Recently in Charity Category

Yahoo's Guide to Giving - a very nice collection of resources about charity. They even have a list (from Business Week) of the top givers:

1. Gordon and Betty Moore ($7.046 billion)
2. Bill and Melinda Gates ($5.458 billion)
3. Warren Buffett ($2.622 billion)
4. George Soros ($2.367 billion)
5. Eli and Edythe Broad ($1.475 billion)
6. James and Virginia Stowers ($1.205 billion)
7. The Walton Family ($1.1 billion)
8. Alfred Mann ($993 million)
9. Michael and Susan Dell ($933 million)

Normally, articles like this have a "top ten" list, I guess whoever number ten is must fall embarrassingly short of the Dells.

I was also surprised Bill Gates was not at the top, probably because the media has covered Bill's Philanthropy so much that I expected it.

What surprised you about the list? Was there someone you would have guessed was on it, but surprised when they didn't make it?

Comments welcome.

Charities Predict Stagnant or Declining End-of-Year Fundraising

Nearly 80 percent of charitable organizations anticipate that the year's natural disasters will cause end-of-year contributions to remain at or decrease from 2004 levels, a new survey by GuideStar, the public charity that connects people with nonprofit information, reveals.

After the ho-hum response to the earthquake in Pakistan/India, I'm not surprised.

Also see this.

A question for the blogospere: Why no effort to help the earthquake victims?

Being a very new (3 weeks) blog, I didn't participate in the charitable efforts after the tsunami or hurricane(s). But being a long time reader of the larger blogs, I watched as those blogs generously donated time and pixels to encouraging donations to help the victims from those disasters. TB and I gave through my employer (who matched donations), and I gave much more than I would have in no small part due to the encouragement of the blogs I read daily.

The earthquake death toll is now estimated to be near 40,000, and as many as 2 million lack shelter.

But this time I see damned little effort on the part of the blogosphere to help. Sure, some smaller blogs have some links to charities, but among the larger blogs, nothing that even comes close to this.

Or this.

Or this.

Or this.

Or this.

I would like to note here that this is not an attack on the above blogs. Indeed, their previous efforts were exceedingly generous and deserve praise. In the interest of fairness, the right side of the web wasn't alone. Here's some examples from the liberal side of the web of attempts to coax donations from their readers:

Example here.

And here.

And to reiterate, I know that many smaller blogs have been involved in earthquake charity efforts.

What about me? I gave $100 through my employer (although they are not matching donations this time), and if I challenge my readers to match me (which I guess I'm doing right now), well, that's, um, $200 to $300 if I get 100% participation. A little nudging from the above heavyweights could raise many thousands more.

So is everyone just overloaded on disasters? Is there a feeling that governments and charities have this one under control and no further help is needed? Has it just washed right on by with all of the rapidly changing fall news cycle? I really want to know. If you think I'm off-base by asking in the first place, please let me know why.

In the event that any of the above bloggers take offence at this post, my apologies in advance. No offence is intended. You are all certainly entitled to use your blogs however you see fit. It's just that I thought I saw a trend among political bloggers to do a little more than just chew the fat about the latest beltway antics, and saw it as a good thing. I wonder now if I was mistaken.

Update (10/22/2005): Someone else noticed. (hat tip Instapundit)