So Supreme decided to release a Japanese benefit shirt
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by moneymike88,
- Start date
- 6,126
- 6,688
- Joined
- May 15, 2005
I wanted to see pics. Thought that smiley was like looking through binoculars.Originally Posted by Mr Fongstarr
Originally Posted by Tupac Jordan
It wasn't as odd as it seems. $100 for a japanese style tattoo with all proceeds going to charity. Even when I went in the morning, they had about 8 tattoo artists working at one time. That hour alone, they probably made about $1000 easy. I wouldn't be surprised if they raised 10k for charity and all on a 6 hour workday. It was a great thing that Seventh Son Tattoo did and they realize within the tattoo culture that Japan and their Japanese influence is a big deal.
- 6,126
- 6,688
- Joined
- May 15, 2005
I wanted to see pics. Thought that smiley was like looking through binoculars.Originally Posted by Mr Fongstarr
Originally Posted by Tupac Jordan
It wasn't as odd as it seems. $100 for a japanese style tattoo with all proceeds going to charity. Even when I went in the morning, they had about 8 tattoo artists working at one time. That hour alone, they probably made about $1000 easy. I wouldn't be surprised if they raised 10k for charity and all on a 6 hour workday. It was a great thing that Seventh Son Tattoo did and they realize within the tattoo culture that Japan and their Japanese influence is a big deal.
- 15,855
- 3,476
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2006
come on method man how are you trying to tell people how they should donate their money? if someone donates $5 to a charity and someone buys a $50 shirt and $5 gets donated to charity isn't that the same thing?
- 15,855
- 3,476
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2006
come on method man how are you trying to tell people how they should donate their money? if someone donates $5 to a charity and someone buys a $50 shirt and $5 gets donated to charity isn't that the same thing?
- 1,665
- 10
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
Originally Posted by Night Marcher01
Originally Posted by NiPxD
$7.50 shipped
Beat that
I need a link NOWWW!!! *Arnold voice*
- 1,665
- 10
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
Originally Posted by Night Marcher01
Originally Posted by NiPxD
$7.50 shipped
Beat that
I need a link NOWWW!!! *Arnold voice*
- 20,254
- 12,705
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2008
That shirt is weak. Props to Supreme for their effort to help others in their time of need though.
- 20,254
- 12,705
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2008
That shirt is weak. Props to Supreme for their effort to help others in their time of need though.
- 6,362
- 12
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2006
- 6,362
- 12
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2006
- 4,490
- 15
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2009
We missed the dealine by 1 day. FUUU!Originally Posted by The Takeover
Originally Posted by Night Marcher01
Originally Posted by NiPxD
$7.50 shipped
Beat that
I need a link NOWWW!!! *Arnold voice*
http://japanrelieffunds.weebly.com/faqs.html
- 4,490
- 15
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2009
We missed the dealine by 1 day. FUUU!Originally Posted by The Takeover
Originally Posted by Night Marcher01
Originally Posted by NiPxD
$7.50 shipped
Beat that
I need a link NOWWW!!! *Arnold voice*
http://japanrelieffunds.weebly.com/faqs.html
night marcher01
Banned
- 5,383
- 220
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2006
*Darth Vader* NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!
night marcher01
Banned
- 5,383
- 220
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2006
*Darth Vader* NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!
- 13,036
- 7,220
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2007
Originally Posted by Tupac Jordan
I wanted to see pics. Thought that smiley was like looking through binoculars.Originally Posted by Mr Fongstarr
Originally Posted by Tupac Jordan
It wasn't as odd as it seems. $100 for a japanese style tattoo with all proceeds going to charity. Even when I went in the morning, they had about 8 tattoo artists working at one time. That hour alone, they probably made about $1000 easy. I wouldn't be surprised if they raised 10k for charity and all on a 6 hour workday. It was a great thing that Seventh Son Tattoo did and they realize within the tattoo culture that Japan and their Japanese influence is a big deal.
Haha! I honestly don't even know what that means too. I thought that meant I was weird or was another version of a bugged stone face.
Anyways, here it is. Just the wave part at the top near the elbow.
And not that it matters, but I am half Japanese.
