Concern Nothing but Money Whores

12-05-2013 11:50AM

crackcrack30 wrote: »

Why is it that charity work to some means donating your time free of charge........but to others its a triple income......

The CEOs of charitys are not volunteers. They would have applied for a job as CEO of a company. As far as they are concerned they are running a business and of course should be well remunerated for it.

If you want someone with the necessary expertise and experience to work in these types of jobs they have to be well paid otherwise you will not have good people and the charity's will suffer for it.

homemadecider · 12-05-2013 11:52AM

I don't think it's as simple as 'go over there and build schools'. Let's say a school is built in a rural community, for example. You now have a decent building with blackboards and tables and chairs. Who will teach the children? No one in that community is qualified. How do you convince qualified teachers to move to the sticks and teach in your new school? Who pays their salaries? Where do teaching resources come from? Do you train local people to become teachers - if so, how do you stop them leaving for bigger and brighter things once they are trained?

Just trying to show that things are a lot more complicated than 'sure just go and build schools'.

squod · 12-05-2013 11:54AM

Dear African People.

My children are born into debt. The government are making them pay €120,000 to the governments friends for the lulz. Some b*stards huh? Please send me some of your assault rifles so we can have a clean slate for our kids.

Thank you.

dh0011 · 12-05-2013 11:57AM

Cork24 wrote: »

Irish Hospice foundation has the highest CEO earner per Charity income @ a rate of 24 euros to every 1000 euro

IRISH HOSPICE FOUNDATION
Supports the development of hospice and palliative care.
Chief executive: Sharon Foley (appointed May 2011)
Salary 2010: €101,350 (linked to civil service principal officer grade).
Salary 2011: No change.
Expenses 2010: €3,091.29 (vouched).
Expenses 2011: €1,134.16 to end of August (vouched).
Bonus payments: €17,800 in 2010. Paid only if certain pre-established targets are reached.
Pension entitlements: Chief executive makes own contribution plus 10% contribution by charity.
Company car: None.
Charity income 2010: €5.35m.
Amount paid to chief executive per €1,000 of charity income: €24.19.

CONCERN
International humanitarian agency
Chief executive: Tom Arnold
Salary 2010: €130,000 (based on assistant secretary grade in the public service).
Salary 2011: No change.
Expenses 2010/ 2011: Vouched. No figures supplied. It is Concern policy to fly economy class and use public transport where available.
Bonus payments: None.
Pension entitlements: The chief executive is on secondment from the Department of Agriculture where he was assistant secretary general.
Concern maintains his pension rights under that scheme.
Company car: None.
Charity income 2010: €167m.
No of euro paid to chief executive per €1,000 of charity income: €0.78.

your figures are out of date - the business post did an article recently about the worst offenders rehab ireland had 1 in 8 euros ir received going to the ceo.

dh0011 · 12-05-2013 11:58AM

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

Africa is a black hole for money and it will be a cold day in hell before i ever send anything to that part of the world.

when you say black hole do you mean because the people are black. if so that a bit harsh.

Phoebas · 12-05-2013 12:09PM

galwayrush wrote: »

I gave a fiver to a drunk homeless dude in Galway yesterday, I know where 100% of that charity donation will go.

6 cans of Dutch Gold.

Cody Pomeray · 12-05-2013 12:17PM

Cork24 wrote: »

Irish Hospice foundation has the highest CEO earner per Charity income @ a rate of 24 euros to every 1000 euro

IRISH HOSPICE FOUNDATION
Supports the development of hospice and palliative care.
Chief executive: Sharon Foley (appointed May 2011)
Salary 2010: €101,350 (linked to civil service principal officer grade).
Salary 2011: No change.
Expenses 2010: €3,091.29 (vouched).
Expenses 2011: €1,134.16 to end of August (vouched).
Bonus payments: €17,800 in 2010. Paid only if certain pre-established targets are reached.
Pension entitlements: Chief executive makes own contribution plus 10% contribution by charity.
Company car: None.
Charity income 2010: €5.35m.
Amount paid to chief executive per €1,000 of charity income: €24.19.

If the IHF are only raising €5.35m a year that's a major problem.

Say what you will about Concern, at least they're bringing in €167 million.

wtf is she at?

NuckingFacker · 12-05-2013 12:18PM

dh0011 wrote: »

when you say black hole do you mean because the people are black. if so that a bit harsh.

Noo, Black holes are in space, and everyone knows there are no rascists in space. Black holes are big voids of nothingness that suck in matter for no return. A bit like Anglo, or - and here's the "analogy" - some "charitable causes".

