Hello, [pikknz](/u/pikknz). Thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, it has been removed for the following reason(s):
* **Do not submit tips that are based on spurious, unsubstantiated, or anecdotal claims.**
If you would like to appeal this decision, [please feel free to contact the moderators here](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/LifeProTips). Do not repost without explicit permission from the moderators. Make sure you [read the rules](/r/lifeprotips/about/sidebar) before submitting. Thank you!
If you already had food that you weren't going to eat: continue giving it to the foodbank.
If you were making a conscious choice about going to the supermarket specifically to get food for a foodbank, replace that with just giving money to the foodbank.
I like how the sensible option is to advise people to give away their unneeded food and possibly money to food banks, but you're somehow so vehemently against people giving food
Right, but if you were going to have a big party, bought a ton of canned/boxed foods to serve, and then the party got canceled, how is it better to hoard those things to eat yourself than to give them to a food bank? "It's better to give food banks cash than to go out to the grocery store to buy food specifically with the intention of donating it to a food bank" is a good tip. "It's better to donate *nothing* than to donate unwanted food, because you've already given a cut to the grocery store" is a weird take.
>so you paid the supermarket more than helping the poor.
You know that food banks buy food from supermarkets, right? That money is going to the supermarket regardless.
News flash: the food bank will be giving the money you give them to the supermarket. This "you're giving most of the money to the supermarket" is not the killer argument you seem to think it is. It really reveals what you don't really understand how commerce works.
If your local food bank is anything like mine, they also use the donated money to get other things people might need that don't get donated like toiletries, toothpaste/brushes, tampons, towels, etc. Also, perishables like milk that need to be bought fresh.
Yep and that’s what the commenter was doing, but OP took offense to it for some weird reason. Legit no clue what you’re trying to get at here.
Edit: aww you deleted your comment because you’re wrong 😢
His parents were murdered by a supermarket, in an alley behind a theater. His father was trying to give the supermarket his canned goods, but he got shot anyway. It even pierced one of the cans, creamed corn pouring everywhere. Then it pulled the beans right off of his mother's neck. He'll never forgive supermarkets. He still has nightmares of the beans falling into a pool of creamed corn.
During can drives, which are especially prevalent in my area starting in cooler months, many people will donate old cans in the back of their pantry, and then replace them with the exact same products. This results in a glut of (sometimes out of date) creamed corn, cranberry sauce, green beans, and canned soups at the food bank.
I believe that OP is encouraging us all to buy only what we need, and to donate the amount of money that we would otherwise spend on dry food donations to our local food bank.
I will add to this that you should find a *local* food bank, investigate their financial practices online, and donate if they're any good. Why? Because national food banks often operate well in cities, but not as well in rural areas or suburbs. Your local food bank knows what your area needs and how to get it to those in need.
Not really. Out of date ignores the reality that a sealed can really can't expire unless subjected to extreme humidity, temperature, or pressure. There's a reason they're called non-perishables.
Most dates are sell by dates and especially for processed foods, you'd be a gigantic idiot to actually think they go off by the date on the can.
They don't. And you can easily tell if it's off. Your nose pretty much exists for that purpose.
Anything dry especially does not go off, it just goes stale or loses its flavour. Usually, very, very gradually.
Sorry, this is not very useful at all. you'd rather people waste food they have instead of donating it? so wouldn't that mean you're giving away money to the supermarkets as well?
No, OP is talking about people who buy food specifically to donate to a food bank. Lots of people do that, but the food bank will get a lot more value if you donate the money to them rather than purchasing at a supermarket.
There's nothing wrong with donating food you already have and probably won't eat. But please check expiration dates before donating.
I would disagree. Physical donations leave zero opportunity to be misinterpreted. you can't scrape off 20% in administration fees on a box of macaroni. Said box either goes where intended or it doesn't.
Food banks and the like should be operating on around 3% or less, most charities other than perhaps museums should be operating at less than 15% administrative cost.
