school fundraisers

Beliavsky wrote:
My son's Catholic school periodically has fundraisers where he can
sell $X worth of goods (calendars, cookies etc.) or his parents can
just write a check for some slightly lesser amount. I don't mind just
paying, since the overall costs are still pretty low. I wonder,
though, if kids can pick up important skills, in particular
salesmanship, by participating in fundraisers. How do people decide
whether to have a child involved in raising money or to just pay
directly?

Personally, I don't like fundraisers. If I wish to donate to the
organization, I will. For the most part, the stuff you get when you buy
from fundraisers is not worth it, unless it is something you would buy
anyway (never happened to me, except, once in a while, some magazines).

There are a few exceptions, like the family of kid I knew with cancer
had a fund raiser to pay for the treatments. Great family. And, I think
the kid made it.

When I give money to NPR stations, I don't even want the "free"
thank-you gift. You can't deduct the value of the free gift (so if you
donate $100 and get a $30 thank-you gift, you can only deduct $70). And
the station has to pay shipping and handling. If I wanted the thank-you
gift, I would have gone to a store an bought it.

Jeff

On Nov 20, 9:28�am, Beliavsky wrote:
My son's Catholic school periodically has fundraisers where he can
sell $X worth of goods (calendars, cookies etc.) or his parents can
just write a check for some slightly lesser amount. I don't mind just
paying, since the overall costs are still pretty low. I wonder,
though, if kids can pick up important skills, in particular
salesmanship, by participating in fundraisers. How do people decide
whether to have a child involved in raising money or to just pay
directly?

I can't stand school fundraisers. I can tolerate the fundraising movie
nights for students and the like, but that's about it.

I hate that they suck all children into an assembly and get them
geaked out over useless/cheap prizes that wind up in the garbage by
the end of the day.

I don't believe young children should be involved whatsoever, as they
cannot go out alone to do so or even relay why it is they are doing
it, tell to whom the check should be made payable, or make change. It
is also a let down for those children who have only one working parent
who also works amongst peers of the same age group with children
selling at the same time, etc. No hope of ever really competing. Our
system does not accept direct contributions either, which really chaps
my ass. We have one fundraiser for cookie dough that tells the
children they get $1 for every bucket they sell; for this one, I pay
my children $20 to NOT participate. It goes against the purpose.

Someone I know had a good idea -- why not make the teachers
participate in the generation of funds?

I participated in high school as a student myself and sold quite a
bit, but I was of an appropriate age to be doing so.

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 04:07:09 GMT, Jeff
wrote:


When I give money to NPR stations, I don't even want the "free"
thank-you gift. You can't deduct the value of the free gift (so if you
donate $100 and get a $30 thank-you gift, you can only deduct $70). And
the station has to pay shipping and handling. If I wanted the thank-you
gift, I would have gone to a store an bought it.

Jeff

I don't usually watch Oprah, but I happened to see a segment today
that was pretty impressive.

Bill Clinton was on promoting his new book. It's called Giving and is
a who's who of philanthropic organizations and civic organizations
that make a real difference in people's lives.

Muhammad Yunus, founder of the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh, was awarded
the Nobel Peace Prize for 2006. Nearly everyone discounted the
success of such microcredit programs when they began, but it seems
they have beaten the odds and now a website has been started to allow
us to participate in loaning small amounts to real people who want to
begin businesses to help themselves out of poverty. Due to Oprah's
popularity, the website is experiencing heavy traffic, atm, but it's a
great idea, in my opinion. According to the Oprah show over 90% of
the loans have been repaid in full.

http://www.kiva.org/

We let you loan to the working poor

Kiva lets you connect with and loan money to unique small businesses
in the developing world. By choosing a business on Kiva.org, you can
"sponsor a business" and help the world's working poor make great
strides towards economic independence. Throughout the course of the
loan (usually 6-12 months), you can receive email journal updates from
the business you've sponsored. As loans are repaid, you get your loan
money back.

We partner with organizations all over the world

Kiva partners with existing microfinance institutions. In doing so, we
gain access to outstanding entrepreneurs from impoverished communities
world-wide. Our partners are experts in choosing qualified borrowers.
That said, they are usually short on funds. Through Kiva.org, our
partners upload their borrower profiles directly to the site so you
can lend to them.

We show you where your money goes

Kiva provides a data-rich, transparent lending platform for the poor.
We are constantly working to make the system more transparent to show
how money flows throughout the entire cycle. The below diagram shows
briefly how money gets from you to a third-world borrower, and back!

