bitcoin Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 So I am just really curious what everyone thinks about crowd-funding. Of course its not immoral, but might it subsidize laziness? Admittedly a while back, when I was still in high school I started one for myself to try to gain my independence, go to therapy and pursue some other goals of mine. I lasted only maybe an hour. I got like 3 people to support me that day but I felt extremely nauseaus and sick to my stomach. Needless to say, I returned the funds and shut down the entire thing. I discovered with my therapist this was almost certainly because money and resources were always used to manipulate and control me growing up. Beyond this, I am interested what you all think of doing this kind of thing. Part of me wants to start one to get a new laptop because mine is from 2010 and causing me problems. I will need a new one very soon in either case. Because I am pursuing a career in the software industry, and learning to code and develop now, it can already be quite frustrating. I know you don't need much to write code, but my laptop is on its last legs to say the least. In any case, I wonder what everyone's thoughts would be on starting up one of those things and seeing if I can get help to pay for a new laptop as well as therapy... I don't know what my emotional response would be at this point, but in any case I am more curious on everyone's thoughts of doing this kind of thing. I know for me, I don't like the idea of having achieved something through handouts, nor would I gain nearly as much from the experience. At the same time,I guess it is quite "wooing"... Thanks in advanced! I really look forward to everyone's point of view.
GuzzyBone Posted June 11, 2015 Posted June 11, 2015 Well, is begging immoral? No.Is it frowned upon? Only when the begged believes that the begger is being dishonest or pushy.It's hard to say that a webpost is all that pushy, and if you are being honest about your intention and desire for funding then I see little reason to feel remorse or a case of bad conscious. If people feel your cause is deserving, and they genuinely want to help, then they will give.Voluntary giving can only be wrong if the giver is guilted, deceived, or obnoxiously pushed into their decision to give.Voluntary giving is still an equal exchange. It is the exchange of a physical commodity for the gratification or satisfaction of knowing they helped someone or supported a cause.
surfingthoughts Posted June 11, 2015 Posted June 11, 2015 (This is short quickly using McDonald's wifi) Its not subsidised laziness in the opinion of the donators it's their money and their choice they don't have to give you anything Aslong as your not lieing or being misleading then I think it could be ok. Must admit the concept is strange to me. It's one of a few options I guess later down the line you could consider an investor perhaps ...
Carl Green Posted June 11, 2015 Posted June 11, 2015 From my perspective, if you were to start another crowd-funding source and I gave money to you for it, I would be was investing in mine and your happiness or well being or whatever. I get a good feeling because I can help, and you get what you need. A Win-Win result that we can both feel good about. Another reason for me to donate is because I know if I donate to other people, that often ends up in them being more likely to help other people in the future when the opportunity allows.
bitcoin Posted June 11, 2015 Author Posted June 11, 2015 Hmm so it sounds like it is not necessarily a bad thing then. I wonder if you all have any thoughts on why a person might feel extremely ashamed and humiliated by doing such a thing ? Btw Carl, I really appreciate that! I think that is a very interesting point actually. It seems if it is voluntary though (which I believe you would have meant for sure)... What I mean is excluding welfare and so forth; studies have shown conservatives to donate far more to charities. This is no conclusion, but just as you said it certainly would make sense that people who received support when they could have used it would be much more inclined to help someone in that kind of situation. They would know how much it would have meant to them. Very interesting. And I think its true; if a person thought they were subsidizing laziness, outside of governments and politicians, I would guess 9 or more times out 10 it would be hard to believe that a person would voluntarily choose to give that person the funds. It wouldn't even be "masked" as support. It would be "you are actively supporting the keeping of this person in a state of dependance and continuing this cycle".
Carl Green Posted June 12, 2015 Posted June 12, 2015 ...studies have shown conservatives to donate far more to charities. Very interesting. And I think its true; if a person thought they were subsidizing laziness, outside of governments and politicians, I would guess 9 or more times out 10 it would be hard to believe that a person would voluntarily choose to give that person the funds. It wouldn't even be "masked" as support. It would be "you are actively supporting the keeping of this person in a state of dependance and continuing this cycle". If charitable donations will get you a tax break, you'll probably see a somewhat proportional increase in donations from those being taxed the most. Just an "off the hip" hypothesis. Not wanting to subsidize laziness is probably a reason a lot of people don't donate to beggars/houseless people. They hear stories of people "taking off their panhandling suit" and going home to a nice house after pretending to be broke and "down on their luck" all day.
Recommended Posts