Poverty and the brilliance that is Bon(ehead)-o

[bigred]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/11/nh.anti.poverty.ap/index.html

"The anti-poverty campaign founded by U2 rocker Bono and others is investing $30 million to pressure the presidential candidates to focus on the oft-forgotten issue..."

:boggled: I wonder how many lives could've been saved or mouths fed w/that 30 mil. I can understand it taking some money to put towards awareness, but I'd like to know what requires 30M to "put pressure" on the candidates that has any real chance of succeeeding? Blackmail? Cuz I question if much of anything else will get more than lip service.

But then again, Bono's record of using funds wisely/"justly" to help the cause he soapboxes about isn't quite spotless is it?

[Cleon]

What's the difference between Bono and Jesus?


Jesus doesn't think he's Bono.

[BPSCG]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/11/nh.anti.poverty.ap/index.html

"The anti-poverty campaign founded by U2 rocker Bono and others is investing $30 million to pressure the presidential candidates to focus on the oft-forgotten issue..."

:boggled: I wonder how many lives could've been saved or mouths fed w/that 30 mil. I can understand it taking some money to put towards awareness, but I'd like to know what requires 30M to "put pressure" on the candidates that has any real chance of succeeeding? Blackmail? Cuz I question if much of anything else will get more than lip service.

But then again, Bono's record of using funds wisely/"justly" to help the cause he soapboxes about isn't quite spotless is it?Stop mocking Bono. He was Time Magazine's Man of the Year. He's a great man!

I should know, speaking as the current Time Man of the Year...

[bigred]

my bad.

He good! :clap clap clap:

[Puppycow]

So you're saying that buying politicians is a bad investment? Presumably he thinks that he can leverage that 30 million into a lot more. Isn't that what all lobbyists think? Presumably he wants to get billions for his priorities in return.

His goals may or may not be stupid, but I'm not convinced that his means to achieve them are.

[BPSCG]

So you're saying that buying politicians is a bad investment? Presumably he thinks that he can leverage that 30 million into a lot more. Isn't that what all lobbyists think? Presumably he wants to get billions for his priorities in return.And who does he think the politicians are going to get those billions from? Hint: Look at your wallet. Then ask yourself if you really believe poverty will be eliminated by taking a few billion from you and everyone else and giving it to the poor.

[The Painter]

At a U2 concert in Ireland, Bono (the lead singer) asks the audience for
some quiet. Then he starts to slowly clap his hands.

Holding the audience in total silence, he says into the microphone.... "I
want you to think about something. Every time I clap my hands, a child in
Africa dies."

A voice from the front of the audience yells out...."Then fookin' stop
clappin', ya ********!"

[TragicMonkey]

Dear Bono,

Thank you for your interest in helping the poor. Attached is the book of payment coupons for my student loan with Sallie Mae. Thanks ever so much.

Love,
Monkey

PS: Are you any relation to Sonny Bono?
PPS: I liked "War". Have you done any music worth listening to since then? Oh, well, you've probably been too busy to.

[BPSCG]

At a U2 concert in Ireland, Bono (the lead singer) asks the audience for
some quiet. Then he starts to slowly clap his hands.

Holding the audience in total silence, he says into the microphone.... "I
want you to think about something. Every time I clap my hands, a child in
Africa dies."

A voice from the front of the audience yells out...."Then fookin' stop
clappin', ya ********!":dl:

[Puppycow]

And who does he think the politicians are going to get those billions from? Hint: Look at your wallet. Then ask yourself if you really believe poverty will be eliminated by taking a few billion from you and everyone else and giving it to the poor.

I know. But it would'nt be worse than all these other rent-seekers. Compared to the bill for the Iraq war it would be a bargain. Neocons predicted that it would pay for itself with oil revenues.

[Molinaro]

I would love to hear how the cure for hunger is suposed to be imposed. Do the rich nations step in and take control of the poor countries to ensure that the charity is properly distributed?
Do they simply hand over billions to impoverished governments and cross their finders hoping that it will turn out all right?

What exactly is the plan? Or does Bono even have one?

[Lurker]

Hmm, I guess all you cynics think it would be better if Bono and all other people working to alleviate poverty should just stop their efforts and do like you folks do - nothing. Ooops, my bad. You all do a great job criticizing on the Internet. If only the poor could eat your words then the problem would be solved. :)

I am not saying that Bono will solve the problem. I am not saying if I know his solutions are the best use of money towards the problems. But something is better than nothing.

Lurker

[Darth Rotor]

Hmm, I guess all you cynics think it would be better if Bono and all other people working to alleviate poverty should just stop their efforts and do like you folks do - nothing. Ooops, my bad. You all do a great job criticizing on the Internet. If only the poor could eat your words then the problem would be solved. :)

I am not saying that Bono will solve the problem. I am not saying if I know his solutions are the best use of money towards the problems. But something is better than nothing.

Lurker
Yep. It's not the critic who counts, for all that Bono is a blowhard. He at least gives it the old college try. He has entered the arena.

DR

[varwoche]

Hmm, I guess all you cynics think it would be better if Bono and all other people working to alleviate poverty should just stop their efforts and do like you folks do - nothing. Ooops, my bad. You all do a great job criticizing on the Internet. If only the poor could eat your words then the problem would be solved. :)

I am not saying that Bono will solve the problem. I am not saying if I know his solutions are the best use of money towards the problems. But something is better than nothing. I should save time going forward and just add to my sig: What Lurker said.

[Tricky]

At a U2 concert in Ireland, Bono (the lead singer) asks the audience for
some quiet. Then he starts to slowly clap his hands.

Holding the audience in total silence, he says into the microphone.... "I
want you to think about something. Every time I clap my hands, a child in
Africa dies."

A voice from the front of the audience yells out...."Then fookin' stop
clappin', ya ********!"
Funny, but just an urban legend (http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/bono.asp).

[Tricky]

And who does he think the politicians are going to get those billions from? Hint: Look at your wallet. Then ask yourself if you really believe poverty will be eliminated by taking a few billion from you and everyone else and giving it to the poor.
Yes, I can see Bono's priorities are misplaced. BPSCG and his poor wallet are the ones he ought to be worried about.

[Lurker]

I should save time going forward and just add to my sig: What Lurker said.

Put in a good word with my wife - she disagrees with my genius all too often. :)

[Flo]

Yes, I can see Bono's priorities are misplaced. BPSCG and his poor wallet are the ones he ought to be worried about.


Don't be so hard on the BPSCGs of the World. They would gladly give from their wallet, but only provided they can be assured this would solve the problem once and for all ;)

[andyandy]

Hmm, I guess all you cynics think it would be better if Bono and all other people working to alleviate poverty should just stop their efforts and do like you folks do - nothing. Ooops, my bad. You all do a great job criticizing on the Internet. If only the poor could eat your words then the problem would be solved. :)

I am not saying that Bono will solve the problem. I am not saying if I know his solutions are the best use of money towards the problems. But something is better than nothing.

