Kim Kardashian only donates 10% to typhoon victims

Link

I think this is pretty disgusting, using this tragedy to make money.

What a parasite.

That is a lot more than I donated.

And that is that.

@-TheSecondSign-: it's not 10% of income it's 10% of a charity auction proceeds. That's pretty bad if it's true.

This sort of thing happens with a lot more charities than you might realize.

Alex Rodriguez's charity gave only 1% of proceeds to an actual charity

A lot of charities are poorly run. They have these huge administrative costs. The actual namesake of the charity may not see any of that money. It may go to those who run it, but I agree that they are very deceptive. I remember reading some site that gave tips on how to evaluate which charities are best.

She worships Satan so no surprises here.

So what? She didn't have to donate anything. The fact that she sold some of her possessions and donated some of it is a lot more than most people did, I'm sure. Why do some people think wealthy people have to empty their bank accounts for every cause?

It's because she is profiting from the suffering of typhoon victims, and the generosity of idiots.

but good on her for donating some of that money.

I'm certainly no fan of the Kardashians, but regardless of the amount, she still donated some money.

Celebrities are not a concern to me in the least but some people make it sound as if she was obligated to donate money just because she is wealthy.

BTW, why is she famous? It can't be a result of her looks.

I have a feeling that the people bidding on these items didn't really care whether or not the money was going to typhoon victims, they just wanted some clothes that a celebrity used to own. If they really wanted to just donate to typhoon victims there are easier/better ways to do it.

After reading the article I don't think Kim Kardashian did anything wrong. She's just an internet punching bag so people are piling on. Apparently she's been selling off her old clothes for a while now and the letter she wrote simply stated "a portion of this auction will go to victims".

I'm sure they did want the items, but usually in these charity auctions, people still donate way more than they normally would because of the cause.

I assumed too much on the nature of those that participated; now that I consider what they were bidding for, they are clearly subhuman.

@Solaryellow:

She is part of a species called "Snooki." But yes, it's her looks that made her famous as well as her tv reality show and sex tape.

shes not obligated to donate anything

What a bimbo, all butt and no heart.

That aside, I'm not all that infuriated given how the nonprofit organization at hand is International Medical Corps. I've always been baffled how they spend the money on what one would think to be luxuries to the anguished people in distress while completely ignoring the fact that these people disparately need the money for something else, something much more crucial and indispensable. We're talking about basic needs here: housing, food, medicine...etc. I've seen them gathering people in serious need of these things and start offering them "psycho-social therapy", wasting the money on therapists, logistics, niceties like offering the sessions in hotels...etc. Also their employees' wages are outrageous for a nonprofit humanitarian organization.

Non-profits I think can keep 95% of their revenues for administrative costs, like paying the head spokesman, so I can form a non-profit raise food for Africa and I can earn $1 million but only have to pay $50K on Campell's Soup and shipping, and I can keep the other $950K for my troubles of raising that money.

Don't insult Satan by associating him with such a terrible person.

Anonymous charity is the only way to properly give money to the needy.

kudos to you.

Because she's not emptying her bank account, she is MAKING MONEY. A person with a net worth of $40 million is doing a 'charity auction' which will see her wealthier than she was before.

I need no kudos. It's the only way to give. Giving with expectation of recognition, praise or some kind of reward isn't giving.

No.

She's not making a new clothing line and then saying "profits will go to charity" and only giving 10% to charity.
She's selling her old clothes, and saying "a portion will go to charity".

It's doubtful it will even be HER selling the clothes, which means she'll be paying someone to sell them for her.

It's no different than your local thrift-shops, they collect donations of clothes/furniture, sell it, and only after paying staff/rent/utilities etc does any money end up going to help the needy.

10% of 1,000,000 is a lot more than 0%.

my thoughts exactly.

it's scrutiny like this that is going to make her not want to donate a dime to the next natural disaster relief

Maybe instead of talking about some incredibly rich woman being cheap we should focus on the people who are flying out, on their own dime, to directly help those in need.

My guess is that the family managed to milk the Kardashian name. Like someone posted earlier, not only did she had that sex tape, Her father Robert, was part of the "Dream Team" of lawyers who defended O.J. Simpson during his murder trial back in 1995.

Uh... so? She's selling clothes on ebay. Why should she be expected to give all the money to the victims? It's not like she's advertising a charity, she just said that part of the money she makes will be going to them.

Holy shit, that pig is fatter than I remembered.

I wonder if this gigantic ass is flabby and cottage cheese-like or firm and smooth. Its huge it can't be firm, no way.

Not the most noble thing to do, but she's not obligated to donate money to charity.

How can you say no? 10% is going to charity. That leaves 90%. Do you think the other 90% is going to the person she is paying to sell the clothes?

Use your brain man.

Guys, I'm not saying she's obligated to give anything, but if you're going to sell your stuff under the guise of charity, at least give them a substantial amount of the money that is made, otherwise you're tricking people into thinking they're helping victims with this, but instead they're only helping her to get a new Porsche or whatever.

She's not selling it under the guise of charity though. She just said in an announcement thing on twitter or whatever that 10% of the money will go to victims. Which is actually a pretty standard thing to do.

since when is the clothing section on e-bay "charity"?

I'm sure 10% is more than what you've donated so be thankful.

>Has 50 million

>Spend 10 million on clothes

>Auctions off clothes for 5 million

>Donates 10% of that 5 million to charity.

How's she making money in the long term?

Are you suggesting she made these clothes by hand?

Kim Kardashian was not obligated to give large portion of her profits from that auction. Considering the reasons for her fame, is it really any surprise that she is not the most generous celebrity in the world?

I did not donate any money.

So, she still donated more money than I did.

i too never understood why are some folks convinced that wealthy people owe something to them.

She got all those clothes as gifts...

Wow, people aren't getting the point at all...

She got them ALL as gifts?
Where did you read this? I just read she was auctioning off her "old" clothes and donating a portion to charity.

So what? It's not like she deceived anyone here. The listings are up-front about what percentage is going to the charity.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

@deeliman: You have no point. People don't have to buy her old clothes and she doesn't have to donate anything.

What a surprise, a rich person whose name rhymes with "Jim Farcashian" is a shitty person.

Although this can't be the only charity this happens with.

She's not obligated but she's using a tragedy and charity auction to make money for herself. She knows that by saying she's donating proceeds to the Philippines, her profits from the auctions will be significantly greater. Much higher than the 10%, meaning she turns tragedy into profit. It's despicable.