

Child's Play takes in $3,512,345 - bendoerr
http://penny-arcade.com/2012/01/04/proven-strategies

======
mattmanser
[http://childsplaycharity.org/news/post/2011-an-incredible-
ye...](http://childsplaycharity.org/news/post/2011-an-incredible-year)

For a bit more context.

------
earnubs
Congratulations to Penny Arcade, a smile is an important ally when you're
healing.

------
peterwwillis
Am I the only grinch who looks at a number this big and wishes some of it was
used to pay for children's medications that their parents can't afford or some
other patient care? It's very noble to want to reduce pain and suffering but I
care more about saving lives or improving quality of life long-term.

~~~
InclinedPlane
There are already many charities and government programs to do just that.

For example, in 2010 Seattle Children's Hospital took in $10.7 million in
donations. That is one hospital in one city in one year, and it's more than
what Child's Play has raised in total since 2003. I think it's fair to say
that that aspect of charitable giving is pretty well covered and it's safe for
Child's Play to keep its focus on making childrens' stays in the hospital more
bearable.

~~~
peterwwillis
I like your rationale because it's the same argument I use to not give to any
charities: somebody else is already doing it so I don't have to.

I can't help it. I'm a grinch. I know video games are fun and kids everywhere
get lots of innocent joy out of them. I know that the kids who probably need
video games the most are those who have no other activity they could do that
would distract them from their situation and let them have fun. But....
something about the idea of collecting a bunch of money to buy video games...
it just seems misguided to me. I know, i'm supposed to say "yay they're trying
to help kids in the hospital, go them!" and ignore this weird voice in the
back of my head. But is it really the best thing that could be done?

I mean is it _really_ the _best thing_? Or is it not just a nice idea someone
had that really took off and now that it's slowly becoming this huge thing
that nobody anticipated there's the potential for greater good? Look, nobody's
going to change Child's Play, that's obvious. It's a huge success and
hopefully it continues in its success. But there must be a way to replicate
its success into directly supporting children's needs in a long-lasting and
constructive way. If you agree that trying to help kids feel happier while in
the hospital is important, _you have to agree_ that giving them a life to be
continuously happy for years to come is even more important. I don't know what
kind of charity that would be, or if there even is one. But there are 13
million children living in poverty in America. Thirty nine percent of
America's children live in "low income" families, or $40K for a family of
four.

Giving to hospitals is important for precisely the preceding reasons: the
children's families don't have enough to cover the rest. I just know that
after the toys have been bought, there's still more help that is needed. And
to me that's a big issue. That's all i'm saying.

~~~
InclinedPlane
<http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2305>

