I'm quite bemused by Vic's criticisms of the auDA
Foundation and his comment:
"its very easy to be charitable with other peoples
money. it would be a feather in their caps if it was
their own money, or donated voluntarily."

Yet it's the right's ideological heroes who pursue
private giving and the withdrawl of the state from
service provision.

It's the right who is gung ho on giving by trusts,
estates and foundations and not through taxation.

So, do you mean to say that our current government,
and the neo-cons in America, are just too left wing
for you Vic?

If you had any knowledge of philanthropy Vic you'd
hang your head in shame at your comments.

Regards,
David

--- Deus Ex Machina <vicc&#167;cia.com.au> wrote:

> Kim Davies [kim&#167;cynosure.com.au] wrote:
> > Quoting Jim Preston on Wednesday August 16, 2006:
> > | We are missing the true point on the Auda
> Foundation. Whether it's a great
> > | success or a dismal failure - it's a great
> feather in the cap of those who
> > | initiated this generous charitable cause.  Who
> really cares if it's 
> > | unlikely to work, it presents those behind it as
> having their heart in the 
> > | right place.
> > 
> > I guess I missed the point too. I thought this was
> was about auCD, not
> > the auDA Foundation.
> 
> ditto. intention is not enough anyway, all
> castrophes can find good intentions
> at their core. intention must be firmly wedded to
> skillful means lest
> they end up as paving stones to you know where.
> 
> on the point of the auda foundation, its very easy
> to be charitable with
> other peoples money. it would be a feather in their
> caps if it was their
> own money, or donated voluntarily.
> 
> Vic
> 
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
> http://dotau.org/
> 



		
____________________________________________________ 
On Yahoo!7 
Answers: Real people ask and answer questions on any topic. 
http://www.yahoo7.com.au/answers