- 13,036
- 7,220
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2007
Originally Posted by Tupac Jordan
I wanted to see pics. Thought that smiley was like looking through binoculars.Originally Posted by Mr Fongstarr
Originally Posted by Tupac Jordan
It wasn't as odd as it seems. $100 for a japanese style tattoo with all proceeds going to charity. Even when I went in the morning, they had about 8 tattoo artists working at one time. That hour alone, they probably made about $1000 easy. I wouldn't be surprised if they raised 10k for charity and all on a 6 hour workday. It was a great thing that Seventh Son Tattoo did and they realize within the tattoo culture that Japan and their Japanese influence is a big deal.
Haha! I honestly don't even know what that means too. I thought that meant I was weird or was another version of a bugged stone face.
Anyways, here it is. Just the wave part at the top near the elbow.
And not that it matters, but I am half Japanese.
- 154
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
There's actually some really cool designs for the Threadless Japan and Pacific Relief T-shirt Challenge. I hope they're printing some of those that I like. You guys should check it out.
- 154
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
There's actually some really cool designs for the Threadless Japan and Pacific Relief T-shirt Challenge. I hope they're printing some of those that I like. You guys should check it out.
- 7,333
- 28,780
- Joined
- Dec 8, 1999
Is that really the choice people are making here?
Do you even know how much will go to charity if you buy that shirt? If not, how can you claim that it's the same as donating $X directly? You'd be buying a t-shirt under the assumption that it's "just as good" as making a direct donation. At that point, these products are competing with donations because people are purchasing crap they don't need with money that they might otherwise have donated.
Claiming "something is better than nothing" allows for no middle ground. If donating $10 is better than donating $5, why not donate $10 directly as opposed to paying $10 for something you don't need, of which only $5 will go to charity?
- 7,333
- 28,780
- Joined
- Dec 8, 1999
Is that really the choice people are making here?
Do you even know how much will go to charity if you buy that shirt? If not, how can you claim that it's the same as donating $X directly? You'd be buying a t-shirt under the assumption that it's "just as good" as making a direct donation. At that point, these products are competing with donations because people are purchasing crap they don't need with money that they might otherwise have donated.
Claiming "something is better than nothing" allows for no middle ground. If donating $10 is better than donating $5, why not donate $10 directly as opposed to paying $10 for something you don't need, of which only $5 will go to charity?
- 1,477
- 75
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
It is less helpful if these sorts of promotions wind up competing with direct donations.
By buying these products, people can feel as though they've completed their "obligation," that they've made their donation, done their good deed, and helped Japan. If the only way to help was via direct donation, the process would be far more efficient. Instead, we have people using the opportunity to promote their brands, do a little CSR / image buffing, and sell merchandise. "Well, as long as I'm buying the Japan shirt, let's see what else is on the site." It's good for business.
People need to think critically about this sort of thing. I don't think it's right for companies to be able to use charity as this impenetrable shield that renders them invulnerable to criticism. Just because $8.50 of your (Product) Red iPod goes to "the global fund" doesn't exempt Apple from the practices of its suppliers in China. Underage girls are literally getting sick while polishing the chrome backs of iPhones and are subjected to humiliating strip searches in plain view of their coworkers before they leave each day - but let's not question that, because a portion of the proceeds not exceeding what you likely paid in sales tax will go "to charity."
That's kind of irrelevant to your argument because ppl usually buy products like ipods regardless of how they're produced. In other words, ppl are going to buy an ipod regardless of whether or not underage girls are getting sick, so they might as well buy one that goes for a good cause. Honestly, I don't blame this kind of thinking either because its not a companies responsibility to protect the citizens of another country. If a country doesn't have strict laws against this sort of thing, than the blame falls solely on the government for exploiting its own ppl.
The rest of your argument makes sense, but your not taking into consideration people who don't plan to donate at all. Take me, for example, I don't plan on donating for personal reasons, but if I liked a product that would benefit disaster relief, than I wouldn't hesitate to buy it. I'm sure I'm not the only peson that has this type of mentality, so these companies are providings funds that would otherwise not have been donated.
- 1,477
- 75
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
It is less helpful if these sorts of promotions wind up competing with direct donations.
