Fed up of businesses aligning themselves with politics!

[thehorsehasnowbolted]

I was about to grab a turkey and cranberry sandwich yesterday at a major retailer when I noticed on the package that 5% of that purchase would go to Shelter.

Why are we being increasingly forced nowadays to contribute to causes we may not necessarily agree with in this way? Why don't businesses stick to selling goods? Why the constant virtue signalling? It's annoying

I do not intend to comment on this charity in particular, but I have seen my fair share of pensioners being out of pocket to evict problem tenants who were in a position to pay the rent and look after properties but simply didn't want to and just played the system.

The results of charities activities are not always 100% positive, so customers shouldn't be forced to contribute in this way.

Why do businesses assume that their customers agree with the charities they pick? The constant virtue signalling is patronising and insulting.

As long as the charity is clearly stated, so consumers have the choice to buy/not buy I don't have an issue with it.

It's the customers choice - don't want to support the charity then buy something else. It's that simple. Same with the donations question when paying by card. It's us that put the pressure on ourselves, as evidenced on this thread - embarrassed to say no. Own that and be strong and decline if you don't want to contribute. No one else cares which button you push.

Businesses have always given to charities for whatever reason. I don't think donating to a homelessness charity is particularly political.

The constant virtue signalling is patronising and insulting.

Lucky we don't live in a communist type country with only the State Sandwich Shop, the State Supermarket, The State Clothes Shop and so on, and that we have choices about where to go.

I've never encountered this but it seems from reading the thread it's kind of like a service charge in a restaurant that you can ask to have removed from the bill? Seems ok to me. They are perfectly entitled to take part in any kind of Corporate Social Responsiblity they like and you are free not to purchase any of their goods.

The constant whining about "virtue signalling" is very useful though: it tells me who i can ignore in the same way they can not use businesses that donate to charities of whom they don't approve. Win-win, right?

I regularly use businesses that have a) a commitment to sustainability and b) a good programme of Corporate Social Responsiblity. Other people do their own thing. It is all fine.

You do have a choice though- you could not by the products

I want to know more about the actual product, I'm not interested in somebody else's morals and woo

The product is a bog-standard turkey sandwich made from dead animals, cheap wheat and some sort of milk-derived spread. Clearly they need to give people some compelling reason to buy and they don't think the quality of the food is worth shouting about so they've found a different incentive.

Polarising content sells. For every person who gets turned off, another person gets a strong "OMG YES" response that makes them a repeat buyer which is worth more than two opportunity one-off sales.

I just tune it out if it's something benign like Shelter, but if I saw it was donating to Mermaids or what have you, I'd have to look for another below-average lunch option instead.

I'm glad the innkeeper in Bethlehem didn't think the same about the homeless as you do!!

Suggest your pensioner friend takes out landlord insurance HTH

Oh, and morals are not 'woo'

Somebody else's morals are 'woo' to those who don't agree with them. Or do you believe that 'ethics' is a universally accepted concept?

He's a very Christian owner, saw a programme on him once. Refuses to open on a Sunday, etc.

I don't think donating to a homelessness charity is particularly political

Charities can be (and often are) political. Most carry out a massive amount of lobbying.

What do you think is driving current uncontrolled rent rises? The demonization of landlords by some charities has probably driven a lot of the current landlord- hostile legislation which has caused the sell off of properties reducing available stock (and price increases)

Well, I believe that looking after those who are less fortunate than we are is the decent thing to do. If that's 'woo', then I'm woo. Doesn't Christianity have similar principles?

The demonization of landlords by some charities has probably driven a lot of the current landlord- hostile legislation which has caused the sell off of properties reducing available stock (and price increases)

The activity of most charities (especially today) is not neutral or innocuous. There are consequences that part of the population may not want. Why should we be 'forced' to donate?

Charities need to be political because government policies affect the population the charities are trying to support. I'm surprised you don't see this.

Rent rises are happening because we are not building enough affordable rented housing and because of Right to Buy. That's on Thatcher. Taken across the piece, landlords still have fewer protections than tenants.

What do you think is driving current uncontrolled rent rises? The demonization of landlords by some charities has probably driven a lot of the current landlord- hostile legislation which has caused the sell off of properties reducing available stock (and price increases)

oh god MY RIBS ACHE

utter piffle.

If you wanted to write a post about the poor ol' landlords why didn't you do that instead of all the anti-virtue signalling about how you hate charities?

And you're not forced to donate. You can 1) buy your sandwich elsewhere, 2) bring a packed lunch. I mean, of all the things to get a bee in your bonnet about this one is up there with the silliest.

You're not coming across well here.

The demonization of landlords by some charities has probably driven a lot of the current landlord- hostile legislation which has caused the sell off of properties reducing available stock (and price increases)

Oh, and this will be appropriated by all kinds of political parties to score political points. It can (and most often is) political

Charities need to be political because government policies affect the population the charities are trying to support

Aren't charities who receive public funding supposed to remain apolitical? Just saying. That's another issue

You seem to equate 'be apolitical' with 'shut up and defer to the government'. Doesn't work that way. A homeless charity is supposed to stand up for the homeless. If that means saying things the current government doesn't like, so be it - the charity has to be free to do its job.

Exactly

There are children dying in this country because of terrible housing conditions that landlords won't fix, but god forbid your turkey sandwich sends a couple pennies to a housing charity

It is illegal to tell lies as a fundraiser. Report your charity to the Charity Commission.
Personally I am dubious.

And Shelter are fighting for the very poorest that need somewhere safe to live. I really do not care about pensioners making money by renting out houses, that is a business. I care about that poor two year old child who died because their flat was so mouldy it killed them.

Shelter's purpose is not to 'screw over pensioners'

It exists to inform tenants of their legal rights. If landlords don't want to follow the law, they should not be landlords. If they disagree with the law, they should complain to parliament, not the charities trying to keep thousands and thousands of families from being homeless.

Why do businesses assume that their customers agree with the charities they pick?

They don't. If you feel that strongly, you didn't HAVE to have their a turkey sandwich did you? It wasn't the last sandwich in town, and you weren't literally starving, were you?

Plus having a pop at Shelter in particular, because on the grapevine you've heard about some stories about pensioners having problem tenants (presumably pensioners rich enough to have a property to rent out in the first place, and afford landlord insurance which every landlord should have anyway?)... low blow.

It isn’t “food for thought” at all you melt, how do you think these companies know that their advertising campaigns work? 🙄

Fair enough for Shelter, but look at it another way - how would you feel if 5% of the money was going to the Muslim Brotherhood, or Mermaids? Not that I've got anything against them particularly, but try to see it from the OP's perspective.

Also more crap. Do you think it’s more attractive for an investor to invest in a business which deals in weapons or tobacco or to invest in a business which supports elderly or disabled people in the UK?