Lurker


if Bono actually contributed to national state income through paying taxes, rather than off shoring the U2 brand to avoid such inconveniences, i might have a little more respect for the guy. As it is I have none.

Help the poor - but don't expect us mega rich to pay taxes - that would just be unfair

he's a horrible hypocrite and a terrible embassador for any global movement to alleviate poverty.

[Mercutio]

Hmm, I guess all you cynics think it would be better if Bono and all other people working to alleviate poverty should just stop their efforts and do like you folks do - nothing. Ooops, my bad. You all do a great job criticizing on the Internet. If only the poor could eat your words then the problem would be solved. :)

I am not saying that Bono will solve the problem. I am not saying if I know his solutions are the best use of money towards the problems. But something is better than nothing.

Lurker

While I agree with your sentiment, I am going to quibble a tiny bit here, and perhaps change this thread from mostly sniping to some potentially constructive debate (ha!). "Something is better than nothing" is not necessarily true; there are many things that people could do that would actually make any given problem worse. (The analogy I use in my class is medical--if someone has a currently untreatable cancer, shall we bleed him, on the assumption that "something is better than nothing"?)

Some interventions work better than others, that is certain. It is also testable. Those people who are complaining about Bono (or anyone else, for that matter)--what would be a better use of that money, and for what reasons? (The reasons we give should reflect our priorities--e.g., is the money best spent for immediate relief, or for long-term prevention?)

Maybe I am looking with a biased eye, but I too often see opinions that are the result of a political ideology, and that are assumed to be true because they are consistent with that ideology, rather than testable hypotheses. If the progress that science has made by imposing structure on our ideological battles (disagree with my theory--great, bring on the evidence, I'll bring mine, and we'll kick each other's asses with it) can be utilized in these social problems, there may be hope.

[Lurker]

if Bono actually contributed to national state income through paying taxes, rather than off shoring the U2 brand to avoid such inconveniences, i might have a little more respect for the guy. As it is I have none.

I can't speak about his personal income tax, but the corporate side he did offshore to the Netherlands. Previously, Ireland allowed tax free royalties then capped it at 250k euro recetly. That is when Bono moved his corp to Netherlands. I just googled all of this so I thank you for bringing this up and me learning about this.

I guess what you and I are missing in this equation is how much Bono actually gives himself to aid causes. Although I am not a fan of him moving his corp to the Netherlands, my outrage would be mollified a bit if he contributed large amounts to his aid efforts. We *do* know he spends an inordinate amount of time to his cause which I find commendable. I am willing to guess he also contributes a fair amount of dollars. When I think about it, perhaps that is better than funneling it through govt where very little will actually go to his cause of choice, right?

[Lurker]

While I agree with your sentiment, I am going to quibble a tiny bit here, and perhaps change this thread from mostly sniping to some potentially constructive debate (ha!). "Something is better than nothing" is not necessarily true; there are many things that people could do that would actually make any given problem worse. (The analogy I use in my class is medical--if someone has a currently untreatable cancer, shall we bleed him, on the assumption that "something is better than nothing"?)
I was operating under the assumption that the "soemthing" was a positive. Of course if "something" is a negative than it should not be done.

Some interventions work better than others, that is certain. It is also testable. Those people who are complaining about Bono (or anyone else, for that matter)--what would be a better use of that money, and for what reasons? (The reasons we give should reflect our priorities--e.g., is the money best spent for immediate relief, or for long-term prevention?)
Agreed although this does nothing to show Bono's efforts are a negative. All this may show is an alternate plan may be a larger positive. I am all for that, of course.

So until something better is proposed (and preferably tested), I will continue with Bono doing something (positive) is better than nothing.

Lurker

[BPSCG]

I guess what you and I are missing in this equation is how much Bono actually gives himself to aid causes. I'd be a lot more interested in knowing whether the millions he's raised - plus all the other billions (or is it trillions now?) that have been sent by other countries, organizations, and agencies have made the slightest difference in Africa. Last I checked, the poverty, disease, and hunger there were widespread and rampant. And we keep hearing from all the beautiful people demanding our money that the situation is getting ever worse. "All the billions you've spent haven't helped! You need to send more!" At what point do intelligent people say, "Wait a minute... this isn't working"?

We *do* know he spends an inordinate amount of time to his cause which I find commendable. I am willing to guess he also contributes a fair amount of dollars. So what? If he were working 25 hours a day raising billions of dollars so that he have the world's biggest bonfire, would you applaud? Is spending an inordinate amount of time raising money to send to Africa, to no measurable effect, any different?

[BPSCG]

Funny, but just an urban legend (http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/bono.asp).FSM damn it... it was the best laugh I'd had all day!

What the hell, it's still funny.

[BPSCG]

Don't be so hard on the BPSCGs of the World. They would gladly give from their wallet, but only provided they can be assured this would solve the problem once and for all ;)...as opposed to the people who continue to gladly give from their wallets, even in the absence of any evidence that their largesse is making the slightest difference whatsoever.

That's why I give to the American Cancer Society and the American Heart Association and other charities.

[Lurker]

I'd be a lot more interested in knowing whether the millions he's raised - plus all the other billions (or is it trillions now?) that have been sent by other countries, organizations, and agencies have made the slightest difference in Africa. Last I checked, the poverty, disease, and hunger there were widespread and rampant. And we keep hearing from all the beautiful people demanding our money that the situation is getting ever worse. "All the billions you've spent haven't helped! You need to send more!" At what point do intelligent people say, "Wait a minute... this isn't working"?
I don't disagree. I would love to see some statisitcal analysis of aid and its impact. Perhaps I am wrong and nothing comes of it. If so, I would agree we need to reconsider how we do things.


So what? If he were working 25 hours a day raising billions of dollars so that he have the world's biggest bonfire, would you applaud? Is spending an inordinate amount of time raising money to send to Africa, to no measurable effect, any different?

Assuming there is no measurable effect.

Lurker

[BPSCG]

(The analogy I use in my class is medical--if someone has a currently untreatable cancer, shall we bleed him, on the assumption that "something is better than nothing"?)

Some interventions work better than others, that is certain. It is also testable. Those people who are complaining about Bono (or anyone else, for that matter)--what would be a better use of that money, and for what reasons? (The reasons we give should reflect our priorities--e.g., is the money best spent for immediate relief, or for long-term prevention?)What is a better use of the money? I calculated the other day that the $60 billion the G8 countries pledged last week worked out to about $176 per poor African. Better use of that money, if you stipulated it had to go to Africa, would be to give it to every poor African individually. That way, 90% of them would spend it immediately on food or clothing or something, or be cheated out of it, due to ignorance, while a certain percentage of the rest would do something useful with it - use it to buy seed for next year's crop, or to buy some small amount of tools to start a bicycle repair shop or something. Some people would actually improve their lives, and even if it were only one percent of Africa's 350 million poor, that would be 3.5 million people. That must surely be a better record than what the current system is doing.

