The Stinginess and Meaness of Conservatives Touches Me Personally

[BoberFett]

Dude and to think I thought you were one of the good guys. I am extremely disappointed in you.

What a scumbag you are, you only want to donate money when it gets you a day off work. Piece of shit.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

bshole sounds like a greedy piece of shit. Only donates when it benefits him, and gets pissed off when others don't donate to benefit him.

I didn't realize you had a problem with being a "greedy piece of shit."

 

[TuSpockShakur]

The OP is a real American idiot.

From the pen of a liberal...

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I'm thankful that my problems seem so small in comparison.

 

[realibrad]

OK, lets use your burger analogy since its almost lunch time.

Lets say I work for a burger joint. The company says that if I work an hour, they will pay me $5. They also say that if I donate $5 to the Home For Retired Democratic Idiots, I can have 2 hours off paid. The company paid me $5, I gave away the $5 and the company paid me $10. So in reality, all that happened was the company gave me an extra $5.

Getting paid $5 is not charity.

Maybe. Its also not forced labor either.

 

[squarecut1]

Second, conservatives are more generous than liberals when it comes to giving to charity. Work in a nonprofit for a few years and you'll get a completely different view of Republicans. Where do most of your dollars come from? Major gifts from the wealthy elite. Who can afford to give these gifts? Business owners.

Not talking about absolute numbers, but it is a fact, across all different cultures and continents, that the less wealthy and poor donate a greater percentage of what they have compared to the rich - regardless of any political affiliations. The less fortunate often do not have the time and luxury to have strong political views anyway.

 

[realibrad]

you dont get it do you?

I dont know how simple i have to make it for you.

The company said that is 90% of the employees donate, 100% of the employees get an extra day off. But if 80% of employees donate, 0% of the employees get an extra day of.

Lets make this even simpler.

Say there are 10 employees in the company.

9 donate to united way. all 10 get a day off
8 donate to united way. ZERO get a day off.


Dont you see how that creates a hostile work environment that will force employees to donate?

8 employees donate, they figure out who didn't. Now these 8 want an extra day off, so they band together to bully the other 2 into donating.


This situation is not at all like your made up example that if I donate I get a day off, and if I do not donate I dont get a day off.

If I do not donate, YOU dont get a day off.

The problem you have, is that you are making a lot of assumptions you dont seem to realize.

Not giving someone extra is not punishment. If the office is going to bully the people who did not want to donate, then that is a problem. Having said that, I don't see how you are defending the idea anyone was forced. It seems like now you are saying it was a bad in how it was implemented, which might be the case. I am talking about how people feel like someone was forced. There is a difference in compelled and forced.

The fact that the option was given that would allow those who did not want to donate would receive nothing "extra" means they were not forced. Its compelling to get an extra day of pto, but not forced. If a supermodel wants to sleep with me, and I don't have any better options, I am not forced, just compelled.

 

[thraashman]

I didn't realize you had a problem with being a "greedy piece of shit."

It's Bober, he's more a fan of the just being a piece of shit in general. That's sorta his schtick.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Absolutely true story.

This year, our human resources department has started a brand new United Way campaign. This year they divided the company into teams based on department. If 90% of your team donates a measly $3/week to the United Week, your entire team gets 1 day paid vacation!

Well I got pretty excited and started discussing it with my department. It seems like most everybody is down except 2. The two that are adamently opposed are tea party type religious conservatives. Always railing against welfare, etc.... Well these two douche bags say that this incentive program is blackmail. I was like, you two are always railing against welfare and that charity should take care of these people and yet here you are screwing over the entire department because you refuse to give to charity. I have to wonder if these two are outliers or are symptomatic of the whole conservative movement...... selfish motherfuckers who don't give a shit about the poor and needy.

Anyhow, no paid vacation day for me and now we have two employees that are loathed by the entire department

Misleading thread title......

Thread title should be -- bshole crying because other want to exercise their right to freely choose where to donate their money!!

 

[JEDIYoda]

I'm thankful that my problems seem so small in comparison.

<-- ain`t that the truth!!

 

[rudeguy]

Maybe. Its also not forced labor either.

no one said anything about forced labor you dolt

 

[JEDIYoda]

What a scumbag you are, you only want to donate money when it gets you a day off work. Piece of shit.

<-- another accurate way of looking at this whole boondoggle!!

 

[JEDIYoda]

The idea of charity is to do it out of the goodness of your heart because its the right thing to do.

<-- never truer words spoken!!

 

[realibrad]

no one said anything about forced labor you dolt

This seems tough for you.

When the person gets paid for making burgers, they are paid for...."Labor".
At no point was the person forced to work. This is about the use of force to get something. Stay on topic and this will be much easier.

So, if the extra money was not charity, what was it? What would you label it?

 

[FerrelGeek]

Dude and to think I thought you were one of the good guys. I am extremely disappointed in you.

So your definition of 'good' is spending money to benefit you??? You're even more fubared than I though.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Very well said. But you'll never convince the libs on here of this.

Two things. First, michael1980 is right, in that promotions like this create a hostile work environment because it pits employees against each other and leaves no room for someone to say, "no" without getting flack from every one of their coworkers. That's terrible for morale and outside of the realm of best practices for proper ways to encourage donations to nonprofits in a professional environment.