We facilitate connections

Kiva is using the power of the internet to facilitate one-to-one
connections that were previously prohibitively expensive. Child
sponsorship has always been a high overhead business. Kiva creates a
similar interpersonal connection at much lower costs due to the
instant, inexpensive nature of internet delivery. The individuals
featured on our website are real people who need a loan and are
waiting for socially-minded individuals like you to lend them money.

--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

On Nov 21, 8:09 pm, Chris wrote:
On Nov 20, 9:28�am, Beliavsky wrote:

My son's Catholic school periodically has fundraisers where he can
sell $X worth of goods (calendars, cookies etc.) or his parents can
just write a check for some slightly lesser amount. I don't mind just
paying, since the overall costs are still pretty low. I wonder,
though, if kids can pick up important skills, in particular
salesmanship, by participating in fundraisers. How do people decide
whether to have a child involved in raising money or to just pay
directly?

I can't stand school fundraisers. I can tolerate the fundraising movie
nights for students and the like, but that's about it.

Our (public) school no longer sells 'stuff',' excluding a Scholastic
bookfair -- for the most part, the fundraisers are for the activity
involved (e.g., kids washing cars so they can go to XYZ camp). We're
requested to donate to the various dinner dance/auction-type things
that occur, or to write a check, but that's about it.

I hate that they suck all children into an assembly and get them
geaked out over useless/cheap prizes that wind up in the garbage by
the end of the day.

That sounds really difficult and annoying.

I don't believe young children should be involved whatsoever, as they
cannot go out alone to do so or even relay why it is they are doing
it, tell to whom the check should be made payable, or make change. It
is also a let down for those children who have only one working parent
who also works amongst peers of the same age group with children
selling at the same time, etc. No hope of ever really competing. Our
system does not accept direct contributions either, which really chaps
my ass. We have one fundraiser for cookie dough that tells the
children they get $1 for every bucket they sell; for this one, I pay
my children $20 to NOT participate. It goes against the purpose.

Someone I know had a good idea -- why not make the teachers
participate in the generation of funds?

Our fundraisers (e.g., dinner dance and auction) go to support random
extracurricular activities or 'things' (e.g., crew sculls). There are
kids who do their own individual fundraising as they'd like to
participate in an after-school activity or sport, and everything is on
a paid basis (including generic non-sports things like Yearbook).

Caledonia

On Nov 21, 5:09 pm, Chris wrote:

Someone I know had a good idea -- why not make the teachers
participate in the generation of funds?

This sounds to me like a slap in the face to people who already work
hard for peanuts. Many, if not most teachers already do participate
in the generation of funds by using their own personal money to buy
things for the classroom. We then turn around and say, hey you with
the college degree working for far less than you could earn in another
field, already spending your own money for basics that we ought to be
providing you, that's not enough -- now you need to spend your
personal time raising money for the school. Sounds like a singularly
awful idea to me.

Kate, ignorant foot soldier of the medical cartel
and the Bug, 4 years old
and a boy brewing, 4/08

Akuvikate wrote:
On Nov 21, 5:09 pm, Chris wrote:
Someone I know had a good idea -- why not make the teachers
participate in the generation of funds?

This sounds to me like a slap in the face to people who already work
hard for peanuts. Many, if not most teachers already do participate
in the generation of funds by using their own personal money to buy
things for the classroom. We then turn around and say, hey you with
the college degree working for far less than you could earn in another
field, already spending your own money for basics that we ought to be
providing you, that's not enough -- now you need to spend your
personal time raising money for the school. Sounds like a singularly
awful idea to me.

And besides that, teachers often *do* participate in
the fundraising. Every year at our school's silent auction,
some of the most popular items are those involving donations
from the teachers (an afternoon bowling with Mr. Smith, a
trip to the arcade with Ms. Jones, etc.). Whenever there
are dinner fundraisers (eat at Potbelly's tonight and X percent
of the profits go to the school), there are teachers and school
staff all over the place.

Best wishes,
Ericka

On Nov 23, 10:00 am, Ericka Kammerer wrote:
Akuvikate wrote:
On Nov 21, 5:09 pm, Chris wrote:
Someone I know had a good idea -- why not make the teachers
participate in the generation of funds?

This sounds to me like a slap in the face to people who already work
hard for peanuts. Many, if not most teachers already do participate
in the generation of funds by using their own personal money to buy
things for the classroom. We then turn around and say, hey you with
the college degree working for far less than you could earn in another
field, already spending your own money for basics that we ought to be
providing you, that's not enough -- now you need to spend your
personal time raising money for the school. Sounds like a singularly
awful idea to me.

