MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
Anyone else just hear that?
Robtel Neajai Pailey, apparently.
She wants the Band Aid single withdrawn as it's insulting.
Doesn't seem particularly arsed that less money would be raised.
My first reaction was disbelief.
Yours?
I need to read more on this, obviously.
Lots of negativity out there regarding the single:
[url= http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2014/11/bob-geldof-ebola-africa-band-aid-bono-one-direction-famin-20141113833733496.html ]Al Jazeera article[/url]
to whom ?
I just wish they could do something "different" the one in 2004 was bloody awful (I've not heard the new one yet). Shirley someone could pen a more up to date song? Hashing some slightly different lyrics into the old one to is a bit meh.
weeksy - Memberto whom ?
Africans, apparently.
Apparently the WHO and CDC need to be a bit more upbeat about Ebola. So perhaps a reworking of 'Walking on Sunshine' would be more acceptable.
Doesn't make any odds what the song sounds like. It could be Bob Geldof farting through a mega phone for what its worth. Its about us putting our hands in our pockets and giving something to a nation full of very very poor people. Just hope the money goes where its needed.
There is a text number to donate a fiver if you don't want to listen to the song. I don't for one.
[i]Africa doesn't want any more western band aids[/i]
Ok, fine.
Is the money going directly to the DEC appeal?
They'd raise more money if they held a bidding war for the opportunity to punch Bono
Western charity songs like the one being proposed by Geldof are not only patronising, they're redundant and unoriginal. Producing an Ebola song now to raise money, nearly one year after the first reported case in Guinea, is belated at best. It reeks of the "white saviour complex" because it negates local efforts that have come before it.
Seems a fair point to me.
Rest assured Bob will get money for a good scrub and a new pair of socks.Just hope the money goes where its needed
They'd raise more money if they held a bidding war for the opportunity to punch Bono
+a lot
Drac, I agree.
On a logical level, it's a valid argument.
However, if it helps save lives in a time of crisis, does the end justify the means?
lilchris - MemberRest assured Bob will get money for a good scrub and a new pair of socks.
Evidence?
The word 'patronising' is pretty redundant term here. I don't mind being patronised by a paramedic if I'm lying broken in the gutter, I just want to be fixed up.
If Liberia and Sierra Leone had the outbreak under control already, they wouldn't need to be patronised by western governments sending medics and setting up field hospitals on their territory.
Doesn't make any odds what the song sounds like. It could be Bob Geldof farting through a mega phone for what its worth. Its about us putting our hands in our pockets and giving something to a nation full of very very poor people. Just hope the money goes where its needed.
Bollox. It's about a bunch of washed up, sell out, aging rockers shouting "look at me!!!"
They could collectively donate more than the sales will raise without even noticing. And, without subjecting us to this spectacle.
I think(and I may be wrong) it was insulting because they are dealing with the problem and don't need the paternal guidance off the White Man.
On that basis you can sort of see the point, how would we feel if the bunch of Americans singers put out a record raising money for NHS because we are too poor or stupid to run a health service?
Any way I don't give, they can look after their own problems and Ebola isn't even much of a problem considering all the other shit going on in Africa.
However, if it helps save lives in a time of crisis, does the end justify the means?
Possibly but it doesn't take the point away.
Bollox. It's about a bunch of washed up, sell out, aging rockers shouting "look at me!!!"They could collectively donate more than the sales will raise without even noticing. And, without subjecting us to this spectacle.
Or that. They could pay their tax avoidance to the cause that would help.
Was she on Sunday Morning live? I think so. I get why she might find the whole thing irksome and patronising, and generally not good for the image of Africa as a whole. But people lying dying in ditches and mass graves probably does a lot more damage to Africa's image.
If Africa was capable of dealing with it as she suggests then we wouldn't be having this conversation as African nations would have controlled it. She was proposing people boycott the record. As vomit inducing as it might be to see celebrities back slapping and moral high horsing, it might save some lives. You would like to think.
