"Peter R." wrote in message
oups.com...
Gary wrote:

Nope, not 'merely'. Just *largely*. The same amount of effort--
and especially money--directed elsewhere could do far more good.

I disagree, but honestly I have never sat down and performed a
cost-benefit analysis of AF versus the many other charities out there.

It's a matter of relative benefit, which I think Gary already pointed out
reasonably well.

In developed nations, we spend an awful lot of resources (read, money)
keeping just one person alive (and in many cases, they even want to be kept
alive ), when those resources could be applied elsewhere to keep
thousands, tens of thousands, or more alive.

This sort of analysis can be applied to a variety of things we do as
developed nations; it's not unique to Angel Flight. But it definitely
applies to Angel Flight (and similar charity work).

I'm not passing judgment (nor does it appear that Gary is). But like Gary,
I agree that it's helpful to at least keep things in perspective.

Pete