in some of the poorest countries of the world.

On the contrary, those in fame have been found to use philanthropy as a way to gain a worthy reputation in the eyes of the public. A form of fakery disguised by money and eminence. For example Angelina Jolie’s charitable act in adoption enabled her to secure the trust of millions of people and divert their attention from her wealth, to her qualities. A subtle cry for attention in another format. Similarly, there have been cases of apathetic, sordid politicians who have misled the public by claiming to promote charitable work as a way to prevent poverty during campaigns, but have later decided that other policies are far more crucial to implement. Fahrenthold noted in September that Trump paid a penalty in 2016 to the Internal Revenue Service for a 2013 donation in which the foundation gave $25,000 to a campaign group affiliated with Florida Attorney General Pamela Bondi. This means that his foundation illegally used money that was supposed to go to charity for politics. As a result, such deception towards society triggered hate, anger and violence and to this day, thousands are still protesting against Trump, across the globe.

Furthermore, in recent weeks, there has been a spate of stories about wealthy individuals trying to reduce their tax bills. If assets are given to charity, one can claim income tax relief up to their entire value. For example, there has been a rise in the number of freehold property with an eight-year lease on it, being given to charity. The charity then holds the property for the term of that lease and benefits from any rental income during that period, but at the end of the lease the property reverts to the owner. As a result, there is a tax relief on the value of the freehold property, but not on the value of the lease. In London, a lease on a £1m house could be worth £50,000. This illustrates how apathetic individuals have the means, motive and opportunity to seek ways to benefit from a given situation, while a charitable person prioritises the need for others to benefit from the same situation.

To conclude, it is evident that the act of charitable work benefits a huge proportion of people including the beneficiaries and benefactors. It is through international legislations and powerful tools such as education and the media, that the need to carry out more humanitarian acts is shared vastly and quickly. We all stand united to continue to tackle the crisis of poverty in order to help others out of empathy. This will ensure that we live a long, happy and prosperous life.

You write well, your structure, grammer and vocabulary are good. However, I think you’re slightly lead astray by the quote. Whilst your essay about charity as a whole is good, so without the quote it would be great, but if you wanted to focus on this quote this is what I understood. From this quote I understood that apathy – disinterest/ unenthusiastic, so those that don’t really care see the cause whereas someone that wants to help others will see the need.

This is not to say that people that see the cause don’t donate to charity, because evidence suggests they do, but evidence says that if you are actually invested in a charity you donate up to 50% more. Ideally charities need people to feel inspired to donate and not pressured.

However, those that are apathetic are more likely to pick flaws in the charity and see where the need has originally risen from and either argue to themselves that it’s self-inflicted/ the governments problem and therefore donating money is only going to help in the short term and not the long term.

Both people are looking at the situation and seeing different things. This suggests to me that having intellect does not always make you a wise/ empathetic/ better person. E.g famine in Sudan, an apathetic person might look at the self-inflicted factors that have caused the famine such as the violence and conflict that have lead to the cutting off of supply routes and the sky high food prices. Whereas the charitable person would see the people in need and look at ways to help them directly.

To be honest I think this is a super hard quote so well done!!

The purpose of this essay is to provide reasons for the high levels of poverty in Africa and to also discuss strategies that have been designed to help reduce these levels.

Source A is a Chloroplethic map that illustrates the poverty rates across the globe. The map shows the differences through colour shading. This particular map is coloured with different shadings of yellow, to indicate the dissimilarities in poverty percentages. The lighter shades of yellow on the map indicate low levels of poverty. For example, Russia (number 15) is yellow and its poverty rate is 0.3%. Most of the map is coloured yellow, indicating that a large majority of the world does not have a serious poverty problem. The darker shades on the map, such as orange and brown, represent high levels of poverty. These darker colours are applied to a small cluster covering the African regions. Mali (number 16) has the highest rates of poverty at 79%.

As seen on the map, the higher poverty rates fluctuate more toward the African regions. There is a clear poverty difference visible, and this is due to the North/South Divide. The North/South is the division of developed and developing countries. Countries that are considered to be wealthy and developed fall under the “North” and countries that qualify as poor and underdeveloped are put into the “South”. Countries that are in the North include North America, Western Europe and some parts of Asia. The South holds Africa, Latin America and the rest of Asia. 25% of the total global population live in the North of the divide but they control over 80% of the global income (https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/what-is-the-north-south-divide.html, 2017). Much of the individuals living in the North have enough access to food, shelter and a functioning educational system. They are well developed because they are heavily industrialised, are politically stable, democratic and have strong technological infrastructure. The South, however, are not as lucky. ¾ of the total world population live in the South and they only have access to 1/5 of the world’s income (https://youtu.be/2WQrY4xMfks, 2017). The South have suffered a historical lack of trade due to the colonial rule that occurred from 1870 to 1900. (http://exhibitions.nypl.org/africanaage/essay-colonization-of-africa.html, 2011). Countries in the North have invaded many of the African countries in the South and exploited them for their raw materials. The South have had no control over the exports and imports, and thus, received very little profit or income. 5% of their population have access to sufficient food and shelter (https://www.worldhunger.org/africa-hunger-poverty-facts-2018/, 2018).

