Should Paul give his proceeds to the poor?
-
Paul McCartney is probably a billionaire by now and at 71 he continues to tour the world, sell merchandise and receive royalties which would be in the multi millions. He has more money than he'll ever be able to spend so imagine how amazing it would be for Paul to donate every cent he earns from this moment on to the poor in the world. Imagine the legacy he would leave if he was to commit to such an amazing gesture. Paul has always had a reputation for being a skin flint but this is one way that he could put this to bed. I don't know if Paul reads these forums but if he does then I would like to think he would respond in some way, thoughts?
-
A great idea, but not one I see happening. Just being realistic, don't mean to sound like a killjoy.
-
We should all give our proceeds directly to the poor...at least 10% at the very least...that is
-
I'd say that if anyone has incredible wealth there should be a cap on how much a person can personally own, there is too much suffering in the world. People like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet and Australia's Dick Smith do donate amazing sums to different causes but really you have other Billionairs who are only interested in making more money. James Packer earns most of his money from casinos which I think is immoral and should be outlawed. If people who are filthy rich continue to make incredible amounts of money then they should be forced to give large sums to the poor. World poverty could be obliterated if the world's filthy rich donated in a big way.
-
I don't know what Sir Paul should do. I think it would be nice if wealthy people would give back to their communities and donate money, time, etc... Where I live you see some wealthy people doing good deeds and then some just take advantage of the less fortunate to make more money off their unfortunate circumstances. Real estate developers are some of the most greedy bunches I have ever encountered. They are ruthless and will literally run you off your property with the help of other wealthy people in political offices that benefit from their works. If I had a lot of money I would donate most of it and help people and animals. I still hope to be wealthy oneday and be able to help.
-
Actually from what I've read and been told Paul has and still does give a lot to charities around the world. He just doesn't blab it to the whole world. He's not as tight with his money as a lot of people think in that aspect. He's also helped several friends and others with medical bills and medical treatments when they couldn't pay/afford it themselves.
-
^^ Very true. Some people I know in my life have made their most generous donations anonymously. Unless you use your name to promote a cause there is no need to talk about it.
-
The trouble with people donating and remaining anonymous is it gives the ones that don't donate an easy out. Their should be a public register for the most wealthy people in the world and it should show how much they earn and how much they donate. Shaming them into giving is the way to go.
-
There is definitely a slippery slope when the public adores an artist, and then a few others assume "a some kind of friendship", of bonding, and then, due to that misconception, a handful of usually highly vocal individuals then demand money for ransom, as if nobody did the work. As if somebody is guilty for enjoying the benefits of their labor. Meanwhile, I find dark humor in those who shout, all the while wasting their days in fan sites making demands for their poverty as if it was anyone's fault but their own while doing absolutely nothing for themselves by way of this wonderful invention known as The Internet staring them smack in the face. There are so many sources for self-improvement and self-education that the only excuses are, oppression by others, a lack of access to the information, or they are simply incapable of helping themselves and need the help. All of which is perhaps a matter of using one's reputation to spotlight the problems and spur action. Bandaids and handouts will not help the hungry. Now, I might be happy to see investment, in clean water. In agriculture. In the people helping themselves instead of blaming the rich who are already paying 65% of their wealth in taxes, and paying those ungodly taxes exactly to help those who cannot help themselves. So, to then demand more money than that from anyone sounds like the need to demand government accountability for the programs that already exist. Else we are creating far too many Dependents with our bandaids and our handouts. If Sir Paul had nothing, you wouldn't be here. What have you got for yourself? What have you done for yourself? And are there conflicts involved that need to be addressed?
-
I have discovered that corruption in high political office that trickles down to corruption in police departments and other government entities designed to protect citizens does oppress lower and middle class citizens to the point they become poverty stricken. If they had adequate protection like the wealthy they would not be in dire circumstances. If you have a wealthy class of society who cares nothing about people they consider 'beneath them,' and do nothing to promote the basic rights of people to survive on their own, then you have an evil elitist population who can profit from destroying the lower socioeconomic class. That is what we have in the city I live in. I see other towns and cities that do not operate that way. It was not always that way here, but began in the past decade and has gotten worse. The wealthy here should do more to just protect the basic right to live, and then the lower classes would not need a handout.
