Charities benefitting the Organisers

It seems every week we are being told of yet another charity function whether gay organised or otherwise.
What we are not being told is that in many cases those who are organising these various functions are making huge profits for themselves and when it suits their margins they are giving some of the funds to various worthy causes.
I recently visited Pattaya coming from here from via Bangkok and Europe and was appalled to discover that only a small percentage if any of the "takings" actually go to charities the rest of what is collected actually is shared between those running these events.
I know this because my partner's brother who is Thai was being chased by a farang who took us all out to dinner at his expense. He got very drunk and showed us a wad of severel thousand baht notes which he said was his share of some recent charitiable event.
I did some checking and discovered he was indeed one of the organisers.
Surely there is some control or accountability on these individuals?
I for one will never again contribute to such events knowing what I do now of what happens to my cash given believing wrongly it is going to a good cause.

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

that may have been some of my baht in his wad.

This was one of Hedda's hobby horses as well

[Marsilius]

"This was one of Hedda's hobby horses as well."

That fact does not, in itself, invalidate the legitimate concern that many others of us have about this issue.

What a dreadful man boasting about making money from a charitable event.

I have given the matter a fair bit of thought over the years with people wanting full accounting and - buzz word - transparency.

First and foremost, we must remember that the Gay world in Pattaya raise astonishing amounts of money for very worthwhile charities. A lot of good people give a lot of time and effort to organize events and foremost of these is the Pattaya Gay Festival.

I think that there is nothing wrong with venues who host events making a reasonable profit.

I think it should be crystal clear in the publicity what sums raised are to go to charity. The PGF seems to lead the way here and their norm seems to be that a portion of the entrance fee, profits from raffles/lucky numbers, flowers bought for a contest and a percentage of the drink sales will be contributed. Short of flooding the place with independent investigators this cannot be expected to be a proven amount.

I do admire the way that Madam Jim keeps announcing how sales and door money is growing during events. One can ask no more.

The PGF also publish clear accounts on their website. I don't see how they could do anything better than they do.

Other gay charity events seem less motivated to raise money for charity. Bangkok Pride has not gone that route to any degree.

I think that these events in Pattaya have brought the gay community together and provide us with brilliant entertainment and fun dinners and help our wallets slim down.

Please remember that not all bar events are charity events. Also some bars donate event moneys to the PGF but on an independent basis.

I hate when people say there is something dishonest about charities without full detail. Especially when they say that, for that reason, they are not going to give to charities.

Even if you give money to charities direct you can never be sure exactly where it goes. Government Aid from Western countries very often finishes up in the pockets of the rulers.

I would ask Karl Heinz to say if the charity referred to in his posting was a gay one.

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

but he had a good point.

I prefer to give charity direct where I see it's needed.

But Madame Jim is excellent and does charity well..full marks to her.

[Bob]

As long as the charitable event discloses what amount (either what portion of a ticket purchase or percentage of whatever sales) are going to the given charity, then who cares if the business also makes a profit on top of that? Let's not be silly,
there wouldn't be the quantity of charitable events if the businesses who participated suffered significant losses while putting on the events. As noted, Madame Jim and the PGF have raised phenomenal amounts for charity - and it's my hope that all the businesses which have participated have made some money doing it as it increases the likelihood of further fundraisers.
Some previously posted that somehow it was unethical for a business to make money on a charitable event. That's baloney in my view and, so long as the business openly states what portion is going to the charity, further disclosure of gross or net incomes is none of anybody's business except the owners.
Franky, likely due to discussions of this very topic here and on other boards, we've seen a lot more of the disclosures regarding the percentage or take for the charity. With that information, you can reasonably decide whether to participate or not. If you don't like what amount is going to the charity, then don't go, simple as that.
Direct giving is admirable, for sure, but eliminating the sponsored events and leaving it all to direct giving would, unfortunately (just my view), result in less money going to the charities.

Allegedly some Bona Fide charities in the UK absorb up to 95% of income in salary, adminstration & advertising costs, leaving about 5% to be paid out to the good cause.

Wherever you are in the world, if you really care where the money goes, check out the figures before contributing.