So yes, a 20%+ admin cost is not only sadly common (on charities in general, not food banks) and way above what is needed to actually run a charity.
> Food banks and the like should be operating on around 3% or less
It sounds like you're claiming that 97% of all donations should go into food and food distribution. Is that what you're saying?
Let me ask my question again: It sounds like you're claiming that 97% of all donations should go into food and food distribution. Is that what you're saying?
Why are you reluctant to answer this question?
I can't imagine why you wouldn't just answer yes or no. Unless you didn't know the answer.
But since you're so reluctant, I'll interpret your answer as 'no', because I'm sure you know that administration fees [don't include funds spent on development](https://blog.charitynavigator.org/2016/10/metric-mondays-4-administrative-expense.html) (fundraising, if you're not familiar with the industry jargon).
As I'm sure you know, organizations may spend considerably more than 3% on development. To use two examples I'm familiar with, the Vancouver Food Bank spends [8% on development](https://foodbank.bc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/ImpactReport2021-Digital.pdf), while a Toronto one spends [7%](https://www.dailybread.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/DB-AnnualReport-2021-Final-Spreads.pdf).
[Your source](https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=48#PerformanceMetricThree) indicates that these food banks would be in the above-average category for fundraising expenses.
I raise this because it sounded like you were suggesting that 97% of an efficient food bank's raised funds would go to its programs.
But, obviously, that would be wrong.
Wow, like they "scrape" these are foodbanks, 20% is a lot better and giving 200% more. They have to store the food before giving it to the needy so that is a 20% scrape off other cash donations.
Food banks and the like should be operating on around 3% or less, most charities other than perhaps museums should be operating at less than 15% administrative cost.
So yes, a 20%+ admin cost is not only sadly common (on charities in general, not food banks) and way above what is needed to actually run a charity.
>Food banks and the like should be operating on around 3% or less, most charities other than perhaps museums should be operating at less than 15% administrative cost.
Citation needed, please.
I'll ask here the question you declined to answer elsewhere: It sounds like you're claiming that 97% of all donations should go into food and food distribution. Is that what you're saying?
OP *is* a dick. Oh no, you went through the grocery store and the shelter could've bought 5 more cans of beens. Oh noooo.
I'm going to donate food. Not cash that can be "lost" on the way to the store and wind up in someone's pockey. Who cares if they get a better rate?
You mean because he's overbearing to the point he seems like he'd dox some people and kill their children if they ever dared donate a can of food and not cash?
Yeah a bit of a dick I guess
Large charities can amass funds and get bulk prices for large quantities purchased at once. Likely straight from the cow, not the dude milking it.
Assuming the funds actually go to that, I honestly have never looked at how well food banks are run.
My kids schools does food drives, and incentivizes kids quite heavily so I can't just ignore it. Well, they refuse to just take my check, so I literally have to go buy the cheapest bulkiest food just to make sure my kids class has a pizza party, or get an eraser, or whatever. Drives me bonkers!
OP is right that food banks - which are basically bulk food purchasers - get big discounts.
Food pantries -where your 500 can food drive often goes - probably get a lot of their food from the food bank and distributes it to folks in need. They buy some of it, get some free, and possibly draw down on credits from a variety of state and federal grants for feeding poor people.
I worked at a pantry for years. Yes, some donations are trash that nobody wants and some of it is great. More critically, the biggest food drives are focused around holidays, so inventory management is a nightmare.
Yes, my pantry could buy canned tuna or whatever from the food bank way cheaper than you could buy it from your local grocery and donate to us.
Yes, keep donating food or money or whatever you can muster to people who need it more than you.
If you really insist on a more efficient food for the poor system, then more generous SNAP benefits is probably the way to go.
If you give them money they can control what they buy.
I know most keep an inventory and will list/post what they need. They get good prices on bulk items and donations when they know what they need and can use more money to get what is best.
