Combined Federal Campaign

[BMC John Phillips III]

NBC just ran a story on how many charities in CFC are cheating on their taxes. It also showed how they submitted a false charity to the campaign and it was approved.

Here is more:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15832673/

[MKCM Brett Ayer]

I love the news media, they dig up an old story the week the CFC campaign ends just for the sake of ratings, without regard of the damage it creates.

Where is Paul Harvey when you need him (The rest of the story)

The GAO report showed that only 6% of the CFC charities owed back taxes. The rest of the story is that only a small % of those owe taxes because of fraud. The rest either owe because of accounting errors, because of lack of a understanding of our “Simplistic” tax code, or because they had to make the choice of either closing their doors, or putting the little money they had into their cause.

The vast majority of CFC organizations do their best to stretch every dollar as far as it will go, and to comply with federal tax laws.

How many of you would survive a GAO audit? I have never been involved in an inspection that did not find problems with unit personal property.

Be safe,

Brett

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Sensationalism.......... so pick your CFC charity wisely and give to it.

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

Or if you are really concerned, investigate your charity of choice and give directly to them. CFC takes 5% for their efforts before they give what you wanted to give to the charity. Then again, if the charity is really that, they should be a "non-profit" and therefore not subject to taxes. CFC has gotten better then they were years ago. I always looked at the % that the charity took for administration. Some were quite high. I think that CFC has put a cap of 15% (maybe less) now. Even at that, 5% for CFC, 15% for admin expenses (salaries) and 80% for what you intended for. I would say, do your homework, find a cause that stirs you and give as best you can. Money, time, whatever.

[MKCM Brett Ayer]

I just finished my allotment form and turned it in. In the process, I discovered if you do a search of the online guide for the DC area, you get:

100 hits for "Military"
126 Hits for "Dog"

Tells you where the hearts and minds of the people are.

Be Safe,

Brett

[BMC John Phillips III]

Sensationalism.......... so pick your CFC charity wisely and give to it.

Sensationalism or truth? The story did say, "...which account for nearly 6 percent of the approximately 22,700 charities funded by the Combined Federal Campaign." That's 1362 charities and of the 15 they audited, all 15 were found to be engaged in “abusive and potentially criminal activity.”

15 out of 1362 might not be that many, but they only investigated 15 and again, all were found to be engaged in abusive and potentially criminal activity.

That may be sensational, but it's not sensationalism.

I agree that picking your charities wisely is a great choice. I also second Jim's comments below.

Or if you are really concerned, investigate your charity of choice and give directly to them. .............I always looked at the % that the charity took for administration. Some were quite high.

I want to apologize if it seemed as though I was trying to shed a negative light on CFC (I do contribute to them - American Cancer Society - mother had cancer) and I encourage others to contribute to specific causes rather than a general donation which is divided among all charities.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Sensationalism.......... They said they checked only 15. You chose to believe them. Look at the timing of their report. Are they going to follow up, or wait until next year's campaign for that ?

[BMC John Phillips III]

Are they going to follow up, or wait until next year's campaign for that ?

And you call me a conspiracy theorist. I call it good old fashioned American journalism, come on it's NBC not FOX

:p

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

John, you are a conspiracy theorist.............
Question, do you spend more than three minutes a week searching the web for who is to blame ?

Question two Molder ? Did you start this thread to inform the rest of us that someone is out to get us ?

I get it, the truth is out there............

[BMCS Burt Ford]

Molder......thats freakin funny Stu!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

[BMC John Phillips III]

What's even funnier is that it's Mulder and I have never even watched an episode of the X-files.

If you want to ridicule me for trying to educate, go ahead. I thought that it was a news-worthy story, especially considering how many of us give freely to the CFC...

How many of you are there out there that wouldn't give a bum on the street a few dollars because you know they would spend it on booze? Yet some of the charities investigated are using the dollars they are receiving to by boats and other high ticket items.

Of course you look right past the part where I said CFC is a good thing and you should choose your charity wisely and focused soley on the part where the truth about the fraud and abuse was being reported, even worse you look at it like it's a bad thing to reveal.

I would say if the timing was "planned" to have a negative impact it would have revealed this information at the beginning of the campaign season. I took the story as educational, not anything else.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

What's even funnier is that you keep pointing out spelling errors and ignoring content. I've never seen an episode of the show either. Speaking of things I never saw,...... I never saw where you say CFC is a good thing.

You can also start calling me M. Night if you want, because I'm starting to see a pattern. Anytime someone calls you on something it becomes ridicule or a personal attack. We're two pages into this; go back and look where I was ridiculing you. I said the piece was sensationalism, which it is. Who started with the accusations ? Who introduced conspiracies into a thread.......again.

John, pick a neutral party, and have them read your posts in this thread. After they read them, ask whether you have a positive take on CFC or a negative one. It's simple to do. Count the number of times you speak well of the program and compare it to the number of times you talk about the corruption.

And I never said the piece was trying to create a negative impact. I'm just pointing out that the story comes out during this time of the year. When will we hear about it again? My bet is this time next year.

What were you trying to educate people on ? Just looking for a little honest......

[BMC John Phillips III]

"I never saw where you say CFC is a good thing."

{I want to apologize if it seemed as though I was trying to shed a negative light on CFC (I do contribute to them - American Cancer Society - mother had cancer) and I encourage others to contribute....} my quote

Ok so I didn't come out and say CFC is a great thing, but would I contribute or encourage others to if I thought it was totally negative?