One of the physical reasons for Africa’s status as a developing country is their land. Africa is one of the driest continents in the world, with the Sahara Desert taking up almost a third of the continent. The areas that have the most residents experience both dry and wet seasons every year. The rainfall regimes vary in length and severity every year. The area at the South Sahara, called Sahel, experiences dry seasons that have become longer and more pronounced over the past 30 years. In the 1970’s and 1980’s, the Sahel suffered a long period of drought and they only experienced rain for one year throughout that period. (https://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn/2013/453521/, 2012). The dry periods prove to be quite difficult for Africa as those living there are reliant on their agricultural and natural resources. When droughts like this occur, it has environmental effects. Some of the effects that come from this are severe environmental degradation, declining soil fertility, deforestation, soil erosion and desertification. A second physical reason that contributes to Africa’s poverty was the El Nino event of 1997. From 1997 to 1998, Africa had experienced the worst El Nino effect of the century. An El Nino is “a periodic warming of tropical waters in the Pacific Ocean” (https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/learning/ocean/el-nino, 2018). It affects weather patterns globally and usually occurs every five to seven years. When Africa was hit by this, the Horn of Africa took most of the devastation. They were hit with heavy monsoon rains and floods. Somalia’s popular banana industry, which was their second most important foreign exchange earner, was completely swept away and the plantations were waterlogged. Zimbabwe also suffered as their maize crops were destroyed and this was a source of food for many, so it proved to be a very serious consequence.

Health is a severe human factor for Africa. Poor living conditions, lack of clean water and sanitation, lack of nutrition and limited access to good healthcare are all reasons leading to why Africa has a serious health problem and why the life expectancy sits at 61 years. (https://www.statista.com/statistics/274511/life-expectancy-in-africa/, 2018). Many African’s are still being infected with diseases that have already been eradicated and cured elsewhere in the world as their healthcare has been neglected, the Government does not fully serve its citizens and they have become heavily reliant on irregular foreign aid. Because they do not have sufficient access nor knowledge of modern medicine, they do not trust it so spiritual healers have became more popular. Africa has a high mortality rate for HIV/AIDS and it takes 147 lives per 100,000 a year. Africa’s HIV/AIDS problem is only getting worse and predictions are that the new cases will rise to 30 million a year by 2022. (https://borgenproject.org/10-facts-about-hivaids-in-africa/, 2013)

Colonisation was another human factor that impacted Africa. During the 19th century, many African territories were invaded by former European colonial powers. The colonies were created for the sole benefit of the colonial powers rather than the locals as they were viewed as another natural resource to take advantage of. Africa’s wealth was a primary resource as they had raw minerals, tropical hardwoods and crops to sell. Africa was exploited for consumption and use, and their materials were being exporting in raw form which meant little profit for them. Fertile land that was previously used to grow crops were now overrun with plantations of crop for export. The economic development of Africa was primarily motivated by European profit. The infrastructure of railways and roads that were built to link areas of production to coastal ports for exports. Despite gaining their independence, Africa was not prepared for it. They had a poor economy, no educated or skilled labour and no health facilities. Civil wars broke out as tribes and clans fought each other over land. Financial aid from the countries that previously colonised them was hard to get. During the Cold War, Russia and the US helped Africa in exchange for access to their natural resources which led to mass corruption. China owns 40% of Sudan’s oil production, while Sudan exports approximately 50-60% of their domestically produced oil to China. (https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/oil-and-darfurs-blood-chinas-thirst-for-sudans-oil-2332-0761-1000189.php?aid=69390, 2016).

Aid for Africa is a charity that works in Sub-Saharan Africa. (https://www.aidforafrica.org/about-us/where-we-work/). The charity is dedicated to tackling the challenges that face Africa. They do many things, from providing books to the children to introducing new medical strategies that aim to combat the spread of HIV/AIDS. Aid for Africa first began it’s work in 2004 with the aspiration of changing lives but quickly focused their attention toward the education of young African girls. They believe that when a young girl is given the opportunity to attend school, the cycle of poverty breaks for her and her family. Since the establishment, Aid for Africa has succeeded in partnering with over 60 non-profit organisations to create an alliance and work on their dream of helping those in need. Because this charity has partnerships with over 60 non-profit organisations, it allows their cause to be spread further and reach many more people, while also promoting the causes of the charities that support them. However, there is always the risk and fear of charities manipulating and lying to their donors. Some charities lead their donors to believe that their money is directly helping the cause, which is not always true. In 2013, Marie Curie Cancer Care were in the news for a fundraising scam. A group of people were found guilty of posing as collectors for the charity and keeping all the money donated. It gave the charity a bad reputation and made donors warier of giving to their cause. (https://www.civilsociety.co.uk/news/gang-found-guilty-of-marie-curie-cancer-care-fundraising-scam.html, 2013)

A second charity that fights to reduce poverty in Africa is Action Aid. They work in both rural and urban communities across Africa. The main cause for this charity is ensuring that women and girls receive the rights that they are entitled to. Action Aid say that less opportunities are available for those in poverty. On the official site, Action Aid say that – “from the moment they’re born, many girls are seen and treated as less than boys”. Gender inequality is their main cause and they support women’s rights. Their strategies include the launch of a 5-year plan in 2017. The 5-year plan has 3 main aims: to reduce the risk of violence against females, fight for women’s equal rights for economic opportunities and to prioritise females’ rights and leaderships in economic crises. They say that to achieve these goals, they will raise money through investments and support humanitarian action. So far, their work has worked quite well, and they achieved a lot. Africa is such a popular topic when referring to charity and foreign aid. There are a lot of charities that are all in support for Africa. Because there are so many, it raises a lot more awareness about the subjects and it would also raise a lot more in donations. For example, Save the Children, UNICEF and Action Aid are all very popular charities that are well known. They aim to receive support for Africa and would provide a lot more attention to Africa. In addition to this, some online donation pages can be faked, and the money would be essentially stolen. In 2005, following the effects of Hurricane Katrina, more than 4000 websites were set up that appeared to be donation pages for the victims of the hurricane. The American Red Cross page was used as a disguise and all the money donated did not make it to the victims.

Throughout this essay, I will be examining if charity law is a communitarian concept. I will be able to analyse and critique two political perspectives of charities, communitarianism which is the social democratic concept and a liberal concept. This essay will ultimately conclude that charity law is a communitarian concept.

