Snowfall and Christmas music do not merely signal the beginning of the holiday season, but the onset of the season of giving. During this time of year, most everyone makes a greater effort than usual to benefit their community.

One charity that is extremely prominent during this time, is the Salvation Army; volunteers emerge in full force, ringing bells in an effort to collect cash donations for our veterans. Another approach to capitalizing on people’s heightened sense of generosity, is when groups such as Adopt A Family ask for people to purchase household goods and gifts, which they then donate to families in need. While both of these charities are honorable in virtue, they are not both sensible in practice.

Through a purely economic perspective, the way in which the Salvation Army collects donations allows for many more people to be helped with the same value of donations, as compared to Adopt A Family. No charity wishes to help less than they are able to, but a singular item purchased from your local Target, is not equal to the same item supplied directly by the manufacturer. The $30 you spent on a toaster, should only be seen as a waste of $30, and hence your potential for giving. Charities are meant to be the organizations who acquire monetary donations in order to obtain these discount prices that manufacturers are able to supply.

The overarching goal of any charity is to benefit some cause to the fullest of that group’s abilities. However, it seems as though many charities have lost sight of what the sole purpose of their organization is. Rather than relying on the individual generosity of people, charities are created to organize the donations of many, and then convert those donations into more product than any one person could ever acquire alone. Any charity that does not strictly push for cash donations, misses out on one of the main benefits of their existence — acquiring goods at wholesale prices.

One charity at Dakota RIdge High School, is Grub Club. This group is headed by Mrs. Buchanan-Lind in partnership with the Jeffco Action Center and “focuses on our three thousand homeless and emancipated youth in our district of Jeffco,” Buchanan-Lind says. “Grub Club is working to provide food items, hygiene items, and school supplies, to make sure that those kids will make it through the next semester, and the boxes contain enough food to get them through two or three days.”

Unlike other charities within the school, this one advocates for both cash and physical donations. While every donation contributes to the well being of the community, a $5.00 check would stretch much further than a few cans of soups, as the Jeffco Action Center is able to convert all of its cash donations into food items. They are able to obtain exactly what they need, and in greater quantities, when working with cash donations.

For as to why a charity would ask specifically for tangible items, the answer is fairly simply; in order to support a non profit, you must convince people that it is a benefit to them in donating to your cause. With this in mind, you must consider what creates action within people. These two factors are sympathy and satisfying the idea that you “did your part.” A person is more likely to feel like an active proponent of society if they drive $50 worth of food to the local soup kitchen, rather than “only” mailing in a check for $50. The fact that any donation is asked to be purchased at retail prices is nothing more than a waste of time, money, and energy. By these actions, charities become the middleman of the giving world, who are burdened by all of the problems of any retailer, and blessed by none of the discount prices.

While the sentiments expressed above are extremely critical of some actions of charities, it should not be interpreted to say that charities are immoral or a negative aspect of society, rather that the way in which we conduct them needs to change. Charities need to be in existence, and people need to contribute to the well being of their communities. However, this does not make null the fact that things could and should be better. And rather than encouraging people to donate more, people simply need to donate more intelligently.