By buying these products, people can feel as though they've completed their "obligation," that they've made their donation, done their good deed, and helped Japan. If the only way to help was via direct donation, the process would be far more efficient. Instead, we have people using the opportunity to promote their brands, do a little CSR / image buffing, and sell merchandise. "Well, as long as I'm buying the Japan shirt, let's see what else is on the site." It's good for business.
People need to think critically about this sort of thing. I don't think it's right for companies to be able to use charity as this impenetrable shield that renders them invulnerable to criticism. Just because $8.50 of your (Product) Red iPod goes to "the global fund" doesn't exempt Apple from the practices of its suppliers in China. Underage girls are literally getting sick while polishing the chrome backs of iPhones and are subjected to humiliating strip searches in plain view of their coworkers before they leave each day - but let's not question that, because a portion of the proceeds not exceeding what you likely paid in sales tax will go "to charity."
That's kind of irrelevant to your argument because ppl usually buy products like ipods regardless of how they're produced. In other words, ppl are going to buy an ipod regardless of whether or not underage girls are getting sick, so they might as well buy one that goes for a good cause. Honestly, I don't blame this kind of thinking either because its not a companies responsibility to protect the citizens of another country. If a country doesn't have strict laws against this sort of thing, than the blame falls solely on the government for exploiting its own ppl.
The rest of your argument makes sense, but your not taking into consideration people who don't plan to donate at all. Take me, for example, I don't plan on donating for personal reasons, but if I liked a product that would benefit disaster relief, than I wouldn't hesitate to buy it. I'm sure I'm not the only peson that has this type of mentality, so these companies are providings funds that would otherwise not have been donated.
- 7,333
- 28,780
- Joined
- Dec 8, 1999
That's part of the problem in a sense: it allows selfish people to rationalize their selfishness. e.g. "I did a good thing by buying that iPod for myself."
Just because a portion of the proceeds goes to charity doesn't make something "noble" and if you actually DO care about the cause then you should be concerned with the impact of the product and with the efficiency of your donation. Nothing's more efficient than a direct contribution.
Selling this stuff, then, is only of benefit in the sense that it generates SOME money from people who wouldn't otherwise give. The catch is that a lot of people DO care - which is why they want a Japan relief shirt in particular as opposed to an ordinary designer shirt - but instead of donating directly they're now buying a tangible product and sacrificing efficiency in the process. That's where it's problematic.
Just because a portion of the proceeds goes to charity doesn't make something "noble" and if you actually DO care about the cause then you should be concerned with the impact of the product and with the efficiency of your donation. Nothing's more efficient than a direct contribution.
Selling this stuff, then, is only of benefit in the sense that it generates SOME money from people who wouldn't otherwise give. The catch is that a lot of people DO care - which is why they want a Japan relief shirt in particular as opposed to an ordinary designer shirt - but instead of donating directly they're now buying a tangible product and sacrificing efficiency in the process. That's where it's problematic.
- 7,333
- 28,780
- Joined
- Dec 8, 1999
That's part of the problem in a sense: it allows selfish people to rationalize their selfishness. e.g. "I did a good thing by buying that iPod for myself."
Just because a portion of the proceeds goes to charity doesn't make something "noble" and if you actually DO care about the cause then you should be concerned with the impact of the product and with the efficiency of your donation. Nothing's more efficient than a direct contribution.
Selling this stuff, then, is only of benefit in the sense that it generates SOME money from people who wouldn't otherwise give. The catch is that a lot of people DO care - which is why they want a Japan relief shirt in particular as opposed to an ordinary designer shirt - but instead of donating directly they're now buying a tangible product and sacrificing efficiency in the process. That's where it's problematic.
Just because a portion of the proceeds goes to charity doesn't make something "noble" and if you actually DO care about the cause then you should be concerned with the impact of the product and with the efficiency of your donation. Nothing's more efficient than a direct contribution.
Selling this stuff, then, is only of benefit in the sense that it generates SOME money from people who wouldn't otherwise give. The catch is that a lot of people DO care - which is why they want a Japan relief shirt in particular as opposed to an ordinary designer shirt - but instead of donating directly they're now buying a tangible product and sacrificing efficiency in the process. That's where it's problematic.
Similar threads