As it is now, shocking amounts of the money get stolen, and a large amount of it is simply used to push starvation off for another six months, when the west will be asked to pony up again.

Let's go back to your cancer analogy again. You ask, "shall we bleed him, on the assumption that 'something is better than nothing'?" and then go on to answer no, and then ask "what would be a better use of that money, and for what reasons?" In the cancer patient's case, you would ask, "what would be a better use of those leeches, and for what reasons?" Maybe leeches are a completely inappropriate way to approach the problem.

And maybe shovelling money into Africa and watching it mysteriously vanish is, too.

[Snide]

Funny, but just an urban legend (http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/bono.asp)....and a rip-off of an old Emo Philips joke, that went something like this:


"I was walking down the street when a person came up to me and handed me a piece of paper that read, 'By the time you finish reading this, another person will have died from...' So I stopped reading right there! I'm not going to kill someone just to finish a sentence!"

[Miss Anthrope]

if Bono actually contributed to national state income through paying taxes, rather than off shoring the U2 brand to avoid such inconveniences, i might have a little more respect for the guy. As it is I have none.

Help the poor - but don't expect us mega rich to pay taxes - that would just be unfair

he's a horrible hypocrite and a terrible embassador for any global movement to alleviate poverty.

Seconded. I see he wants politicians to use our tax money to help, but not his.

[varwoche]

Better use of that money, if you stipulated it had to go to Africa, would be to give it to every poor African individually. Maybe George Washington's invisible robot friend can distribute the cash.

[Lurker]

Seconded. I see he wants politicians to use our tax money to help, but not his.


And how do you know he is contributing no money? A quick google search found one donation of 50000 Euro by him.

Lurker

[Miss Anthrope]

And how do you know he is contributing no money? A quick google search found one donation of 50000 Euro by him.

Lurker

I said tax money.

[CFLarsen]

While I agree with your sentiment, I am going to quibble a tiny bit here, and perhaps change this thread from mostly sniping to some potentially constructive debate (ha!). "Something is better than nothing" is not necessarily true; there are many things that people could do that would actually make any given problem worse. (The analogy I use in my class is medical--if someone has a currently untreatable cancer, shall we bleed him, on the assumption that "something is better than nothing"?)

Quibble a tiny bit, too:

That analogy would only be valid, if you considered poverty a problem that is untreatable.

[Lurker]

I said tax money.

I fail to see what the difference is to those who get the $.

Lurker

[Miss Anthrope]

I fail to see what the difference is to those who get the $.

Lurker

Let's see. It is well known that Bono has gone to great lengths to evade taxes. He wants governments to forgive loans that were paid by whom? TAXPAYERS. He is taking thirty million dollars and using that to push governments to do something. Again, with taxpayer money. Does your irony meter not even jiggle with that?

I most certainly want food, medicine and decent living conditions for all Africans. There is more to do than throw money and "awareness" at the problem. The governments in Africa are a HUGE part of the problem. Will other governments pressuring them make a dent? Will forgiving the debts put food in African bellies? That remains to be seen.

I'm all for any TANGIBLE, EFFECTIVE help for the African situation. However, that does not mean Bono is not being hypocritical.

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Let's see. It is well known that Bono has gone to great lengths to evade taxes.

Is it?

Tax evasion means using illegal methods to not pay tax. I have seen no evidence at all that he has done this.

What he does appear to have done is organised his affairs in a completely legal manner to reduce his tax bill. That is not a crime and, to me, is a perfectly acceptable thing to do. There is no obligation on anyone to maximise the amount of tax they pay - that goes for celebrities as well as ordinary people claiming deductions against their income.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_evasion

[bigred]

His goals may or may not be stupid, but I'm not convinced that his means to achieve them are.If anything, you have it backwards. His goals (at least on the surface) are noble. It's his methods I question.

And I still haven't heard a valid/logical reason why $30M of lobbying is likely to produce more than that in aid.


Hmm, I guess all you cynics think it would be better if Bono and all other people working to alleviate poverty should just stop their efforts and do like you folks do - nothing. 1 - Interestring how you think you know what donations everyone else does or doesn't give. Call Randi someone, we finally have evidence of supernatural powers!

:rolleyes:

I am not saying that Bono will solve the problem. I am not saying if I know his solutions are the best use of money towards the problems. But something is better than nothing.If I understand you correctly, that's true. That also states the obvious, is quite an oversimplification, and disregards the point.


if Bono actually contributed to national state income through paying taxes, rather than off shoring the U2 brand to avoid such inconveniences, i might have a little more respect for the guy. As it is I have none.

Help the poor - but don't expect us mega rich to pay taxes - that would just be unfair

he's a horrible hypocrite and a terrible embassador for any global movement to alleviate poverty.
Exactly. Somebody gets it. Thanks.

I would be very interested to see how much he saves via tax shelters/etc vs how much he donates (which - oh yeah - is also a tax shelter is it not?).

[Lurker]

Let's see. It is well known that Bono has gone to great lengths to evade taxes. He wants governments to forgive loans that were paid by whom? TAXPAYERS. He is taking thirty million dollars and using that to push governments to do something. Again, with taxpayer money. Does your irony meter not even jiggle with that?
Perhaps. Again, what difference does it make to you if he has $10 million that he would have paid in taxes and instead gives it to his charities directly? Seems you get rid of the middle man who would have taken a sizeable chunk of that $10 million. Now I have no way of knowing if he is donating less, equal to, or more than what his Irish tax bill would have been.

I would agree with your charge of irony IF Bono were not donating to the charities he is lobbying for to govts.

[Lurker]

1 - Interestring how you think you know what donations everyone else does or doesn't give. Call Randi someone, we finally have evidence of supernatural powers!
Well, I *do* have evidence of Bono dedicating a whole lot of time and a whole lot of money to his causes. That is more than I can say for most celebrities. As to you, I hope you do donate to the causes that suit your fancy.


If I understand you correctly, that's true. That also states the obvious, is quite an oversimplification, and disregards the point.
I stated the obvious to show agreement with someone else who stated the obvious.

Look, I know that aid to 3rd world nations is a complex problem not amenable to a simle formula to determine aid. If you want to create a model showing us how to maximize benefit to these people go right ahead.


I would be very interested to see how much he saves via tax shelters/etc vs how much he donates (which - oh yeah - is also a tax shelter is it not?).
Damn! You are cycnical! :) Let's say he donates $50k. Under the US system all he has saved is his tax rate (let's say 24%) times his donation, or 0.24x50000 = $12000. But he is still out the $50k so net loss is $38000.

Hmm, seems even a "tax shelter" is not really making up for the loss of donations, right? Do you think people magically make money on tax shelters? (in response to your "is also a tax shelter is it not?" comment)

In response to the first part of your query, I too would be interested to know his donations versus what his Irish tax bill woulld have been.

Lurker

[andyandy]

Is it?

Tax evasion means using illegal methods to not pay tax. I have seen no evidence at all that he has done this.