No Foreign people or animals were harmed in the making of this post. This post may contain nuts, milk products, scatological shyte and a touch of the absurd. It may also not be true, does not represent the views of Boards.ie or neccessarily the Poster. This post has been scanned for Trolling using Trollhunter 2013TM and is free from SARS.

Grand Moff Tarkin · 12-05-2013 12:22PM

dh0011 wrote: »

when you say black hole do you mean because the people are black. if so that a bit harsh.

The good Mr Facker answered that one for me.

Grayson · 12-05-2013 12:31PM

I have no idea how good the CEO of concern is at his job, so I can't comment directly on him. But generally to run an organisation that big, you have to have a certain amount of experience. And to draw the best candidates, the charities need to offer a competitive package. If they pay less, they'll get less from the CEO and that means the whole organisation suffers. Less money coming in and less money going out. And what money there is, is spent less efficiently.

Then again, I'm sure no matter how much they get paid, if it's anything more than minimum wage, people will be griping.

tfitzgerald · 12-05-2013 12:32PM

woodoo wrote: »

And then we are asked to help feed them. BTW is the catholic church still against contraception in africa?

This thread is about the CEO of charity's getting big money. But a few post in the Catholic Church starts gettin bashed. Ffs

1ZRed · 12-05-2013 12:33PM

Phoebas wrote: »

There has been plenty of progress in Africa.

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21572773-pride-africas-achievements-should-be-coupled-determination-make-even-faster

I don't even want to think of the chaos that's going to come from Africa over the next few decades. Once they start developing and living longer once diseases like HIV is cured as others are treated, their population will absolutely explode and their demand for food, water, space and other resources will be massive -already when we are a population of 7 billion that consume 1.5 earths of reasources already, which is expected that we will be consuming 3 earths of resources in just 25 years. That's a crazy demand for resources that are finite. We are living far too unsustainably already!

I can't imagine the toll an explosive burst of population of this magnitude will have on the earth. Demand for energy and food will ravage the environment and we will all have to deal with the consequences of that. Rapidly developing countries are big contributors to our environmental problems because they love cheap, dirty energy. Who could blame them? They need so much that expensive alternatives are out of the question.

Call it an extremely unpopular opinion but if I had to choose them or the sake of the whole planet, I'd pick the planet without hesitation.
There are far too many of us at it is, the only difference is that our populations in developed countries are levelling out, even falling in some case and we are in a position to (admittedly slowly) implement more environmentally friendly energy alternatives.

Technoprisoner · 12-05-2013 12:34PM

i dont give to any charity's for this simple fact....most the ceo's are on rock star wages.

Grayson · 12-05-2013 12:36PM

And just to add, with concern at least, that guy is making decisions that affect lives. I mean, they are trying to save lives. How ever money is distributed, people will die. And it seems to be the opinion of some that it's ok to hire anyone at all to do the job of deciding the most effective way of spending that money. Fine, pop down the local fas office and hire someone to do it for next to nothing. More people will die.

Grayson · 12-05-2013 12:38PM

tfitzgerald wrote: »

This thread is about the CEO of charity's getting big money. But a few post in the Catholic Church starts gettin bashed. Ffs

Never any harm in reminding people that in a continent ravaged by aids, the catholic church is still telling people that condoms don't work.

Yamanoto · 12-05-2013 12:40PM

tfitzgerald wrote: »

This thread is about the CEO of charity's getting big money. But a few post in the Catholic Church starts gettin bashed. Ffs

By far the most effective instrument for breaking the hold of poverty on those in third-world nations is to provide women with the means to take control of their own reproductive cycle.

If charities such as Trocaire are asking for donations to alleviate poverty across the World, then woodoo's question would seem to me an entirely valid one.

Grayson · 12-05-2013 12:42PM

1ZRed wrote: »

I don't even want to think of the chaos that's going to come from Africa over the next few decades. Once they start developing and living longer once diseases like HIV is cured as others are treated, their population will absolutely explode and their demand for food, water, space and other resources will be massive -already when we are a population of 7 billion that consume 1.5 earths of reasources already, which is expected that we will be consuming 3 earths of resources in just 25 years. That's a crazy demand for resources that are finite. We are living far too unsustainably already!

I can't imagine the toll an explosive burst of population of this magnitude will have on the earth. Demand for energy and food will ravage the environment and we will all have to deal with the consequences of that. Rapidly developing countries are big contributors to our environmental problems because they love cheap, dirty energy. Who could blame them? They need so much that expensive alternatives are out of the question.

Call it an extremely unpopular opinion but if I had to choose them or the sake of the whole planet, I'd pick the planet without hesitation.
There are far too many of us at it is, the only difference is that our populations in developed countries are levelling out, even falling in some case and we are in a position to (admittedly slowly) implement more environmentally friendly energy alternatives.

they're not the problem. We are.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/12/observer-editorial-carbon-dioxide-levels-high

But we've created a problem that's going to affect them. And millions will die because of it.