The first one was pretty ridiculous, treating "africa" like one hot dusty weird place, "there won't be snow in africa this christmastime except hopefully in the ski resorts..." "No rain nor river flows, except one of the world's longest rivers is in africa". "Do they know it's christmastime, well a pretty decent proportion of the world's christians live there, give it time and africa'll be more christian than the uk so yeah they do."
The new one's tried to get away from that though it's pretty clunky, it's all a bit "patronising ignorant bullshit redacted"... Was this really the best idea anyone had? But what are the odds of it doing more harm than good? Not much I think.
does the end justify the means?
The means could have been achieved in another way
Two things struck me
1. He was immensely ignorant of African charity songs
2 He kept just saying so we should do nothing even though she clearly articulated what she wanted and her objections
The band Aid fella should be a Big hitter on here...belligerent, did not listen, attacked straw men and repeated himself till the other person wandered of bored.
IF africans say the song offends them then they are better placed to judge than I am
PS they do its christmas time even though "they" are Muslims unlike "us"
Isn't that kind of the point. What they need is to be able to solve these crises themselves. Having 'the west' come in with a sticking plaster once every few years does save lives now but it isn't a sustainable solution.If Liberia and Sierra Leone had the outbreak under control already, they wouldn't need to be patronised by western governments sending medics and setting up field hospitals on their territory
It does bug me a bit when a bunch of millionaire tax dodgers ask me to stick my hand in my pocket.They could collectively donate more than the sales will raise without even noticing. And, without subjecting us to this spectacle.
Froth, froth, fizzle...
Just what the f*** has she done to raise funds for for the ebola crisis and if she doesn't like it she can give to DEC etc. Same applies to the whingers on here, too. It's just one tiny bit of an overall bigger effort.
I'll start the Bono thing off...£20.
Isn't that kind of the point. What they need is to be able to solve these crises themselves. Having 'the west' come in with a sticking plaster once every few years does save lives now but it isn't a sustainable solution.
Yeah, it'd be nice if they had sanitation, education, infrastructure, stable democarcy, low levels of corruption, etc etc but that isn't the case on the ground now is it?
If Bono gets his jollies and feels he's made his contribution then that's a small price to pay for some quick funds for a problem that's occuring today.
I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning.
Will the money raised amount to more than U2 have dodged in tax, through their creative offshore accountancy schemes, I wonder?
And I wonder how many of 'the Great and the Good' involved are up to exactly the same? Most, if not all, I'd imagine
Its great donating a couple of hours one afternoon to help some people in Africa, all very publicly, in a blaze of self-congratulatory publicity, when at the same time considering yourself above the business of contributing any of your income to the society you make all your money in 🙄
My best mate is a medic on (taxpayer funded) RFA Argus out in Sierra Leone, treating ebola victims, at the moment. To my knowledge he's not been on telly preaching to people while avoiding paying any tax
Most of those having a go at it are just trying to make a name for themselves or think they are being particularly cool. Not sure about the new version, have not really heard it yet, but the original was a great song. If you really look at the lyrics, yes they don't make a great deal of sense but that goes for most songs, does it matter?
Will those the money is for tell Bob to keep his money because they think the song is awful and patronising?
Did Robtel Neajai Pailey suggest how she will raise the money or is any charity fund raising patronising?
Well given that is it us who are ultimtely sorting this issue out (better late than never) and it is costing us alot of money, how we decide to raise that money is upto us and if it causes offence then tough titties.
You're damned if you do and damned if you don't. If we jumped on the Ebola issue early on and intervened, we would have been criticised for assuming that African nations can't sort these things out for themselves. And in any case we were supporting the Ebola outbread early on, its only since its not been contained and is spreading that we've upped the activity on it to prevent a global epidemic.
I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning.
S'okay, but it's not bacon, is it?
We've had people in Africa crying out for western intervention in the Ebola crisis for quite a while now.
Seems to have been something in the media almost every day.
What do we do?
Try and raise some cash quickly and carry on with the longer term initiatives that have been in place for years, or not bother for the fear of insulting someone?
1. He was immensely ignorant of African charity songs
So was I.
No one seems to have made a very good effort to publicise them.