What he does appear to have done is organised his affairs in a completely legal manner to reduce his tax bill. That is not a crime and, to me, is a perfectly acceptable thing to do. There is no obligation on anyone to maximise the amount of tax they pay - that goes for celebrities as well as ordinary people claiming deductions against their income.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_evasion

In the common use of the term he certainly evades taxes - ie by avoiding them through offshoring - is this a crime? No - whether it is legal or not is irrelevant. The entire live8 movement was about builidng political presssure on governments to write off debts, reform trade protectionism etc etc. All of this requires the the states in question use tax payers' money to do so. The poor and the simply well off can't avoid paying taxes - but we should be happy to have a global poverty movement spearheaded by an extraordinarily wealthy man who chooses to use his wealth to prevent its redistribution?

[andyandy]

Well, I *do* have evidence of Bono dedicating a whole lot of time and a whole lot of money to his causes. That is more than I can say for most celebrities. As to you, I hope you do donate to the causes that suit your fancy.


Damn! You are cycnical! :) Let's say he donates $50k. Under the US system all he has saved is his tax rate (let's say 24%) times his donation, or 0.24x50000 = $12000. But he is still out the $50k so net loss is $38000.

Hmm, seems even a "tax shelter" is not really making up for the loss of donations, right? Do you think people magically make money on tax shelters? (in response to your "is also a tax shelter is it not?" comment)

In response to the first part of your query, I too would be interested to know his donations versus what his Irish tax bill woulld have been.

Lurker

hang on - you're using a rather strange method there

(Irish Times) -- U2's tax-free status under the artists' royalty exemption scheme has helped to lift the rock band to number five in a list of Ireland's 100 richest people.

The band has reportedly received £3 in royalties for each of the 85 million albums sold in its 23-year career. Included in those sales was an estimated £21 million in the past year from their latest album All That You Can't Leave Behind, bringing to £475 million U2's estimated wealth and moves the band up one place in the Sunday Times annual Richest 100 survey.http://www.macphisto.net/article184.html

U2's wealth is ~$1billion - let's say it's split equally amongst the 5 [unlikely but possible]

in 2006 U2 made $45million

the higher rate individual tax in Ireland is 41%

That looks like a rough and ready tax bill of $19million p/a

let's assess U2 solely as a business, in which case corporation tax is 12.5%

That gives a rough and ready tax bill of $5.6million p/a

even dividing by 5, just for Bono's part i don't think $50k makes much of a dent in the amount saved.

Oh yeah, and Bono also set up a private equity business "Elevation" - which has just (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/06c7ba0c-1302-11dc-a475-000b5df10621.html) completed a $325million 25% buyout of Palm

I forgot about that.....

[ponderingturtle]

Hmm, I guess all you cynics think it would be better if Bono and all other people working to alleviate poverty should just stop their efforts and do like you folks do - nothing. Ooops, my bad. You all do a great job criticizing on the Internet. If only the poor could eat your words then the problem would be solved. :)

I am not saying that Bono will solve the problem. I am not saying if I know his solutions are the best use of money towards the problems. But something is better than nothing.

Lurker

Look, we all know it is their fault, if they didn't want to be poor and starving to death, they should have made a better choice of who their parents where.

When people make the mistake of being born in Africa, well you can't help some people when they keep making such foolish mistakes can you?

[andyandy]

Tax avoidance itself is one the fundamental areas which requires reform if one is genuinly interested in alleviating poverty;

Mr Pendleton {Christian Aid said the £272bn the multinational corporations and rich individuals avoided each year dwarfed the annual amount of annual overseas aid.

"The sheer scale of the lost tax revenue this implies for governments around the world beggars belief," he said.

"There is a crisis developing in poor countries as public services and infrastructure crumble because of a lack of public money.

"Tax avoidance by wealthy people and multinational companies is one of the main causes of this. Corrupt leaders, criminals and terrorists are hiding away their ill-gotten gains by piggybacking on the systems set up for tax avoidance."http://www.guardian.co.uk/debt/Story/0,,1568254,00.html


and an entire article on the Irish tax situation with reference to Bono

Where does this leave Bono? Seriously out of step I’m afraid. In fact, well outside the development agenda. The tax havens he uses undermine development. They divert income from developing countries. They ensure tax is not paid in them. They facilitate capital flight from those developing counties. As Raymond Baker has shown, tax avoidance driven capital flight costs developing countries ten times their aid receipts.http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2006/08/20/100/

Bono's answer to his critics?

U2 frontman BONO has denied being hypocritical by flaunting his wealth while still preaching the need for greater aid for the world's poor. The singer, renowned for his humanitarian work in Africa to promote awareness of AIDS and poverty, insists he would be "crucified" if he ever handed over his own millions. He says, "There is a sort of a Catholic guilt that comes with making a few bob. "Was it RUSSELL SIMMONS, the godfather of hip-hop who said, 'You can't help the poor if you are one'? "I tell you what would be more insufferable - can you imagine if I publicly gave all my money away? They would just hang me from the gallows. They would just say, 'Get on the f**king donkey and this way to crucifixion.'"
http://www.contactmusic.com/news.nsf/article/bono%20slams%20critics%20over%20wealth_1013507
So he doesn't give more away, because people might not like him.....

which is nonsense - and revealing of the egocentric way in which he approaches the issue.

[Lurker]

man who chooses to use his wealth to prevent its redistribution?

Assumtion not in evidence.

Lurker

[Lurker]

U2's wealth is ~$1billion - let's say it's split equally amongst the 5 [unlikely but possible]
What about managers, what about support? what about the label? Is this AFTER all of those and other expenses?

in 2006 U2 made $45million

the higher rate individual tax in Ireland is 41%

That looks like a rough and ready tax bill of $19million p/a

even dividing by 5, just for Bono's part, even factoring in that U2 is likely classified as a business, even doing all that i don't think $50k makes much of a dent in the amount saved.

I used the $50k donation as one example of his donation. How you can extrapolate that to be his ONLY donation is beyond me.

Lurker

[Lurker]

Another question is what percent of Bono's tax bill could we expect to go to foreign aid? Of the $19 million, we would expect less than 1% to actually go to foreign aid, right? I mean, a govt has a lot ot pay for with their tax receipts than foreign aid. Isn't Bono espousing 0.7%? So that would be 0.007x19million = $133,000. Hmm, now that single donation of $50,000 is looking pretty big, eh Andyyandy? :)

Lurker

[andyandy]

Assumtion not in evidence.

Lurker

That's what tax is. That's why we have higher rate taxes.

[corplinx]

Even if Bono does try to pay less in taxes, I think you forget that the time he spends on these causes is a form of donation in itself.

I don't buy the Bono hating, he seems sincere in his causes even if he doesn't always recommend the right solutions.

Chuck Norris wears a bracelet with the letters WWBD.

[andyandy]

What about managers, what about support? what about the label? Is this AFTER all of those and other expenses?

