Excession:
"presumably you would still see more 'utility' in giving some % of our winnings to charity than to a 'hookers and blow' fund for MVP?"
Not necessarily; it depends which charity you're talking about. Let's not be naive about the nature of some charities working in the developing world. I'd much rather donate to MVP's hookers and blow fund than to a well-meaning organisation that over a period time has unwittingly become a major source of funding for a corrupt and oppressive regime.
"I'm all for idealism but it's important to differentiate between the way the world IS and the way it OUGHT TO BE. "
Exactly. Money given to a charity OUGHT TO go to the intended recipients, but the way the world (or some parts of it) IS means you often don't know where your $4, $40 or $400 is going.
In countries where you can barely take a piss without having to bribe someone (bribery being a custom that pre-dates the earliest White settlers, incidentally), the idea that local charities can organise relief for people without having to pay large sums of money to and therefore prop up the very forces who control and profit most from the appalling situation, is preposterous.
"if I think (as I do) that the the amount of aid given by my government IS too low then that doesn't mean I can change it in any way"
If it means enough to you, it can influence your vote.
ED:
See para 1
JUSKIMO:
"NV, as I see it, you make two distinct statements in this thread.
1) talking about giving charity is bad and people should not talk about it."
False, false. I find all brag posts here leave me feeling much the same way - puzzled as to why the bragger feels they need to up themselves so much - but when it comes to bragging over how much money you're donating to worthy causes, I despair. It's sick. DUCY?
"2) peoples efforts are not good enough and if they want to do something to help, they should do what YOU have already done, then then might understand what is going on, because they obviously do not and you do, therefore they cannot possibly help because what they want to do is stupid and not as good as what you want to do (despite the fact that there is a 99.999999999999999999999% chance that the people here could never do what you are suggesting (Get their governments to give more money) in the time it will take them to ship $100 a week or whatever to charity).
Hypocrisy ftw. DUCY? "
False again.
As you asked (in a roundabout insulting/patronising sort of way that I've learned to expect from the legal fraternity in particular

![Hearts [h]](https://pofex.com/images/smilies/hearts.gif)
I've chosen the former, though I'd like to think the times I've spent arguing the toss over the causes and remedies of famine etc with clueless but arrogant people, haven't always been wasted.
In short: go ahead and give to famine relief for that warm/fuzzy feeling (and come and brag about it afterwards!), but don't kid yourself it's done anyone else any good in the long term.