Well we could just put a big wall up around the place and say ‘sort it out yourselves’
You have wonder where Africa would be now if we’d done that in the first place rather than hundreds of years of colonialism.

They would have a lot more diamonds for a start so wouldn’t need charity singles

and you haven’t asked yourself why that is?

I know full well why that is, but not buying the Band Aid single is hardly likely to reverse the legacy of colonialism, africa not having the industrial revolution, the reanissance, establishing the global economic system, blah blah blah is it?

It will alert them to the existence of Bono though. Haven’t we inflicted enough on them?

It’s alright, most of them already know and hate him via their iTunes account.

maybe when Bob and Bono start paying taxes, and give up a chunk of their vast fortunes.

Ebola vs Bono

That’s a tough call.

The natural transmission rate of Bono is significantly lower, hence the need for the recent biological warfare.

> Ebola vs Bono

And the ebola threat to the bonobo…

http://www.bonobo.org/bonobos/threats/

I thought it was a surprisingly good piece on Today. Both sides well up for it, but respecting the ref.

On the actual issue… From a W African perspective I guess it’s are the extra £££ worth the misrepresentation in the UK? From our perspective you’ve got to factor in the shite song and the sight of bono and the rest strutting about. Tough indeed.

Rusty Spanner

Rest assured Bob will get money for a good scrub and a new pair of socks.

Evidence?[/quote]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ONE_Campaign#Controversy
Various links off of that relating to Geldof and Bono’s raising of money, awareness, personal profile.

In September 2010, it was reported that ONE used only 1.2% of their funds for charitable causes.

The tragedy of all this is that the Ebola outbreak is caused by low standards of living in Africa, which is a direct consequence of African leaders’ avarice in looting their countries. Fatalism allows them to get away with looting and in fact some would say that a poor, skinny politician would not be accorded any respect. If African leaders were not looting and raping their countries, African nations would be able to provide decent living conditions for their people along with proper food and healthcare. I would never suggest that developed countries are not complicit in the looting.

I would never suggest that developed countries are not complicit in the looting.

Indeed…. Nothing to do with us at all

In September 2010, it was reported that ONE used only 1.2% of their funds for charitable causes.

So, obviously, he kept the rest.
Fiver in Midge’s Christmas card?

Thanks for the clarification.
🙂

So obviously he kept the rest.

You’re right. Lets hope those Boomtown Rats royalties keep paying out to keep a roof over his head 😉

Bono and charity work… I think he does Ok, supporting this lot:

http://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/bono

Also, if you want people and corporations to pay tax in the UK, get on to your MP as they set the system up, including the bit that enables these groups and individuals to legally do the offshore thing…

Mini rant over, back to the OP

Also, if you want people and corporations to pay tax in the UK, get on to your MP as they set the system up, including the bit that enables these groups and individuals to legally do the offshore thing…

Yeah, because the politicians in power have the best interests of us, the taxpayer, at heart, and not the interests of those funding them.

Also… just because a system exists to avoid paying tax, you’re not under some kind of obligation to use/exploit it. Thats a conscious choice you make. So probably best to take that into consideration with regard to Saint Bono, and his tax dodging chums.

He’s all over the telly when he’s doing something for charity, hectoring everyone else while he’s at it! Which would be fine, if he then publicised it with equal vigour, when he was off to his accountants to decide if he was putting his royalties through Belize, or the Cayman Islands this time around. The hypocritical, sanctimonious, self-aggrandising, messiah complexed ****!!!

An altogether nicer sounding Ebola record from, among others, the amazing Malian duo Amadou & Mariam

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruYQY6z3mV8[/video]

How come millionaire celebrities are expected to support charity with an afternoon of their time, whilst us plebs are expected to support it by dipping our hands into our pockets.

Yeah, because the politicians in power have the best interests of us, the taxpayer, at heart, and not the interests of those funding them.

Vote them out then.

The only reason politicians get fat, lazy and complacent is because they know that however much they take the piss nearly 40% of the electorate will continue to vote for them (if they’re Labour or Conservative) and that elections are won and lost by a small percentage of swing voters.

A prominent US political commentator espoused a theory whereby the electorate should vote against the governing party at each election.
This, he said would get politicians working for the electorate and give the power back to the people at a stroke, if politicians knew they faced just a single term in government they would move mountains to implement real policies and affect change rather than spending their first term trying to secure a second term.

It is our dogmatic loyalty to a particular party that allows people to choose to be an MP for a career, this has always bothered me, I don’t want an MP who has known nothing but political studies at school/college/university before taking a research job with a chosen party and then making an electoral list and then taking up residence in the House of Commons.

Surely it would be better to have people choose to put themselves forward as MPs later in life with experience and careers behind them?
The nuances of Government are always taken care of by Civil Service advisors anyway.