U2 the business are worth $1billion - the business is the 5 band members. This $1billion is distinct from the money the label makes.


I used the $50k donation as one example of his donation. How you can extrapolate that to be his ONLY donation is beyond me.

I was pointing out the strange method you were using. Find me evidence that Bono donates in the millions of dollars a year, and i'll revise my stance.

Well, I *do* have evidence of Bono dedicating a whole lot of time and a whole lot of money to his causes.

Ok - show me your evidence - I can show you that he's just completed a 25% buyout of Palm with a separate private equity company (Elevation) he set up - that was for $325million. You surely should be able to find evidence beyong $50k - because relative to the $100millions he owns that's hardly a laudable amount.

indeed, based on his personal wealth - that's equivilent to me giving $1 to charity. And I wouldn't expect any platitudes for that.

[andyandy]

Another question is what percent of Bono's tax bill could we expect to go to foreign aid? Of the $19 million, we would expect less than 1% to actually go to foreign aid, right? I mean, a govt has a lot ot pay for with their tax receipts than foreign aid. Isn't Bono espousing 0.7%? So that would be 0.007x19million = $133,000. Hmm, now that single donation of $50,000 is looking pretty big, eh Andyyandy? :)

Lurker

this misses 3 very salient points;

1) poverty alleviation is not simply an issue for Africa - states require taxes [as i'm sure you're aware] to redistribute wealth - Bono has decided he would rather keep his wealth to himself.

2) the entire system of tax avoidance schemes and capital flight is one of the key areas which need reform if one is genuinly interested in fighting global poverty - he chooses to fight against global poverty whilst using the very tools that keep the poor poor.

3) Live8 required that governments use their significant clout to affect global change re debt relief, trade protectionism etc. This requires vast investment - from taxation - yet he is unwilling to contribute to the tax coffers himself.

[The Painter]

Funny, but just an urban legend (http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/bono.asp).

I never said it was true. That's why there is no source link. It's a joke. Get over yourself.

and do like you folks do - nothing.
Lurker

How dare you make an assumption like this. You have no idea how much time and money I contribute to charity. What do you do Lurker? j'accuse

[Lurker]

That's what tax is. That's why we have higher rate taxes.


You assume taxes are the only means to redistribute wealth.

Also, you edited your post to include Bono's response about his wealth. Surely you are not saying he MUST give away some alrge proportion of his wealth in order to not be hypocritical? Bono has never said wealthy people should not be wealthy, has he?

Lurker

[Lurker]

this misses 3 very salient points;
No, you have not responded to my math. You said he should be paying $19 million in taxes this year. OK, using Bono's own words, he wants 0.7% of govt receipts to go to alleviate poverty. So, if we examine what his alleged taxes should be and multiply by what percent Bono thinks should go to poverty charities we have:

19,000,000 x 0.007 = $133,000.

I have a website that mentions him donating $50,000 to charity in one donation. That covers quite a bit of the $133,000 that he thinks he should pay to charity.

So now, to satisfy YOUR concern about hypocrisy, you feel he should open up his provate accounts so YOU can be satisfied. Perhaps we should just make everyone's donation history public knowledge just in case there is a charge of hypocrisy.


1) poverty alleviation is not simply an issue for Africa - states require taxes [as i'm sure you're aware] to redistribute wealth - Bono has decided he would rather keep his wealth to himself.
Valid point.

Lurker

[Undesired Walrus]

Bono has never said wealthy people should not be wealthy, has he?

Lurker

It's not a question of Bono's stance toward wealth in the Western world, it's about the ideological stance he takes on poverty striken areas like Africa whilst completly taking the opposite ideological stance himself. Would you have called Karl Marx a Marxist if he lived in a huge private fenced off area in central London before he died?

[Lurker]

How dare you make an assumption like this. You have no idea how much time and money I contribute to charity. What do you do Lurker? j'accuse

Ah, so you are outraged that I use the very tactic you used against Bono against you? I mean, you really have no idea how much time and money that Bono contributes to charity, do you?

As for me, I fully admit I do not do enough for charities. I'll check myself in to the pillory.

Lurker

[Lurker]

It's not a question of Bono's stance toward wealth in the Western world, it's about the ideological stance he takes on poverty striken areas like Africa whilst completly taking the opposite ideological stance himself. Would you have called Karl Marx a Marxist if he lived in a huge private fenced off area in central London before he died?

This is BS. Find me where Bono thinks wealthy people should not be wealthy? All he is saying is wealthy countries should contribute more. That does not exclude individuals from being wealthy and enjoying the trappings of wealth.

Or are you one of those individuals who feel people must live monastic lives if they help the poor?

Perhaps I am missing your point.

Lurker

[Undesired Walrus]

This is BS. Find me where Bono thinks wealthy people should not be wealthy?

I didn't mean that. What is more logical to bring from this is whether he feels wealth is evenly distibuted around the world? I would guess his conclusion is that it is not.

All he is saying is wealthy countries should contribute more.

Whilst avoiding the method in which they can do this with tax income.

I do not doubt the man is a good man, and if I were as rich and healthy as him, I would be more willing to give it away than tour the world promoting change and awareness.

But the message I wish to get across is whether you believe this image is a good role model for impressionable children who will one day be the future leaders of the world?

[CFLarsen]

It's not a question of Bono's stance toward wealth in the Western world, it's about the ideological stance he takes on poverty striken areas like Africa whilst completly taking the opposite ideological stance himself. Would you have called Karl Marx a Marxist if he lived in a huge private fenced off area in central London before he died?

How would you describe Friedrich Engels (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Engels)?

[andyandy]

You assume taxes are the only means to redistribute wealth.

No it doesn't - it merely makes the point that Bono is not redistributing his own considerable wealth through taxation - If you can find evidence that he instead recirculates that money he saves in some other forum (ie charity donation) then please provide it.


Also, you edited your post to include Bono's response about his wealth. Surely you are not saying he MUST give away some alrge proportion of his wealth in order to not be hypocritical? Bono has never said wealthy people should not be wealthy, has he?

No not that he must - but one would expect at the very least for him to operate within the wealth redistribution channels that the non-mega wealthy have to participate in. Nevertheless, the fact that he chooses to avoid these channels does call into question how commited he really is - and how he himself resolves such a contradiction - his answer is illuminating in its egocentricity - thus it is certainly relevant.

[Undesired Walrus]

How would you describe Friedrich Engels (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Engels)?

A slight hypocritical? Does that mean Bono cannot qualify for this honour too?

The question is not, is Bono a man who devotes time and energy toward a massive global problem, it is, should everything he does that is questionable be considered 'ok' and make him a more of a 'saint' than a 20 year old campaigner who works at Amnesty International?

[andyandy]

No, you have not responded to my math. You said he should be paying $19 million in taxes this year. OK, using Bono's own words, he wants 0.7% of govt receipts to go to alleviate poverty. So, if we examine what his alleged taxes should be and multiply by what percent Bono thinks should go to poverty charities we have:

19,000,000 x 0.007 = $133,000.

