Ozzie's Weekend Poll #8

ozziepost

G'day folks, how's the weekend going? Not too strenuous I hope. But just in case you're at a 'loose end', here's something to give you a little 'light relief'. Yep, it's time for another poll!

This weekend's topic is:

When the 'donation arrangement' for literature was introduced, did you..........

1. Think it was a privilege to pay twice?

2. Carry a little purse in field service for the donations?

3. Put money in the box at the literature counter when you collected your supplies?

4. Keep a record of all donations made to you 'at the doors'?

5. Decide to just pay up and not bother "inviting" donations?

6. Believe what the Society told you, that it was a "loving arrangement"?

7. Didn't place any literature?

8. Think that it was another tax dodge by the WTS?

9. Other

===============================================================

Cheers,

Ozzie

Freedom means not having to wear a tie.

Mackin

no. 3 sometimes

no.5 most of the time

no 8 ALL THE FRIGGING TIME!!!!

I was a free person when the so-called donation arrangement made its appearance as the latest derangement from the Borg. However, as a person who has owned his own business, I would have spotted that "arrangement" a mile away for what it is: a double-dipping, double-dealing rip-off from some of the best scam artists on the planet. These folks make Elmer Gantry look like Mahatma Gandhi.

However, I do take delite in requesting a sample of all literature in the bag of any JW unfortunate enough to show up at my door. Then when they hit me up for the inevitable "donation in support of [their] world-wide ministry," I regretfully inform them that no, I wouldn't be interested in supporting their world-wide ministry, and then close with, "Y'all come back, y'heyah." They never do.

Francois

Pathofthorns

It was explained at the time the donation arrangement was introduced that the "free literature" was for simplicity so we would not have to collect tax on contributions. Of course, they hated the words "free literature" because at the time, many thought now would be a good time to complete their "theocratic libraries" and ordered everything they could get their hands on.

This led to two different groups of persons, those who would agonize for hours about how much a publication was worth and those who just took them without putting anything in the box or very little. Literature servants made mental notes and made remarks about people who didn't pay for what they took.

It seemed awkward to ask for a donation so many (or maybe most) just left the literature with people and never brought it up unless they asked how much it was.

This change I think was due to a Jimmy Swaggart lawsuit, but seemed to be implemented very suddenly in Canada. It was accepted with mixed feelings at first and there were repeated demonstrations emphasizing how to ask for a donation, but I think as time went on most seemed to prefer this new way.

Path

Edited by - Pathofthorns on 23 June 2002 7:29:42

Scully

From the instant it was announced, I considered it to be #8 "Tax Evasion - Watchtower Style".

In Canada the donation arrangement was implemented just as the government was implementing the Goods and Services Tax (GST) which is a kind of a Value Added Tax on just about everything. When plans were being made for this tax, I wondered how the WTS would handle having to collect and remit tax on literature placed at the doors. The only way I could see them avoiding it (rather than "paying Caesar's things to Caesar") would be to give the literature on a donation basis. A few months later that's exactly what they did.

I also figured out when they announced how it was to be implemented (ie, publishers donate when they pick up their literature, then remit donations when they place it) that it seemed that the expectation was that publishers would donate the $0.25 each for magazines and $1 or whatever it was for books to maintain the status quo, PLUS give whatever was collected at the doors. I mentioned it to hubby in a "did you notice that?" kind of way and he was floored. So we stopped contributing for literature that was designated as placement literature. Eventually our contributions for personal literature dwindled too. We figured that our time and our own resources were being donated quite enough already, thank you, since we always used our vehicle in service and nobody seemed to be contributing to the fuel or wear and tear on the van, but always wanted to ride along with us.

Love, Scully

Amazing

I vote for Numbers 5 and 8.

For 5: Because it was just a lot simpler to keep doing what I was doing all along anyway. Paying for the literature at the Hall and giving it away at the doors ... the only way to have decent placements to report is to not charge for the literature. Although, in the USA we had already been on the donation arrangement since they started publishing magazine in the late 1800s. For us, the new arrangment meant that we culd no longer ask a donation for the magazines, but for the Worldwide Kingdom Work.

For 8: I followed the Swaggert court case while I was still a JW Elder. And when the Society announced the 'donation' deal, I took it as a way to avoid the complexities of sales tax. Can you imagine 6,000,000 Dubs keeping sales tax records? The WTS statement announced that this new arrangement was getting us further out of Babylon the Great. That did not fool me, for I knew it was a result of the Supreme Court ruling. What did fool me was I thought that the new deal was worldwide - getting out of Babylon would seem that it should be in every nation - but no, it was only done in a handful of western nations.

Btw: Are you ever going to publish the results of these polls - or am I just missing them?

seedy3

I've been gone for about 25 years, but I do remember that in actuallity the placement of literature was always on contribution, I mean that is what we told people, "I would like to leave this Watchtower magazine along with it's companion the Awake for a contribution of 10 cents" (OH WOW I just gave away my age LOL)

But to me as soon as I heard about it, it sounded like a tax scam.

Seedy

ozziepost

G'day Amazing,

What results? Most posters give comments (which are very enjoyable) but not like in a poll. Anyways, you could check out each thread, I guess.

Personally, I just LOVE these comments on a lazy Sunday.

Many thanks for participating.

Cheers, Ozzie

Freedom means not having to wear a tie.

gumby

I remember feeling pissed. I said" oh!.....so we have to pay for them twice now! Others thought the same thing.

I don't remember one person who liked the idea of asking for the donation for the worldwide work. Most I worked with didn't ask....just gave it away. It was easier and less embarrasing to give it away.

We had a special envelope that was carried in your bookbag, and when money WAS given.....we were sure to let the householder see that their donation went in the special envelope.

I don't remember too well but.....I think much of that envelope money, ended up at WINCHELS DONUTS at breaktime......which was about 45 minutes into service......after....we stopped at some yardsales.

Edited by - Gumby on 23 June 2002 9:15:26

Xena

We would usually drop something in the box when we picked the lit up, but rarely if ever ask for a contribution at the door. Just to darn ackward!

lol and it was a cardinal sin to say the lit. was FREE....don't know how many times we heard from the platform that it is not FREE! Free implies to people that it has no worth.....lol go figure huh????

Ozzie's Weekend Poll #8

Share this