Sadly people wont ever go for it as the electorate likes to wear its party allegiance like some kind of badge of honour, you’d never get dyed in the wool Labour voters choosing Tory in order to remove a useless and arrogant Labour party from power and vice versa.
As the electorate we are complicit in giving MPs so much freedom and power to take the mickey the way they do.

The only reason politicians get fat, lazy and complacent is because they know that however much they take the piss nearly 40% of the electorate will continue to vote for them (if they’re Labour or Conservative) and that elections are won and lost by a small percentage of swing voters

Parkli…

Heavens forbid “white saviour complex”. I’ll be sure not to buy a copy.

Vote them out then.

Sadly people wont ever go for it as the electorate likes to wear its party allegiance like some kind of badge of honour,

You’ve missed the recent by-elections then? And the little matter north of the border last month? And the fact that the Green party now polling way more than the Lib Dems

While somewhat misguided and optimistic in thinking an ex-banker would do owt about tax avoidance, I think the electorate are very much in the process of telling the major parties what they can do with their cozy, self-serving complacency.

Theres another byelection this week. Watch the panic spread through Westminsterwhen the results of that come in.

Surely it would be better to have people choose to put themselves forward as MPs later in life with experience and careers behind them?

Like Alan Johnson, for example? The entire labour party want him to stand for the leadership, and be crowned PM. His reaction to this? He said he’d rather go back to being a postman.

The whole political system is ****ed! Here’s hoping its in for a shake up

Rumour has it that approx 40 days of global military spending would be enough to end world poverty…

Seems conceivable:

http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/redirect-military-expenditure-sustainable-future

Not as much profit in aid and resulting peace though.

binners – Member

Also… just because a system exists to avoid paying tax, you’re not under some kind of obligation to use/exploit it. Thats a conscious choice you make. So probably best to take that into consideration with regard to Saint Bono, and his tax dodging chums.

My brother was working as a contractor for a bank. One day, a colleague says “Dave, you’re new to this contracting lark so you probably don’t know about this, let me help you out” and started telling him about all the tax avoidance schemes available to a contractor earning several times the average wage. Various others join in, soon everyone’s exchanging notes on better ways to save tax. Finally, job done, Dave says “Well thanks for that, but I’m going to keep doing it the way I’m doing it”. First man is gobsmacked, says, why would you do that? Dave looks him in the eye and says “because I’m not a ****”.

I think we should send my brother around the country, calling people ****s. Might not solve anything but it’d be entertaining. Hi Bono, pleased to meet you, I’m Dave and you’re a ****.

I dont find the song insulting as a song. What I find offensive is a bunch of so called popstars trying to get everyone else to put their hand in their pocket but not do so themselves. Many involved have had their own tax affairs queried. Bob Geldoff was happy to slate Adele for not taking part and ignoring that she had quietly made a donation to Oxfam herself.

If these popstars want to raise some money for a charity, then great, put your hands in your pockets and donate. Dont just urge everyone else to because youve spend a couple of hours singing a rehashed song.

You’ve missed the recent by-elections then? And the little matter north of the border last month? And the fact that the Green party now polling way more than the Lib Dems

While somewhat misguided and optimistic in thinking an ex-banker would do owt about tax avoidance, I think the electorate are very much in the process of telling the major parties what they can do with their cozy, self-serving complacency.

Theres another byelection this week. Watch the panic spread through Westminsterwhen the results of that come in.

I hope you’re right….but by-elections have often produced strange results/protest votes etc, come the general election people seem to revert to old Labour or Tory allegiances.

I wouldn’t be so sure this time deviant. I really think people have had enough this time. Both the main parties are now indistinguishable, and are saying nothing worth listening too, as they just carry on doing the bidding of their corporate paymasters. The ones who (like Bono) think that tax is an optional thing, they don’t need to bother with

The Green Party seems to be proposing actually doing something about stuff like we’re on about here – tax avoidance, and a bit more of an equal society – as the silence from the labour party is deafening on these subjects. And UKIP is running rings round the Tories at the moment. How many defections in the week after they lose Rochester on Thursday, do you reckon?

And north of the border, the SNP are making labour look as irrelevent as the Tories. And I think we can forget about the Lib Dems. They won’t exist by June.

Heres hoping that the complacent bastards in Westminster are in for one hell of a shock, eh fella? Then we might be in with a chance of seeing Amazon, or Bono, or whoever else actually pay tax like us ‘little people’?

The Green Party seems to be proposing actually doing something about stuff like we’re on about

Seems to be working for Mrs Lucas!

(ps I don’t think it’s working for Mrs Lucas, YOMV)

I’ll start the Bono thing off…£20.