I have a website that mentions him donating $50,000 to charity in one donation. That covers quite a bit of the $133,000 that he thinks he should pay to charity.

So now, to satisfy YOUR concern about hypocrisy, you feel he should open up his provate accounts so YOU can be satisfied. Perhaps we should just make everyone's donation history public knowledge just in case there is a charge of hypocrisy.

Why should an individual who speaheads a global poverty movement be reticent about publicising charity donations? If one asks for everyone else to donate to charity, and to subsidise massive debt relief and trade protectionism changes, whilst at the same time, avoiding paying taxes, it is wholly relevant to ask if they contribute themselves. I've seen no evidence that he does. I've already said that $50k from Bono is equivalent to $1 from me - so forgive me for not being impressed by his generosity. In any case, you seem to be advocating a "pay for what you like" form of governance - Bono wants governments to contribute 0.7% of GDP - so as long as he gives 0.7% of his earnings to charity then he can be forgiven for not actually participating in the very system he's campaigning to reform?


Valid point.

quite - as are points 2 and 3

2) the entire system of tax avoidance schemes and capital flight is one of the key areas which need reform if one is genuinely interested in fighting global poverty - he chooses to fight against global poverty whilst using the very tools that keep the poor poor.

3) Live8 required that governments use their significant clout to affect global change re debt relief, trade protectionism etc. This requires vast investment - from taxation - yet he is unwilling to contribute to the tax coffers himself.

[CFLarsen]

A slight hypocritical? Does that mean Bono cannot qualify for this honour too?

The question is not, is Bono a man who devotes time and energy toward a massive global problem, it is, should everything he does that is questionable be considered 'ok' and make him a more of a 'saint' than a 20 year old campaigner who works at Amnesty International?

I'm trying to understand what you are saying.

Are you saying that a rich man who wants to help the poor, cannot help the poor, unless he stops being rich?

[Undesired Walrus]

Are you saying that a rich man who wants to help the poor, cannot help the poor, unless he stops being rich?

As a figurehead for the rest of the world on the priorities involved, I'd say he was a bad figure of tokenism.

[Tony]

And who does he think the politicians are going to get those billions from? Hint: Look at your wallet.

Since when do you care about our tax dollars?

[CFLarsen]

As a figurehead for the rest of the world on the priorities involved, I'd say he was a bad figure of tokenism.

Was that a yes or a no?

[andyandy]

Was that a yes or a no?

surely you don't require that such a complex question on an individual's repsonsibility with regards to global poverty alleviation and personal wealth be reduced to a facile yes/no answer?


please answer either yes or no. :)

[CFLarsen]

surely you don't require that such a complex question on an individual's repsonsibility with regards to global poverty alleviation and personal wealth be reduced to a facile yes/no answer?


please answer either yes or no. :)

Well, it can be answered with a yes or a no, so.... :)

[Tricky]

I never said it was true. That's why there is no source link. It's a joke. Get over youself.
You didn't say it was a joke. You told it exactly like it was true. I was just clarifying for those who aren't tuned in to your... um... unique brand of humor.

And I said it was funny in the very post you are quoting. That should indicate that I knew it was a joke. Stop using your personality for birth control. (Hint: It's a joke.)

[Tricky]

A slight hypocritical? Does that mean Bono cannot qualify for this honour too?
Bono is hypocritical too. I would venture to say we all are in some some way or other. But let's just say hypothetically that you have one rich person who gives nothing to charity and one who gives a lot and actively works to have others give, and finds legal ways to increase the amount of money given to charities by governments, yet is still rich. Wouldn't you say that "slight hypocrisy" is better than "total greed"?

A The question is not, is Bono a man who devotes time and energy toward a massive global problem, it is, should everything he does that is questionable be considered 'ok' and make him a more of a 'saint' than a 20 year old campaigner who works at Amnesty International?
No, it shouldn't, but the way the world works is that powerful, charismatic people get the lion's share of the honors. In some ways, this is correct, because while the 20 year-old Amnesty International worker does in fact do good, he is not (for obvious reasons) as capable of inspiring others to do good as a well-known celebrity. It doesn't make Bono better or worse than the youth, just more effective.

I am a hypocrite too. I strongly believe in, and make regular donations to many organizations (like JREF) yet I don't donate all my disposable income to them. I still live in a nice house and have a closet almost full of clothes. Should I do more? Maybe so. Am I a hypocrite for not doing so? Maybe so. But I'm not totally greedy.

[andyandy]

Bono is hypocritical too. I would venture to say we all are in some some way or other. But let's just say hypothetically that you have one rich person who gives nothing to charity and one who gives a lot and actively works to have others give, and finds legal ways to increase the amount of money given to charities by governments, yet is still rich. Wouldn't you say that "slight hypocrisy" is better than "total greed"?

Valid points - nevertheless the reasoning is flawed with regards to Bono insofar as he stands as a self appointed figurehead of an anti-global poverty movement. If he was just another tax paying Joe Millionaire who expressed no views on the matter, then you're right that he should be held to account no more than Joe Average Wage should be. The fact that he actively campaigns on an issue that he himself undermines through his actions - that he fails to practise what he preaches certainly brings that hypocrisy into necessary focus. I'd argue that Bono's involvement in a global poverty campign does more harm than good - as nothing spreads disillusionment in a movement faster than leadership hypocrisy.

[Tricky]

Valid points - nevertheless the reasoning is flawed with regards to Bono insofar as he stands as a self appointed figurehead of an anti-global poverty movement. If he was just another tax paying Joe Millionaire who expressed no views on the matter, then you're right that he should be held to account no more than Joe Average Wage should be. The fact that he actively campaigns on an issue that he himself undermines through his actions - that he fails to practise what he preaches certainly brings that hypocrisy into necessary focus.
I cannot see that he undermines the issue through his actions, at least not significantly.

I'd argue that Bono's involvement in a global poverty campign does more harm than good - as nothing spreads disillusionment in a movement faster than leadership hypocrisy.
I will acknowledge that Bono has become a bit of a flash point for people who don't like preachy liberals. As such, he might do better to farm out his spokesperson role to others less controversial. Yet, controversy means attention, and attention means donations.

I couldn't say for sure that his causes would be better off or worse off without his volatile presence. I do suspect that he could not force himself to remain silent even if he knew it would be for the greater benefit. Whatever you think about him, you cannot deny he has a fire within him. I'm not necessarily saying that's a good thing. It depends on what is burning.

[The Painter]

Ah, so you are outraged that I use the very tactic you used against Bono against you?
Lurker

A tactic? Where did I use a tactic? Quote my post, show me. You just make assumptions.

[The Painter]

Stop using your personality for birth control. (Hint: It's a joke.)

My face works just fine for that. Thank you.

[Tricky]

My face works just fine for that. Thank you.
:D

[Solitaire]

Stop mocking Bono. He was Time Magazine's Man of the Year. He's a great man!

