3 ms·
No. It does "good" with about 25% of it's income. A lot of that "good" is stuff that the government or local councils would just fund directly if the Lottery wa
by rjmunro 3y ago
No. It does "good" with about 25% of it's income. A lot of that "good" is stuff that the government or local councils would just fund directly if the Lottery wasn't paying for them. Much better to just give money to your favourite charity directly.
- Ylpertnodi 3y ago>Much better to just give money to your favourite charity directly. Checking the (published) 'admin costs' vs actual donated/ used monies is a great way to pick favorites.
- rjmunro 3y agoI disagree. I'd argue that Wikipedia or the Internet Archive are 100% admin, and that's a good thing. I don't want them spending money paying people to write articles or paying people to add stuff to the archive. There are a lot of charities in between where some more money on admin (e.g. better training, better organisation) can make the front line workers more effective.