From there I would say that the status and prestige of working at a large and powerful NGO can make up for the difference in pay one might make elsewhere. There are obviously many people who go into non-profit work for purely altruistic reasons. I only meant to state that there are plenty of people who do not. Therefore using the position as a signal of the quality of a person's character is not valid.
I was in fact using "above average" as meaning they tend to be more white collar jobs that pay more than the median salary.
With that said, this really seems like something that is upsetting you and I really want you to know that I'm not trying to play a game or trick anyone. Either way, it's just a web forum. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. There is no prize. Just making internet conversation since I'm a little bored today.
Please don't get too worked up about it and I wish you well.
Simply put, they are better off than most.
The comparison with similar positions is the only one valid, because those are the better paying job they did not take even though they were qualified.
Those people are not taking a hit working for an NGO because they would never have the equivalent roles in the business world.
Incorrect. Furthermore, the salaries are often public, so this is provable. Look up our 990 if you don't believe me. You can also review via GuideStar[0] or Foundation Center[1]. I work with a lot of fellow non-profits, on average our positions pay about 80% of market. Perhaps you are only looking at CEO pay? On average, that is also below market, but there are some outliers which I'd have to guess you are basing your incorrect assertion on.
[0] https://www.guidestar.org/Home.aspx [1] https://foundationcenter.org/