Cub Scouts
For Cub Scout specific topics only.
3781 topics in this forum
-
- 13 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 3 replies
- 847 views
-
- 14 replies
- 3.6k views
-
- 8 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 4 replies
- 778 views
-
- 29 replies
- 2.8k views
-
- 6 replies
- 1.8k views
-
- 13 replies
- 2.6k views
-
- 17 replies
- 2.5k views
-
- 7 replies
- 6.6k views
-
- 3 replies
- 874 views
-
- 9 replies
- 1k views
-
- 7 replies
- 906 views
-
- 46 replies
- 6k views
-
- 4 replies
- 803 views
-
LATEST POSTS
-
The complete lack of transparency by BSA (or DBA SA as part of BSA...it's somewhat confusing) on actual membership numbers is certainly neither Trustworthy or Helpful and is troubling. I would also suggest that the management team is not at all Thrifty with BSA resources. Obviously the numbers are low, or they have no good way to validate or generate membership numbers. Par for the course for an organization that judges success by money raised and not participants -
April 1 update: average $534,599 per TDP claim. For the Expedited Distribution, 99% claims determined and 92% paid (6,036 claims) For the TDP, 39% claims determined and 19% paid (58,088 claims) For the IRO, 17% claims determined and 5% paid (230 claims... not all of which are finalized like the ED and TDP) If the Trust were to stop here, just based on claims paid amounts (not determined)... they would need just shy of $6B. -
By RememberSchiff · Posted
Moderator note: We scouts can agree to disagree without being disagreeable. Thank you! ~ RS @Eagle1993 -
By InquisitiveScouter · Posted
Other than "lawyer" and "Scout", what names did I call you, pray tell? Upon further reexamination, I retract both. -
By SiouxRanger · Posted
My analysis is based on the facts presented. The parent's intent is pretty clear: Dupe their employer into making a MATCHING charitable donation, all the while the parent intending to effectively retract their donation. Why, oh WHY would the parent not just pay for their scout's expenses straight-away without involving their employer??? To obtain $$$ from their employer AT NO EXPENSE to the parent. They never made a donation for their employer to match. My analysis is always subject to reexamination if further facts are presented. Stick to legal analysis and skip the name-calling.
-
-
Who's Online (See full list)
- There are no registered users currently online