J

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

and what you say about the UK is most likely reflected in most western countries. I never give money to the huge charities anymore-not after meeting a few highly paid board execs and professional fundraisers from them. There are some exceptions..a couple run by the Catholic church where priests and nuns do the same job as these execs would usually do and the bulk of money does actually reach the poor.

But the small charities based in Pattaya like PGF do a great job and should be applauded. When charities are on a smaller scale like that and discussed so much on boards like this they are kosher.

(whatever happened to the $$$$billions raised after the tsunami ??..or is the Red Cross still sitting on most of it ?)

[catawampuscat]

I checked Karl heinz first posting as his second posting is the one where he reveals the shock horrors of red rashes.

Nobody uses their full name (except JB) and nobody would spell their family name without a capital letter. Obviously a fraudulent
handle and probably not even German.

Both of this newbies post cast aspersions on Pattaya farangs and tell outrageous tales of corrupt charity organizers and now
a bar owner forcing boys to fuck him..

I sure as hell see a pattern and my guess is somebody has an agenda and is using this forum to further his own twisted agenda.
I wonder who he is. If George knows and needs a hand to rearrange this phony's puss, just pm me and I will wear my steel knuckles. :cat:

I cant see what difference it make who Karl Heinz is, even if he has 57 different handles, as long as what he says has some credence of truth, even though the fact he has not answered to any salient points mentioned in his "A** G**" GO GO BAR" Post, where he was saying the boys were so handsome, his 20 year old companion, had to off one and then found out he has an itch. this happens in many bars as for the rest well, you can only wonder what that's all about.

As far as Charities in Thailand are concerned there are no Registered Gay Charities in Thailand, because there is a 25% tax added to them, so whats the point, as wow pow so rightly says, as long as they are transparent I think they do a wonderful job and with all the money Pattaya Gay Festival takes in, via the most amazing "Madam Jim" in my book, he can keep the rest, if there is any, because I know him so well he would only donate it to his favorite charity.

Its not people masquerading as phony posters that bother me, you can ignor them, and they soon get caught out, its phony people masquerading as pom-pas asses, trying desperately to get any one who will listen, to make them think they are highly Intelligent, when in reality they think they get a medal for trying to pretend they so much more important than any one else, if you ever met some of them, you would scream to get away, even if they bought you a drink, as boring is not the word, just face it, if you just read there posts, your get the picture. You always know when a pretend snob writes, here, he starts by trying to put another poster down, as though he knows better, when in reality he just is screaming to be loved, but thinks because he is looking down his nose at every one, this helps to make people think he is intelligent, wrong again. it make us all think, he is a big buffoon.

[jinks]

I sure as hell see a pattern

Me and Bob too.... on the watch list :faroah:

As far as Charities in Thailand are concerned there are no Registered Gay Charities in Thailand, because there is a 25% tax added to them

I would hate to be considered "pom-pas", but this is simply incorrect. There is no "25% tax" added to or deducted from charitable donations; what you presumably refer to is the fact that only a limited amount of charitable donations made and declared by registered companies in their annual accounts in Thailand are tax deductible - a totally different matter.

The question of whether fund raisers are profiteers or saints is an old one which neither side can agree on and which can never be answered definitively until those concerned (including the fund raisers) publish their accounts in full.

Catholic charities ... no better (and not necessarily any worse) than any other - when did you last see a starving priest?

I checked Karl heinz first posting as his second posting is the one where he reveals the shock horrors of red rashes.

Nobody uses their full name (except JB) and nobody would spell their family name without a capital letter. Obviously a fraudulent
handle and probably not even German.

Both of this newbies post cast aspersions on Pattaya farangs and tell outrageous tales of corrupt charity organizers and now
a bar owner forcing boys to fuck him..

I sure as hell see a pattern and my guess is somebody has an agenda and is using this forum to further his own twisted agenda.
I wonder who he is. If George knows and needs a hand to rearrange this phony's puss, just pm me and I will wear my steel knuckles. :cat:and im prepared to help with my steel toe capped boots

[travelerjim]

[quote="TiT Bits":3lhmba3d]As far as Charities in Thailand are concerned there are no Registered Gay Charities in Thailand, because there is a 25% tax added to them

I would hate to be considered "pom-pas", but this is simply incorrect. There is no "25% tax" added to or deducted from charitable donations; what you presumably refer to is the fact that only a limited amount of charitable donations made and declared by registered companies in their annual accounts in Thailand are tax deductible - a totally different matter.