And besides that, teachers often *do* participate in
the fundraising. Every year at our school's silent auction,
some of the most popular items are those involving donations
from the teachers (an afternoon bowling with Mr. Smith, a
trip to the arcade with Ms. Jones, etc.). Whenever there
are dinner fundraisers (eat at Potbelly's tonight and X percent
of the profits go to the school), there are teachers and school
staff all over the place.

Probably because many teachers love what they do and care deeply about
their school, and that's a wonderful thing. But to "make" teachers
participate is not at all in the same spirit.

Kate, ignorant foot soldier of the medical cartel
and the Bug, 4 years old
and a boy brewing, 4/08

Akuvikate wrote:
On Nov 23, 10:00 am, Ericka Kammerer wrote:
Akuvikate wrote:
On Nov 21, 5:09 pm, Chris wrote:
Someone I know had a good idea -- why not make the teachers
participate in the generation of funds?
This sounds to me like a slap in the face to people who already work
hard for peanuts. Many, if not most teachers already do participate
in the generation of funds by using their own personal money to buy
things for the classroom. We then turn around and say, hey you with
the college degree working for far less than you could earn in another
field, already spending your own money for basics that we ought to be
providing you, that's not enough -- now you need to spend your
personal time raising money for the school. Sounds like a singularly
awful idea to me.
And besides that, teachers often *do* participate in
the fundraising. Every year at our school's silent auction,
some of the most popular items are those involving donations
from the teachers (an afternoon bowling with Mr. Smith, a
trip to the arcade with Ms. Jones, etc.). Whenever there
are dinner fundraisers (eat at Potbelly's tonight and X percent
of the profits go to the school), there are teachers and school
staff all over the place.

Probably because many teachers love what they do and care deeply about
their school, and that's a wonderful thing. But to "make" teachers
participate is not at all in the same spirit.

Oh, I agree. Just pointing out that it might not even
have any effect, given that the teachers may already be participating.

Best wishes,
Ericka

"Akuvikate" wrote in message
...
On Nov 21, 5:09 pm, Chris wrote:

Someone I know had a good idea -- why not make the teachers
participate in the generation of funds?

This sounds to me like a slap in the face to people who already work
hard for peanuts.

Peanuts? you have to be kidding. Almost every person in my DH's family is
an teacher ... most of them make WELL over the norm for the area that they
live in. This is an old and tired argument. The benefits that teachers get
are amazing. Absolutely no one I know in the private sector even comes
close to the benefits that teachers receive.
It's not that they don't work hard for what they earn .. they deserve the
money that they earn .. but it's not bad ... not bad at all.
Anyway ... IMO all the pimping at schools should stop ... teachers, kids,
parents, etc. No one should be asked/made to buy stuff. A bake sale here
and there is ok, a car wash, a 'rent a teen day' where kids do yard work for
$$ to go to band camp .. those are ok to a point.

On Nov 24, 5:19�am, "Woolstitcher" wrote:
"Akuvikate" wrote in message

...

On Nov 21, 5:09 pm, Chris wrote:

Someone I know had a good idea -- why not make the teachers
participate in the generation of funds?

This sounds to me like a slap in the face to people who already work
hard for peanuts.

Peanuts? �you have to be kidding. �Almost every person in my DH's family is
an teacher ... most of them make WELL over the norm for the area that they
live in. �This is an old and tired argument. �The benefits that teachers get
are amazing. �Absolutely no one I know in the private sector even comes
close to the benefits that teachers receive.
It's not that they don't work hard for what they earn .. they deserve the
money that they earn .. but it's not bad ... not bad at all.
Anyway ... IMO all the pimping at schools should stop ... teachers, kids,
parents, etc. �No one should be asked/made to buy stuff. �A bake sale here
and there is ok, a car wash, a 'rent a teen day' where kids do yard work for
$$ to go to band camp .. those are ok to a point.

I agree. We've already figured out the average hourly rate of a
teacher, overtime included, as compared to other high-paying full-time
(i.e. nonseasonal) professional occupations wherein the employee is
salaried and also does not receive overtime. Is a teachers presence at
movie night any different than the employee attending the after-hours
board meeting or convention? Nope. Annually, the numbers differ, but
certainly not hourly. I have teachers in my family as well, and they
are the first to confirm the awesome benefits and perks. Fundraising
for things like band uniforms and such, sure kids should be involved,
(and elementary kids aren't involved in activities requiring uniforms
for much of anything), but for things needed for school, all should be
participating, including the teachers who purchase things individually
for their classrooms and write them off.