I should know, speaking as the current Time Man of the Year...

This guy will never be man of the year. (http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/321/index.html)

[Darth Rotor]

Whatever you think about him, you cannot deny he has a fire within him. I'm not necessarily saying that's a good thing. It depends on what is burning.
An Irishman eating too many jalapeños, or too much Vindaloo and Madras style curry, that would be my guess. He ought to stick to Irish Stew and Corned Beef and Cabbage. Less fire, goes down well with Guinness.

DR

[Miss Anthrope]

An Irishman eating too many jalapeños, or too much Vindaloo and Madras style curry, that would be my guess. He ought to stick to Irish Stew and Corned Beef and Cabbage. Less fire, goes down well with Guinness.

DR

Mmmmm......Guinness.

[Jaggy Bunnet]

In the common use of the term he certainly evades taxes - ie by avoiding them through offshoring - is this a crime?

Sorry but this is wrong. The common use of the term "evade" when discussing taxes necessarily involves committing a crime - see previous link.

Avoiding taxes is NOT evasion. And evasion is, by definition, a crime.

[Mashuna]

Sorry but this is wrong. The common use of the term "evade" when discussing taxes necessarily involves committing a crime - see previous link.

Avoiding taxes is NOT evasion. And evasion is, by definition, a crime.

What's the difference between avoidance and evasion?

About ten years.

[Lurker]

Why should an individual who speaheads a global poverty movement be reticent about publicising charity donations?
I can think of plenty of reasons. Perhaps for appearance? Perhaps he is humble? (I know, long shot there:))


If one asks for everyone else to donate to charity, and to subsidise massive debt relief and trade protectionism changes, whilst at the same time, avoiding paying taxes, it is wholly relevant to ask if they contribute themselves. I've seen no evidence that he does.
No evidence? I already showed you evidence of a $50k donation.


I've already said that $50k from Bono is equivalent to $1 from me - so forgive me for not being impressed by his generosity.
You're either VERY poor or VERY bad at math. Let's look at the proportionality of this donation. You said earlier Bono made $19M. Accepting this and using 50k/19M as a proportion we get 0.0026. Applying this to your "equivalent of $1 from you we arrive at 1/x = 0.0026 where X is your income. We determine that x = 384. Therefore you make $384 per year. Is that really your salary? $384 per year?


In any case, you seem to be advocating a "pay for what you like" form of governance - Bono wants governments to contribute 0.7% of GDP - so as long as he gives 0.7% of his earnings to charity then he can be forgiven for not actually participating in the very system he's campaigning to reform?
No, I wazs limiting my argument to the topic, charitable contributions. I will heartily condemn Bono for offshoring to avoid taxes to support Ireland in general. I find that behavior despicable but I was limiting my argument to the topic at hand.

Lurker

[Lurker]

Whatever you think about him, you cannot deny he has a fire within him. I'm not necessarily saying that's a good thing. It depends on what is burning.

It is an unforgettable fire.

Lurker

[andyandy]

Sorry but this is wrong. The common use of the term "evade" when discussing taxes necessarily involves committing a crime - see previous link.

Avoiding taxes is NOT evasion. And evasion is, by definition, a crime.

in common usage "evade" and "avoid" are used synonomously - i accept that "tax evasion" has aquired a specific illegal connotation - but not that

"He seeks to evade paying taxes"

thus necessarily also takes on an illegal connotation.

Perhaps that's just my own interpretation. Anyway, there's no suggestion of illegality from me - avoid, evade, duck, circumvent or shirk whatever, he should pay some flippin taxes :)

[andyandy]

You're either VERY poor or VERY bad at math. Let's look at the proportionality of this donation. You said earlier Bono made $19M. Accepting this and using 50k/19M as a proportion we get 0.0026. Applying this to your "equivalent of $1 from you we arrive at 1/x = 0.0026 where X is your income. We determine that x = 384. Therefore you make $384 per year. Is that really your salary? $384 per year?

Net worth provides a better indicator than monthly wage.

Conservative estimates of Bono's net wealth $400million

400,000,000/50,000 = 1/8000th of net worth

plug in those figures. And yes - i am quite poor :)


No, I was limiting my argument to the topic, charitable contributions. I will heartily condemn Bono for offshoring to avoid taxes to support Ireland in general. I find that behavior despicable but I was limiting my argument to the topic at hand.

The trouble is that i don't believe you can delineate the two. If you just want to talk about Bono giving $50,000 and nothing else well, ok - as i've said given his net wealth i don't find that impressive, but fine. Unfortunately he's also the self appointed head of an anti-global poverty movement - and so if you want to talk about that then his conduct with his own money is indeed relevant.

[Jaggy Bunnet]

in common usage "evade" and "avoid" are used synonomously - i accept that "tax evasion" has aquired a specific illegal connotation - but not that

"He seeks to evade paying taxes"

thus necessarily also takes on an illegal connotation.

Perhaps that's just my own interpretation. Anyway, there's no suggestion of illegality from me - avoid, evade, duck, circumvent or shirk whatever, he should pay some flippin taxes :)

This is not common usage, it has a specific context, that of tax. IANAL, but would not recommend going around suggesting that anyone evades tax when you mean they avoid it.

And of course he DOES pay some flipping taxes. In fact (unless there is evidence to the contrary) I assume that he pays the full amount which he is required to pay by law. Do you think he has an obligation to organise his affairs so that he pays MORE than the minimum amount which the law prescribes? If so, do you have a similar obligation?

[andyandy]

And of course he DOES pay some flipping taxes. In fact (unless there is evidence to the contrary) I assume that he pays the full amount which he is required to pay by law. Do you think he has an obligation to organise his affairs so that he pays MORE than the minimum amount which the law prescribes? If so, do you have a similar obligation?

If you are of the mindset that it is acceptable for the mega-wealthy to avoid taxation through off-shoring/tax havens then fair enough. I disagree - but that again is secondary to the point at hand - ie that this is the leader of the anti-global poverty movement. The irony of him trying to avoid paying taxes (http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2006/08/20/100/) should not be lost on anyone -and has already been discussed at length.

[Jaggy Bunnet]

If you are of the mindset that it is acceptable for the mega-wealthy to avoid taxation through off-shoring/tax havens then fair enough. I disagree - but that again is secondary to the point at hand - ie that this is the leader of the anti-global poverty movement. The irony of him trying to avoid paying taxes (http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2006/08/20/100/) should not be lost on anyone -and has already been discussed at length.

OK, from your answer it appears that you DO think he has an obligation to pay more tax than he is legally required to.

Do you?

[Lurker]

Net worth provides a better indicator than monthly wage.

Hmm, I'd prefer disposable income but all right.


Conservative estimates of Bono's net wealth $400million

400,000,000/50,000 = 1/8000th of net worth

plug in those figures.

For proportionality to Bono, that would make your net worth to be $8000.


