0
1

[–] BoiseNTheHood 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Wow, you mean to tell me that a government organization sucks at charity and is corrupt? Yes, I'm aware that they're technically a "federal instrumentality" as opposed to an agency. They still have responsibilities given to them by the government and are given federal material support during natural disasters.

The Red Cross has a long history of corruption, by the way. Their response (or lack thereof) to the aftermath of 9/11 was particularly despicable. They've "cleaned house" since then but apparently nothing's changed.

0
2

[–] bfriend13 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Easy - hookers and blow.

0
4

[–] knuklz 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

This is not surprising based upon their history and lack of internal accountability. The Red Cross is a large organization and arguably one that has a relatively thick bureaucracy. Certainly, some immediate spending to hit goals on the ground in a disaster area can be difficult if not almost impossible to track. I do know that there are designated resources that are 'anointed' in disaster zones with the ability to spend money to solve an immediate issue. ie. contract a bulldozer to flatten an area to stand up tents or buy a pump and generator to provide water. Deeper accountability has always been difficult for the Red Cross. I always wonder though, is there FIFA like graft happening in the Red Cross. I would imagine that due to the large sums of cash and how it is spend, there would have to be some.

0
0

[–] BaIoo ago 

the american red cross pay their ceo $500,000 a year basic. if i'm going to be charitable i'm not going to pay an organisation to do it on my behalf, especially when so much of the funds are misused.

0
3

[–] bill.lee 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

I can't recall, but I thought there were similar concerns raised about donations following Katrina?