Dan Pallotta says the way we think about charity is dead wrong, that we need to let our charities flourish the same as we do new start up companies.  Making charities focus on keeping their overhead low rather than on solving the needs in the community, the same needs that they were formed to address is counterproductive.  Why should the successful head of a charity not be paid the same as the successful head of a new start up company, especially if the charity that person is guiding is making a direct positive impact?