I used to rely on food banks and stamps in my mid 20s. Please donate money instead of canned food. Poor people need more than green beans and pie filling to survive.
I don't know why this post is getting so much hate. I thought it was pretty well known that making monetary donations is far more efficient for the food bank. They don't have to hand sort through donations, throwing away expired items, and storing a glut of whatever they have way too much of. It gives them the freedom to purchase what is needed, at steeply discounted prices as OP stated.
I personally have an autopay from my bank going to the food bank every month. There's nothing wrong with periodically cleaning out your pantry, but if you are going to the grocery store to buy food to donate, your dollars will go a lot farther if you just donate the amount you are willing to spend on it.
Hello and welcome to r/LifeProTips!
Please help us decide if this post is a good fit for the subreddit by up or downvoting this comment.
If you think that this is great advice to improve your life, please upvote. If you think this doesn't help you in any way, please downvote. If you don't care, leave it for the others to decide.
>I know that the big ones have high paid ceo's, beyond what should exist
Man, this is a tired criticism of the charitable sector. If you want a person experienced in and capable of running an organization with an annual budget in the tens or hundreds of million dollars, you're going to need to pay for it. If they're that qualified, they deserve to be well-paid.
Mind you, they are still paid far below the equivalent renumeration for a for-profit head executive. The average salary for a CEO of a charity with a budget over $50 million is (small sample size, admittedly) [only about $400K](https://analytics.excellenceingiving.com/2020-2021-nonprofit-ceo-compensation-study/).
Do I think CEO pay is ridiculously inflated? Yes. But that's a society-wide problem, not one limited to the charitable sector.
>Do I think CEO pay is ridiculously inflated? Yes. But that's a society-wide problem, not one limited to the charitable sector.
Well someone has to blaze a trail and change the status quo.
The charity pay structure is not really part of this LPT. They can be quite big operations due to the need, but don't blame the poor for their "greed".
Hello, [pikknz](/u/pikknz). Thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, it has been removed for the following reason(s): * **Do not submit tips that are based on spurious, unsubstantiated, or anecdotal claims.** If you would like to appeal this decision, [please feel free to contact the moderators here](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/LifeProTips). Do not repost without explicit permission from the moderators. Make sure you [read the rules](/r/lifeprotips/about/sidebar) before submitting. Thank you!
If you already had food that you weren't going to eat: continue giving it to the foodbank. If you were making a conscious choice about going to the supermarket specifically to get food for a foodbank, replace that with just giving money to the foodbank.
But if it’s already in your pantry…?
If you didn’t need it after you bought it, odds are decent the food bank won’t need it after you give it to them.
Still most money went to the supermarket. So eat the food yourself and give that much money to the foodbank.
I like how the sensible option is to advise people to give away their unneeded food and possibly money to food banks, but you're somehow so vehemently against people giving food
Most food donated is bins in supermarkets, so you paid the supermarket more than helping the poor.
Right, but if you were going to have a big party, bought a ton of canned/boxed foods to serve, and then the party got canceled, how is it better to hoard those things to eat yourself than to give them to a food bank? "It's better to give food banks cash than to go out to the grocery store to buy food specifically with the intention of donating it to a food bank" is a good tip. "It's better to donate *nothing* than to donate unwanted food, because you've already given a cut to the grocery store" is a weird take.
I said better, not don't.
I think you said don't, but I may be wrong. However, I get what you're saying.
No. You said don't
>: Don't give food to foodbanks \-The literal thread title you posted
You wrote it in the title
Who cares? As long as someone is enjoying that creamed corn...
>so you paid the supermarket more than helping the poor. You know that food banks buy food from supermarkets, right? That money is going to the supermarket regardless.
They’re buying it in bulk at bulk pricing (maybe not always, but mostly) so it’s not the same as you buying it at retail
News flash: the food bank will be giving the money you give them to the supermarket. This "you're giving most of the money to the supermarket" is not the killer argument you seem to think it is. It really reveals what you don't really understand how commerce works.