The question of whether fund raisers are profiteers or saints is an old one which neither side can agree on and which can never be answered definitively until those concerned (including the fund raisers) publish their accounts in full.

Catholic charities ... no better (and not necessarily any worse) than any other - when did you last see a starving priest?[/quote:3lhmba3d]

GF...

It has been a few years since those of us who organized and were originally on the Thais4Life Committee....
researched the registration of a charity in Thailand...and at that time....

We were advised by a distinguished and experienced Thai Attorney in North Pattaya
that there indeed ...was a tax placed on all donations "received" by a charity in Thailand.

I believe he said 10% tax...or possibly it was the VAT of 7%...
but I think it was 10% tax on donations "received".

At the time we felt the tax unfair and did not incorporate the Thais4Life in Thailand.

Has this so called "tax" on donations "received" changed?

I would welcome the good news if it has been and there is NO tax on donations "received" by charity...
that is different than a taxpayer being able to "deduct" contributions they made to a charity in Thailand
on their Thailand Tax return.

Thanks for the information and update.

TravelerJim

[dab69]

i don't want to recall the second post of this lowlife.
should his identity be found would be serious retribution.

that, and fake review sites of someone's bar.
connection?

[Geezer]

I made the following post last night, checked to insure it was тАЬupтАЭ (the post, that is) and edited it twice, but cannot find it now. I think it is only of importance to those with no experience in Pattaya, as others would raise an eyebrow at such a statement.


his 20 year old companion, had to off one and then found out he has an itch. this happens in many bars

I must take exception to this statement. I have a very good friend who, after eight years and over a thousand trysts from all kinds of bars, has only had an тАЬitchтАЭ (both times scabies) twice.

DELETED

Hi John,

That is why I have always given, for want of a better word, 'Goods as opposed to money" then we know where it is going.


I prefer to be a fundraiser rather than an administrator, hand the money over and get on with my life, it also saves me the grief of explaining myself every morning, afertnoon and evening.

All the best everyone.

travelerjim,

that is the case as explained to me at length by an experienced Thai accountant whom I checked with when I was asked to be a trustee for a charity (an invitation I turned down, for a number of reasons not relevant here). Some charities can, however, be liable for tax themselves depending on how they are incorporated and if their aims do not meet certain criteria; most charities mentioned here would meet those criteria.

I hope you and those previously / currently involved with Thais4Life note that elsewhere I have, on a number of occasions, made it clear that I consider Thais4Life to be one of the very few charities in Pattaya whose accounting and integrity are clear for all to see and above reproach.

travelerjim,

that is the case as explained to me at length by an experienced Thai accountant whom I checked with when I was asked to be a trustee for a charity (an invitation I turned down, for a number of reasons not relevant here). Some charities can, however, be liable for tax themselves depending on how they are incorporated and if their aims do not meet certain criteria; most charities mentioned here would meet those criteria.

I hope you and those previously / currently involved with Thais4Life note that elsewhere I have, on a number of occasions, made it clear that I consider Thais4Life to be one of the very few charities in Pattaya whose accounting and integrity are clear for all to see and above reproach.

I have actually assisted without question as I know the people involved and would never question their integrity.

[dab69]

much like "social working" agencies,whose NGOs graft farang sized employee wages, the meager left overs go to the clients ( in the form of western based values/mind control?)

much like "social working" agencies,whose NGOs graft farang sized employee wages, the meager left overs go to the clients ( in the form of western based values/mind control?)And your point is?

[dab69]

dont feed no-life feeble minded trolls with huge post counts?

dont feed no-life feeble minded trolls with huge post counts?You old sweet-talker, you

[thaiguest]

[quote="TiT Bits":25oiq2pz]As far as Charities in Thailand are concerned there are no Registered Gay Charities in Thailand, because there is a 25% tax added to them

I would hate to be considered "pom-pas", but this is simply incorrect. There is no "25% tax" added to or deducted from charitable donations; what you presumably refer to is the fact that only a limited amount of charitable donations made and declared by registered companies in their annual accounts in Thailand are tax deductible - a totally different matter.