2 He kept just saying so we should do nothing even though she clearly articulated what she wanted and her objections
The band Aid fella should be a Big hitter on here...belligerent, did not listen, attacked straw men and repeated himself till the other person wandered of bored.
I thought it was a score draw, tbh.
Scrappy, but a good contest.
Well we could just put a big wall up around the place and say 'sort it out yourselves', so compared to that raising money respining a god-awful song seems pretty harmless.....
Whatever has been said in the above argument, this trumps all:
Most of those having a go at it are just trying to make a name for themselves or think they are being particularly cool.
I love a straw man in the morning- to misquote Binners misquote
given that is it us who are ultimtely sorting this issue out
I think that is the sort of patronising stuff that annoyed her.
What % of people dealing with Ebola are "us" rather than "them"?
I thought it was a score draw, tbh.
I switched it off at the third what do you expect us to do nothing as a an answer tbh..he just ignored every point she made [ yes some were weak]
Just watched this again, didn't realise it was seven years ago.
Isn't that kind of the point. What they need is to be able to solve these crises themselves. Having 'the west' come in with a sticking plaster once every few years does save lives now but it isn't a sustainable solution.
To be fair, no-one in Africa or beyond was predicting an outbreak on this scale, and the current efforts will leave all these governments far better prepared for the next one.
It's not always easy to predict what the next challenge will be, and some of these countries have little or no health infrastructure partly because of conflict.
The point about aid dependence in relation to the 1980s Band Aid/Live Aid cash is a much better one. Hopefully the cash from this release will go straight to an organisation which will spend it in a coordinated way.
The opinion of one African citizen probably outweighs the collective might of the opinion of everyone on this website though.
Frankly I think people who jump into these debates feet first with an opinion aren't treating the subject with the respect it deserves. Your starter for ten should be to spend the time doing something positive. I appreciate there is some irony in me posting here.
I'm off to try and buy one of the other songs she mentioned that are already out there, written and produced by African musicians.
You have wonder where Africa would be now if we'd done that in the first place rather than hundreds of years of colonialism.Well we could just put a big wall up around the place and say 'sort it out yourselves'
I'm off to try and buy one of the other songs she mentioned that are already out there, written and produced by African musicians.
If you find out which option gets more money to those who need it, let us know.
Serious comment, btw, can't find much info out there.
Obviously, we could just donate without having to buy a song in the first place.
The african nations are short of your brass, just look how old those uniforms are.
[img] 
[/img]
Let's all join hands and sing a song about it........
Links to regional/national sites in the banner at the top.
Easy to set up a direct debit.
Worth remembering that the BBC has some history with Band Aid
Apparently the WHO and CDC need to be a bit more upbeat about Ebola. So perhaps a reworking of 'Walking on Sunshine' would be more acceptable.
Never heard of CDC but ain't Townsend still struggling to finnish his book so will not have time for charity record.
Never mind that. How about a charity re-release of 'Breakfast in America', you tight bugger?
[i]Yeah, it'd be nice if they had sanitation, education, infrastructure, stable democracy, low levels of corruption, etc etc but that isn't the case on the ground now is it?[/i]
and you haven't asked yourself why that is?
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?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ONE_Campaign#Controversy
Various links off of that relating to Geldof and Bono's raising of [s]money,[/s] [s]awareness,[/s] 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.... [url= http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/feb/06/bae-tanzania-arms-deal ]Nothing to do with us at all[/url]
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.
🙂
You're right. Lets hope those Boomtown Rats royalties keep paying out to keep a roof over his head 😉So obviously he kept the rest.
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 [url= http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/mar/04/lord-ashcroft-vat-conservative-polls ]funding them[/url].
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 ****!!!
[url= http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2014/oct/29/african-musicians-record-song-ebola-awareness ]An altogether nicer sounding Ebola record from, among others, the amazing Malian duo Amadou & Mariam[/url]
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.
Parkli...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
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:
Not as much profit in aid and resulting peace though.
binners - MemberAlso... 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 DemsWhile 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'?
Seems to be working for Mrs Lucas!The Green Party seems to be proposing actually doing something about stuff like we're on about
(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.