Commercials featuring celebrities are always going to be loaded with bullshit. Actors who are paid to pretend to be something they’re not for a living shouldn’t suddenly make you believe they genuinely care about these cancer patients that the commercial shoves in your face. Yes, cancer is a problem that afflicts millions of people, but that shouldn’t make your emotional and irrational side of your brain con you into giving money to these organizations that claim to help people.
The first thing to realize is that these nonprofits operate like any other business, except that they also beg for taxpayer money more than for-profit ventures do by a longshot. These organizations, such as the Jimmy Fund, American Cancer Society, and others are frauds that parasitically trick gullible people, governments, and corporations into paying their salaries and operating an immensely glorified middle-man that merely exists to toot its own horn.
Buying into the feel-good money machine that is nonprofits grants you bragging rights and a good conscience that gives you a dopamine/oxytocin rush for giving money to someone who says it will stop an evil that is plaguing this world. Many stores ask you upon checkout if you want to donate a dollar to whatever cause is on the screen. Sure, it’s only a dollar, but how much of it actually goes to the cause? I’ve asked this every time when it comes up, and 100% of the time I get the same “I don’t know” answer by the clerk that is being paid minimum wage. While I don’t expect the poor sap behind the counter to actually know this, the fact that the store doesn’t inform their employees is rather poor business practice. If the hapless consumer doesn’t know how much is actually going to researchers to cure cancers, you might as well be putting your dollar right into the CEO’s pocket.
How many times have you seen advertisements for nonprofits? Probably everywhere and anywhere. They are on billboards, commercials, high-traffic websites, movie theater screens, cars, taxis, etc. They feature sports stars, celebrities, and politicians. These ad spaces and people cost money – a lot of money. Wouldn’t you think that these nonprofits would be better suited to spending their money on curing the disease that they constantly claim to be a problem? How much money is wasted on getting to you the message to donate to the cause than actually helping the cause?
The truth of the matter is that these organizations have zero interest in the people that need help, and instead are driven by pure greed and Machiavellian manipulation. Their prerogative is not in assisting researchers or paying for treatments, but in duping more people in covering their enormous overhead costs that keep increasing every year. In order for them to be “nonprofit,” they have to not make a profit. Get it? If they have a million dollars after everything is paid for, they simply increase the salaries of their managers, or pay for advertisements. There, no profit made.
The scheme is so grandiose, that it has infected every part of the globe and inhabits every industry in our lives. Do these nonprofits actually do the research? Are they directly involved with the laboratory work and painstakingly testing and retesting compounds and methods for science?
According to the American Cancer Society’s Wikipedia page, the company’s donations are 37% patient support, 16% research, 13.1% prevention, 9.2% detection and treatment, and the remaining 25% cover overhead and salaries. According to the Better Business Bureau, which acts as a universal stamp of approval and validation for nonprofits, organizations should spend 65% of their expenses on program activities. I’m sure that there are proper documents addressing the definition of “program activities,” but as it stands on public pages, the meaning is ambiguous at best.
These organizations have also been publicly called out for outright stealing the money they get for themselves – if paying yourself a salary for taking donations isn’t already stealing enough. Here are just a few examples of these “trusted and caring” people taking donations for their own personal vanity:
SELF Inc.’s chief program director Nathaniel E. Robinson was charged with spending $154,000 of charity funds on car repairs, expensive restaurants, and theme park trips. SELF claims to help the homeless.
Kevin L. Baker, the former treasurer for the Kent Little League in Washington, in court after being sentenced to 22 months in jail for stealing more than $200,000 from the club.
Brian Farley, treasurer of Pennsylvania’s Tri-Boro Youth Soccer Club, was caught pocketing $120,000.
Father Bruce Ritter, founder of Covenant House, a shelter for homeless teenagers, stole $25,000. He also sexually abused a number of kids that had to stay there.
William Aramony served for 22 years as president and CEO of United Way of America (UWA), the umbrella group for thousands of local United Way organizations that fund social and human service projects nationwide. In 1992, Aramony resigned amidst allegations that he siphoned money from UWA through spin-off companies he helped to create. He stole $1.2 million.
In 1989, philanthropist and entrepreneur John Bennett, Jr. founded the Foundation for New Era Philanthropy (New Era), an organization which boldly promised to double the investments of nonprofits. In reality, New Era was nothing more than a Ponzi scheme that, at the time of its collapse, was considered the biggest financial scandal in the history of American charities. Victims lost $135 million to New Era over its five and a half years of operation.
Lorraine Hale of Hale House, which provided help for children touched by poverty, drug abuse, and AIDS, stole over $700,000 from her charity.
Roger Chapin, a self-described “non-profit entrepreneur,” has founded more than thirty charities and advocacy projects over the past forty-four years. His causes have ranged from curing Alzheimer’s disease and cancer, to assisting veterans. He stole over $42 million, using the money on himself, his friends and endorsements.
Larry Jones of Feed the Children was involved in numerous scandals with his charity. He took donated goods for himself, paid millions to advertising companies that employed his relatives, and gave himself and his family who work for him tons of raises of the years for their work.
These are just a few of the numerous greedy persons that run and have high positions in these organizations.
A question that one must ask when giving money to “fight cancer” or any other cause they have an emotional stake in is why don’t the labs or the people who actually use the money for solving the problem set up an account at Paypal or Patreon and directly get donations there? Is there a required amount of hands the money must go through before it actually gets used for its intended purpose? Are the labs and research centers forbidden from taking money directly from original benefactors and therefore legally bound to the whims of the nonprofit? To conclude, nonprofits have no need to exist. They don’t create any value. The only thing they do is sell their perceived utility of being a middle-man for the transfer and dilution of funds given to them to advertisers, managers, executives, and lastly – the people who actually need it.