Is this a bad idea or not ? all should read - Page 2

kinpin · 10-22-2014, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by two_wheel_mayhem

I've seen things go on like this on other forums. The best way is to just rally for whatever member you care about, when it happens to them.

Those that can or will chip in during that situation will do so.

also a good point

songsj · 10-22-2014, 09:50 PM

Quote:

I think your opening sentences were so rife with ignorance and stereotypes I lacked the will to read the rest of it.
__________________

He says as he was judging the book by it's cover, sometimes the truth hurts, like it or not.

kinpin · 10-22-2014, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by songsj

He says as he was judging the book by it's cover, sometimes the truth hurts, like it or not.

45thCamaro · 10-22-2014, 10:11 PM

While I think it's a noble idea, unfortunately the way the world works, you'll have moochers. People who would use it every month and never putting in for
It.

kinpin · 10-22-2014, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 45thCamaro

While I think it's a noble idea, unfortunately the way the world works, you'll have moochers. People who would use it every month and never putting in for
It.

yes i can see that ... Thats why you would have to contribute to be eligible..

richard200593 · 10-22-2014, 11:56 PM

I agree with what allot have said, great idea and your heart is in the right place, but there would have to be allot more than just "you have to put in to take out" way to many people would put in 20 dollars and a month later be saying "I'm 200 shy on my payment this month times are tough" it would be nearly impossible to regulate but if you found a way I would be willing to contribute for sure.

ssrs2lt · 10-23-2014, 07:07 AM

Charity is a good thing, but there's enough out there already..just donate to an existing one..

Scalded Dog · 10-23-2014, 10:01 AM

I've had a little experience with this, in a sorta similar fashion.

In my community, there was a woman who got into some trouble through no fault of her own (basically, a drunk boyfriend got her car impounded by the police). Some of us rallied together to help this lady out through a local chatroom. Lots of folks opened up their wallets, and nearly $1000 was raised in a matter of hours. I sorta spearheaded the idea, so ended up being the treasurer by default.

What a mess. Instead of just having $1000 to hand over to this woman, it turned out that there was more to the story than originally thought. Sure enough, the car impoundment WAS at least 50% the fault of the woman. So, some of those who had donated wanted their money back... or wanted it donated to some charity (and everybody had a different charity in mind). Some still wanted the woman to get the money. The $1000 was more than she needed, but all of the money had come in, without a way to "stop the flow" partway through, so some wanted PART of their money back... how the hell do you figure THAT out?

The arguments ensued, with people angry about the whole thing, and others angry that others were angry.

Of course, I had to account for every penny... the potential for ME to be accused of making a buck or two was very significant. I had to post, online, the amount of every person's donation, and post where each donation had eventually gone to, in order to show that I was not there to pocket any of it myself.

It was a huge hassle. The only way it would REALLY have worked would have been to have a third- party treasurer, a third- party judge (whose opinion would not be questioned or invalidated), a way of easily transferring funds here, there, back and forth. Then you have a small pseudo- government. And THAT is never good, as the temptation of money--- even a few dollars--- can corrupt some people, and if even ONE member of the group/ pseudo- government is dishonest, then the entire thing falls apart. Most people, I believe, are good, decent and honest... but it only takes ONE person (in a group of administrators)to wreck it for everybody.

You'd need a way that everybody agrees on (that'll never happen) to decide who gets what amount of money, and when, and how much. How much have they contributed (and, generally, the only people who ARE going to "get in a jam" are financially irresponsible types, who would probably have never donated a dime to the fund to start with), how worthy are they, why should THEY get the money, and not some other guy? Too many variables, too much opportunity for corruption, too many opportunities for people to disagree.

I would love to see this enacted, however... as a social experiment. I'd love to be proven wrong. I would not participate in it myself, but would enjoy seeing it done, and seeing how it plays out.

ZED SLED · 10-23-2014, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by F-16 Camaro

I think your opening sentences were so rife with ignorance and stereotypes I lacked the will to read the rest of it.

Really? I have a co-worker who's wife works for the SSA. She used to be a Pollyanna just like you. She now believes about 75% of the people she deals with are scamming but she can't do anything about it, other than make their red tape and wait times miserable. So maybe some stereotypes are spot on.

kalimus · 10-23-2014, 12:12 PM

I can appreciate the good intentioned thought, but I already get plenty of my money taken that goes to help other people, in addition to my charity givings and occasional volunteer works. Not able to keep one's car is not a tragedy. It's a disappointment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by F-16 Camaro

I think your opening sentences were so rife with ignorance and stereotypes I lacked the will to read the rest of it.

Yeah. Because nobody takes advantage of these programs

kinpin · 10-23-2014, 07:19 PM

Thank you all for your honest input . There where allot of good point brought up and i definitely think something like this would be very hard to do now .

JLightning77 · 10-23-2014, 07:53 PM

Nice thought but I think we all know that drastic times call for drastic measures and if that drastic time is you've lost your job, well, now you may have to take drastic measures and get rid of the Camaro unfortunately. You shouldn't own what you cant afford and you cant expect other people to pay your bills.
Back in the early days when men were men and people worked their asses off and didn't look for hand outs could you imagine this conversation lol. I am not at all trying to insult the idea just was thinking about the difference in mind sets these days. Very interesting how far we have come or not come lol.