The trouble is that i don't believe you can delineate the two. If you just want to talk about Bono giving $50,000 and nothing else well, ok - as i've said given his net wealth i don't find that impressive, but fine. Unfortunately he's also the self appointed head of an anti-global poverty movement - and so if you want to talk about that then his conduct with his own money is indeed relevant.
I am dubious that the 50k is his only donation. I found another donation amounting $35M so that certainly raises the amount, yes?

http://www.u2online.org/u2-news-20070212.php

[andyandy]

OK, from your answer it appears that you DO think he has an obligation to pay more tax than he is legally required to.

Do you?

Yes - i think he has an obligation to contribute to the tax sytem of his native country - i'd make that argument for anyone, but especially so for an individual who campaigns for western governments to fulfil their own moral obligation with regards to debt relief/protectionist reform, whilst doing his upmost to avoid paying the taxes necessary for government. Indeed as i've said before, poverty isn't just about Africa - i find it staggering that he's not prepared to recirculate his vast wealth in ireland whilst preaching on a global stage about moral responsibility.

[andyandy]

For proportionality to Bono, that would make your net worth to be $8000.

'fraid so :(


I am dubious that the 50k is his only donation. I found another donation amounting $35M so that certainly raises the amount, yes?

http://www.u2online.org/u2-news-20070212.php

That would be impressive - but the headline is misleading

Irish rock star and U2 lead singer Bono has donated more than E35 million (US$5m) to the National Emergency Council on HIV and AIDS (NERCHA) through his philanthrophic initiative (Product) RED

in fact the RED brand has donated that money - and this has been raised through corporate tie-ups.
The figure also seems out of sinc with other reports of RED's difficulties in raising cash to date

RED, the campaign backed by singer and campaigner Bono to raise money for Aids in Africa, has hit back at an article criticising its performance.

The trade magazine Advertising Age described as "meagre" the $18 million raised by RED since its launch, claiming that participating companies had spent $100 million on marketing.

But the campaign has reacted angrily writing a series of open letters to the publication's editor.

Bobby Shriver, RED's chief executive and the author of one of the letters, noted that the scheme was only properly launched in the US in October last year and that the marketing money spent by the likes of Gap and Apple would have been spent anyway.

http://www.inthenews.co.uk/news/entertainment/music/bonos-red-hits-back-at-criticism-$1062288.htm

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Yes - i think he has an obligation to contribute to the tax sytem of his native country - i'd make that argument for anyone, but especially so for an individual who campaigns for western governments to fulfil their own moral obligation with regards to debt relief/protectionist reform, whilst doing his upmost to avoid paying the taxes necessary for government. Indeed as i've said before, poverty isn't just about Africa - i find it staggering that he's not prepared to recirculate his vast wealth in ireland whilst preaching on a global stage about moral responsibility.

He does contribute to the tax system of his native country. The full amount required by the law of that country (unless anyone has evidence to the contrary...)

Why should he pay more than legally required? Again, do you?

Ireland chose some years ago to reinvent itself as an offshore tax haven within the EU. It does very, very well out of companies and individuals choosing to locate their affairs in low tax countries. I find it difficult to summon up a lot of sympathy when it gets underbid.

[andyandy]

He does contribute to the tax system of his native country. The full amount required by the law of that country (unless anyone has evidence to the contrary...)

Why should he pay more than legally required? Again, do you?

.

we are going round in circles here - are you honestly saying you see no contradiction nor possible hypocrisy in his position as self appointed anti-global poverty leader and him doing his upmost to avoid paying taxes? I pay the maximum amount of taxes asked by the state - and were i to be a billionaire would continue to do so without resort to tax havens or off shoring. Is that really so difficult to accept? That people might actually maintain some civic responsibility despite their wealth? But there is no legal requirement and so that is sufficient....? There is no legal requirement for the western countries to do anything about Africa - screw them - let them keep their debts, keep barriers to trade in place, keep Africans poor - well, there's no legal requirement why should we? If you take on a role spearheading an anti-poverty movement you have to persuade people about their moral obligation - distinct from their legal requirement.

[Jaggy Bunnet]

I pay the maximum amount of taxes asked by the state - and were i to be a billionaire would continue to do so without resort to tax havens or off shoring.

The maximum amount? So you claim no deductions, ensure that any investments are made in the most tax inefficient manner, etc? I find that hard to believe - it would require as much effort to maximise the tax due as it does to minimise it, if not more. Of course if by the maximum amount you mean the full amount which you are due to pay under the law, then so does Bono.

You seem to equate civic responsibility with paying more tax than the law requires. Fine, but I disagree. If you are paying what the law says you need to pay, then you have fulfilled your civic duty. If that does not raise enough, then raise the tax rate or shut down the loopholes - expecting people to volunteer to pay more tax than they owe is, IMO, both unreasonable and stupid as a policy.

As for what you would do as a billionaire, good for you. That is your choice. Personally I have no problem with people arranging their affairs in a tax efficient manner within the law.

[Lurker]

As for what you would do as a billionaire, good for you. That is your choice. Personally I have no problem with people arranging their affairs in a tax efficient manner within the law.

Hmm, I have a problem with corporations and people who reap the benefits under a specific country but then for tax purposes alone they relocate to Bermuda in order to not pay the original country's taxes.

How many US companies have most of their operations in the US but a post office box in Bermuda as a corporate HQ? You think that is right?

Lurker

[andyandy]

The maximum amount? So you claim no deductions, ensure that any investments are made in the most tax inefficient manner, etc? I find that hard to believe - it would require as much effort to maximise the tax due as it does to minimise it, if not more. Of course if by the maximum amount you mean the full amount which you are due to pay under the law, then so does Bono.

You seem to equate civic responsibility with paying more tax than the law requires. Fine, but I disagree. If you are paying what the law says you need to pay, then you have fulfilled your civic duty. If that does not raise enough, then raise the tax rate or shut down the loopholes - expecting people to volunteer to pay more tax than they owe is, IMO, both unreasonable and stupid as a policy.

As for what you would do as a billionaire, good for you. That is your choice. Personally I have no problem with people arranging their affairs in a tax efficient manner within the law.

trouble is, we're not discussing tax havens in general - we obviously disagree with regards to one's civic responsibility - and that is fair enough - we're discussing the hypocrisy of the self appointed leader of the anti-global poverty movement believing that everyone has a moral obligation distinct from legal requirement to recirculate weath from the rich to the poor, whilst himself assauging personal moral obligations for his own benefit through consideration of a much narrower legal framework of responsibility.

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Hmm, I have a problem with corporations and people who reap the benefits under a specific country but then for tax purposes alone they relocate to Bermuda in order to not pay the original country's taxes.

How many US companies have most of their operations in the US but a post office box in Bermuda as a corporate HQ? You think that is right?

Lurker

I blame the US legislature for having such poorly written legislation that it is possible to reduce your tax bill by having a brass plate in Bermuda - relying on the goodwill of companies not to take advantage of legal planning opportunities is stupid.