"Anytime someone calls you on something it becomes ridicule or a personal attack. We're two pages into this; go back and look where I was ridiculing you."

"You chose to believe them." "Question, do you spend more than three minutes a week searching the web for who is to blame ?

Question two Molder ? Did you start this thread to inform the rest of us that someone is out to get us ? I get it, the truth is out there............"

You are right, calling me Molder is appropriate, saying I chose to believe them and saying the truth is out there is totally questioning my ability to read a story and determine the truth for myself. It also creates the perception that nothing in the story is accurate. Of course you may not have meant it that way, but that is the way that it is written (at a minimum, the way I read it).


"Who started with the accusations ? Who introduced conspiracies into a thread.......again."

I said that as a joke, I added the guy with his tongue out to show that it was a joke, I have to start remembering that you don't see these guys - :rolleyes:

"John, pick a neutral party, and have them read your posts in this thread. After they read them, ask whether you have a positive take on CFC or a negative one. It's simple to do. Count the number of times you speak well of the program and compare it to the number of times you talk about the corruption."

Master Chief, I don't have to pick a neutral party, just a party that can read. I apologized after I realized that it could have been perceived as me shedding a negative light on CFC, when my true intent was to educate and share what I saw as a news-worthy story to a group of people that it has a direct impact on. I spoke positively on CFC once and I spent the rest of the time defending my stance on why I posted the thread. You are a moderator, if you feel as though the story or thread has no validity to it or is not informative, delete it.

"And I never said the piece was trying to create a negative impact. I'm just pointing out that the story comes out during this time of the year. When will we hear about it again? My bet is this time next year."

I understand that, but I have never seen a story on CFC fraud in my 12 years of contributing so I thought it was breaking news. I apologize if it was just a rehashed story from the past.

"What were you trying to educate people on ? Just looking for a little honest......"

I was trying to educate them on the fact that the fraud was happening then Jim brought up the fact that each charities administrative costs are listed in the CFC code book, which is probably the most important thing to consider when filling out your allotment sheet. Not sure how to answer the rest of that "little honest...." part, are you questioning my integrity or the story's?

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

What ever happened to you two arguing over Chess? Seems that there is alot of "hair splitting" going on and maybe if you gave each other the benefit of the doubt from time to time, we could start and end this thread in short order and get onto something else that we can really debate. Say, grooming standards for instance.

[MKCM Brett Ayer]

Arguing on the Internet is like wrestling in a septic tank, even if you win you still look like.............:)

Hope everybody has a Great Holiday.

Be Safe,

Brett

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

John, look at the charities that the story covered. I'm willing to bet that everyone one them was on the high end of the administrative costs scale that's listed in the CFC handbook. The story wasn't looking for anything but scandal. They didn't want to just look at the charities, they wanted to shed a negative light on the entire CFC program. They didn't find any that weren't corrupt, because they weren't looking for any. The story is sensationalism, not truth. Is what they they reported the truth,.....maybe. Did they chose the most sensational way to report it, absolutely.

As for everything else, it is the way you chose to read it.

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

Our "mainstream" media has simply become tabloid journolism. Freedom of the press was supposed to be so the people could keep "uncle" in check. That freedom has been exploited into something that must be taken with a healthy dose of salt and a little investigation of your own if you really want to know the "whole" truth. Not just what some editor want's you to know.

[PAC Darrell Wilson (Ret)]

I stopped donating to CFC years ago. I donate on my own right to the person, place, or club that I choose. I also will not give money to a person but I will buy them something. I have boat food, drinks, toys, etc.... I want 100% of my money to go to the cause. My last couple of years in I was really turned off with the CG and CFC gig. At one of my last units, they hammered the people and made you feel forced to give and if you chose not to give, you would get pressured from your boss because they want 100% from each shop.
I am not bashing CFC, I just think the way its shoved down our throats is wrong.

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

Darrell,
I agree that sometimes the CFC campaign comes across like that. I think that is wrong. I think that the CFC has good intentions and does good things for a lot of charities. It porvides a simple avenue for individuals that are so inclined, to give to a worthy cause.

I find it ironic that much of the media has been playing up that the working poor give more than the rich in this nation. That may be true on a percentage basis, but certainly not dollar for dollar.

That said, I don't know anyone that has joined the military to get rich. If they did, I am sorry. I think everyone that puts on the uniform and goes to work is giving already. We are fortunate enough in most cases to make enough money to meet our needs. Some may have to budget a little tighter than others due to personal circumstances, family size, etc. but for the most part, our "needs" are generally met.

I am not bothered when someone chooses not to give to CFC. I understand that there is little left in most budgets, particularly the junior enlisted, and it behooves us all to save a little for a rainy day. I am much more bothered when my folks choose not to spend $20.00 to attend a dinner for our local Auxilliary Flotilla for their "Change of Watch". These are folks that give all year long to support us and the community and ask for very little in return.

Locally, we are fortunate to be able to partner with a local company that is heavily involved with the community and has a massive holidy food drive every year. This year we will help deliver over 8,000 pounds of frozen turkeys and a tremendous amount of dry goods to local shelters and food banks. I push the volunteer effort to support this event more than the CFC. I believe that when my folks get out and see first hand how some folks have it, they will be much more inclined to "count their blessings" and do what they can to help one another. When a crewmember can look into someone elses eyes and see the good that they are doing, or have someone give them a hug and say "thank you", it means a great deal and makes every effort worth it. Time is often worth more than money.