Suffering in the world

Hacker Khan said:
He argued his point which is fine, other people disagreed which is again fine, he did not degenerate into petty personal insults which is my issue. I believe that anyone should be able to bring up something they are passionate about and not expect the personal stuff.
Click to expand...

Possibly not in this case but SILH has a lot of previous for petty personal stuff in the Article 50 thread. Just as you sow, so shall you reap.
 
pauldj42 said:
More often than not it’s the transparencey of the donation, if you donate a quid and find 60-80% is going on admin etc then you would be entitled to question said Charity, more often than not these Charities play the begging bowl while having huge cash reserves.
Some charities take 10p in the quid, some take nothing, it’s human nature to question people on hundreds of thousands of pounds per annum while they tell you how desperate life is.
Click to expand...

Have a look on the CA website and you'll find the following under FAQs

Eighty-five pence in every £1 is used for direct charitable purposes. Of this, 45p supports our long-term development projects, 29p is spent on humanitarian and emergencies and 11p on campaigning, advocacy and education.

The remaining 15p is invested in fundraising. For every £1 we invest, we secure more than £7 in return.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
Have a look on the CA website and you'll find the following under FAQs

Eighty-five pence in every £1 is used for direct charitable purposes. Of this, 45p supports our long-term development projects, 29p is spent on humanitarian and emergencies and 11p on campaigning, advocacy and education.

The remaining 15p is invested in fundraising. For every £1 we invest, we secure more than £7 in return.
Click to expand...
Didn’t single out any particular Charity, all take differing amounts, only one I’m aware of takes zero.
 
Blue in Munich said:
Possibly not in this case but SILH has a lot of previous for petty personal stuff in the Article 50 thread. Just as you sow, so shall you reap.
Click to expand...

I do not intend any of my posts to be personally abusive towards, or to attack, individuals on that thread. I might fundamentally disagree with what a poster has said and the decision that has been made - but I understand that that decision was not down to any one individual and so there is no point in attacking anyone for their views. That I might view a collective decision as being insane does not then make insane those who individually supported the decision (albeit that that inference is regularly drawn)
 
pauldj42 said:
Didn’t single out any particular Charity, all take differing amounts, only one I’m aware of takes zero.
Click to expand...

I collect for Christian Aid - I do not talk for others. I'd be interested to know the charities you know of where "you donate a quid and find 60-80% is going on admin etc"
 
Hacker Khan said:
I'd argue because they are running large organisations with many staff. Yes there should be some different values in some places to a charity then say a hedge fund, with generation of profit being an obvious one. But the skills needed of a CEO to run both large organisations well are probably very similar.
Click to expand...


I would suggest with so many unpaid 'workers' contributing a great deal of time/effort to raising income you can't be judging like for like... Perhaps they need to look at something like the John Lewis model...

Last time I looked my most un-favourite charity had six folk on six figure salaries... Now with all the other 'niceities' that's probably gonna see the charity costing something like £1M to appease the feeding frenzy of the top table... That's an awful amount of money not finding its way to the 'coalface'... Which is where folk were hoping it would arrive when donating...
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
I collect for Christian Aid - I do not talk for others. I'd be interested to know the charities you know of where "you donate a quid and find 60-80% is going on admin etc"
Click to expand...

You are aware that Christian Aid also supports(financially) some environmental lobbying groups? Not sure I'd donate to any charity that had political lobbying on its CV.
 
MegaSteve said:
I would suggest with so many unpaid 'workers' contributing a great deal of time/effort to raising income you can't be judging like for like... Perhaps they need to look at something like the John Lewis model...

Last time I looked my most un-favourite charity had six folk on six figure salaries... Now with all the other 'niceities' that's probably gonna see the charity costing something like £1M to appease the feeding frenzy of the top table... That's an awful amount of money not finding its way to the 'coalface'... Which is where folk were hoping it would arrive when donating...
Click to expand...

Can you Enlighten me to the John Lewis model. I’m not sure what it is.
It doesn’t matter if it’s a charity or not it’s still a massive multi billion pound business that needs suitably qualified people to run it.
If I recall correctly the CEO of save the children cane under huge criticism for her massive salary until she revealed she had taken a huge pay cut to take on the role.
 
bobmac said:
Last year she (Loretta Minghella) was on £127,711 but has since left.

She has been replaced by Amanda Khozi Mukwashi this month but no information about her salary.

However allowing for inflation that could now be around £131,000
Click to expand...

That's the numbers I gound too.

Around 25% less than the average for CEOs for other charities, so 'reasonable' imo. A little above the starting salary for Academy Headmasters and probably lower than what most would be on.

All pretty reasonable, to me, for running a very nearly £100m turnover enterprise!

By comparison, the highest paid in H4H last year (recipient not named; income £41M), was between 100,001 and 110,000. Supposedly 'among the lowest of the major charities'.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tashyboy
Brussels sprouts
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
arnieboy
arnieboy
Top