Second, conservatives are more generous than liberals when it comes to giving to charity. Work in a nonprofit for a few years and you'll get a completely different view of Republicans. Where do most of your dollars come from? Major gifts from the wealthy elite. Who can afford to give these gifts? Business owners. And business owners have a strong lean towards conservative values. No one who has actual fundraising experience believes that conservatives are "stingy and mean," because you'd have to be blind and stupid to believe that when they're your biggest supporters. Admittedly, they are more likely to support religious causes while liberals are more likely to be irreligious, and that tweaks the numbers a bit, but conservative-leaning people still give a greater percentage of their income to charity than liberals across all economic levels outside of "the ten richest people in the world." Saying that someone is stingy and mean because they don't support the same charity as you is arrogant and greedy.

 

[rudeguy]

This seems tough for you.

When the person gets paid for making burgers, they are paid for...."Labor".
At no point was the person forced to work. This is about the use of force to get something. Stay on topic and this will be much easier.

So, if the extra money was not charity, what was it? What would you label it?

no one said anything about forced labor


You are beyond a dolt, you are a full fledged moron. Please stop posting. Forever.

 

[bshole]

So your definition of 'good' is spending money to benefit you??? You're even more fubared than I though.

No, my definition of good is doing things to benefit your fellow man. There is absolutely no argument that donating to the United Way helps your fellow Americans. Furthermore, all of the dollars raised stay right within the community and are applied to local programs helping your immediate neighbors. If somebody can't recognize that and donate a few bucks a week, they have a severely broken moral compass. They are putting selfishness and politics above humanity. The most meaningful things you do in life frequently involve acts of love, compassion and charity to your fellow man. Conservatives give money to build ever more glittery churches that benefit nobody, how about doing something that actually is of value to the less fortunate?

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Dude and to think I thought you were one of the good guys. I am extremely disappointed in you.

The United Way is a sham - you really should do some research. I donate my money other places and never under duress - if a place I have donated in the past calls and starts harassing me, they're off my donation list.

 

[JEDIYoda]

There is absolutely no argument that donating to the United Way helps your fellow Americans. Furthermore, all of the dollars raised stay right within the community and are applied to local programs helping your immediate neighbors. If somebody can't recognize that and donate a few bucks a week,

not true..
http://charity.lovetoknow.com/Where_Does_My_United_Way_Money_Go

When you contribute to the United Way, you are actually giving money to an umbrella organization consisting of more than 1,800 local United Way agencies in countries all over the world. Most of your donation stays in your local community, supporting charities you designate, while a portion is used for administrative expenses and fundraising. Since each local United Way has its own unique expenses, you have to look to your local organization to determine just where your donation goes.

Worldwide United Way claimed combined administrative and fundraising expenses in 2011 of 17 percent, meaning that they spend approximately 17 cents for every dollar donated on organizational costs, and the other 83 cents go directly towards community projects. This is well below Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance Standards for Charity Accountability that allow up to 35 percent in overhead costs. Each local United Way agency, however, is different, so the first thing you need to do is find your local agency's information about its overhead costs.

 

[The Merg]

The problem you have, is that you are making a lot of assumptions you dont seem to realize.

Not giving someone extra is not punishment. If the office is going to bully the people who did not want to donate, then that is a problem. Having said that, I don't see how you are defending the idea anyone was forced. It seems like now you are saying it was a bad in how it was implemented, which might be the case. I am talking about how people feel like someone was forced. There is a difference in compelled and forced.

The fact that the option was given that would allow those who did not want to donate would receive nothing "extra" means they were not forced. Its compelling to get an extra day of pto, but not forced. If a supermodel wants to sleep with me, and I don't have any better options, I am not forced, just compelled.

I definitely see your point, but I would say that is would cause a case of peer pressure. While not being forced exactly, being subjected to peer pressure can sure feel like that.

- Merg

 

[realibrad]

no one said anything about forced labor


You are beyond a dolt, you are a full fledged moron. Please stop posting. Forever.

I just explained why forced labor was used.

 

[realibrad]

I definitely see your point, but I would say that is would cause a case of peer pressure. While not being forced exactly, being subjected to peer pressure can sure feel like that.

- Merg

Totally agree. It may even be the case that this was targeted to do just that. As a self identified libertarian, I would be upset if that were the case. I have chosen to make things harder on my self by not caving on my morals. I understand why those people did what they did. I might have done it though, because the benefit over all would be almost zero. I could have used my day off, to spread the word of how bad the charity was, but thats me.

What I take issue with, is the idea anyone was forced to do anything, even though clearly nothing happened. It just seems stupid.

 

[squarecut1]

There is absolutely no argument that donating to the United Way helps your fellow Americans.

That is quite debatable. But even if it were true, it is irrelevant.

A percentage of everyone's income goes towards helping the fellow Americans, through taxes. There should not be any sort of pressure to donate. People donate as they see fit, to whom they see fit. With money, with time, with efforts. That is their choice, and you should respect that.

In fact the stunt your company pulled is quite unethical and they should not be allowed by law to give people that kind of "incentive" (read pressure) to donate to their designated charity. That is just wrong.

 

[The Merg]

That is quite debatable.

So true. Around me the United Way had multiple scandals where they found that donations through them only led to about 20% of the funds getting to the charities they support.

I just opted to donate to the charities directly and not use the United Way.

- Merg