ALL "Non-Profits" or "Not For Profit" entities are questionable at best. Many are unaware that the NFL operated as a "Not For Profit" until 2015. We see athletes being paid millions of dollars a year to play a game. I have read that there is not a team in the NFL Franchise that is valued at less than $5 Billion. "Not For Profit"?? When you look at the Clinton Foundation where an independent audit reported that less than 6 cents from every dollar raised went to Charity - the rest went to salaries, bonuses and "operating expenses". When you look at the major "Charities" - they have CEO's making 7 figure salaries. They have 100's if not 1000's of offices all over the country. How many employees? Office supplies and equipment? TV commercials? How much money does it take to pay for all of that each year? And all of that money comes off of the top - before a penny goes to the intended Charity. Why do some "Churches" have billions of dollars in cash and treasures stowed away? Why is that money not used to help the poor and suffering? As the old saying goes "Charity begins at home." If you want to help find someone in need in your town or area and help them. Then you will know that every single penny went to help someone in need.
Most non-profit organizations in the US; those with .501(c)3 IRS tax classifications; are required to file an IRS Form 990 annual fiscal report with the IRS. Some of these reports may be a year behind schedule depending on the ending date of a non-profit's fiscal year.
Since you mentioned the Clinton Foundation, I looked at their most recent 990. I did not see any reference to "less than 6 cents from every dollar raised went to charity....." I did not quickly see a reference to an "independent audit." Can you share a link?
Their overall expense rate seems in keeping with what I would expect from a non-profit of that size, amount of assets then listed as $283 million, considering my 4 decades of volunteer work in the development & fundraising field. I did note that some of the Clinton assets are in restricted funds, meaning donors have placed sidebars on how, where, when their donations can be drawn upon.
In general, I'm not disagreeing with you. For example, I give around 1/3 of my AGI to charity each year. I don't fund the high salaries of United Way executives. I select the charities I want to support and send money direct. It helps that I've been a past Board member with several of the organizations that I support. Meaning that I know them well.
Why had someone not wndwd that soros family that’s would be a good place to make a donation get rid of the whole family maybe world would be a better place
It’s all very disturbing. The evil has taken root everywhere, from these non-profits to our tax payer funded government agencies and institutions that are clearly not monitoring the aid, or maybe they are, and they know exactly what they’re doing.
Seems so far reaching that it must be on purpose, as President Lincoln said, the way we would be destroyed is from the inside. It’s all such a huge mess that it’s going to take focused determination to clean it up now, if it’s even possible. It’s WWIII simmering, we can see many of the same problems with leadership in Europe, Canada, Australia.
The swamp extends its reach to our justice system, our schools, healthcare, and on…how can we expect to fix this when even in our courts, where we go when we have disputes has been corrupted. Although I loved seeing that Judge Dugan sentenced to jail for 5 years for helping the offender escape. Although with the soft on crime policies she’ll no doubt be out in less than 2 with good credit’s, like all the other criminals.
Not enough
accountability.
As exhausting as all of this is, collectively, we fight.
Hey @capitalistmag, your note on the dangers of NGOs is spot-on, but let's not ignore the historical context that makes this even more alarming. The Reece Committee's 1950s investigation into tax-exempt foundations uncovered a pattern of abuse that's mirrored today by NGOs. My article, "Weaponized Philanthropy: The Reece Committee's Buried Warning to America," dives into how these entities were historically manipulated to serve private interests, not the public good, and it's a wake-up call for democracy. Understanding this history is crucial to seeing the full threat NGOs pose now. Check it out at https://sleuthfox.substack.com/p/weaponized-philanthropy-the-reece and connect the dots from then to now.
Of course it is. They, "Democrats" take anything that was designed to be good and helpful and twist and skew it until it serves them. One grand example of that was affirmative action. It was a tool designed to prevent hiring and choosing people based on color, creed, origin or disabilities. Then they Dems figured out a way to use it for their nefarious DEI BS to make themselves appear all righteous and good. That is the way of the world where Democrats rule.
The idiot who, blindly, defend artificial persons (i.e., corporations, a/k/a limited liability businesses), and with whom I've argued with over the years amazes me.
There are so many issues that grow from such creations. For example:
(1) The very people known to be such a danger to We The People we created fifty-one constitutions to protect us from them are the ones creating artificial persons, and granting them powers.
The aforementioned powers work as a shield against laws We The People must suffer, if we perform the same acts.
(2) The protective corporate veil seems to have grown all but bullet proof (unpierceable). Big pharma, Hildo and Bildo's 501c's being obvious examples.