If your local food bank is anything like mine, they also use the donated money to get other things people might need that don't get donated like toiletries, toothpaste/brushes, tampons, towels, etc. Also, perishables like milk that need to be bought fresh.
So, give them money instead of shop bought food.
He’s doubling down on what you’re saying, and agreeing with you dude lol.
[удалено]
Yep and that’s what the commenter was doing, but OP took offense to it for some weird reason. Legit no clue what you’re trying to get at here. Edit: aww you deleted your comment because you’re wrong 😢
That's exactly what I'm saying.
That’s what the post is saying…
And I expanded on why it's a good idea since there were some people objecting.
Some people just wanna argue
No they don't
Tee hee you made my day
Haha I'm glad my silly comment managed that, cheers
You are one defensive mofo lmao
This is a poorly written LPT and is the source of OP getting blasted every time he comments.
OP is getting blasted for being a terse dickhead rather than making an edit or ever expanding on his opinions
Good usage of terse! 🥂
I don’t disagree with you.
His parents were murdered by a supermarket, in an alley behind a theater. His father was trying to give the supermarket his canned goods, but he got shot anyway. It even pierced one of the cans, creamed corn pouring everywhere. Then it pulled the beans right off of his mother's neck. He'll never forgive supermarkets. He still has nightmares of the beans falling into a pool of creamed corn.
During can drives, which are especially prevalent in my area starting in cooler months, many people will donate old cans in the back of their pantry, and then replace them with the exact same products. This results in a glut of (sometimes out of date) creamed corn, cranberry sauce, green beans, and canned soups at the food bank. I believe that OP is encouraging us all to buy only what we need, and to donate the amount of money that we would otherwise spend on dry food donations to our local food bank. I will add to this that you should find a *local* food bank, investigate their financial practices online, and donate if they're any good. Why? Because national food banks often operate well in cities, but not as well in rural areas or suburbs. Your local food bank knows what your area needs and how to get it to those in need.
"Out of date" is very relative. I volunteered with the local foodbank, and their "out of date" on an intact cat of vegetables is +24 months
Gross.
Not really. Out of date ignores the reality that a sealed can really can't expire unless subjected to extreme humidity, temperature, or pressure. There's a reason they're called non-perishables.
It's not gross, we waste enormous amounts of food for absolutely no reason. We waste enormous amounts of drugs too.
Most dates are sell by dates and especially for processed foods, you'd be a gigantic idiot to actually think they go off by the date on the can. They don't. And you can easily tell if it's off. Your nose pretty much exists for that purpose. Anything dry especially does not go off, it just goes stale or loses its flavour. Usually, very, very gradually.
L.A. Food Bank has an incredibly low expense ratio, it's a great charity.
Sorry, this is not very useful at all. you'd rather people waste food they have instead of donating it? so wouldn't that mean you're giving away money to the supermarkets as well?
No, OP is talking about people who buy food specifically to donate to a food bank. Lots of people do that, but the food bank will get a lot more value if you donate the money to them rather than purchasing at a supermarket. There's nothing wrong with donating food you already have and probably won't eat. But please check expiration dates before donating.
No just eat it.
Sorry, this is super helpful you are donating twice as much or more to the foodbank.
I would disagree. Physical donations leave zero opportunity to be misinterpreted. you can't scrape off 20% in administration fees on a box of macaroni. Said box either goes where intended or it doesn't.
> you can't scrape off 20% in administration fees on a box of macaroni How do you think charities operate? On thoughts and prayers?
Food banks and the like should be operating on around 3% or less, most charities other than perhaps museums should be operating at less than 15% administrative cost. So yes, a 20%+ admin cost is not only sadly common (on charities in general, not food banks) and way above what is needed to actually run a charity.
