graeme_p - 6:51 am on Dec 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

I have ZERO use for any national 'charity' which has people sitting at the top making six and seven figure salaries. I will give to local charities/groups - the ones I know where the people running it are actually working for free because they believe in their cause and are actually trying to improve their community.

Very true. I live in a developing (hopefully!) country and I give to two charities I know well: a home for the destitute (now also an orphanage etc.) and to my church (which has many very poor people in its congregation while most of the affluent have moved away).

Some of the global charities are even worse. Some are good, but unless you see what they do on the ground you do not know which are which.

The very poor are let down by everyone who should help them. Some people who came here to help after the tsunami spent a lot of time sitting by the pool in resort hotels. Others were volunteers being paid expenses that were more than it would cost to hire a local to do the work. Others were faking their expenses. The government efforts were no better - slow, bureaucratic, and (you can take this for granted) corrupt .

The biggest waste is hiring people at Western expat rates. For example, I once met a European (I cannot remember which country) graphic designer working for the Red Cross (I cannot remember WHICH Red Cross though) here. There are LOTS of good graphic designers here (I have worked with some) who would be MUCH cheaper. There are plenty more like that (IT admins, managers, accountants, management).

Of course the hire of people with unavailable technical expertise, or whose job benefits from being a foreigners (travelling in a war zone) is good, and an organisation might want one or two key managers to be drawn from a global pool.

I would consider a discount for a school or verifiable charity like Goodwill, Salvation Army, etc. but probably not for individuals.

I think helping individuals whose story you can verify is good - but I could find more than I could possibly help.

I hate to sound harsh here but if they can't afford it, and it's not food and clothing, they probably don't need it.

I half agree. I think helping education is also good, as is help that will help people get on their feet. A Jesuit priest I know loaned a fisherman the money to buy new nets. Mirco credit organisations do that kind of lending on a systematic basis.

Donating a computer or books might help a child learn, which might keep them out of poverty later.

Also, an inexpensive (to anyone here) treat makes a huge difference to people to have very little. One meal that is actually nice, rather than adequate, a school bag that is not a hand-me-down, a toy....

Huge difference between NEED and WANT

Not to an economist!