Covid-19 must spell the end of charity. It’s time inefficient altruism stopped bailing out government failure

Non-profits have outclassed neoliberal governments and the private sector during the pandemic, but society shouldn’t have to rely on that. We must end charity and replace it with a fairly funded aid network.

Let’s get the humble bragging out of the way: I’ve been doing a bit of volunteering during lockdown. Not a lot, I grant you, but some. I’ve run errands for neighbours, carted groceries to a food bank and, once or twice a week, I deliver delicious Caribbean food, made by kind people, to vulnerable folk in north London.

My motivation for volunteering isn’t completely selfless. Yes, I wanted to help – I’m a nice guy, obviously– but it also made me feel vaguely useful to society after I lost a ton of work. And, more importantly, I get to hoon around in a car and visit people’s houses without getting frogmarched to Covid jail.

Anyway, the point is, this experience has really opened my eyes. I now see just how tough some people’s lives are, especially when they’re boxed into their homes, often alone and coping with physical and mental health problems and issues bigger than “too many Zoom chats.” Without help, some could perish in the most miserable way imaginable.

Read more

UK Covid-19 death toll surpasses 30k, becoming HIGHEST in Europe

I see how badly let down these people are by profit-obsessed, market-reliant, neoliberal governments, for whom the weak and poor are an inconvenient side-effect that they pass off on kinder souls rather than investing thought and money to make everyone’s lives a bit better.

I see how spritely and efficient charities, community groups, etc, are. Each one not-for-profit, each one far more agile, focussed and effective than the government or any private company. With no shareholders to please and no votes to win, they have one driving factor: to help. All around the world, they do amazing things and ordinary people do amazing things for them.

In summary, these organisations –let’s bundle them together as ‘non-profits’– are generally wonderful. But here’s the thing: Covid-19 should spell the end of charity.

Bear with me on this.

Non-profits rely on people giving them money. Some make a bit from selling t-shirts and pens or renting out property, but most of their income comes via grants from states or foundations, or directly from the public. In fact, in the UK almost half (£22.9 billion, about $28 billion) comes from the public – and half of that again is through direct cash in bucket/marathon sponsorship/text-the-amount types of charitable donations.

The problem, as it has been since the Victorians started getting their altruistic kicks with the “deserving and undeserving poor,” is how people decide to donate. Small local charities might plead their case door-to-door; others might have niche appeal, probably to those personally affected by Loose Eyeball Syndrome or whatever. But for most, it’s an almighty battle for your heartstrings and your purse strings.

There are some 168,000 registered charities in the UK alone, with more than 600 dealing with cancer. Each desperately competes for our generosity.

The big guns of the charity world have vast marketing teams and budgets. This is why your TV ad breaks are filled with crying children, delicate old people, fluffy endangered animals and painfully sincere voiceovers telling us how “a donation of just five pounds could tighten someone’s eyeball for a month”. It’s why most marathon runners dressed as giant turnips are supporting the same few, large charities. Those charities have well-meaning PR muscle.

This makes charity funding unfair and inefficient. Valuable charities don’t get enough money while those who do often blow too much of it on the machinery of getting more. You get charity trends and charities having their existence threatened by things like Covid-19. The charitable model needs to end: all non-profits should be state-funded.

It’s right that good causes are funded by the people, but it should be via the state because the state is “the people.” It’s our money spent by our servants – theoretically. Introducing a “good causes” tax instead of individual donations will see more cash spent on the most in need in the fairest way possible. If you want to top that pot up with extra personal donations so that we still get cake bakes, Telethons and turnip costumes, fine.

It will also spread the personal cost in a more just way because the less money you have, the more, proportionally, you’re likely to give away. Yep, even charitable giving hits the poorest hardest.

People will say, “It’s my money and I’ll give it to who I want.” That’s understandable, but also not really the point. That makes charity market-led and allows for monopolies. You’re not necessarily giving your money to a charity because it’s the best option, you’re doing it for emotional reasons or because it’s the only one you’ve heard of. Charities shouldn’t be competing. That’s like asking your children to fight it out for their dinner.

Read more

More government spending is needed in Britain & it should be paid for with a ‘War Tax’ on companies profiting from Covid-19

Before anyone gets in a Big State frenzy, note that I say non-profits should be state-funded, not state-run. They don’t need to change much: stay nimble and effective, stay connected to those they’re helping, have volunteers. But they can do all that without the fear of running out of money, without relying on weeping kids or giant turnips.

The money can be distributed by a transparent non-governmental body and applied for by non-profits. It already happens with lottery money. Yes, bigger charities would have better resources to write applications, but nothing’s perfect. Managed effectively, this non-profit network could do all the good work that the state is too cumbersome to handle.

While our citizens have been superstars, the Covid-19 pandemic has shown the failure of too many Western governments, for too long, to create a safe and humane society. Altruism, with its random allocation of help based on marketing budgets, has to be replaced by a fairer, flexible and farther-reaching system that makes the representatives of the people responsible for the people.

In the meantime, if you like this article and want to donate to me directly, details of my JustGiving page will be available soon.