2010SLVRBULIT · 10-23-2014, 08:03 PM

As decent as may sound, you just cannot trust some people. Pass.

jrhagen · 10-23-2014, 08:34 PM

Contact Joel Osteen, I am sure he would see the importance of having a luxury over a necessity.

10-22-2014, 11:56 PM	#20
richard200593 Drives: 2012 45th Anniversary RS Join Date: May 2012 Location: California Posts: 887 View My Garage	I agree with what allot have said, great idea and your heart is in the right place, but there would have to be allot more than just "you have to put in to take out" way to many people would put in 20 dollars and a month later be saying "I'm 200 shy on my payment this month times are tough" it would be nearly impossible to regulate but if you found a way I would be willing to contribute for sure. __________________ Performance: mrt v2.0 exhaust/CAI Intake Cosmetic: Zl1 factory Reproduction wheels Bmr 1.2/1.4 springs/Oracle plasma drl lights, footwell ambient lighting, 45th Gobo lights Audio: Memphis pr600 amp/Fosgate 12" t0 sub/******* stealth box

10-23-2014, 07:07 AM	#21
ssrs2lt Drives: too many Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: oh va pa ma tx Posts: 3,046	Charity is a good thing, but there's enough out there already..just donate to an existing one.. __________________

10-22-2014, 10:11 PM	#18
45thCamaro Drives: 2012 Camaro 45th Anniversary RS Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: New York Posts: 2,421	While I think it's a noble idea, unfortunately the way the world works, you'll have moochers. People who would use it every month and never putting in for It.

10-23-2014, 10:01 AM	#22
Scalded Dog Drives: 2011 1LT Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Crestline, CA Posts: 3,029	I've had a little experience with this, in a sorta similar fashion. In my community, there was a woman who got into some trouble through no fault of her own (basically, a drunk boyfriend got her car impounded by the police). Some of us rallied together to help this lady out through a local chatroom. Lots of folks opened up their wallets, and nearly $1000 was raised in a matter of hours. I sorta spearheaded the idea, so ended up being the treasurer by default. What a mess. Instead of just having $1000 to hand over to this woman, it turned out that there was more to the story than originally thought. Sure enough, the car impoundment WAS at least 50% the fault of the woman. So, some of those who had donated wanted their money back... or wanted it donated to some charity (and everybody had a different charity in mind). Some still wanted the woman to get the money. The $1000 was more than she needed, but all of the money had come in, without a way to "stop the flow" partway through, so some wanted PART of their money back... how the hell do you figure THAT out? The arguments ensued, with people angry about the whole thing, and others angry that others were angry. Of course, I had to account for every penny... the potential for ME to be accused of making a buck or two was very significant. I had to post, online, the amount of every person's donation, and post where each donation had eventually gone to, in order to show that I was not there to pocket any of it myself. It was a huge hassle. The only way it would REALLY have worked would have been to have a third- party treasurer, a third- party judge (whose opinion would not be questioned or invalidated), a way of easily transferring funds here, there, back and forth. Then you have a small pseudo- government. And THAT is never good, as the temptation of money--- even a few dollars--- can corrupt some people, and if even ONE member of the group/ pseudo- government is dishonest, then the entire thing falls apart. Most people, I believe, are good, decent and honest... but it only takes ONE person (in a group of administrators)to wreck it for everybody. You'd need a way that everybody agrees on (that'll never happen) to decide who gets what amount of money, and when, and how much. How much have they contributed (and, generally, the only people who ARE going to "get in a jam" are financially irresponsible types, who would probably have never donated a dime to the fund to start with), how worthy are they, why should THEY get the money, and not some other guy? Too many variables, too much opportunity for corruption, too many opportunities for people to disagree. I would love to see this enacted, however... as a social experiment. I'd love to be proven wrong. I would not participate in it myself, but would enjoy seeing it done, and seeing how it plays out.

10-23-2014, 07:19 PM	#25
kinpin 618 RWHP Drives: 2014 ZL1 Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: Albany New York Posts: 772 View My Garage	Thank you all for your honest input . There where allot of good point brought up and i definitely think something like this would be very hard to do now .

10-23-2014, 07:53 PM	#26
JLightning77 Drives: 2012 Anniversary Camaro SS Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Roseville Posts: 12	Nice thought but I think we all know that drastic times call for drastic measures and if that drastic time is you've lost your job, well, now you may have to take drastic measures and get rid of the Camaro unfortunately. You shouldn't own what you cant afford and you cant expect other people to pay your bills. Back in the early days when men were men and people worked their asses off and didn't look for hand outs could you imagine this conversation lol. I am not at all trying to insult the idea just was thinking about the difference in mind sets these days. Very interesting how far we have come or not come lol.

10-23-2014, 08:03 PM	#27
2010SLVRBULIT Drives: G5(LLT) & C6(LS3) Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: MARS Posts: 7,525 View My Garage	As decent as may sound, you just cannot trust some people. Pass.

10-23-2014, 08:34 PM	#28
jrhagen Banned Drives: Camaro Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: USA Posts: 2,701	Contact Joel Osteen, I am sure he would see the importance of having a luxury over a necessity.