Communitarianism mainly focuses on the ideal critique of political liberalism and the idea which organizations seek to help and provide a circle of a group of people who can work together providing something positive which will benefit the public, Section 4 Charity Act 2011 not to be presumed for a purpose. The communitarian spirit is not mainly about sympathy or benevolence the Idea which it works around religious organization such as churches, independent school such as universities shows that they are willing to get and give a service which they are not profiting from but supporting the wider aspect of a community. The accountability and obligation gives a tough-minded spin to the concepts of community and responsibility. This merely brings a bond through social groups which a political society should look like.

Organizations cannot be profited although they can make a surplus that can be invested into things to help and make a change for the better good i.e. Schools and Universities which would fulfil a ‘public benefit’. The main purpose of charity law is getting funds which they can provide so that they can give their money away in order help others. Charity is a charitable trust. As there are many people and companies still setting up trusts they are either still trying to gain profits however they don’t go as well as they expect due to the critique that they get because gaining funds from people or and doing nothing positive with it causes a backlash therefore there is a tendency to set up a charitable company although many that currently exists are very historic and will always keep funding themselves. Re Segelman states that if someone was to dies and therefore sets up a trust their relatives, however the courts held that it could be public as people could be born into the family. In Commissioner of Income Tax v Pemsel, Lord McNaughten gave summary on charity; “Charity In legal terms are 4 principals, relief of poverty, advancement on trust and religion and beneficial to the community”. The main point is for a trust to be charitable which has the spirit and intendment of the Preamble of 1601 and it isn’t sufficient just that a reason for existing is advantageous to the network; it must be one which is helpful and which the law sees as a benefit. While considering Pemsel because only one out of every trust gives an advantage will be charitable regardless.

In the case of Isc v Charity Commmison “It was held that educating children whose parents could afford the fees would indeed exclude the poor, and in turn the private school would not be a charity” the court noticed that private school’s poor make grants, bursaries, and opening up offices to the more extensive community for people to gain a public benefit so it was held that gave this arrangement to the poor was more of a benefit as private schools as they wouldn’t have to exclude the left out. This shows that this is more a democratic left as they are fulfilling their public benefits in every way possible. Frances Ryans – “Private school don’t act like charities, so let’s strip them of benefits” her approach is extreme she talks about constraining markets and engaging in redistributive efforts for the benefit of the lower classes to establish a more equitable society, opposed to neoliberalism of creating an artificial market. Her statement “damage the state education” here is opposed to independent schools as charitable educational organisations, as she believes that the state should be in control of the distribution of money and that she believes that the state should deliver things to the people. Furthermore, believes that the money should be taxed in the collective interest, no room for liberalism. Richard Titmuss’ defends the framework of the state providing welfare saying that although were in this position there is still space for charity.

At the same its questioned whether If charity is a relative standard, if you own a private jet and loose a private jet- get another one as used to it Re Coulthurst. Tocqueville, who went over to the USA to write about the prison system, what he did when he was there was a survey of this new culture which had emerged and he was associating this to, France which he sees as old. He sees America as a society of communities. Local democracy come together Robert Putnam, Idea of a honey cone, is to bring a group of mixed people together. Having a happy society with people constantly helping each other. However, there is not really a honey structure doesn’t really exist.

In Dominion Student Hall Trust v Attorney General [1947] an organisation which was where a student organisation for children of the British empire who were majority white trying to build world around his own image. Due to private prejudice, it created private problems and issues, issues on the fact that racism is involved which can be another cause of conflict. By 1947 it was said to be objectionable and that it should be a mixed hall this would stop any sort of segregation. This would be ‘positive discrimination’ although there shouldn’t be any sort of discrimination however, when it does take place in the eyes of education i.e. school and universities for example, the ones who are being discriminated receive a benefit of lower entry requirements whether that could be for getting into the educational system or exams which they undergo but also receive finical support.

This to me shows there is a public benefit in a society which sees things happening which shouldn’t and that the law is moving more to the political left by benefiting society. It would be questioned whether this is ‘fair’ and ‘equal’. Joanna Southcote; thought she was going to be giving birth to a massacre baby, she had a phantom pregnancy which she had set religion around therefore was questioning herself. Singhs views was that just because something is religious it automatically is for the public benefit . Religion and education are the same thing. Court held that her being religious and following her faith was a public benefit, this still could be contradicted whether this is fair or equal.

Political liberalism focuses on the individual rights and strongly support the law which is very much about individual’s rights and empowering individuals to do what they want. This concept creates a completely different perspective on charities in law to the communitarian perspective. The liberal perspective may be attractive due to involving donors being attracted to social complications they personally care about and they give their chosen charity money rather than the state using tax money to do this. This removes the attitude of the state giving funds to charities who benefit the public. This would cause charities to rely on people having more wealth and to volunteer to donate to charities.

In my opinion, the political basis of the Charities Act 2011 is both liberal and communitarian. On one hand, it is liberal as it is supporting of the view of each individual parent that should have the liberty to choose where they want their child to be educated in a private or state school. The fact that the government supports 2 educational structures, both private and public, shows that they know modern day people have different social values and individually have the right to make decisions. However, it can also be communitarianism as it is based on looking after the welfare of the collective rather than the individual. Public benefit in section 2 means providing for a large group of people, the ‘public’, is a communitarian idea as the purpose of charity is to satisfy the public rather than individuals. Furthermore, the fundamental attitude of Charities allows people to come together forming communities of support.

If the law was to be reformed the focus would have to be on the bursaries and targets, as the arguments being that the wealth of private schools is mixed, and not all private schools would be able to provide them. The Independent school’s council would be required a judicial review of the guidelines’ and interpretation of the law. That trustees of private schools must pursue activities to do this in a way that promoted unrestricted public benefit. While the Charity Commissions retains the power to tell private schools that their activities do not meet the public benefit. The deliberations around the Charities Acts have brought together the themes of fairness, charitable status and public benefit and set the direction for future policy.