That's OK, go back to watching your "reality" shows and know that millions more will die just so you can keep doing it.

NuckingFacker · 12-05-2013 12:50PM

Grayson wrote: »

they're not the problem. We are.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/12/observer-editorial-carbon-dioxide-levels-high

But we've created a problem that's going to affect them. And millions will die because of it.

That's OK, go back to watching your "reality" shows and know that millions more will die just so you can keep doing it.

You so nice. Call it "reparations" instead of "charity" if it makes your PC featers lie flatter. Personally, I don't feel I am the problem, just saying like.

1ZRed · 12-05-2013 12:50PM

Grayson wrote: »

they're not the problem. We are.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/12/observer-editorial-carbon-dioxide-levels-high

But we've created a problem that's going to affect them. And millions will die because of it.

That's OK, go back to watching your "reality" shows and know that millions more will die just so you can keep doing it.

And then what's going to happen when you raise them up to our level? They're just going to add substantially more to our problem because their populations dwarf ours as it is! Look at India and how it's developing rapidly and burning massive amounts of fossil fuels.That's 1 billion right there, imagine how all of them living as we do will affect the planet.

Now I don't deny we are the ones to blame but look at how expensive the alternatives are for us to be greener, how will they ever manage?

And political slowness is a massive problem, that's why I just see things getting worse and worse because no one will bother their ass to do something quickly, so I can't see how a massive new population boom in Africa where they'll seek massive amounts of energy won't have an equally massive negative effect on our planet already. If anything it could be the straw that breaks the camel's back when our efforts to change just won't be enough to reverse the harm we're already doing and what those developing countries will continue to do for the foreseeable future.

XxMCRxBabyxX · 12-05-2013 12:55PM

suicide_circus wrote: »

on that point, since less than 20% of Africa is catholic, its not all down to the evil church that people dont use condoms. it is largely down to lack of education and the fact that it is seen as unmanly etc

Thank you. Someone actually educated on the matter.

I think the biggest problem with these charities is where the money goes. Quite often it doesn't get to those who need it because of the corrupt people in charge in these countries.

It would be a lot better to educate those who need it instead of just handing things out. If they could be taught how to use money, look after their sick before it's too late and alternative ways to feed themselves that would be much more helpful. It's not a cure-all but it can help.

XxMCRxBabyxX · 12-05-2013 12:56PM

Grayson wrote: »

Never any harm in reminding people that in a continent ravaged by aids, the catholic church is still telling people that condoms don't work.

As has already been said the Catholic Church hsve very little influence in Africa.

Grayson · 12-05-2013 12:57PM

1ZRed wrote: »

And then what's going to happen when you raise them up to our level? They're just going to add substantially more to our problem because their populations dwarf ours as it is! Look at India and how it's developing rapidly and burning massive amounts of fossil fuels.That's 1 billion right there, imagine how all of them living as we do will affect the planet.

Now I don't deny we are the ones to blame but look at how expensive the alternatives are for us to be greener, how will they ever manage?

And political slowness is a massive problem, that's why I just see things getting worse and worse because no one will bother their ass to do something quickly, so I can't see how a massive new population boom in Africa where they'll seek massive amounts of energy won't have an equally massive negative affect on our planet already. If anything it could be the straw that breaks the camel's back when our efforts to change just won't be enough to reverse the harm we're already doing and what does developing countries will continue to do for the foreseeable future.

So your solution is slavery and or genocide.

Grow up. You're just being sick.

Grayson · 12-05-2013 01:01PM

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

As has already been said the Catholic Church hsve very little influence in Africa.

185 millions Catholics. That's very little?

And the church is still running clinics and hospitals there. Where they tell people that condoms don't work. But it's ok if it's 185 million people, but wrong when it's 200 million? 300 million? What's your tipping point for something to become wrong.

XxMCRxBabyxX · 12-05-2013 01:06PM

Grayson wrote: »

185 millions Catholics. That's very little?

And the church is still running clinics and hospitals there. Where they tell people that condoms don't work. But it's ok if it's 185 million people, but wrong when it's 200 million? 300 million? What's your tipping point for something to become wrong.

Take a look at the countries with the highest AIDS rates. Very few, if any, are Catholic countries. Mostly Anglican. The AIDS problem is down to lack of education, tribal myths and beliefs and a belief that contraception is not 'manly'. Not to mention high incidences of rape.

woodoo · 12-05-2013 01:08PM

1ZRed wrote: »

I think people are afraid to say it but sending money to Africa is akin to throwing it in the fire.

After how many decades of billions and billions going out to them has there been any progress made? Nope.

