[Closed] Sir David of Beckham

and im less of a dick for having a different opionion to your rose tinted glasses self?

i'm one day hoping to reach fully fledged dick, lets hope its some time soon - and then ill come knocking again to the next time a thread with a so called 'celeb' makes a so called 'charitable donation' then eh?!

i mean what celebrity would ever dream of doing something for nothing eh?!

god bless your naive views

Nice attempt at patronising OW but can I just point out that it is often the charity itself which is most keen to have celebrities as patrons/donors and to publicise the fact.

I'm sure even you can work out the rationale behind it.

clever boy!

charities use celebrities for/to gain money

+

celebrities use charities for PUBLICITY

see what im getting at now? finally!

see what david beckhams getting at now?!?!

Berm Bandit you should declare a vested interest given you're French.

Merde! ........ Busted! ..... désolé pour la réponse lente. Je me bats avec les rebelles à Tombouctou, et la connexion internet est un peu lent.
Mais oui, je suis le légionnaire gay de la ville St Geramine vieux à votre service "

Getting very bored of this now and I'm still waiting for you to answer how you [b]know[/b] that celebrities only do charitable work as a means of self-publicity.

Beckham hardly needs it to increase his profile, as he merely has to scratch his arse for it to be on every front page worldwide. The money is a relatively small amount for him to donate but what he does give up is his time, which I imagine he has far less going spare of than most of us and it is that, which says a lot more about his motives than a showy PR stunt.

Go Go Google Translate!

[img] [/img]
[img] [/img]

He certainly doesn't come across as someone motivated primarily by greed! As this gesture has demonstrated.

I agree I think his primary motivation is playing and a love of football. If he lost it all money, cars, houses and most of his talent, i still reckon he'd be out there on a wet sunday morning playing for his local pub team.

I've heard others complaining that he should be donating to a UK charity not a French one. Its Jingoism gone mad I tell you.

thx1138 - Member

£125m over 5 years is nothing in football terms. Works out at £50k a week

Maths isn't your strong point, is it?

Oh aye, missed a zero in my calculations. That's £480k a week 😯

Go Go Google Translate!

Damn .... you guys just won't let a girl have any secrets!

I'm not under the pretense that my opinion matters, but it is that this is a real low point of STW, and there's been a few.
Damning a bloke for giving money to charity. FFS.

if he's not interested in the money why doesn't he come and play for a low league struggling english team..... Sheffield Wednesday??

Erm.... Let me think, now. Could it be that he fancies playing at the highest level in Europe? As thats been the proposition he's been offered? As opposed to spending Wednesday nights against Blackpool? I'm only guessing, obviously.

wasn't a serious question 😀 but thank you for your serious reply mr bin man. 😉

No problem! It's become increasingly difficult to fathom what's what on this thread 😀

It's not 'greater' a gesture than someone earning £20k a year donating £500 a year to charity though, is it really?

Well. Yes it is actually 😐

It's the equivalent of someone who earns £20k a year giving just shy of £8.5k to charity.

As he is giving five months Salary away.

If you are going to take total worth I to the equation, you can't just do it for one side.

It's not that hard to figure out surely.

No problem! It's become increasingly difficult to fathom what's what on this thread

It has indeed gone in some directions I didn't foresee.

Rich tapestry of life etc etc.

Damning a bloke for giving money to charity. FFS.

No. Get a grip. No-one's 'damning' him, stop being so hysterical. Some people are simply being a bit more open-minded, rather than getting caught up in the Saint David of Beckham mass adulation.

The guy has far more money than he knows what to do with (as exemplified by the obscene vulgarity of his family's lifestyle). Not that he shouldn't enjoy the fruits of his endeavours, far from it. But there comes a point of being comfortable and set for life, and he is way, way beyond that. In order for people like him to be incredibly wealthy, means that an awful lot of other people have to be extremely poor, and that's an inequality which needs constant examination and criticism. What, now no-one's allowed to criticise anyone? So much for Freedom of Speech.

It's the equivalent of someone who earns £20k a year giving just shy of £8.5k to charity.

As he is giving five months Salary away.

If you are going to take total worth I to the equation, you can't just do it for one side.

It's not that hard to figure out surely.

That's a silly argument. £500 a year to someone earning £20k is a significant amount of money, and they may have living costs which mean such a sum is just too much for them to give. That could well be more than all the 'disposable' income they have for the year. A tax-deducted percentage of £3m to a man who has a personal fortune in the hundreds of millions is nothing. Beckham isn't going to go without something he needs, by giving away 5 months salary is he now? It's not that hard to figure it out, surely?

if we were to use the idea of 'giving what you can afford', then Beckham could afford to give a hell of a lot more. And still have enough left for his and his family's lifetimes, several times over.

That's a silly argument.

It's perfectly logical actually.

If someone is going to use Total Worth on one side of a comparison, and just Salary on the other.

Then the comparison makes no sense at all.

You may as well compare One persons salary, and the coins in the ashtray of your car and decide who's "best" for donating to charity.

The guy has far more money than he knows what to do with (as exemplified by the [u]obscene vulgarity of his family's lifestyle).[/u] Not that he shouldn't enjoy the fruits of his endeavours, far from it. But there comes a point of being comfortable and set for life, and he is way, way beyond that. [u]In order for people like him to be incredibly wealthy, means that an awful lot of other people have to be extremely poor,[/u] and that's an inequality which needs constant examination and criticism. What, now no-one's allowed to criticise anyone? So much for Freedom of Speech.

I can only dream of being so open minded.

And all this ratio of wealth stuff is gash.
What matters is the charity and what would they prefer, 0.1% of beckhams wealth or 50% of mine?