However, the problems with reforming the law If laws somehow managed to end up progressively restrictive on the tuition-based school part, it would ruin the relationship between the state and the independent schools. if the public benefits were to be increased numerous schools may quit and return to free organizations with no beneficent status, causing more of segregation among state and independent schools. If they did lose their ‘charitable status’ it would to many pupils being forced to leave private education as many parents would be priced out as of increased school fees as there is no rule on ‘non-profit’ in a business. They would also have to increase fees to cover the VAT increase, as oppose to paying no VAT now, which would also lead to greater segregation and inequality within state schools.

Owen Jones, argues that the independent schools are creating a class people which they have an advantage over other certain individuals; and from the left-wing perspective this is not fair. Independent schools should be taxed because they are a business and however because they are charities they don’t not charge VAT on there fees making them a lot successful. Micheal Groves has slammed on the independent schools as they are using their charitable status to avoid the taxes. Mr Gove criticises the current system for still considering the education of the children of “plutocrats and oligarchs” to be a charitable activity. He argues that removing the tax advantages of private schools would boost standards in the state sector and raise vital extra funds. It’s also said that private schools are a threat because they “failed to help benefit the state school”.

Rawls introduced justice as ‘fairness’ to demonstrate that the general society it creates can persist inconclusively after some time. Moreover, Rawls says that the general society created by the principles is compatible with anyone’ great and can build up the importance to these standards. Society faithfulness to justice is stable is expected to tolerate it over time.

Liberalism is purely a European product, in which the political views are subjected to types of analysis. It’s more a of a ‘absolute’ alternative to other ideologies. If it is found to be more historical can the context bound the relevance within todays modern society. Robert Nozick “imagine a world with no state”. You have the extreme liberal idea where a state is problematized by everything the individuals do and should do to protect themselves because if they don’t they see something which could affect them in the future not necessary in a good or bad way. The liberal’s view to be sure that the pressure comes from the communitarians, the liberals, for example, Keynes and Hobhouse, just as the liberals are looking for any communist option after the Second World War, that the British Welfare State appeared. The liberal’s views on independents schools are that parents would want their children to be going to independent schools, due to the fact there’s a lot more ‘individual freedom’ therefore would benefit them.

Fairness’ as to the idea of justice that John Rawls displays the theory of ‘fairness’ concerns society’s fundamental structure which is “society’s main political, constitutional, social, and economic institutions and how they fit together to form a unified scheme of social cooperation over time”.

Rawls builds the idea of justice as a narrow structure and indisputably states, “Justice as fairness is not a complete contact theory.” Its main demonstration is how we should dispense an agreeable surplus to people in the public society. Accordingly, ‘fairness’ depends on two certain presumptions that the social orders being referred to social collaboration which can work further with everybody’s common advantage as there exists a moderate overflow of accessible surplus to be given. Fairness can’t be operated to decide how individuals in the society when it’s hard. Although, it won’t enable us to distinguish social arrangements where the conditions for example, cultural barriers have been disposed of due to the social adjustments.

Rawls calls the ‘original position,’ these individuals will presumably direct standards of justice. The equal principal, that ‘each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others’. His essential principles that they would be picked as utilitarianism as he would think about the most grounded restriction on justice and fairness. The veil of ignorance, in the first position as commonly impartial balances, attempt to consent to the standards which achieve the best situation for society. As most part of the social job they will endeavor to augment their individual offers of essential products. These products are characterized as “things that every rational man is presumed to want” which is all incorporated in addition to other things such as freedoms, rights and opportunities in society.

In conclusion from a liberal perspective on religion and education I believe that any individual can go to any place of worship such as church and any individual dependant on their financial status are able to go to whichever they feel comfortable either independent school or state school. However, from a communitarian perspective, working together in group an being surrounded by small society for a public benefit but also a benefit for yourself. Being in a happy society with a good group of people is a lot more beneficial as Putnam said although you could also reject that idea because having too many groups within society could cause harm and conflict between groups. Although from a left-perspective there is too much of a concern with the collective on taxing schools and churches which both are fulfilling a public benefit, however, I don’t believe their existence affects the charitable status of each these, therefore believe that they should retain their charitable status.

Introduction

I have chosen the two businesses Burberry and The Rainbow Trust Foundation for this assignment. Burberry is a PLC which means that it is owned by many shareholders, for profit and sells ready-to-wear outwear, fashion accessories, fragrances, sunglasses and cosmetics. The Rainbow Trust Foundation is a charity who gets donations for providing care towards children with cancer or any other illnesses. Being a charity means that the company isn’t for profit.

Ownership and Liability

Burberry is a PLC (Public Limited Company) because it is a large luxury brand and is owned by many shareholders. By being a PLC, the company can advertise its shares and they are listed on Stock exchange which means large numbers of their shares are being bought and sold all the time to whoever wants those shares.

Advantages of being a PLC:

• Because they are listed on the Stock exchange they have a greater number of potential investors than a private company.
• They attract more media coverage because it is owned by many shareholders
• Is likely to attract more interest from the media providing a good form of cheap publicity.

The disadvantage of a PLC:

• More regulated meaning it has more things it must do according to the law for example, producing detailed information on its finances each year and send it to its shareholders giving information away to potential competitors.

As Burberry is a PLC, it has limited liability because of it being such a big company it can own land and equipment since they resource, manufacture and sell their products. The advantage of limited liability is when there is a limit to the amount of money investors can lose; they can only lose the funds invested and not their personal possessions. The disadvantage is that the accounts have to be independently checked.

