Politicans and chess player deal with slogans fools may eat to present them as "good people" and would not at all dare about the effects and who has to bear the pleasure of their stolen honor:
Just a sample of Zuckerberg-strategies an loan-charity impact, since you don't know the other side and the backdraws which will reach you and would just understand from "effectiv" side, the illusional "win-win" strategie which is actually, out of the eightfold path always best a patt:
Regarding Kiva, when I first learned about it (around 2012) I made some research and found that the money is apparently lend at interest rates as high as 35%.
That is predatory.
Here is an example of someone showing the other side of the coin:
To begin with I don't trust Kiva because they go to great lengths to hide the fact that the borrowers are charged interest, and interest at high rates, on the money lent. The rates charged on the money lent is not listed anywhere on the site, and you have to dig into their "what is microfinance" FAQ to get the following bit of neoliberal nonsense.
What Kiva ignores, and frankly I think this is powerfully deceitful, is that 1: the money is being originated for free through charitable lenders and paypal so there are no costs for the money. 2: the risk of default is born by the charitalbe lender, so there is no cost for default. Therefore the only costs are transaction costs, the money that kiva employees and their partners draw. In otherwords the overhead. As a charitable organization, they should not be passing their overhead on to the people they are helping at usurious rates upwards of 36%, which is the only number I could find on the site.
Why I don't trust Kiva (loan)
One incapable of giving, greedy, stingy and after control, without faith, without wisdom, without noble prinziples, of where and what could he ever rejoice?
Caught in the suffering of Danawheel, not knowing the meaning of giving, not knowing where long lasting fruits are gained...
Actually in this case about 30-50 thousand dollar more deprived from poor, taking from more poor to fulfill their obligation toward the "good-people"...
In this way the poor in virtues are bound to each other, sometimes loan giver, most of the time loan taker.
And this is why the first help for outwardly poor is to give them the possibilities to make merits, to sacrifice, since this is the first cause for future welbeing.
That is why the foolish Brahmans have been rejected by the Buddha as they rebuked the monks for going for Alms under the poor.
Nobody falls into poorness by giving alms. Only own failing in managing business makes people, aside of lack of virtue and prinziples, lack of generosity poor.