Fair play to him, the charity gets his salary and presumable any tax he would have paid on it. Not sure how some people think he has a tax break on it, as he will have given it all away.

So he gives a shedload to charity yet people still feel the need to be critical. 🙄

I'll have 50% of yours wrecker. Then you'll be broke. 😛

thx, that's a hell of a statement considering you were keeping an

open mind

63 voices now and I've got you down as the 62nd least open minded. And that's only because wrecker joined in. 😀

As you well know DD, my GAFometer nary flickers.

Tell you what - it is possibly a very good way of ensuring that the french government get no tax from him. Or is that just the UK where that stupid tax thing happens?

[img] [/img]

I can only dream of being so open minded.

At least you've got your dreams.

If someone is going to use Total Worth on one side of a comparison, and just Salary on the other.

Then the comparison makes no sense at all.

It does if you apply a bit of common sense, rather than using simple figures to form the basis of an argument. A bit of lateral thinking is needed here though, however. Not a lot of evidence some folk on here are capable of that.

What a bellend

Yes you are, aren't you?

Now go and release all that pent-up anger in you, using that nice picture Jamie's kindly posted up.

Toodle pip! 🙂

Yes you are, aren't you?

Ok, can we:

1) Agree to stop calling each other bellends.

2) Agree it's a good thing a charity is getting £3million

3) Agree/Disagree that the donor is either a good egg/manipulative shit and we occupy the high ground/low ground/[s]wombling free[/s].*

*Delete as applicable.

Tip to anybody going to the last post in this thread and working back - don't scroll up (I daresay it's not anything like so disturbing if you start from the top and scroll down).

Tip to anybody going to the last post in this thread and working back - don't scroll up (I daresay it's not anything like so disturbing if you start from the top and scroll down).

😀

[img] [/img]

Take the fame out of it and you have:

Talented man is very good at his job.

Lots of good employers want him.

Follows standard upward career path of a motivated and 'in demand' employee.

Adapts his product offering as his career advances to ensure continuing relevance.

Accepts final "trophy role" at back end of career doing a very good job for all his employers and donates salary to good cause while raising awareness for the charity.

I say hats off. I also say there's a huge amount of prejudice because he is famous and a footballer. he's just a guy who is good at his job when you strip it back.

As somebody who isn't a fan of Becks or footy, I'm still quite curious what he's going to do when he stops playing. He is a celebrity who it is possible to find interesting, as he's not just famous for being famous.

[quoye]It does if you apply a bit of common sense, rather than using simple figures to form the basis of an argument. A bit of lateral thinking is needed here though, however. Not a lot of evidence some folk on here are capable of that.

I was actually pointing out that use of "simple figures" (that are incorrect) are no way to form an argument. So thanks for your support. It's much appreciated.

I'm glad you appreciate the use of "lateral thinking" that means you would have spotted the fact that you were actually making my point for me rather than arguing against it.

Happy days.

Beckham will earn a lot of money from merchandising at PSG, this would be taxed at 30 percent under French law.

Do you not think that by giving the income that would have been taxed at 55 percent to charity, he will sell a lot more merchandise through publicity and wind up making more money than if he'd kept the money from PSG.

My understanding, from being an expat (though in a different country) is that by his family living and being educated in the UK and taking no salary from PSG he will probably be domiciled from a tax perspective in the UK so won't be bothered by the French tax rates. I guess he still owns IP on his personal brand which he will argue are not related to French employment and the money he gets from sponsorships etc, which won't be taxed in France.
From where I'm sitting it's a great thing to do for all parties (owner, charity, Beckham, image of the sport) apart from the French taxman.

Anyone care to comment?

Anyone care to comment?

Yes. You're getting desperate.

How are you getting on at that land-mine clearing job?

Thx, let's play 'who said this'

I'll go first.

I think some people need to get over judging others they don't know

Well?

In case you didn't get it, you did. On the thread where you were saying how boring it was spunking £3100 on bikes you have no idea about. Now here you are criticising what a bloke is doing with his cash, despite having to defend yourself against similar accusations on aforementioned thread.

You may wish to join oscillate wildly on the hypocrites table.... Or **** off back under your bridge.

Good on Becks, if he benefits from a charity getting a £3 million cheque, that's fine by me.

Don't worry I'll be going somewhere hilariously tragic with MSF once I get the chance.

Thanks for your concern though deadlydarcy.

If he does manage to avoid tax, what it will effectively mean is that the French taxpayer will be footing 55 percent of that donation to charity so that Beckham can earn a nice wage off his sponsorship deals. Whilst you guys that are throwing insults around will be made to look like idiotic deferential aspirational voting fools.

No probs with the concern. Type of guy I am. 8)

In the meantime, like I said earlier, you could offer some menial skills while a Biomedical Scientist position comes up. It would show the world the type of standup guy you can be.

Right, so when's his first game?

In the meantime, like I said earlier, you could offer some menial skills while a Biomedical Scientist position comes up. It would show the works the type of standup guy you can be.

I already do but not with msf, again thanks for your continued concern.

How does Mother Theresa fit into this measure of charitable work, the self-promoting publicity whore that she was?

The stupidity of this post had this song start playing in my head....

Still not seeing seeing pictures of billy big bollocks clearing mines.

Just saying like.

Still not seeing seeing pictures of billy big bollocks clearing mines.

Just saying like.

That's not the point though is it, the point is why should I or others here who have been attacked give a **** about Beckham donating to charity when there are far more people in this world who do much better work for nothing.

As I said....bunch of deferential clowns.....Beckham gave 1.5 million of the taxpayers money and 1.5 million of his own to charity.....omgz that's soooooo amazing111111.....this is like totally for altruistic reasons....wot a heroz....