The Rainbow Trust Foundation is a charity that supports families who has a child aged 0-18 years with life-threatening or terminal illness and needs the support according to their website. Unlike Burberry who makes profit, Rainbow Trust is a non-profit company meaning any money they get from donations they don’t buy anything they already have but to invest in anything they need in order to make useful charitable purposes. The charity is not owned by anyone but is controlled by a board of directors/trustees who are responsible for ensuring the charity are run well to deliver charitable causes. The trustees recruit people who are passionate, motivated and find this particular purpose rewarding since they need to be committed on caring with people.

Pros of becoming a charity:

• Are widely recognised as existing for social good and certain sources of grant funding are open only to organisations with charitable status.

Cons of a charity:

• They may face restrictions that can be carried out or funded and charities cannot raise equity investment (the buying and holding shares of stock).

Purpose and Sector

Burberry is a brand that purely exists for focusing on outdoor attire. Thomas Burberry first supplied a weather-proof gabardine trench coat for World War 1 officers in trenches. Nowadays Burberry is well-known for their trench coats as its name came from trenches where military personnel were sustained in World War 1 to keep officers protected against the wind and rain.

Burberry is in the primary, secondary and tertiary sector since it manufactures, produces and sell their products. The company can take control over their supply chain since it is in more than one sector by knowing the key knowledge that the factories are in which is a huge benefit for the company. There are also disadvantages, for example:

• Burberry is a huge brand worldwide which means they have many manufacturing factories across the world. The operating factories can produce many toxic fumes and pollution which can cause global warming.
• The factories take away crucial space of farmland and requires a large quantity of water in an area where its already sparse.

As Burberry sell, manufacture and improve ideas for the products to hopefully maximize their profit to satisfy the shareholders, compared to Rainbow Trust, it is completely different. Firstly, since Rainbow Trust is a charity, they do not have any stakeholders and most charities are not there for profit. Rainbow Trust purely exists to support families with children with illnesses and working more closely with hospices and other charities and organisations that also support children and their family. Any money that they get from their donations, they will use it to invest to something that can make their services better (growth).

Business Aims and Objectives

PLC’s generally have four main aims for their company such as profit maximisation, growth, increase market shares and survival. For example, Burberry’s goal for growth is to aim to positively impact 1 million people by 2022:

• 65,000 students engaged in Yorkshire, UK, through school workshops and work experience at Burberry
• 18,000 people in Tuscany, Italy, benefitting from enhanced multicultural spaces
• 7,000 people in Afghanistan benefitting from training on more sustainable livestock management

Every PLC’s main aim is to have profit maximisation so Burberry’s aim is to:

• focus on expanding the business year after year and increasing its market share
• maximize profits by reducing costs and generating sales to satisfy their shareholders

Whereas Rainbow Trust is mainly for survival and growth. This is because charities do not get enough profit from the donations and grants they get. They mostly need the money to invest in different things such as revenues to keep their charity open. They make money by using volunteers, hosting gala fundraising events, sponsoring events and advertising to bring in more donations.

Scale and Size

As Burberry is one of the biggest luxury brands in the worldwide, it is an international company meaning that they have stores all around the world (475 stores as of 30/03/19) such as the Asia Pacific, EMEIA (Europe, Middle East and Africa) and America. Burberry has its headquarters in London and has its manufacturing factories throughout the world such as China, Poland, Romania, India, Spain, Italy, England and some in the US.

Advantages of a large enterprise:

• They have a greater degree of security than smaller companies and they offer career growth
• Income that cannot be matched by small companies.

Disadvantages:

• Big companies are usually very slow to act. It can take years to get a new idea accepted
• They can be too layered with management meaning you can find yourself ten layers removed to being a manager, thus being in the dark side about the direction of the company.

Unlike Burberry, Rainbow Trust is a medium enterprise because they have 11-49 employees working since it’s just a charity but there are at least 32 volunteers, 53 staff and 8 care teams of family support workers in 9 locations so this charity is only a national and local charity within the UK. They do not support families internationally since they do not have enough funding.

Stakeholders

Burberry has internal and external stakeholders. Their internal stakeholders are the employees (want to stay employed), managers (only interested in maximizing the profit the business makes), the board of directors and investors (concerned about earning income from their investment). For Rainbow Trust, its internal stakeholders are also the managers, employees and owners but because it is a charity they also have volunteers because they contribute by volunteering with supporting families.

Burberry’s external stakeholders are its suppliers (wants the business to continue purchasing from them), the government (wants the business to pay taxes, employ more people, follow laws and truthfully report its financial conditions), shareholders, creditors (wants to be repaid on time and in full), the society (community wants the business to contribute positively to its local environment and population), customers (wants the business to provide high-quality goods or services at low cost). Rainbow Trust’s external stakeholders are also their suppliers, customers (affects the charity because they are the ones giving donations which is very important for a charity), competition (for example, Make a Wish) and the government. Since charities do not make enough profit like big companies such as Burberry, they receive most of their money from customers and grants from the government.

Conclusion

In conclusion Burberry and The Rainbow Trust Foundation are both very different from each other. Rainbow Trust is a rather small and national charity but as for Burberry, it is a very large company and a very well-known brand across the world.

1. Introduction

To plan, prepare and perform/carry out for an event is sometimes laborious, hard and demanding. To successfully carry out the whole plan for an event, the team has to have the same purpose and the same goal. In this case, as students from the Volume and External Catering Management course we undertook the name Floresta as our organization name to successfully prepare, setup and execute a charity event for Kaibosh in their facility on the 25th of May. The students then, is divided into teams which will be responsible for different things such as logistics, food and beverage, decorations and marketing. Those teams will be led by the original Floresta members that acts as a leader to monitor and delegate tasks to their members, a person from the original member (Mickey) is also appointed to be the manager or the one that oversees the whole teams and he is in charge of reporting and gathering up all the information from those groups. In this report, there will be sub-sections that talks about the logistics, sequence of events and issues that we as a team face during the planning, interpretation of the significance of the events, the outcomes of the decisions made, leadership, followership skills and management structures, customer interaction and feedback, overall evaluation of the event and lastly self-reflection. There will be conclusions made in the end to summarize the key points of the report and recommendations made so that in the future if we were going to create a similar event we will perform better and minimalize our mistakes.

