Chuck,

I have always considered any charity that spends less than 10% of it's
contributions on administration and fund raising, as an extremely reputable
and efficient charity. My favorite charity spends 3% on admin and fund
raising.

The BBB uses 35% for admin and fund raising as their criteria for evaluating
reputable charities. The AIMS is not listed on www.Give.org ,
http://www.charitywatch.org/, or http://www.charitynavigator.org/. This is
normally a red flag.

What percent of AIM's contributions are used for admin and fund raising?
This info was not available on AIMS web site, which is another red flag to
look at the charity closely before contributing.


wrote in message
oups.com...

Psuedo, you're a simpering dweeb.

Here are a couple of links to sites that describe some of the work done
by the organization with which I was once associated. As you say, the
NG has many bright members who can decide for themselves (assuming they
gave a ratz patoot in the first place)whether your charge that I was
engaged in a dishonest business and involved in "tax fraud" has any
merit or not.

There were some abuses throughout the entire boat donation industry,
and the firm I worked with was probably not a vestal virgin. No
business (or person) is perfect, or absolutely ethical 24/7/365. That
business morality doesn't automatically reflect on the morality or the
ethics of everybody involved. In recent years, we have seen many news
accounts of pedophile priests and attempts by bishops, etc, to cover up
the crimes of these guys and just transfer them from church to church
rather than deal with the problem. I assume, by your standards, that if
ever you meet a priest you're going to assume he's a pedophile? If
there are 10 people working in a church and it is ultimately discovered
that the priest has been having his way with the altar boys in the
confession booth, would you consider the church secretary, the janitor,
etc etc etc pedophiles as well? Would you consider any church to be the
domain of a pedophile?

Still have any of that literature you claim I gave you 6 or 7 years
ago?
If so, take a look at it. Every page had bold statements urging people
considering the donation of a boat to check with their own attorney or
tax professional before going ahead. Most did, and some of them
discovered that for various reasons, (such as AMT, specific bracketing,
etc), it wouldn't be a good idea to proceed. Fine. In my role, I wasn't
in the business of giving tax advice but I could explain the mechanics
of the program as it would be implemented for people who chose to make
a donation. We continuously urged prospective donors to get some
independent advice before donating.


http://www.miami.edu/campaign/donors...s_dp_aims.html


http://www.aims-nw.org/seattleservice.htm


http://www.mpcfaculty.net/tami_lunsf...returnsweb.pdf

http://www.miami.edu/campaign/donors...s_dp_aims.html

As far as I'm concerned, that's my portion of this "discussion".

GFYS. (go fantasize you're skipper)