Nov 6, 2009
We know nothing about someone’s character by learning how much money they make.
This month’s World Magazine lists 48 non-profit executives’ salaries.
What can I possibly do with that out-of-context information other than judge them?
Subscribe to 22 Words
Recent Comments
Sponsors
Categories
- Arts in General (24)
- Bible (67)
- Blogging (158)
- Brevity (25)
- Constructive Criticism (271)
- Faith (217)
- Food & Drink (63)
- Language (226)
- Literature (112)
- Love (93)
- Miscellanea (308)
- Movies & TV (27)
- Music (171)
- parenting (158)
- Personal (191)
- Questions (258)
- Quotes (41)
- Recommendations (132)
- Sports (14)
- Technology (2)
- Uncategorized (9)
- Visual Art (36)
- Writing (57)
Archives
- September 2010 (9)
- August 2010 (88)
- July 2010 (116)
- June 2010 (79)
- May 2010 (89)
- April 2010 (62)
- March 2010 (21)
- February 2010 (25)
- January 2010 (32)
- December 2009 (47)
- November 2009 (63)
- October 2009 (45)
- September 2009 (40)
- August 2009 (40)
- July 2009 (40)
- June 2009 (37)
- May 2009 (47)
- April 2009 (51)
- March 2009 (40)
- February 2009 (31)
- January 2009 (44)
- December 2008 (47)
- November 2008 (54)
- October 2008 (50)
- September 2008 (41)
- August 2008 (45)
- July 2008 (51)
- June 2008 (51)
- May 2008 (66)
- April 2008 (74)
- March 2008 (71)
- February 2008 (19)
Reader Recommendations
Some of the books and music that you, the readers, have recommended here over time:
Twitter Recommendations
Theme based on Derek Punsalan's Grid Focus.
Be jealous?
True.
Ask them for a handout?
that’s the first thing I thought — ask them for money! ha!
Ha ha, I thought the same thing when I saw that page. I would be much more interested in where it’s going.
What if Franklin Graham is paying out-of-pocket for Wes Stafford’s entire salary? It’d be a completely new perspective on those numbers.
why is it even any of our business? as long as they are accountable to the organization, who cares?
Agreed. I’d rather not know what any particular person makes. Knowing what a position earns can be helpful for comparison’s sake, but not individual people’s salaries.
We are supposed to be good stewards of the money God had given us, and if I am supporting these organizations (a few of which I am), and they are being wasteful with it, I would like to know and give my money elsewhere. Granted, this chart does next to nothing to help with that, but there are better ways to provide this type of information that would.
Many non-profits are charities that receive benevolent gifts from people. If the executives are getting huge salaries, it may indicate that much of the funding is not making it to the people in need.
Agreed. The overhead percentage of the charity would be more useful, but this is similar. If the head of the charity is making millions, I’d be less likely to donate.
It would be much more helpful to see their checkbook ledgers.
Indeed. Maybe Franklin Graham pays for all his travel expenses out-of-pocket. I have no idea if he does, and he probably doesn’t, but as with all wealthy people the allocation of his money is more important than the fact that there is a lot of it. If he is a wise and generous steward, it may not be a bad thing.
As is the norm, everything the world views as valuable, God views as invaluable. Nothing new there. Come Lord Jesus…and quick. I’m becoming more alien like everyday.
great question – the only way those numbers could mean anything would be, perhaps, if they also listed the value of what the exec brought in…
the posting of these salaries seems to have the taint of controversy journalism.
And populism.
Similar (htough non-Christian) interesting discussion:
http://runningahospital.blogspot.com/2007/01/do-i-get-paid-too-much.html
I agree with other’s comments that it would be much more informative to see where the executives spend their salaries.
Since when are people’s budgets — any people’s budget — the business of other people?
I understand the case of a non-profit, but still: how you spend your own personal money is YOUR business, and not your neighbor’s. If you’re not getting the job done with the money I give, then I’ll find somewhere else to give. But if the job is getting done….
I agree that people’s budgets shouldn’t be other’s business, but as AP pointed out in the title of his post, “we know nothing about someone’s character by learning how much money they make.”
If it’s someone’s character/priorities/values you want to better understand, then spending habits are much more informative since “where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”
Absolutely, the pocketbook is where you can see where their heart is. And Abraham is spot-on with the critique that incoming money is no indicator of a person’s character. Your post brings that out, Emily.
Nevertheless, even if you can tell a person’s character by what he is spending, should you have access to that information? You know what I mean?
Why would anyone even judge them? Is having money now a crime in America?
Only when it’s other people.
Exactly.
My mother-in-law worked for ten years as the director of a non-profit organization without being paid. One year the board decided she needed to be compensated for her efforts. That little act opened up many opportunities for her to be criticized and scorned. One person went so far as to say she was only doing the work for the money. She gave up her salary within six months and very nearly quit.
> One person went so far as to say she was only doing the work for the money.
And that is a reflection of jealousy and covetousness disguised under altruistic language.