-
Fantastic post, Audley` Piano.. We should be thinking about we can do not what we imagine other people should be doing. There is no way we can know what Paul donates - he won`t tell us. But stories trickle out - see if you can find the Ian Dury story. Unfortunately, all of the world`s problem are not going to be solved just by throwing money at them.
-
Hey hey_kittay and femaleanimal (thank you for your kind thoughts), I see both instances occurring. The poor are easily trapped by the very programs that our Uncle Sam offers to help them. It is not help to enforce domestic standards that then deprive the opportunities and the ability to explore them. Like housing assistance, Section 8. The poor are expected to not do anything that may incur the wrath of the program inspectors. You can't work out metal from mud. It's dirty. You can't recycle. It's trash. You can't saw wood. It's dusty. You can't keep pets. They stink. The Section 8 inspectors too often demand a sterile environment that pretty much guarantees that the disadvantaged will sit boo-boo like in a sterile waiting room, just waiting to die. As long as the inspectors are providing that all-mighty help just to make the rent? The recipients are too often forced to live by the standards which will surely deprive their opportunities, and I mean standards that the average homeowner would never bother with themselves. And then, the poor man doesn't need the do-gooders pricing him out of his cigarettes by hiking the pricing and the taxes to do so and then condemning him for smoking 'because he can't afford it'. Many folks are simply not about the lifestyles that others demand, and it is wrong to create more problems for them. People need solutions, not persecutions. As for cigarettes, I know, but the tobacco taxes are being used to provide children's State health care for families of four who earn up to $36,000, and there are provisions for allowing families with $48,000 a year to benefit from these taxes that are being collected from much poorer folks who then catch the piss for smoking at all, many of whom are highly responsible people who happen to smoke, but do not have children, or the means to then provide the quality of life that is being offered to the Children's State Health Care families of greater wealth. And on the other end of it, the U.S. government collects as much as 65% in taxes at the very same time the U.S. government is mining gold and silver, and allowing General Electric 0% taxes. What is going on?
-
I find it offensive that I receive emails from Paul asking for everything from concert tickets to cd's and collectables. I love Paul and the music he's produced but I feel offended that he's asking for more money from his fans. I don't expect him to play for free but I would be much more likely to pay for things if I knew the poor were benefitting from his proceeds because as I said Paul is rich enough and certainly doesn't need any more money.
-
^^ That would be Sir Paul's PR team and his, what would you call them, the people who run the website. Maybe he is not paying attention to what they are doing as he is busy doing other things? Still I agree.
-
Plastic Mac:
I'd say that if anyone has incredible wealth there should be a cap on how much a person can personally own, .
I dont' agree with that. It just demotivates me to work. why work when it's just going to be taken from me and given to someone else who didn't do my work? But the rich need to pay their share in taxes. Some pay none or little. Mitt Romney never did produce his '09 return when asked......
-
Paul isn't asking you to buy anything, he is telling you what is available. He is in business and sells a product that enhances our leisure time. It's not required or necessary to buy anything. We buy of our own free will and to give us pleasure.
-
Many good points in these posts. I would ask what most people are doing to help the poor before judging anyone's effort. Paul McCartney does donate to the charities of his choice. Do you? If he gives 10% that's a lot of money. If you give 10% it's still more than the charity had before you gave. If you really can't afford to give, do you do some volunteer work? Paul McCartney can't do that; it would take away from the charity. I volunteer at RAM - Remote Area Medical, ramusa.org. I would love to see Paul McCartney come in and work the clinic. But, it would only call press attention to him, not to the people who are un/underinsured and need help.
-
I've understood for years that Paul does donate a lot of money to charities. That is his business. The emails we received have Paul's name on them. Yes, we have a choice. My future choice is to just say no.
-
Paul's very generous as 'tis. Maybe there are some 'poor',,, read 'musicians' who need his help... out there somewhere. (hint) **** ))))
-
I don't know what he do with it, I never think about his money, only his music. I like to think that making music is a talent you are born with and something you do in spite of everything else going on in your life. In a different time he might have written songs and nobody listened, like with Bach, he composed all these masterpieces as a hobby.
