Dilemma: To give or not to give that is the question

[Robin-H]

Yep there sure is, you need to learn some manners.

 

 

There is a big difference between being ignorant and being wilfully ignorant. I am ignorant about a lot of things. Whilst I agree that the term is sometimes meant to be disparaging - it isn't always.

 

If you do not know why getting access to clean water is cheaper in some countries than in others then you are clearly ignorant on some matters.

[Owethemnowt]

A salary for so called 'do-gooders' of £119k is obscene. Theft in fact.

 

Median my back side. Jargon to argue an injustice.

 

Think outside the box, don't swallow the propaganda and think for yourself.

 

If there's a minimum wage ........... why aren't the charity workers on it? Fat cats on a diet of cream that's why.

 

Charity achieves nothing other than lining the pockets of the few who sit at the top.

 

That's the way it is.

[smithy266]

Well, I hope that with all your charm and knowledge, you will remain healthy, wise and INDEPENDANT until you cease to be.. 'wise' might have been a bad choice of word, on second tnoughts.

[sgtkate]

A salary for so called 'do-gooders' of £119k is obscene. Theft in fact.

 

Median my back side. Jargon to argue an injustice.

 

Think outside the box, don't swallow the propaganda and think for yourself.

 

If there's a minimum wage ........... why aren't the charity workers on it? Fat cats on a diet of cream that's why.

 

Charity achieves nothing other than lining the pockets of the few who sit at the top.

 

That's the way it is.

 

No it isn't and you clearly don't know very much except how to be angry.

Running a charity is a difficult job, some of the larger ones have budgets of millions and millions of pounds. It's not Ethel running the tuck shop at the local scouts hall. The law is extremely tight on accountancy of any charity and massive penalties including jail for those who get it wrong. Then consider the responsibilities of safety for any people who work overseas often in dangerous places for those charites, ultimate responsibility rests with the CEO of that charity. Relatively charity CEOs work for a tiny percentage of what an equivalent FTSE sized company would earn, so in relative terms they are doing it for minimum wages.

 

Sorry to bring facts into things but in 2015/16 Oxfam had an income of £417m. The director of Oxfam was paid £119k.

 

Hargreaves Landown (Most similar revenue I could find without spending way too much time) revenue was £395m. Their CEO earnt £2m.

 

Now do you want to try again saying how unbelievably awful charities are for daring to pay their CEOs a 20th of what an equivalent CEO earns in the private sector?

 

---------- Post added 09-01-2017 at 13:40 ----------

 

Well, I hope that with all your charm and knowledge, you will remain healthy, wise and INDEPENDANT until you cease to be.. 'wise' might have been a bad choice of word, on second tnoughts.

 

Wow Smithy, we finally agree on a thread!

[Owethemnowt]

Running a charity is a difficult ...... blah blah blah

 

Taking a salary of £100k plus is obscene. Hey let's end world poverty ....... I need a salary of £100k before I get out of bed! Where's the decency in that?

 

Stop obsfucating the truth. H L ...... are a pensions, funds, ISAs and shares company. Their business is making money for themselves. It is their money. They don't claim to be a charity. It is charities who take donations meant for worthy causes and use it to excessively pay for staff, premises, vehicles, travel and expenses. That's money taken out of the mouths of starving babies and given to fat CEOs - all £119 k of it.

 

When we are told £3 a will provide a child with an education, or clean water, or vital medical assistance, how do you justify that CEO denying over 39,000 children that life chance.

 

Obscenity!

 

Mealy mouthed words won't wriggle you far from the truth.

 

And the truth is schools have tuck shops - Scouts have woggles. They come in three different flavours: codswallop, bunkam and tosh. But you know all about that.

 

You need to get your facts right. When trying to do ''research'' either do it wisely or not at all. And I took all of several minutes to write, spell check and post this because it's based on common sense. That Hargreaves Landown really was a stupid example. But thanks for it ..... real gift.

 

Quite charitable of you!

Edited January 9, 2017 by Owethemnowt

[ANGELFIRE1]

Here is the best clip of film I have seen regarding poverty, and the aid it gets, it's about 5 mins long, but stick with it, it certainly opened my old eyes.

 

 

Angel1.

[GLASGOWOODS]

I agree with smithy.

 

We support the British Heart Foundation. Much of the money raised by them is used on research into different heart conditions. Without this vital research, many more people like my husband would have died. A positive change IMO.

 

If it wasn't for some charities, we'd all be paying more tax to fund necessary research and care. No one is forced to donate, and if they want to support a charity but don't have much money, volunteering is a good option.

 

Ah. The same charity that had 2 foot soldiers canvassing on an estate in Glasgow last year. These 2 parasites managed to work their way into my girlfriends home while she was out- because her mum who has dementia let them in. They got her to sign up for a direct debit £20 per month! She hadn't a clue what was happening.

 

I would never give money to corporate charities (which is what they are) because it's not only the CEO who's coining it in, it's thousands of other managers on the gravy train.

 

---------- Post added 09-01-2017 at 19:26 ----------

 

In its 65 year history, Sightsavers has distributed treatment to protect more than 295 million people against river blindness (onchocerciasis), carried out 6.1 million sight-restoring cataract operations and treated 43 million people with antibiotics to combat the potentially blinding infection trachoma.

 

---------- Post added 08-01-2017 at 23:01 ----------

 

Every member of our board of trustees is unpaid – and it’s their job to make sure we get the best possible value for money.

Sightsavers CEO, Dr. Caroline Harper, earns £119,500 per annum from April 2015. Caroline’s salary is agreed by the board of trustees, after careful consideration by the remuneration committee who look at benchmarking evidence of the median salary for our type of organisation. The trustees believe this salary reflects the varied and challenging role that Caroline holds, and the impact Sightsavers has in the developing world under her leadership. She has no bonus scheme or car allowance, and the same pension rights as all other UK staff. All UK staff are paid at least the living wage, including interns. The ratio of the highest paid person to the lowest in the UK is approximately 6:1, and the ratio of highest to median is 3:1.

 

 

I' like to see exactly what is so challenging to merit such a high salary.

Edited January 9, 2017 by GLASGOWOODS

[Hopkins]

Back in the 50s schoolkids raised money for children starving in Africa. For sixty years money has been raised for children starving in Africa. Today there are still children starving in Africa. ?!!?

And a well known country in Africa the receives our overseas aid has a diplomat in Lucerne who's just had 5 luxury cars taken away.

Just think what your water aid pays for.

 

---------- Post added 09-01-2017 at 20:44 ----------

 

I' like to see exactly what is so challenging to merit such a high salary.

One charity pays The 16 top earners a total of £900,000, it takes 300,000 £3 donations just to pay them, Hmm.

[Margarita Ma]

Here is the best clip of film I have seen regarding poverty, and the aid it gets, it's about 5 mins long, but stick with it, it certainly opened my old eyes.

 

 

Angel1.

 

Sorry Angel1 but that clip is about poverty and immigration levels to the USA.

 

---------- Post added 09-01-2017 at 21:07 ----------

 

I' like to see exactly what is so challenging to merit such a high salary.

 

I would like to see their balance sheet, instead of a lot of Blurb.

[Robin-H]

Here is the best clip of film I have seen regarding poverty, and the aid it gets, it's about 5 mins long, but stick with it, it certainly opened my old eyes.

 

 

Angel1.

 

Is that the right clip? I watched the whole thing and it didn't mention aid at all..