Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Perfidious charities, Catholic and Protestant

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Perfidious charities, Catholic and Protestant

    One of the things I'm not going to forget (and neither will any of you, as long as I'm around) is just how thoroughly and completely so-called 'charities' have been instrumental in bringing this immigration debacle to a head. First, Catholic Charities:

    Originally posted by Allan Wall
    As of November of 2013, the group’s total revenue was $4.39 billion. Of that total, more than 66%—$ 2.916 billion—came from the government.

    Government agencies that have contracts with Catholic Charities include: the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Justice, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Labor, and the Department of Homeland Security. [President’s Budget Proposal 2014, Catholic Charities]

    So much for passing around the collection plate.

    Needless to say, Catholic Charities is hardly a neutral observer in the immigration debate. Not surprisingly considering its financial self-interest, the group supports amnesty.

    But don’t worry—treason is ecumenical. Protestant groups aren’t letting the Catholics get all the government funding.

    For example, Baptist Child and Family Services (BCFS) sounds like a Red State charity out of Richard Dawkins’s fever dreams, but it’s actually the government contractor that snagged a $50 million deal to purchase the Palm Aire Resort hotel in Texas. BCFS was to make it into a resort hotel for illegal alien minors. [Feds to Open $50 million resort for illegal children – complete with tennis courts, sauna & pools (updated), by Kristinn Taylor, Gateway Pundit, July 16, 2014]

    After the story was posted on the Drudge Report, BCFS withdrew its bid because of the negative attention. But don’t worry—it has plenty more government contracts where that came from. [UPDATE on BCFS: Using the word “Baptist” in the Government organization title doesn’t make it a Church, by Mara Zebest, Gateway Pundit, July 17, 2014]
    What about the immigrant right to privacy?

    In the end, your tax dollars go into the pockets of people like Kevin Dinnin [pictured right] President and CEO of Baptist Child and Family Services Emergency Management Division (email him). He receives a salary of at least $477,799 annually. The organization’s entire payroll amounted to $33 million.

    This isn’t unusual. Time’s Altman and Dias report:

    "The median salary for the CEOs of nonprofit organizations like BCFS was about $285,000 in 2011, according to a 2013 survey by Charity Navigator."

    Altman and Dias also explain why the government is so secretive about all this:

    "To shield vulnerable kids from angry opponents of immigration and the media spotlight, the government declines to disclose the locations and activities of many of the facilities operated by BCFS and similar organizations."

    But while the Left says it aims to “shield vulnerable kids,” it is really protecting profiteers like Dinnin.
    xkevin-dinnin.jpg.pagespeed.ic.Ni-za7BZZh.jpg
    Kevin Dinnin, who totally has a right to privacy in his public financial schemes.

    As usual, the culture follows the church in actual behavior if not stated morality:

    Needless to say, secular groups are also getting in on the action. An outfit called Wolverine Human Services received federal funds to dump illegal aliens on the small town of Vassar, Michigan. [Wolverine Human Services on housing refugee teens in Vassar: ‘We can’t make everyone happy,” by Lindsay Knake, Michigan Live, July 9, 2014]

    As these groups have learned, illegal immigration isn’t just government policy. It’s a moneymaking scam that eliminates the distinction between charities and business.

    As Brenda Walker reported, one “deluxe detention center for illegal aliens” in Texas is run by The GEO Group, a private prison company. However, this “private” company relies on the same government sources for funding as supposed “charities” and religious groups.

    Perhaps some of the people involved in these groups have good intentions. But the U.S. government does not exist to cater to their pathological altruism. And the government should certainly not be redistributing our tax dollars to these people and calling it “charity.”

    In the face of this massive conflict of interest, what we need in dealing with these multimillion dollar “nonprofits” and their millionaire “charitable” executives is more cynicism.

    These alleged charities are indistinguishable from the self-interested plutocrats of the Cheap Labor lobby—what VDARE.com calls the “Slave Power.”

    Above all, these privileged recipients of state largesse have no business lecturing Americans, who provide their ill-gotten gains, about morality.
    Some secularists seem quite eager to make those same lectures here. Before you do, please post your salaries and funding sources so that we may either mock or pillory you at our leisure.

  • #2
    Pretend I'm stupid (shouldn't be hard for you) and connect the dots a bit more. Why does Catholic Charities receiving government money result in a conflict of interest?
    Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Spartacus View Post
      Pretend I'm stupid (shouldn't be hard for you) and connect the dots a bit more. Why does Catholic Charities receiving government money result in a conflict of interest?
      I am going to pretend that you're just intelligent enough to see conflicts of interest. Maybe you are not thinking hard enough. Come on, a bit more effort might do the job.

      Let me see, what would charities look like, if no government were pouring out money? No bureaucracy would be involved. You do realize that bureaucracies tend to grow their budgets and spending? And we don't have charities competing for government funding. If we did have government funding, that means charities jump through hoops for bureaucrats' favors.