The question of whether fund raisers are profiteers or saints is an old one which neither side can agree on and which can never be answered definitively until those concerned (including the fund raisers) publish their accounts in full.

Catholic charities ... no better (and not necessarily any worse) than any other - when did you last see a starving priest?[/quote:25oiq2pz]

The original point made was that catholic charities ( and I assume all mainstream church charities) have a transborder infrastructure manned by unpaid clerics to administer the donations directly in the field. No chief executives, executives, fancy jeeps and expense accounts. What good would a starving priest be among the starving except to be a burden?Why doesn't the poster contact some of the priests in Sudan etc and ask them directly what they're not themselves starving?

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

John Botting-JB indeed uses his real and full name to his credit but so do I !!he and I are the only ones and I'm proud of it..

I know you think I jest but O'Booze is my name .I'm Irish on my mother's side and Irish through a friend of my fathers.

John Botting-JB indeed uses his real and full name to his credit but so do I !!he and I are the only ones and I'm proud of itNot so fast, Lunchtime. Ever since my niece Aunty outed me, the family name has been emblazoned on my Blog - http://www.sawatdee-gay-thailand.com/fo ... g.php?w=40 (http://www.sawatdee-gay-thailand.com/forum/weblog.php?w=40)

The original point made was that catholic charities ( and I assume all mainstream church charities) have a transborder infrastructure manned by unpaid clerics to administer the donations directly in the field. No chief executives, executives, fancy jeeps and expense accounts. What good would a starving priest be among the starving except to be a burden?Why doesn't the poster contact some of the priests in Sudan etc and ask them directly what they're not themselves starving?

I have checked carefully and I failed to find any point, original or otherwise, referring to Catholic charities having "a transborder infrastructure", etc, etc. This appears to be as accurate as the rest of your post.

By "a transborder infrastructure manned by unpaid clerics" you presumably mean the locally employed volunteers "in the field", not the administrators being paid to work safely in their comfortable offices in their home countries?

Unless the Catholic church has changed a great deal since I last attended mass it has a considerable number of highly paid executives and chief executives, with very large expense accounts and running costs outmatched only by its capital wealth - the last chief executive took over three years ago.

Most of the priests in Sudan, being Sudanese, are starving, along with their congregations. I fail to see the relevance of this to a thread on charities here.

[thaiguest]

The original point made was that catholic charities ( and I assume all mainstream church charities) have a transborder infrastructure manned by unpaid clerics to administer the donations directly in the field. No chief executives, executives, fancy jeeps and expense accounts. What good would a starving priest be among the starving except to be a burden?Why doesn't the poster contact some of the priests in Sudan etc and ask them directly what they're not themselves starving?

I have checked carefully and I failed to find any point, original or otherwise, referring to Catholic charities having "a transborder infrastructure", etc, etc. This appears to be as accurate as the rest of your post.

By "a transborder infrastructure manned by unpaid clerics" you presumably mean the locally employed volunteers "in the field", not the administrators being paid to work safely in their comfortable offices in their home countries?

Unless the Catholic church has changed a great deal since I last attended mass it has a considerable number of highly paid executives and chief executives, with very large expense accounts and running costs outmatched only by its capital wealth - the last chief executive took over three years ago.

Most of the priests in Sudan, being Sudanese, are starving, along with their congregations. I fail to see the relevance of this to a thread on charities here.

What I mean by transborder infrastructure is the basic structure of the mainstream churches such as catholic and episcopalian, namely; DIOCESE AND PARISH UNITS plus RELIGIOUS ORDERS. If you attended mass once in your life only you should know this.
The point being made is simple; to administer charity to the poor, the orphaned, the starving, these bodies don't have to reinvent the wheel.
Many charities in Thailand: hospitals, orphanages etc. are run through these local but universally connected units hence the relevance to the thread here.
Now that you HAVE found some priests who are starving i hope you'll DO something about it.

