Trust funds- pros and cons

[Guest guest]

Madhava Ghosa wrote:

It is common because the funds are co mingled with general revenues. A gift

to a Trust can only be used for the purposes of the Trust. A Trust prevents

diversions.

Thanks, MG for making it so clear.

Thankyou also, HK Dasi for your relevant quote.

My fear still remains that in corrupt managements, which are the biggest

threat to cow protection, this trust could be used to justify overbreeding,

with the attitude that if we go beyond the carrying capacity, its OK, we

have all these funds to fall back on- and see?- because its in a trust, it

can be only used for the cows. It may lead to a false sense of security, or

a facade -that the cows are being properly provided for, when all we're

interested in, is exploiting them.

 

....If someone were to apply to the Trust for the assurance the calf would

cared for, the Trustees would apply the proper criterion to the situation,

deciding on issues of land capacity, stability of breeder, etc. before

approving the breeding.

 

So the trustees non-approval will ensure overbreeding will not take place?

When a temple is in financial straits, and is considering to step up milk

production, would they feel themselves bound by such recommendation, or is

it legally binding?

What about SP's desire that we show the economic viability of cow protection

itself- requiring trust funds to support cow protection, is like maintaining

dependency on money, seems to me, instead of progressing to

self-sufficiency, which is our goal. Therefore, although SP recommended the

cow-land trust, we should not let it replace, or in any way overshadow, his

main formula for economic security- utilizing the talents and products of

cow and ox, in a self-sustaining kind of way.

Is it like an emergency fund, or an every-day use fund? Or a retirement fund

for when they get older? If it is required for everyday protection of cows,

i.e. feed etc. -that is not very good, better to have our own stock of

fodder produced from ox-labour.

Of course, if the land that they are on is held in a trust, to prevent it

getting taken by land-developers, that is a most necessary step, especially

with all these lawsuits. It should be an absolute requirement!

I'm thinking that it is not very ideal, but most probably necessary in the

interim, and only in the light of our unfortunate circumstances, unless you

have some quote that it is actually desirable- vedic quote.

My concern is that so many devotees, and Indians see cow protection as a

sentimental thing, with the result they easily will donate to some trust,

but Prabhupada never considered it sentimental. He said it was practical,

that the cow was so very valuable to human society, and so on. That by cow

protection, all wealth and necessities can be attained. This is our real

challenge.

Otherwise how can we show a positive alternative to the hellish modern dairy

practices?

If we cannot keep it simple, and non-reliant on donations, then how can we

show an example of how its done to Mr. Softhearted Dairyman accross the road

who loathes slaughtering his bull calves, or old cows, but can see no

economic alternative? He will point out, we may be a charity, but he isn't.

To put it into an equation, be it idealistic at present, but something to

work towards, as it is not impossible, nor even impractical:

(milk from cow) + (labour from ox) = (all cow and ox requirements)

+ (all human beings requirements):

Then the purpose of the trust is just security against disaster or

ill-health requiring vet assistance, or just security.

ys, niscala.

 

____

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com