Population of Ethopia in 1984 when Bob Geldof brought the hunger plight there to our attention was 39.4 million. Population in 2010 was 91 million.

1ZRed · 12-05-2013 01:09PM

Grayson wrote: »

So your solution is slavery and or genocide.

Grow up. You're just being sick.

I never said any of that and you know it. Of course I'd like them to have a better life but that will have a cost on the planet, as we already do.

I'm happy to let them be and for them to develop as they rightfully should, but there has to be very rigorous rules set in place like china's one child policy (or similar) because there are far too many of them which is hugely unsustainable as it is, never mind when their life expectancy gets as high as ours.

Say what you will, but it's going to be extremely difficult to get Africa to develop without massive amounts of negative environmental consequences and it'll only take massive amounts of money to avoid that which I don't believe people will do because we'll only do the bare minimum as with everything unless we have to.

*I also believe that we should look into child limit restrictions in some developed countries and an agressive push towards greener, less destructive lives as well, I'm not just singling out 3rd world countries.

7 billion is far too many as it, and out of the 3 billion or so who do live as well as we do, that's already too unsustainable as it is. It's not as straight forward as saying "give them whatever it takes to get up to our level" because that comes at a price as well. The earth can only take so much of us and we need to start planing very intensely beit 1st or 3rd world.

Stereomaniac · 12-05-2013 01:20PM

So how are things in Ethiopia these days and when is Bob Geldof going to fly in to save the day?

Grayson · 12-05-2013 01:20PM

1ZRed wrote: »

I never said any of that and you know it. Of course I'd like them to have a better life but but that will have a cost on the planet, as we already do.

I'm happy to let them be and for them to develop as they rightfully should, but there has to be very rigorous rules set in place like china's one child policy (or similar) because there are far too many of them which is hugely unsustainable as it is, never mind when their life expectancy gets as high as ours.

Say what you will, but it's going to be extremely difficult to get Africa to develop without massive amounts of negative environmental consequences and it'll only take massive amounts of money to avoid that which I don't believe people will do because we'll only do the bare minimum as with everything unless we have to.

*I also believe that we should look into child limit restrictions in some developed countries and an agressive push towards greener, less destructive lives as well, I'm not just singling out 3rd world countries.

7 billion is far too many as it, and out of the 3 billion or so who do live as well as we do, that's already too unsustainable as it is. It's not as straight forward as saying "give them whatever it takes to get up to our level" because that comes at a price as well. The earth can only take so much of us and we need to start planing very intensely beit 1st or 3rd world.

The earth can support more than 7 billion, if it's managed properly.
It's strange your post starts with

I never said any of that and you know it. Of course I'd like them to have a better life but but that will have a cost on the planet, as we already do.

BUT. That's the key word there.
I'm not racist but...
I don't have any problems with islam but...
Sure, that Jew's allright but...

It's a horrible ****ing word and is used to justify all typed of evil.

So you'd like them to have a better life but.....

I'm happy to let them be and for them to develop as they rightfully should, but there has to be very rigorous rules set in place like china's one child policy (or similar) because there are far too many of them which is hugely unsustainable as it is, never mind when their life expectancy gets as high as ours.

You want them to have children but... after one child what? You kill the next one? mandatory abortions? Mass sterilisations? Of course you'd apply the same to the west but... we aren't the problem or as much of a problem as them? We don't produce more carbon than the whole developing world. And it's not like we don't try to shackle them in debt and take all their resources anyway. And then use that to pollute even more. Rather than change our ways, we should force them to live in the dark ages? No, of you'd like to see us take some responsibility, but not as much at the darkies. Right?

Grow up and quit trying to place problems you contributed to at the feet of people who had nothing to do with it.

Grayson · 12-05-2013 01:26PM

Stereomaniac wrote: »

So how are things in Ethiopia these days and when is Bob Geldof going to fly in to save the day?

They're going to get worse. Ethopia needs the waters of the nile. But thanks to a colonial era document the egyptians have full rights to all the water. This means that there's a bloody big river they can't tap for irrigation or hydro electric power. And they (along with the rest of the countries the nile flows through) need to. This means there's been an arms build up. Which the west is financing quite nicely. Egypt, even after the revolution kept buying loads of aircraft and missiles. And they've said they will use all options available to protect their interests in the nile. So the next time he goes out there, it'll probably be a war zone.

Grayson · 12-05-2013 01:27PM

woodoo wrote: »

Population of Ethopia in 1984 when Bob Geldof brought the hunger plight there to our attention was 39.4 million. Population in 2010 was 91 million.

So what you're saying is that the potato famine and the mass immigration in ireland were good things?

Concern Nothing but Money Whores

Comments