The point being made is simple; to administer charity to the poor, the orphaned, the starving, these bodies don't have to reinvent the wheel.... Many charities in Thailand: hospitals, orphanages etc. are run through these local but universally connected units hence the relevance to the thread here.

My point is equally simple. Just because a charity is run by a Christian (or any religious) order does not necessarily mean that the charity is any better run, better administered, has lower overheads / salaries / administrative costs, etc, or cares more for "the poor, the orphaned, the starving, ... hospitals, orphanages, etc" than one which is totally secular. This applies in Pattaya as much as anywhere else.

A purely hypothetical question, as this thread is going way off-course, but why should I choose to help starving priests in preference to anyone else in a similar position? The Catholic church, since you mention it, hardly needs my "widow's mite" to support it financially.

"Beware of the scribes who like to go about in long robes and have salutations in the market place and the best seats in the synagogues and the place of honour at feasts, who devour widows' houses and for a pretence make long prayers. They will receive the greater condemnation"
Mark 12: 28-34 / Luke 10: 25-28

[thaiguest]

The point being made is simple; to administer charity to the poor, the orphaned, the starving, these bodies don't have to reinvent the wheel.... Many charities in Thailand: hospitals, orphanages etc. are run through these local but universally connected units hence the relevance to the thread here.

My point is equally simple. Just because a charity is run by a Christian (or any religious) order does not necessarily mean that the charity is any better run, better administered, has lower overheads / salaries / administrative costs, etc, or cares more for "the poor, the orphaned, the starving, ... hospitals, orphanages, etc" than one which is totally secular. This applies in Pattaya as much as anywhere else.

A purely hypothetical question, as this thread is going way off-course, but why should I choose to help starving priests in preference to anyone else in a similar position? The Catholic church, since you mention it, hardly needs my "widow's mite" to support it financially.

"Beware of the scribes who like to go about in long robes and have salutations in the market place and the best seats in the synagogues and the place of honour at feasts, who devour widows' houses and for a pretence make long prayers. They will receive the greater condemnation"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But sir I'm only replying to your posts. On 31/01/08 you asked, perhaps rhetorically, "when did you last see a starving priest?". By 02/02/08 you found enough to justify the following claim " most of the priests in the Sudan, being sudan, are starving". What's going on here? Cyberspace is a strange place. I'm leaving this strand.
thaiguest chapter finito.

What's going on here?

What's going on is that far from "replying to my posts" you are taking part of a reply and misquoting it, totally out of context.

On 31/01/08 I responded to another poster who implied that "priests and nuns" from "the Catholic church" did a similar job to "highly paid board execs" and passed on more of the funds collected to "the poor" - a point I disagreed with on the grounds that they were "no better (and not necessarily any worse) than any other".

On 02/02/08 you wrote that "the original point made was that catholic charities (and I assume all mainstream church charities) have a transborder infrastructure manned by unpaid clerics ... etc ... Why doesn't the poster contact some of the priests in Sudan etc and ask them directly what they're not themselves starving?".

This was not the original point, as I said, and I added that "most of the priests in Sudan, being Sudanese, are starving, along with their congregations. I fail to see the relevance of this to a thread on charities here." I still fail to see any relevance, as most of these are parish priests, with no connection with any charitable organisations.

On 02/02/08 you stated that "transborder infrastructure is the basic structure of the mainstream churches such as catholic and episcopalean, namely diocese and parish units ..." This is demonstrably and totally incorrect. With the exception of the Jesuits, who are organised very differently, the Catholic church is administered and run with a strict hierarchy and national divisions, with only the very top echelon having any "transborder" (international) responsibility - again irrelevant here, however, which is why I did not make the point. You went on to say "now that you have found some priests who are starving i hope you'll do something about it" - an ill-informed and forlorn hope, since most of the 4% of the Sudanese population who are Christian live in SPLA controlled areas where very little international aid is allowed, and one Sudanese Catholic Bishop stated that "65% of the aid is diverted to the SPLA".

Cyberspace is a strange place. I'm leaving this strand.

The one point on which we agree and the best thing for both of us; you are making a fool of yourself with your posts, and I am making more of a fool of myself by replying.