2. Findings and analysis

2.1 Logistics evaluation, sequence of events and issues

One of the most important part of planning for an event is the logistics. According to Partridge (2011), “when the supply chain goes wrong, everything starting from the food safety to supply, consumer satisfaction and management cost is compromised”. Talking about logistics for the charity event, we will start by constructing our ordering list. Our ordering list consists of food and beverage ingredients and equipment.

The most important part in ordering is to know how many numbers you are catering for and to make a list of the items you need and make sure to double check it with the other teams such as the F&B team needs to work with the logistics team to discuss the equipment they need for transporting the food and reheating the food on site, the decoration team also needs to work with the logistics to discuss about their decorations/the items they need to transport before the event day/on the event day itself. For purchasing and inventory control we try to minimalize and save as much profit/donation as we can by only purchasing/hiring what we need. Mainly, the logistics and F&B team is in charge of the purchasing and inventory control, they gather up information from the ordering list. For logistics as they are in charge of equipment, they try to contact companies that can hire equipment for 1 day such as Hiremaster. For the F&B team we try to create a list of ingredients and the total amount needed and send the list to Tia who is in charge of ordering ingredients in LCB. For our equipment, we have created a list and send it to the logistics team so they can know what to hire and what they can get from school for free. In terms of portion control and yield for food and beverage, we only made enough for 30 people as we try to minimalize our food waste, however for the mains we ended up making around 15-20% more because it is an option and we have to provide extra portions for the vegetarian and non-vegetarian options as the consumers will choose their mains on the spot. When planning about this event, as a whole class our concern is always to gain as much profit as we can get so we can increase the donations to Kaibosh. We ended up with some ideas on how to increase our profitability such as by selling booklets and creating a silent auction from the paintings. At the end of the day, our goal for Floresta is to promote sustainability, by minimalizing wastage and reusing ingredients whenever we can and gathering up stuffs from the nature (woods, etc.) and to raise awareness to the local community in Wellington about Kaibosh and what they provide to the community.

In terms of operational procedures every team has their own timeline and tasks written down, it is a detailed timeline and mentions the individual that is in charge of doing it. The teams will list their timeline starting from the event day, going backwards to make sure everything is on time. They also create a risk register plan to specify the risk level and the solutions on how to overcome those risks. Every team also creates an operational plan that mentions how things will work on the preparation day and on the event day so that everyone knows what to do and is efficient, because time is essential for us. For the F&B team we have divided them into different groups that is responsible for different sections (canapé, mains, etc.) and for each sections there is a leader that is appointed. The leaders from each group then creates a work flow so that their team members understand what to do and what technique is required when doing it. As we are still students, some of the techniques that we listed might not be the right technique however thanks to the guidance of our lecturers (Chef Evan and Anita) we ended up using the right technique for preparing the food such as when we were doing the bavarois Chef Evan showed us the right technique such as “folding and cutting” the mixture so that the end result would be perfect and the texture of the bavarois will be correct.

Encourage different people – there are billions of people in this world who are worse of than we exist in any one moment. Some of these people have problems that are not their fault or are beyond their ability to prevent or change. Humans are the social creature and the greatest way for humans to advance is by helping those who are unable to help themselves. We have the duty to care other people, to help those less fortunate than ourselves. When we take some extra currency, time or goods, it is the opportunity to improve out. Now, let’s which importance poses a philanthropy.

First of all, donating to charity is the great mood-booster. The knowledge that you are helping others is tremendously empowering and, in exchange , can make you feel happier and more satisfied. Research has identified the connection between making a donation to charity and increased action in the region of the mind that registers joy – proving that as the old saying goes, it actually is far better to say than to get. In our investigation, Why we say, the thought of social morality was the most widely-given cause to make to charity. Whatever kind of giving work they supported, 96 percent said they thought they had the moral obligation to use what they had to encourage others, the feeling very often rooted in their personal values and principles. So, we have that using charity you can give the majority part of people a chance to start new life with new goals, and, may be, have some response about that in future.

The second point of advantages is you can meet new people – donations to charity give you the opportunity to meet new people and increase your circle of acquaintances. This is particularly true when you give and share with your time, experience or expertise to a worthy reason. While most charitable organizations and project usually require money, some would not operate without the army of volunteers. Whether you abandon your time one day a week to serve meals, make a couple of minutes a chance to sit with the elderly or travel overseas to help build homes, you can surely meet many like-minded people along this way. Also as existing expected sallies, who knows where these current relationships will take you and how these new people might be able to assist you in the future. You can expand your social level, create new treatments, which benefit you will be able to get immediately or over time.

Other statement, why goodwill is essential and important part of our live is the psychology of generosity. With positive self-esteem and self-worth comes a genuinely more optimistic mood and outlook on life as even more health benefits of giving. Studies show that donating money to charity has been proven to have a positive impact on the brain. These effects are similar to activities people usually associate with joy and happiness such as eating, exercising, or affectionate gestures like giving someone a hug. Different chemical reactions can lead to an ongoing pattern of improved mental health and well-being. Keep this in mind the next time you’re having a bad day and need something uplifting to draw from. There are many advantages of helping others, as donating can help better somebody else’s life and lead to a healthier you. How we see, along with helping other inhabitants of our planer, we also can enhance our health conditions from psychological side.