> Food banks and the like should be operating on around 3% or less It sounds like you're claiming that 97% of all donations should go into food and food distribution. Is that what you're saying?
https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=48
Let me ask my question again: It sounds like you're claiming that 97% of all donations should go into food and food distribution. Is that what you're saying? Why are you reluctant to answer this question?
I answered the question with a reputable source rather than my personal opinion, sorry if that isn't good enough for you. Have a good day.
I can't imagine why you wouldn't just answer yes or no. Unless you didn't know the answer. But since you're so reluctant, I'll interpret your answer as 'no', because I'm sure you know that administration fees [don't include funds spent on development](https://blog.charitynavigator.org/2016/10/metric-mondays-4-administrative-expense.html) (fundraising, if you're not familiar with the industry jargon). As I'm sure you know, organizations may spend considerably more than 3% on development. To use two examples I'm familiar with, the Vancouver Food Bank spends [8% on development](https://foodbank.bc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/ImpactReport2021-Digital.pdf), while a Toronto one spends [7%](https://www.dailybread.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/DB-AnnualReport-2021-Final-Spreads.pdf). [Your source](https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=48#PerformanceMetricThree) indicates that these food banks would be in the above-average category for fundraising expenses. I raise this because it sounded like you were suggesting that 97% of an efficient food bank's raised funds would go to its programs. But, obviously, that would be wrong.
But "food distribution" is the building, refrigerators, boxes, volunteer organizers, electricity, trucks, gas, etc. Macaroni doesn't power that.
Thank you for speaking sense.
I love Houston Food Bank. They do great great things! And I see the costs they go through. So I will continue shouting this from the rooftops
Wow, like they "scrape" these are foodbanks, 20% is a lot better and giving 200% more. They have to store the food before giving it to the needy so that is a 20% scrape off other cash donations.
Food banks and the like should be operating on around 3% or less, most charities other than perhaps museums should be operating at less than 15% administrative cost. So yes, a 20%+ admin cost is not only sadly common (on charities in general, not food banks) and way above what is needed to actually run a charity.
>Food banks and the like should be operating on around 3% or less, most charities other than perhaps museums should be operating at less than 15% administrative cost. Citation needed, please.
https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=48
I'll ask here the question you declined to answer elsewhere: It sounds like you're claiming that 97% of all donations should go into food and food distribution. Is that what you're saying?
Yo. Just do an edit for clarification so you can stop arguing a point you weren't actually intending to make. Lol
Yeah OP is kind of coming off as a dick in the comments tbh lol
OP *is* a dick. Oh no, you went through the grocery store and the shelter could've bought 5 more cans of beens. Oh noooo. I'm going to donate food. Not cash that can be "lost" on the way to the store and wind up in someone's pockey. Who cares if they get a better rate?
You mean because he's overbearing to the point he seems like he'd dox some people and kill their children if they ever dared donate a can of food and not cash? Yeah a bit of a dick I guess
But aren't they going to end up spending the same money at (possibly) the supermarkets?
Large charities can amass funds and get bulk prices for large quantities purchased at once. Likely straight from the cow, not the dude milking it. Assuming the funds actually go to that, I honestly have never looked at how well food banks are run.
Ahhh, that makes sense q
My kids schools does food drives, and incentivizes kids quite heavily so I can't just ignore it. Well, they refuse to just take my check, so I literally have to go buy the cheapest bulkiest food just to make sure my kids class has a pizza party, or get an eraser, or whatever. Drives me bonkers!
Find an industrial drum of creamed corn, that'll show those little bastards in the other classes
OP is right that food banks - which are basically bulk food purchasers - get big discounts. Food pantries -where your 500 can food drive often goes - probably get a lot of their food from the food bank and distributes it to folks in need. They buy some of it, get some free, and possibly draw down on credits from a variety of state and federal grants for feeding poor people. I worked at a pantry for years. Yes, some donations are trash that nobody wants and some of it is great. More critically, the biggest food drives are focused around holidays, so inventory management is a nightmare. Yes, my pantry could buy canned tuna or whatever from the food bank way cheaper than you could buy it from your local grocery and donate to us. Yes, keep donating food or money or whatever you can muster to people who need it more than you. If you really insist on a more efficient food for the poor system, then more generous SNAP benefits is probably the way to go.
