So Many Times, I just don't get it...
I rarely, if ever, voice my personal thoughts on things... I am breaking that rule, just because I wonder if it's just me who just "doesn't get it" all the time.
Case in fact: Heather Mills
Now, admittedly I never knew who she was until she married Paul McCartney.
My second "knowledge of her" was her divorce from Paul McCartney. (big surprise huh?.. meaning that she'd be in the news for that)
My third "knowledge of her" was in Dancing With the Stars. She did not impress me. False leg or not I didn't feel any pangs of sympathy for her since she was a lucky one and could afford to care for her problem without going without eating like some of us would.
Then she got bounced from Dancing With The Stars and had this to say:
She said her participation on the program "raised a fortune for our charity, and hundreds of thousands of animals' lives will be saved."
Hearing that she was somehow "raising money for a charity" by dancing struck me oddly. I don't know why.. maybe it's because I had an idea of how much money she got from her divorce...
On 21 January 2007, the press announced a settlement between the two, mentioning that Sir Paul would pay £32 million in cash and property to his ex-wife
Now, don't get me wrong. I don't think the wealthy should just give away all their money to charity. After all.. everyone has to live, and she has a long life to live yet.
But it sorta made me laugh. (warped sense of humor) Here's a multimillionaire who could easily give that charity the amount she said she raised and not bat an eye... but did she? (I can't say but I doubt it) Instead, she helped "beg" for money from those of us who live paycheck to paycheck, social security to social security. