Jump to content

Recommended Posts

There are chuggers out this morning on Lordship Lane. I detest chuggers. They never ever give a straight answer as to how much money they keep back in fees. If you keep pressing the question and demand to know how much the charity receives then they just get arsey with you. Plus it really bugs me how much they flirt to try and get you to sign up.


Here's my advice, if you want to give money to the NSPCC then click on the below link, then double click on the red "donate" link. The charity will receive every single penny that you give to them and they can claim the tax back. If you have signed up with the chuggers today then I would urge you to cancel your standing order immediately and donate direct.


http://www.nspcc.org.uk/WhatWeDo/MediaCentre/OurCampaigns/Ourcampaigns_wda36383.html

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/6907-chuggers/
Share on other sites

Having worked for a national charity that used chuggers I agree with giggirl - it takes more than a year to re-coup the fees for each successful sign up. It relies solely on the assumption that people won't cancel their direct debit but will just keep on giving.


Also - I would urge people thinking of giving to charity to actually consider smaller charities in their local area rather than always going for the obvious national charities. Your money can go an awful lot further when it's not supporting Head Offices and expensive marketing campaigns.


A really good resource is www.thebiggive.org.uk - you can put in your charitable interests, your location and it will bring up lots of small charities looking for support.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/6907-chuggers/#findComment-221217
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Girls In Your City - No Selfie - Anonymous Casual Dating https://SecreLocal.com [url=https://SecreLocal.com] Girls In Your City [/url] - Anonymous Casual Dating - No Selfie New Girls [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/molly-15.html]Molly[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/cheryl-blossom-48.html]Cheryl Blossom[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/carola-conymegan-116.html]Carola Conymegan[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/pupa-41.html]Pupa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/mia-candy-43.html]Mia Candy[/url]
    • This is a remarkable interpretation of history. Wikipedia (with more footnotes and citations than you could shake a shitty stick at sez: The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government. In his June 2010 budget speech, Osborne identified two goals. The first was that the structural current budget deficit would be eliminated to "achieve [a] cyclically-adjusted current balance by the end of the rolling, five-year forecast period". The second was that national debt as a percentage of GDP would fall. The government intended to achieve both of its goals through substantial reductions in public expenditure.[21] This was to be achieved by a combination of public spending cuts and tax increases amounting to £110 billion.[26] Between 2010 and 2013, the Coalition government said that it had reduced public spending by £14.3 billion compared with 2009–10.[27] Growth remained low, while unemployment rose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_government_austerity_programme From memory, last time around they were against the LTNs and competing with the Tories to pick up backlash votes - both failed. They had no counterproposals or ideas about how to manage congestion or pollution. This time around they're simply silent on the matter: https://www.southwark-libdems.org.uk/your-local-lib-dem-team/goosegreen Also, as we have seen from Mr Barber's comments on the new development on the old Jewsons yard, "leading campaigns to protect the character of East Dulwich and Goose Green" is code for "blocking new housing".
    • @Insuflo NO, please no, please don't encourage him to post more often! 😒
    • Revealing of what, exactly? I resurrected this thread, after a year, to highlight the foolishness of the OP’s op. And how posturing would be sagacity is quickly undermined by events, dear boy, events. The thread is about Mandelson. I knew he was a wrong ‘un all along, we all did; the Epstein shit just proves it. In reality, Kinnock, Blair, Brown, Starmer et all knew as well but accepted it, because they found him useful. As did a large proportion of the 2024 intake of Labour MPs who were personally vetted and approved by Mandelson.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...