yyWhere does the money go?

[Julian2]

A horny traveller has a stop over in BKK for a couple of nights and on departure gives the Isaan girl he picked up a hundred bucks for services above and beyond the call of duty.

Meanwhile, his old Mum at home answers the door to find World Vision or (Charity of choice) collectors rattling their tin. She had a good session on the pokies the day before so she drops a hundred into it.

Cut now to the impoverished Isaan family. What percentage of the money reaches them in each case?

[rickfarang]

Topologically similar to this classic math question.

 

"Two trains leave Bangkok's Hualomphong station at the same time. Train A is heading toward Udon Thani, 800 Km distant at 40 km per hour, and train B is heading toward Surat Thani, 700 km and 34 km per hour. When the trains at equal distances from their destinations, which one will be carrying the most gold necklaces?"

 

There is no deterministic solution to your question.

 

[bust]

I'll have a crack at this.In the Isaan case the probability is that most of the $100 will be spent within the village so many benefit from the entire $100......with World Vision only about 30% ever reaches the intended recipients. This has been discussed at length before.

[cavanami]

Cut now to the impoverished Isaan family. What percentage of the money reaches them in each case?

 

Depends on the "charity". Many "charities" eat up all the donations with "administration costs", which means that the CEO is bilking the "charity" for a 6, 7 or more digit salary...plus "expenses".

 

I only donate face-to-face, my hand to their hand...and I do not give "hand outs" but rather give a "helping hand"

[sanddawg1]

I concur; take the United Way for example 30%+ for admin cost I don't give a baht to any of them

 

S1

[YimSiam]

Out of a $100 donation at departure? No more of that will get back to the village than a donation to a charity - too many administrative and overhead costs to cover immediately for the TG, just like NGOs (rent, loans from friends, calls/emails to donor (aka Fundraising), party with friends to celebrate 4,000 baht windfall, etc)... Let's say a girl works a month, makes 15k, 20k during the month - sending home 2,000 of that is an optimistic guess at home much she'd be able to send back. So, 90% admin and overhead, 10% to the beneficiaries - far worse than World Vision, where an alleged 87% goes directly to programs.

 

YimSiam

[bust]

far worse than World Vision, where an alleged 87% goes directly to programs. YimSiam

You have obviously never read one of their annual reports.

 

[YimSiam]

No, I haven't, and the number is not something I'd stand by - I think you'll note the word 'alleged' in my post. The 87% is from one of the charity-rating websites. No need to argue about the figures, the point remains the same: both types of rural development organisations (the NGO and the BG) have administrative costs that suck up lots of the cash, and in my view, the BGs aren't likely to be any better than an NGO - though you, the donor, certainly get more bang for your buck personally (unless Oxfam is now providing special perks to its $100 donors, inspired by BG techniques...).

 

YS

[unit731]

I sense a new color picture taking cell phone for the gal. Then rent. Then food. A few personal products. Then the rest goes home to village.

 

Noting is wasted. Except, of course, the bragging rights to the new cell phone.

 

Oh, and maybe a payment for the motobike. Then the rest goes to village.

[chelseafan]

Strange, I always through that the BG puts the money away in a bank to look forward to her long retirement....boy did I get THAT one wrong