      I have to confess so far I can't think of a concrete example of charity managers having conflicts of interest. When I find an example, I'll post here again.
      The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu

      [T]he truth Iím after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -ó Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Truthseeker View Post
        I am going to pretend that you're just intelligent enough to see conflicts of interest. Maybe you are not thinking hard enough. Come on, a bit more effort might do the job.

        Let me see, what would charities look like, if no government were pouring out money? No bureaucracy would be involved. You do realize that bureaucracies tend to grow their budgets and spending? And we don't have charities competing for government funding. If we did have government funding, that means charities jump through hoops for bureaucrats' favors.

        I have to confess so far I can't think of a concrete example of charity managers having conflicts of interest. When I find an example, I'll post here again.
        Not only is it necessary to demonstrate a conflict of interest, but to demonstrate that the conflict of interest, rather than anything else, is what leads to Catholic advocacy of amnesty. Neither has yet been demonstrated to my satisfaction.
        Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Spartacus View Post
          Not only is it necessary to demonstrate a conflict of interest, but to demonstrate that the conflict of interest, rather than anything else, is what leads to Catholic advocacy of amnesty. Neither has yet been demonstrated to my satisfaction.
          amnesty = more poor people = more government charity money to help take care of them
          "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

          There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
            amnesty = more poor people = more government charity money to help take care of them
            The goal of charity is to remove the need for charity. How do you think the charity provided by these organizations encourages desperation instead of cures it?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
              amnesty = more poor people = more government charity money to help take care of them
              Amnesty gives more of these people a way out of poverty... and even if it didn't, how would Catholic Charities benefit from having more money to take care of the poor? In order to have a conflict of interest, you kind of have to have an actual interest in the outcome.
              Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.

              Comment


              • #8
                The management and the bureaucracy of a few or many charity organizations may have an interest in getting as much money as to spend on themselves as they can get.
                The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu

                [T]he truth Iím after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -ó Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Truthseeker View Post
                  The management and the bureaucracy of a few or many charity organizations may have an interest in getting as much money as to spend on themselves as they can get.
                  Ever heard of this thing called "low overhead"? Unless you can demonstrate that Catholic Charities, and not just the Baptist organization the article mentions, would use a substantial portion of any new funding to sustain bureaucratic graft, you don't have a leg to stand on. The claim you're making is ultimately an empirical one. Unless you have proof, all you're doing is defaming people who have dedicated substantial talent and treasure to taking care of the poor.
                  Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
                    The goal of charity is to remove the need for charity.
                    True charity, yes.

                    How do you think the charity provided by these organizations encourages desperation instead of cures it?
                    By importing large numbers of people who don't have the mental or social capacity to get out of poverty, you give the charity assigned to take care of them an infinite justification to demand more funding. Simple, easy to remember.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Spartacus View Post
                      Ever heard of this thing called "low overhead"? Unless you can demonstrate that Catholic Charities, and not just the Baptist organization the article mentions, would use a substantial portion of any new funding to sustain bureaucratic graft, you don't have a leg to stand on. The claim you're making is ultimately an empirical one. Unless you have proof, all you're doing is defaming people who have dedicated substantial talent and treasure to taking care of the poor.
                      Ask and ye shall receive:


                      On the ground, at the local level, USCCB runs its program through Catholic Charities, a network of affiliates around the country.

                      So can we assume that, at the local level, “existing and projected private resources for the provision of reception and placement services” spring up to leverage the government dollars with their own efforts?

                      Afraid not! The only thing that multiplies: the need for more taxpayer funding.

                      As the July 2012 GAO Report observes:

                      One state refugee coordinator noted that local affiliate funding is based on the number of refugees they serve, so affiliates have an incentive to maintain or increase the number of refugees they resettle each year rather than allowing the number to decrease.

                      “Affiliate funding” does not mean voluntary donations. This is not charity. The USCCB and its Catholic Charities affiliate assist refugees only when paid by the U.S. government.

                      And in many cases, there is no need even to pretend to show that money obtained from government sources was spent on government purposes—like, say, helping refugees.


                      For instance, in 2011 USCCB earned $3.7 million from commissions on the interest-free travel loans made by the US government to refugees. USCCB actually hires collection agencies to ensure that refugees repay these loans. There is no requirement to show how any of the money generated from this federal program is spent.

                      An example of refugee racket economics: For one of its several refugee programs, USCCB receives from the taxpayer $1,825 for each refugee (including children) that it resettles. Only $1,000 of that $1,825 needs to be shown to have been spent on the individual refugee.

                      Of course, considering the challenges of resettlement, both of these might seem to be relatively small amounts—until you realize that the agency’s contractual engagement with the refugee ends 30 to 90 days after arrival. The refugee is eligible for all forms of federal (and often state) welfare 30 days after arrival.

                      Even volunteer time and donated items given by local community members turns into money for USCCB. It imputes a dollar value to all volunteer activity and gives the bill to the feds under the misnamed Federal Matching Grant program.


                      My question: has the USCCB’s greed have anything to do with the fact that, in addition to an annual report for its federal refugee contracting arm, it must publish an Annual Report on the Implementation of the “Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People” [PDF] a catalog of the steps it is taking in the wake of settlements following pederast priest sex scandals?

