Mari Ellen Loijens
Posted on 05/12/2018 8:37:06 AM PDT by rktman
As Silicon Valley technology executives have amassed enormous fortunes in recent years, one relatively obscure group — the Silicon Valley Community Foundation — has emerged as the local charity of choice.
Facebook's chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, has donated stock worth more than $1.8 billion to the foundation. Reed Hastings, the founder and chief executive of Netflix, has given $100 million. And many other tech titans, including the Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey and Microsoft's co-founder Paul Allen, have donated millions.
According to interviews with a half dozen former and current employees, some of whom only agreed to do so on the condition of anonymity, Mari Ellen Loijens, the foundation's top fund-raiser, routinely bullied and demeaned colleagues, made sexually and racially insensitive remarks and at times even threatened physical violence.
The employees say that Emmett Carson, the foundation's chief executive, ignored multiple complaints about abusive behavior by Ms. Loijens because she was responsible for much of the organization's growth.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
You have no idea what you are talking about. The money in Leftist “charities” dwarfs all the donations to every right-wing cause combined by orders of magnitude. Big charity is big government. You think the Clinton Foundation is an anomaly?
Open your eyes! The non-profit tax law was expressly written to fund the progressive agenda. It is being used to destroy this country and enslave your children.
True charity doesn’t come from coercive tax law. Any charity that folds because someone loses a tax write off deserves to die. Get out of your bubble—look at any list of non-profits and see how many are conservative. And as for $$ and assets, conservative charities don’t amount to a fraction of a percent.
They’ve got $13.5 billion in assets.
Mari Ellen Loijens
Yes, the basic idea behind the charitable tax exemption is that a person can decide to fund a local charity instead of the federal government. Sure, people would contribute to charities regardless, but not sure why we’d ever sign off on allowing them to deduct it from their taxes.
Silicon Valley has a toxic culture overall, so this is no surprise.
Yeah, even in a charity, if you’re bringing in billions of dollars, the CEO is not going to be very receptive to hearing about any complaints about how you treat your reports.
Bingo
“basic idea behind the charitable tax exemption is that a person can decide to fund a local charity instead of the federal government.“
The idea behind charitable tax exemption is to give the government power over the organizations through the status. The other intent of tax law is to coerce the taxpayers to spend money in accordance with government aims. The Tax Code is impossibly complex and written by special interests.
Going to some sort of flat tax across the board would invigorate the economy and deny this pernicious state control of individuals and organizations. If you want to save trees, have at it. If you want to have a black, white or Micronesian colony group enjoy. If you want to build schools, hospitals or stadiums, go for it. Just don’t coerce everyone else to support your individual or group’s goals.
She resigned last month in less than 24 hours after an expose on her was published.
Seems to be married but that sure doesn't mean much for the liberal grads of Holyoke.
And to think that its original name was Mount Holyoke Female Seminary.
How times change.
I wonder how many non-profits are charities that actually help the needy and how many are left-wing environmental, quasi-political, etc., groups. They can have lots of salaried people and many study meetings without actually helping anyone. Think of the Clinton Foundation.
I wonder how many non-profits are charities that actually help the needy and how many are left-wing environmental, quasi-political, etc., groups. They can have lots of salaried people and many study meetings without actually helping anyone. Think of the Clinton Foundation.
This is exactly what is wrong with the Clinton Foundation, this one and all others...The flowery language on all their websites is total garbage. Has anyone ever SEEN any results produced in any arena with the millions of dollars raised? Just as they say - unicorns and pixie dust...all’s right with the world as long as you keep sending us those checks. The big donors don’t care about results - they still get the tax exemption. It needs to STOP! Kind of like Buffett and Bill Gates urging tax increases for everyone else - their assets are protected with clever accounting.
The posters are absolutely correct - put a stop to all of them. Shut them down!
https://www.philanthropy.com/article/Opinion-Growth-or-Mission-/243383
“”Silicon Valley Community Foundation is not alone in trying hard to please its biggest donors. Every nonprofit worth its tax exemption works to cultivate and provide stewardship to its major supporters. But here’s the difference. Most charitable organizations have a compelling mission describing why they exist. They are saving an endangered species, counseling veterans, curing diseases, teaching immigrants, providing housing, training nurses, feeding children, preserving a historic home, or what have you. These organizations try to get donors to connect with the organizational mission and to see that work as vital. The contributions then follow. This is the building block of charitable fundraising.
But what about an organization whose mission, essentially, is whatever the donor says its mission is? At a basic level, that’s how a donor-advised-fund-sponsoring organization operates. If the donor cares about saving elephants in Africa, that’s the mission or the organization. If the donor cares about educating orphans in New Brunswick, that’s the mission, too. The SVCF mission statement reads: “Silicon Valley Community Foundation is a comprehensive center of philanthropy. Through visionary leadership, strategic grantmaking and world-class experiences, we partner with donors to strengthen the common good locally and throughout the world.” I read that to mean: “Our mission is whatever the donors think the mission is.””
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.