And the final aspect of charity is improving the world community. We’re all trying to make the world a better place. The holidays are a time where we can appreciate the people and causes we hold dear. One person’s charitable giving can help the greater good of humanity, positively impacting more people than a giver may ever comprehend their donation could reach. In many parts of the world, others are not so fortunate. Charitable communities help foster a happier and healthier world by improving the quality of life for those around us as a whole. By doing this world better, you “prepare the ground” for next generations, including your heritage too.

On my mind, doing the charity is really good and necessary action. Philanthropist and victim get their benefits and help, no one stays away. All this activities can enhance our humanity’s status and develop ourselves. Of course, somebody can say that “charity can lead to favoritism rather than justice” or “charities often target symptoms rather than causes”. But it does not matter, because we cannot let our social level and humanness fall down. It is how we can save ourselves and create the best future. Taking care and help each other.

“Take care of the human inside of yourself” Anton Pavlovich Chekhov.

CHARITY

Charity is an act of benevolence. It is the practice of giving and sharing what we have with those who do not have. It means voluntary giving your help to those who need it. Acts of charity could be in form of cash, material gifts, quality time or kind words. It could be in the form of providing basic necessities like food, water, clothing, shelter, healthcare, education, occupation and security. You could give directly, volunteer for a charitable organization or invest in a charitable trust. The recipients of charity are often; the poor, beggars, orphans, widows, homeless, jobless, stranded, handicap, ailing or injured people. Recipients of charity could also be the people close to you who desperately need your help. Remember the saying, “Charity begins at home”. If we can give to strangers, we should also be able to give to our very own. Every act of charity gives the recipients a lease to life and a hope for survival. Charity is a selfless act. Most people think it is solely a religious practice like an extension of almsgiving but, I do not agree. I think everybody should be able to display generosity at some point in their lives.

WHY SHOULD WE GIVE?

You may be wondering, “Why should I waste my money on someone else when I’ve got my own problems?”

I know right. I mean, what all the fuzz about anyway? It’s not like their problems go away forever when you help them. They will always need your help and you will have to give out your hard earned money again and again and again. Just as you are battling with your thoughts, some other people are thinking that it is a tool for enabling poverty and encouraging laziness.

You must understand that we do not live in a perfect world. Everyone can never attain the same live of financial status. Even the bible says we shall always have the poor among us. It’s not just a 3rd world country thing. If you conduct a thorough survey of developing and world power countries, you will find that there are still poor people among them. It is easy to get lost in our pile of problems or become overwhelmed by life’s troubles and think our chicken change cannot make a difference. There will always be people out there who need your help. The least you can do is to offer that help them. I’m not asking you go overboard or donate all your wealth to charity. All I’m saying is take it one day at a time. Doing the little you can when you can is more than enough. Every little bit helps. If you do not have the means to give, you can volunteer for a charity organization.

Contrary to popular opinion, you stand to gain a lot by being generous. The giver is rewarded as much as the recipient. Some even say it has health benefits and it boosts our mental well-being. In fact, people who live in developed country are given tax breaks for participating in acts of charity.

The Ripple Effect of Kindness

Charity works for the greater good of the society. We are often told not to expect anything in return when we show kindness to people. That is the best approach so our expectations are not disappointed. Whoever you help today is really under no obligation to repay or reciprocate. In fact, if that is your reason for giving or helping in the first place, then you are missing the point. That is not the purpose of charity. Charity is helping people even when you know they do not have the capacity to repay you. However, there is something occurs when we are kind to people. Some sort of ripple effect occurs. You know how you dip your finger into a bowl of water and the entire water is stirred. Another scenario is when a drop of water stirs the entire ocean. That is a ripple effect and kindness causes that kind of effect. Humanity is connected in more ways than we can imagine. Charity produces a ripple effect that effects every single individual in this planet.

When we show kindness to people, we create a chain reaction which causes that kindness to find its way back to us. It’s like the law of attraction of the universe. What we constantly think about or desire becomes ours. What you do also comes back to you. It doesn’t just apply to karma. It applies to everything we do. The good we do always has a way of coming back to us. Perhaps not through the same people or in the same manner but it always comes back. So you see, it really is better to give than to receive.

Here’s another way the ripple effect words. It produces kindness in people. Sometimes, when we do good to people that are overwhelmed by our act of kindness that they feel the need to do same for others. So as a sign of gratitude, they vow to help some other person who may need their help in future. One little act of kindness gives birth to several other acts of kindness. Remember I said it is a chain reaction. That is the philosophy behind the clause, “Pay it forward”. So instead of repaying that act of charity ‘back’ to you, they pay it ‘forward’ to another person. This way, that act of charity is passed on from one person to the other until it spreads to the whole world. Won’t it be good to live in a world where everyone is kind and generosity to each other? I think it will make the world a better. So sometimes, when people are good to us for no reason in particular, do not be quick to conclude that it was a divine orchestration of favour or grace. It could just be that they are paying their gratitude forward.

Our charitable actions can compel or inspire others to do same. Yes, you may not know it but someone is watching you. Now these people are not even in the original chain reaction. They are just people who observe and admire of acts of generosity either from a close range or a far and they are inspired to do same. Your good works begins to stir up their passion. Even if they once had reservations about charity, as they watch and see the joy you bring to people through those good deeds, they will begin to see the need to do same. These people could be your spouse, friends, family members, colleagues, distant relations, neighbors, flat mates, roommates, classmates, acquaintances, church members, business partners, mentee or even your secret admirers.

Let’s not also forget your children. We keep saying that they are leaders of tomorrow, but what are we teaching them to do differently from the leaders of today. You can start by sharing your charity experiences and exploits with them. Research shows that children learn better through observation than mere words. They will listen if you tell them to do something but it does not guarantee that they will do it. However, if they see you doing it, they are most likely to do same. Promote generosity among your children. Teaching them the importance of charity at an early age shows them that they too can make positive impact in the world. It helps build that virtue in them early enough before they are exposed to the toxins in this world. When they watch you give to the less privileged, they are more likely to adopt that lifestyle when they are grown. They will grow up a greater sense of care towards other people and a heart of gratitude for what they have. It could even become a transitional family ritual.

