neophyte321
Guest
It's an interesting debate.
I think private charities are far better at getting bang of their donated buck than government outlays. For example, Buffet's money will be stretched far further in private hands than had it been confiscated via a punative tax structure and thrown into the general budget to finance a week or two in Iraq.
U2's only saving grace would be to pull a Buffet, otherwise they do look like hypocrites. Bono is a charitable guy, that much does seem clear, and few probably doubt he donates more than his fair share.
Personally, I think U2 is a bit over-rated. They can't hold a candle to bands like the Rolling Stones for sheer quality and quantity of outstanding Rock, but the world does need a Rock Star of Bono's character and moral standing.
I think private charities are far better at getting bang of their donated buck than government outlays. For example, Buffet's money will be stretched far further in private hands than had it been confiscated via a punative tax structure and thrown into the general budget to finance a week or two in Iraq.
U2's only saving grace would be to pull a Buffet, otherwise they do look like hypocrites. Bono is a charitable guy, that much does seem clear, and few probably doubt he donates more than his fair share.
Personally, I think U2 is a bit over-rated. They can't hold a candle to bands like the Rolling Stones for sheer quality and quantity of outstanding Rock, but the world does need a Rock Star of Bono's character and moral standing.