Oh come on! Genuinely, I think I would probably pay several hundred quid to be allowed to punch Bono in his smug face….. as long as he keeps those ****tty sunglasses on.

Any advance on £500?

Musicians raising money for charity by singing a song. I don’t really see a big problem with that. It works, so why not?

Who really knows how much some of the stars might or might not donate on a personal level? Charity donations are also tax efficient are they not? But does it really matter as long as a lump of cash is generated that otherwise wouldn’t exist? Nobody is asking anybody to donate their life savings, just a few quid if they can.

Quite a few people seem to be more upset about how rich these celebs are than the plight of the Africans. They are only rich because people here buy their music. It never ceases to amaze me how “celebrity” is worshipped by the masses, but it doesn’t bother me either. If people choose to spend their money on making celebs richer then that’s fine by me.

Some people always get offended by charity, but if it saves even a few lives then it’s not a bad thing. Too much cynicism going on. You’d think they’d invented a new mtb wheel size.

Musicians raising money for charity by singing a song.

I shall shortly be writing a fascinating model in Excel on the cash flow of an office rent review.

I expect you lot to buy a copy fur charidee, awight?!

What I think is patronising, to all parties involved, is this idea that “the west” is being the “white saviour” whether or not you think that’s okay, or an extension of colonialism.

Western governments are not cacking themselves about ebola and sending millions of $, troops and hospital ships out of altruistic concern for dying Africans, whether laudable or patronising, it’s happening because this is a potentially global problem that is just about contained for now in Africa, and we’d really like to see it stay that way thank you.

EDIT: The Al Jazeera lot are dead wrong if they think we’re doing this to patronise or perpetuate colonial attitudes, we’re doing this to save our own asses.

For those of you who think the western response (both governmental and charitable) is about saving the poor little black people, and a laudable attempt to fight a disease that takes many innocent lives, I have one word I’d like you to consider (and, as jivehoneyjive might suggest, re numbers of fatalities, and treatability, “do your own research”):

Malaria.

. I don’t really see a big problem with that

I wonder if any of this was covered in the thread?

does it really matter as long as a lump of cash is generated that otherwise wouldn’t exist?

I wonder if any of this was covered in the thread?

Quite a few people seem to be more upset about how rich these celebs are than the plight of the Africans.

They are annoyed, rightly, because they avoid tax and then lecture us about our moral responsibility towards helping the poor and needy. Do you know anyone who admires hypocrisy ?

All this tax money that’s being saved. Do we know what the various, let’s assume, altruistic celebrities are actually doing with it?

Just saying, like…

They are annoyed, rightly, because they avoid tax and then lecture us about our moral responsibility towards helping the poor and needy. Do you know anyone who admires hypocrisy ?

It’s only hypocrisy if you choose to see it that way as you clearly do. It’s not really a balanced view though is it? Do you pay more tax than you legally need to? As above, do you know where that saved tax is actually going? Maybe, just maybe some of it goes to charities.

Anyway if you have an issue with legal tax avoidance, it’s not the celebs you should be pissed at. Oh sorry, have we covered that?

All this tax money that’s being saved.

Have they done the “we’ll let them off the VAT” thing for this again? Think they’ve just done that for the ceramic poppies outside the Tower of London thing, haven’t they? How generous.

Actually, no it’s not. It really peeves me off actually, as someone who works for a charity. We’re all (okay, there’s a few exceptions, mountain rescue equipment being one iirc) in this sector shafted on VAT – compared to most commercial businesses who recover, we pay 20% more for everything that attracts VAT.

Then occasionally there will be a high profile campaign or event that the government bow to public pressure on and go all “aren’t we generous?” and let them have the VAT back.

On behalf of all those working for and with charities who don’t happen to be doing sexy-charity-thing-of-the-month activities, I’d just like to say that this sucks and if they think it’s unfair for charitable endeavours to be stung for an extra 20% cost, can we please have a blanket, universal charity exemption for VAT please Gideon?

Thank you

EDIT: And on a separate note, if we’re willing to commit time, lots of money, troops and hospital ships out of altruistic/patronising* regard for the health needs of people in Africa, what do we think about doing something on malaria (and then when that’s sorted, which is totally achievable with the will and resources, maybe HIV next)?

*Delete as per personal view on this

Surely it would be better to have people choose to put themselves forward as MPs later in life with experience and careers behind them?

This used to be very much the case. Back in the 70’s when I worked in a print/publishing place in Chippenham we used to get jobs in for our local MP, who used to come in to check proofs, etc. (accompanied by a big bloke in civvies with a gun). He actually owned, and ran, a big print place down in Bridgewater, IIRC, and that wasn’t uncommon back then.
FFWD to now, and Westminster is full of carreer politicians who’ve never done a proper days work in their lives.