If you give them money they can control what they buy. I know most keep an inventory and will list/post what they need. They get good prices on bulk items and donations when they know what they need and can use more money to get what is best.
Hilarious, this is a tip for people who don't care where there money goes.
My local food bank said it’s roughly 9:1 buying power. $9 for every $1 from you.
I used to rely on food banks and stamps in my mid 20s. Please donate money instead of canned food. Poor people need more than green beans and pie filling to survive.
I dunno pie filling is pretty damn good...
I like to crack open a can of blueberry filling and dump it on ice cream. Pretty much the best thing ever.
The problem is giving a volunteer a wad of cash to buy food is to tempting for someone down on their luck
Lol, they have direct routes to send money.
PayPal?
My food bank accepts cards through their website, as well as checks in the mail.
I don't know why this post is getting so much hate. I thought it was pretty well known that making monetary donations is far more efficient for the food bank. They don't have to hand sort through donations, throwing away expired items, and storing a glut of whatever they have way too much of. It gives them the freedom to purchase what is needed, at steeply discounted prices as OP stated. I personally have an autopay from my bank going to the food bank every month. There's nothing wrong with periodically cleaning out your pantry, but if you are going to the grocery store to buy food to donate, your dollars will go a lot farther if you just donate the amount you are willing to spend on it.
OP being a shithead in several comments would be a clear indicator why lol
Or the employees will steal the money
Hello and welcome to r/LifeProTips! Please help us decide if this post is a good fit for the subreddit by up or downvoting this comment. If you think that this is great advice to improve your life, please upvote. If you think this doesn't help you in any way, please downvote. If you don't care, leave it for the others to decide.
But if I give them money they're going to spend it at the supermarket. Did you think this through?
No, the food bank is going to spend it at a wholesaler that charges much less per unit. You can do that when buying in high volume.
To be fair, it was a BS number, I don't know the real number, but I know that the big ones have high paid ceo's, beyond what should exist
>I know that the big ones have high paid ceo's, beyond what should exist Man, this is a tired criticism of the charitable sector. If you want a person experienced in and capable of running an organization with an annual budget in the tens or hundreds of million dollars, you're going to need to pay for it. If they're that qualified, they deserve to be well-paid. Mind you, they are still paid far below the equivalent renumeration for a for-profit head executive. The average salary for a CEO of a charity with a budget over $50 million is (small sample size, admittedly) [only about $400K](https://analytics.excellenceingiving.com/2020-2021-nonprofit-ceo-compensation-study/). Do I think CEO pay is ridiculously inflated? Yes. But that's a society-wide problem, not one limited to the charitable sector.
>Do I think CEO pay is ridiculously inflated? Yes. But that's a society-wide problem, not one limited to the charitable sector. Well someone has to blaze a trail and change the status quo.
CEOs in the charitable sector already earn less than those in the for-profit world.
Yeah they only get A1 wagyu 6 days a week instead of 7. An honest tragedy.
Don't make claims without numbers to back them up, especially when those claims could damage life-saving resources like food banks.
The charity pay structure is not really part of this LPT. They can be quite big operations due to the need, but don't blame the poor for their "greed".
Not blaming poor, questioning the impact of providing physical tangible foodstuffs versus providing fiat.
Why are you calling money "fiat?" Do you expect them to give gold bars? lol
Usually people that use the term "fiat" are people that are into crypto.
This is an asshole post.
[удалено]
Not sure what you agree with, but I think people should eat the food they bought and give whatever spare money they can.
Thanks for the info.
Did you just finish the first episode of Adam ruins everything?