Optimising charity!?

Begins, by starting at home and forcing recalcitrant corrupt administrations to use their own taxpayer funds to support their own as opposed to spending it on arms and bullets to control their own dissidents' all while alleged leaders live lavish lifestyles, where no expense is spared!?

If our alleged foreign aid could be directed solely to those in need as manufactured here gifts of SMR, MRS? Thorium and deionisation dialysis desalination plants.

Place truly affordable, clean, cheap, safe, carbon-free power and cost-effective irrigation via potable water, in their hands and then just wait for the transformation that has to follow, in every which way!

We could end local pockets of poverty one destitute village at a time.

My concern is and remains those stories that claim as much of our hard-won charity dollar, funds administration? Reportedly, as high as 80%?

And therefore would favour our charitable donations be funnelled into a direct, adopt a village outcome where every penny collected goes directly to a responsible village matriarch, who would need to keep receipts and account for every dollar! If only to ensure the flow of donated funds continues!

As a few of the more intelligent sons and daughters received university scholarships in water management etc and nuclear physics/engineering, etc. So when complete, able to start taking care of the running of donated, poverty ending, infrastructure?

Other than that? We can keep pouring money down black holes and support a few in lifestyles they've grown accustomed to as the situation goes inevitably from bad to worse! All over the drought-ravaged areas of the globe! And that's not assisting anyone in actual need!

Take care and stay safe.
Alan B.

I choose strictly local ones, run by local people. I wouldn’t trust ‘Oxfam, World Vision, the International Rescue Committee, Doctors Without Borders or UNICEF, particularly World Vision and Unicef, who have history. People are more and more reluctant to give to charities, which are now more businesses than they are charities, with the extra odour of tax exemption and Left wing lobbying.

I have stated countless times that aid should only be in the form of locally produced goods & commodities, not money !

So, judging by the reactions to this thread, would it be safe to assume that most Australians prefer sending foreign aid money instead of sending Australian manufacturing to the wall ?

should of course be... instead of not sending .....

Just some thoughts in response to the article and comments: 1) I think it is reasonable that aid organizations take moderate administrative costs out of donations. 2) Not to do the above, will tend to mean that the aid is not properly directed. 3) Aid organizations also need to advertise, within reasonable limits of course. 4) There is the issue of whether aid is directed towards appropriate development, although the donor should check on this. 5) I was interested in the post about the destruction of Australian manufacturing - I was wondering whether the person posting this might elaborate?