I have seen that traditional approaches to charity and aid don't solve problems of poverty. In fact, too often they create dependence.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
If you don't improve the lives of the poor, it's not charity.
You can't get rid of poverty by giving people money.
The best way to end poverty is to simply give people work, which isn't considered 'sexy' among donors who want to fund a preschool or cure a disease.
Money is better than poverty, if only for financial reasons.
I believe that poverty is often the result of inappropriate behavior - out-of-wedlock births, dropping out of school, crime and drugs - which should not be rewarded. But often it isn't, and common decency requires that we take care of the least of these.
Most organizations should be pro-active, but philanthropists concerned with poverty should deliberately be reactive, learning from the efforts of ordinary folks who tired of looking the other way as their communities fell apart.
Charity is a fine thing if it's meeting a gap where needs must be met and there are no other resources. But in the long term we need to support people into helping themselves.
Poverty is not inevitable. It is a human ill that we can fight if we decide to do so together.
We often have an exaggerated sense of what nonprofits and governments are doing to help the poor, but the really inspiring thing is how much the poor are doing to help themselves.
Anticipate charity by preventing poverty.