I appreciate the article from Lifehacker. It's always great to see where your money is going when you donate. We should be careful on our words +Baker Kawesa
when we say they "pocketed 70%" as the tax for clearly shows they didn't "pocket" it. It actually says the amount "pocketed" was appropriate and in line with standard NPO. Perhaps they aren't as efficient as you'd like, that's okay and accurate to say, but they didn't just pocket it.
There's always going to be upkeep. Even the organization Lifehacker mentioned at the end suggested a "100% go to malaria nets" however, in order to get them there, pay people, they have to have more income. Someone is paying for it. It's just a matter of who. If you want 100% of YOUR donation to go to something give to something like that. But we can't assume whatever we give magically appears where it needs to go without a cost.
To all those who commented on "why we should be risking ourselves for someone else" (+Sean Davis
, +Paul Henning
, etc), it's much easier to say that from the comforts of America. Not to say Americans have it easy, but I can't remember the last time someone was brutalized in front of me, or I saw people skin and bones around me.
When I was at the +The White House
lobbying with IC for the passing of the bill, Ugandan Delegates weren't asking us to wage war in Central Africa. They asked for our help. Whatever we can give. They've attempted and can't track him down fast enough. He moves by the time they get there. They need advisers and technology, which is what the Bill gave.
Either way, I think the outrage on the issue reflects selfishness and lack of care for humanity. It's the "me" perspective at its finest.
Appreciated your thoughts +Erika Newnam and +Andrew Sorn