Though the corporations are incapable of either good or ill, absent the acts of their agents, too often it appears the only thing they seem to suffer for crimes committed in the names of the corporation are, fines and penalties that do nothing more than reduce their obscene profits to lesser obscene profits.
Those fines and penalties are imposed by public agencies charged with overseeing the corporations, and work against the corporation, rather than the individual agents. The usual due process expected of the courts and by agents don't play, because the processes work against the imaginary entities that exist by permission, rather than by right, unlike the live-born agents running them, and who committed the actual violations of laws, and policies made in pursuance of them.
This negates the principal of laws deterring behaviors, or even omissions of required acts. This leaves agents believing they can commit their crimes over and over again, with relative impunity. And they may be inspired to commit such acts because the principal of the agency still sees it's profit.
Think in terms of the mail order types who, admittedly, set aside one million of the three million dollars they took in, to pay back to complainants, knowing they still get to keep the other two million.
Similarly, when judgements issue against public agencies for illegal acts and injuries, the public pays, and agents are free to continue their acts and omissions contrary to law with relative impunity.
(3) The non-profit version of artificial persons allow creators to dump much or most their money into them, claim the money dumps as tax exempt, then enjoy all the benefit via management of the non-profits affairs.
(4) ALL the real properties owned by the non-profit artificial persons are taken off the tax rolls. Moving the burden public agents claim to the remainder of us who don’t enjoy special privileges.
(5) The non-profit artificial persons are incorporated as, for example, unions, then operate like campaign entities by using members’ money to alter elections.
The financial might of these artificial persons are used to override the will of live born men and women. Including those forced to participate in the scheme.
Usually, these union type artificial persons promote socialist values at odds with our guaranteed republic, in which individual liberties should be paramount.
If you're referring to the SCOTUS decision in the Citizen United case, I agree. There is no way that corporations should be considered as "people." The decision opened the door to all sorts of "dark money" coming in to influence US elections and policy discussions.
As for "socialist values," suggest checking out the cover story in the January issue of Reason magazine, titled "Republican Socialism."
ALL "Non-Profits" or "Not For Profit" entities are questionable at best. Many are unaware that the NFL operated as a "Not For Profit" until 2015. We see athletes being paid millions of dollars a year to play a game. I have read that there is not a team in the NFL Franchise that is valued at less than $5 Billion. "Not For Profit"?? When you look at the Clinton Foundation where an independent audit reported that less than 6 cents from every dollar raised went to Charity - the rest went to salaries, bonuses and "operating expenses". When you look at the major "Charities" - they have CEO's making 7 figure salaries. They have 100's if not 1000's of offices all over the country. How many employees? Office supplies and equipment? TV commercials? How much money does it take to pay for all of that each year? And all of that money comes off of the top - before a penny goes to the intended Charity. Why do some "Churches" have billions of dollars in cash and treasures stowed away? Why is that money not used to help the poor and suffering? As the old saying goes "Charity begins at home." If you want to help find someone in need in your town or area and help them. Then you will know that every single penny went to help someone in need.
Most non-profit organizations in the US; those with .501(c)3 IRS tax classifications; are required to file an IRS Form 990 annual fiscal report with the IRS. Some of these reports may be a year behind schedule depending on the ending date of a non-profit's fiscal year.
Since you mentioned the Clinton Foundation, I looked at their most recent 990. I did not see any reference to "less than 6 cents from every dollar raised went to charity....." I did not quickly see a reference to an "independent audit." Can you share a link?
Their overall expense rate seems in keeping with what I would expect from a non-profit of that size, amount of assets then listed as $283 million, considering my 4 decades of volunteer work in the development & fundraising field. I did note that some of the Clinton assets are in restricted funds, meaning donors have placed sidebars on how, where, when their donations can be drawn upon.
In general, I'm not disagreeing with you. For example, I give around 1/3 of my AGI to charity each year. I don't fund the high salaries of United Way executives. I select the charities I want to support and send money direct. It helps that I've been a past Board member with several of the organizations that I support. Meaning that I know them well.
And the mindless masses suck it all up!!!
Fantastic article Daniel. Well done Sir!
Does anyone in government have the spine or a pair to hold this. Communist anti America accountable ???
No not many. Because the few who do end up dead or on the run.
So who has Soros “
Bought” ??!
If he can't buy them then he digs up dirt on them. MTG I think is the latest.