                      Indeed, the latest issue reports that for 2011

                      495 new credible allegations of sexual abuse of a minor by a diocesan or eparchial priest or deacon. These allegations were made by 489 individuals against 406 priests or deacons. (395 victims were male, 86 female)

                      USCCB has paid out over $2.1 billion related to the abuse settlements since 2004. (Attorneys alone walked off with $361 million. Yes, that’s a problem too, but for another article.)

                      The worst may have passed, but USCCB still faces ongoing outlays directly related to the scandal that will be well in excess of $100 million per year. And incidents, involving refugees, continue to occur.[Catholic Charities of Houston worker accused of sexually assaulting refugee boy, Friends of Refugees Blog, August 25, 2011]

                      Nevertheless, this is the same organization that went ballistic when it lost a federal contract to aid “victims of labor and sex trafficking” which had brought in 19 million or $6,800 per client over five and a half years. [USCCB seeks answers to why plan to help trafficking victims was denied, by Dennis Sadowski, Catholic News Service, December 13, 2011].

                      (Although most publicity is given to the sex trafficking and the minors aided by the fraud-prone anti-trafficking legislation, with its refugee-like privileges and payouts, the large majority of cases involve “labor” trafficking. Only 3.8% of USCCB’s “trafficking” caseload consisted of minors.)

                      Is the refugee program helping the Catholic hierarchy keep the red ink at bay—and paying executive salaries well into the six figures at local affiliates around the country wherever Catholic Charities is imposing refugees?
                      "Catholic Charities" is not flouting our laws and empowering the worst immigrants with Catholic money, it's doing it with my money.
                      Last edited by Epoetker; 08-12-2014, 01:46 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Epoetker View Post
                        By importing large numbers of people who don't have the mental or social capacity to get out of poverty, you give the charity assigned to take care of them an infinite justification to demand more funding. Simple, easy to remember.
                        So this scheme depends upon immigrants not escaping poverty? Wouldn't amnesty be counter-productive?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Epoetker View Post
                          Ask and ye shall receive:




                          "Catholic Charities" is not flouting our laws and empowering the worst immigrants with Catholic money, it's doing it with my money.
                          The title of the article implies that Catholic Charities is laundering federal money intended for refugees to pay for abuse settlements. If true, Catholic Charities would most likely be disqualified from any federal funding whatsoever: this story would be on the front page of every major paper. This blog post is close to 2 years old, and I know of no major paper that has reported on this alleged scandal.

                          I ask for an argument and get a bucketful of horse crap.
                          Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Spartacus View Post
                            Amnesty gives more of these people a way out of poverty
                            Yeah. It'll also impoverish more natives. On the whole poverty will increase while oligarchs reap the benefits. Not to mention that the Catholic church benefits from wealthier Hispanics to add more shekels to the RCC's existing wealth.

                            ... and even if it didn't, how would Catholic Charities benefit from having more money to take care of the poor? In order to have a conflict of interest, you kind of have to have an actual interest in the outcome.
                            They keep their jobs, can hire more people, can pay themselves more, etc. Charities can be quite lucrative.
                            "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

                            There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
                              So this scheme depends upon immigrants not escaping poverty? Wouldn't amnesty be counter-productive?
                              To the host? Certainly! To the parasites? Not so much. Are you not supposed to be a strong Communist? As Chesterton once said, and you no doubt have heard quoted in different forms previously:

                              To-day the rich man knows in his heart that he is a cancer and not an organ of the State. He differs from all other thieves or parasites for this reason: that the brigand who takes by force wishes his victims to be rich. But he who wins by a one-sided contract actually wishes them to be poor. Rob Roy in a cavern, hearing a company approaching, will hope (or if in a pious mood, pray) that they may come laden with gold or goods. But Mr. Rockefeller, in his factory, knows that if those who pass are laden with goods they will pass on. He will therefore (if in a pious mood) pray that they may be destitute, and so be forced to work his factory for him for a starvation wage. It is said (and also, I believe, disputed) that Blucher riding through the richer parts of London exclaimed, "What a city to sack!" But Blucher was a soldier if he was a bandit. The true sweater feels quite otherwise. It is when he drives through the poorest parts of London that he finds the streets paved with gold, being paved with prostrate servants; it is when he sees the grey lean leagues of Bow and Poplar that his soul is uplifted and he knows he is secure. This is not rhetoric, but economics.
                              As such, this sort of businessman finds Catholic Charities both an instructor and a bedfellow, and often a suitable tax shelter.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by seer, Today, 06:05 AM
                              0 responses
                              5 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post seer
                              by seer
                               
                              Started by Maranatha, Yesterday, 10:58 PM
                              17 responses
                              114 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Reepicheep  
                              Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 03:56 PM
                              3 responses
                              31 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Ronson
                              by Ronson
                               
                              Started by seer, Yesterday, 11:32 AM
                              13 responses
                              80 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post seanD
                              by seanD
                               
                              Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 09:11 AM
                              1 response
                              32 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Sparko
                              by Sparko
                               
                              Working...
                              X