Generosity is contagious. One simple act of charity can change the course of the world.

Character Building

Charity is a great way of building ourselves and reinforcing our own personal values. Charity helps us build our social conscience and a sense of moral duty towards each other. This is one act that builds up our personal values and principles. It causes us to live a life that truly reflects the ethics and values we profess. It opens our eyes to see the suffering and vulnerability of others. It makes us recognize our own good fortune. It helps us to become grateful for the little we can afford while being careful not to hurt people in our quest for more. That is why prisoners and youth corps members are encouraged to participate in community development. That is the first step to building our sense of responsibility and obligation.

Charity also improves our interpersonal and social interaction skills. We truly need to create human connection during our acts of charity. You can’t just walk up to people frowning and twitching your nose and then you tell them that you came to help them. Listen, they already have a lot they are dealing with. Do not add your nasty attitude to the list. You are there to uplift their spirit not pull them down. You have to show them warmth and care. The only you can do that is by being friendly towards them. It helps you become more humble and polite when relating with other people. Participating in acts of charity also helps to boost our self –esteem and self-confidence. We become more appreciative of our lives and the things we are privileged to possess. It gradually debunks our negative outlook to life. It changes our mindset and perception completely.

Charity is a good tool for financial management. When we plan our charity goals, we need to make a financial commitment to it. If we really want to achieve that goal, we would have to include it in our monthly financial budget. It makes us pay closer attention to our bank statements. We begin to track our expense to avoid running behind the estimated budget.

A Sense of Fulfillment

Charity gives us a sense of fulfillment. People who give are happier people. It brings a great deal of joy and contentment to us. Psychologists say it activates the pleasure centre in our brains. Isn’t it lovely to see the smile on their faces? Inasmuch as we hate to admit it. It makes us feel good about ourselves. It gives our life more meaning. We actually rise by lifting others and that’s what charity gives us the opportunity to do. The knowledge of our own goodwill overwhelms us with this sense of happiness and satisfaction. Being able to improve the lives of other people in our own little or big way is fulfilling. It gives us a great sense of personal satisfaction. Is it okay for us to pride in ourselves for participating in impacting the world positively through charity? Well, I will say it never hurts to applaud yourself once in a while. It is a sign that you are enjoying what you’re doing. It even propels you to do more. If you do not enjoy the moment you share with those people while helping them, it’s only a matter of time before irritability and grumbling sets in. It’s just the same way we feel happy after eating, playing, swimming, vacationing, shopping or participating in fun activities. Charity could be your own way of fulfilling purpose.

Don’t get caught up in the life’s problems and troubles that you can’t spare a minute to display a single act of kindness to someone who needs it.

LITTLE DRPOS OF LOVE

…Simple ways of practicing charity

I choose to call acts of charity “little drops of love” because these seemingly simple things we do to help the less privileged creates a special effect in their heart. That is the true evidence of love. A love that only boosts of what it a can do without actually doing is not love at all. A love that only gives for the benefits that will be given in return is not love. A love that has terms and conditions for its expression is a lot of things but deficiently not love. The love I know is kind, selfless, sacrificial and unconditional. Like wonder they love is not just a feeling. It is a decision. It is a decision to open our hearts to give care and support to someone without expecting anything in return. Small acts of kindness can have enormous impact on the recipient. It may seem like a mere gesture to you but it means everything to them. It feels like doing less but it actually brings us more. It is regenerative in an amazing way. It is a medicine for true happiness. These little gestures count. Jordan Carroll said,

“Sometimes it is actually the smallest gestures that can make the biggest impact”

What is your excuse for not charitable? You do need to become mega millionaire before you can practice little acts of kindness. All you need are these easy, simple and inexpensive practices.

Occasionally, you should go through your properties and select item you’ve not used in a long time. They could be items you do not like. Or items you have no need for. Select such items and give them to people who really need them. Moreover, decluttering your living space will do you some good. It is a remedy to excessive attachment to material things.

In this part of the world, we always seem to be in a hurry. We are so into ourselves. All we care about is how to satisfy out immediate needs that we do not take cognizance of the people around us. It must be “Me, Myself and I or we won’t hear of it. While you are in a haste to make ends meet, pause for a minute and give these ones priority over yourself. It is as simple as letting someone take your turn on the queue in the bank, supermarket or at an office. Yes, it is as simple as letting them go first. Who knows? There own emergency may be more serious than yours.

When you go grocery shopping or any other activities, do not spend the little change that remains on snacks or other frivolities. Save them up consistently. When they must accumulated into a handsome amount, give them to someone who needs them. It could be that relative who has money problems or the beggar on the street who is not sure of his breakfast that morning. You could also engage in monthly donations, giving activities in your local church and volunteering for charitable organizations. If you do not want to give in cash, you could think of several options. You could decide to give them random gift little gifts like; Books, cards, clothes, health care support etc.

You could participate in this challenge. Spare 5 minutes in a day to do something nice for someone you barely known. Doing this will instill the habit of kindness in our hearts.

Whatever you say must be a true reflection of your heart. You may not know what they are going through but your kind words. Let every compliment you pay to people be heartfelt. It should resonate with their hearts and put a smile on their face.

The disposal of leftover food in a waste dump it is an awful sight to behold. You may not need that food but there are many people out there who desperately need it. Don’t store your food items in the fridge for them to soil. Wrap up leftovers and unwanted food items. Walk into the streets and you will find someone who truly needs them.

Try practicing charity whenever you have the opportunity. You won’t regret for get him.