Why had someone not wndwd that soros family that’s would be a good place to make a donation get rid of the whole family maybe world would be a better place
It’s all very disturbing. The evil has taken root everywhere, from these non-profits to our tax payer funded government agencies and institutions that are clearly not monitoring the aid, or maybe they are, and they know exactly what they’re doing.
Seems so far reaching that it must be on purpose, as President Lincoln said, the way we would be destroyed is from the inside. It’s all such a huge mess that it’s going to take focused determination to clean it up now, if it’s even possible. It’s WWIII simmering, we can see many of the same problems with leadership in Europe, Canada, Australia.
The swamp extends its reach to our justice system, our schools, healthcare, and on…how can we expect to fix this when even in our courts, where we go when we have disputes has been corrupted. Although I loved seeing that Judge Dugan sentenced to jail for 5 years for helping the offender escape. Although with the soft on crime policies she’ll no doubt be out in less than 2 with good credit’s, like all the other criminals.
Not enough
accountability.
As exhausting as all of this is, collectively, we fight.
Hey @capitalistmag, your note on the dangers of NGOs is spot-on, but let's not ignore the historical context that makes this even more alarming. The Reece Committee's 1950s investigation into tax-exempt foundations uncovered a pattern of abuse that's mirrored today by NGOs. My article, "Weaponized Philanthropy: The Reece Committee's Buried Warning to America," dives into how these entities were historically manipulated to serve private interests, not the public good, and it's a wake-up call for democracy. Understanding this history is crucial to seeing the full threat NGOs pose now. Check it out at https://sleuthfox.substack.com/p/weaponized-philanthropy-the-reece and connect the dots from then to now.
Of course it is. They, "Democrats" take anything that was designed to be good and helpful and twist and skew it until it serves them. One grand example of that was affirmative action. It was a tool designed to prevent hiring and choosing people based on color, creed, origin or disabilities. Then they Dems figured out a way to use it for their nefarious DEI BS to make themselves appear all righteous and good. That is the way of the world where Democrats rule.
If the money at "non-profits" was actually used to help people we could get rid of the government welfare system
The idiot who, blindly, defend artificial persons (i.e., corporations, a/k/a limited liability businesses), and with whom I've argued with over the years amazes me.
There are so many issues that grow from such creations. For example:
(1) The very people known to be such a danger to We The People we created fifty-one constitutions to protect us from them are the ones creating artificial persons, and granting them powers.
The aforementioned powers work as a shield against laws We The People must suffer, if we perform the same acts.
(2) The protective corporate veil seems to have grown all but bullet proof (unpierceable). Big pharma, Hildo and Bildo's 501c's being obvious examples.
Though the corporations are incapable of either good or ill, absent the acts of their agents, too often it appears the only thing they seem to suffer for crimes committed in the names of the corporation are, fines and penalties that do nothing more than reduce their obscene profits to lesser obscene profits.
Those fines and penalties are imposed by public agencies charged with overseeing the corporations, and work against the corporation, rather than the individual agents. The usual due process expected of the courts and by agents don't play, because the processes work against the imaginary entities that exist by permission, rather than by right, unlike the live-born agents running them, and who committed the actual violations of laws, and policies made in pursuance of them.
This negates the principal of laws deterring behaviors, or even omissions of required acts. This leaves agents believing they can commit their crimes over and over again, with relative impunity. And they may be inspired to commit such acts because the principal of the agency still sees it's profit.
Think in terms of the mail order types who, admittedly, set aside one million of the three million dollars they took in, to pay back to complainants, knowing they still get to keep the other two million.
Similarly, when judgements issue against public agencies for illegal acts and injuries, the public pays, and agents are free to continue their acts and omissions contrary to law with relative impunity.
(3) The non-profit version of artificial persons allow creators to dump much or most their money into them, claim the money dumps as tax exempt, then enjoy all the benefit via management of the non-profits affairs.
(4) ALL the real properties owned by the non-profit artificial persons are taken off the tax rolls. Moving the burden public agents claim to the remainder of us who don’t enjoy special privileges.
(5) The non-profit artificial persons are incorporated as, for example, unions, then operate like campaign entities by using members’ money to alter elections.
The financial might of these artificial persons are used to override the will of live born men and women. Including those forced to participate in the scheme.
Usually, these union type artificial persons promote socialist values at odds with our guaranteed republic, in which individual liberties should be paramount.
If you're referring to the SCOTUS decision in the Citizen United case, I agree. There is no way that corporations should be considered as "people." The decision opened the door to all sorts of "dark money" coming in to influence US elections and policy discussions.
As for "socialist values," suggest checking out the cover story in the January issue of Reason magazine, titled "Republican Socialism."