Agreed, there’s no connection between character and salary. I’m a free market guy – and I like the role of the ECFA. A ministry doesn’t have to belong to it, but as a consumer/contributor, as long as I believe the ECFA is doing their job, I’m going to be more likely to give to its member organizations. If the CEO is adding value (“paying for himself”), the market has a way of deciding what the job is worth.
Non-profits get a huge tax break because their stated purpose is helping others, not enriching insiders. It’s very reasonable that I want to judge whether it’s worth donating money to an organization based on whether I think insiders are being unduly enriched.
Plus, given that all non-profits receive a huge tax benefit and many get some government contracts, it seems reasonable that we get to evaluate how they spend their money much closer than, say, a private business or family.
If a local children’s shelter pays its CEO $1 million, I might not donate money. I might even be mad. If a local store pays its CEO $1 million, I couldn’t care less.
(On the other hand, if it treats its workers really poorly, I might care. That’s why I boycott my local car wash)
I agree with this. I just don’t think a list with a name and a dollar amount gives enough information to be mad accurately.
Reading lists like this makes me think of how difficult it will be for these folks to enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Your salary may not determine whether you are rich or whether you are a good steward. I think it is a money in minus money out sort of calculation. I took that as the point of the post.
Just because someone makes good money does not meant they are successful a what they do. It just means they make a lot of money.
It seems similar to something people in this country do all the time: ask where you work or what you do so they can place you in the correct position on the socio-economic scale.
Shame on World Mag for that one.
I’m a little curious as to why it would even occur to you to “judge them”.
….especially since you have already ceded the point that we know nothing about someone’s character by learning how much money they make.
I would hope people don’t instinctively “judge” me because I’ve never “made alot of money”.
Frankly, I’m more curious about World’s motivation in publishing the information. Possessing such a powerful flashlight is a pretty awesome responsibility: I wonder if they sometimes get caught up in just feeling compelled to “brighten some [supposed] dark little corner”–just because they have this reeeaally powerful flashlight.
There should either be many details or none.
In my opinion, the public has the right to know the bulk of all expenditures for organizations that receive tax-deductible donations, including the salaries of employees.
Yet if only the salaries are listed, it seems like the list was generated so that people could complain about it.
Potential donars should be allowed to know how their donations will be spent.
A salary number tells you little about the executive (other than who to hit up for a contribution to MY non-proft), but it can be the starting point to discover more about the non-profit paying the big salary.
A few years back the some well-known non-profits went through a series of scandals about executive compensation. The executives involved pointed out that they had increased donations so that even with their big salaries (and perqs) it was a net gain for the non-profits.
But this kind of thinking betrays how off-course the non-profits had become. They were focusing on dollars and not people.
I’m now in my third year sitting on my church’s board and I cannot imagine ever taking money that people sacrificed to give and paying anyone these kinds of salaries.
In the words of Wes “Scoop” Nisker, “Your guru should never drive a better car than you.”
It is disappointing when we respond to hearing about Franklin Graham’s 1 million dollar salary by deciding we will give less, or stop giving, to Samaritan’s Purse, when on the other hand, we respond to Christian athletes who make multiple millions of dollars by celebrating them, going to their games, buying jerseys and other apparel or items, buying their books, paying them to speak at our churches, etc.
How much more does Graham, or any other missionary, merit making that much money than someone who runs around a field with a ball? Admittedly, that is hard work, too, but so much different.
I remember reading about the things that Graham does (in the early days–I’m not sure how much he does hands on work anymore) and it seems that he risked his life on many occasions to help people in the most dangerous parts of the world.
Of course, for every Franklin Graham, there are hundreds or more who risk their lives and make far less money, if any at all. In the Bible there are those who were supported by those they served, and people like Paul who made and sold tents so that he would not have to take any money from those he served. Some have different callings than others.
It’s very sexy to be against those who are successful and rich in this country right now. You need look no further than the rise in socialist tendencies from our current administration.
Executive compensation is one useful metric by which to evaluate how well a non-profit organization is run; but not terribly useful all by itself. Better to look at a whole range of numbers such as Charity Navigator (http://www.charitynavigator.org) or the Better Business Bureau (http://www.bbb.org/us/charity/) provides; but if you’re going to use a single number to compare various charities, the percentage of their income spent on programs, vs. administration and fundrasing, is probably single most useful metric. My general rule of thumb is not to give to a charity where that number is less than 80%, or maybe to one where it’s between 70% and 80% if it’s doing unique work that no similar charity does.
On the other hand, while earning a largish income is not wrong, living a life of voluntary poverty does tend to be a sign of holiness or of being serious about attempting holiness. You can’t necessarily tell that by someone’s reported income; some people living a life of voluntary poverty have negotiated a lower salary than others with similar skills doing similar work, while others earn a salary comparable to others in their profession but quietly give most of it away.
And if I recall correctly, Samaritan’s Purse’s admin cost is 10% or less…
If I recall correctly, the scrutiny of Franklin Graham’s salary was enough to make him change his salary. If he truly worked hard to earn it, then why portray guilt by changing it?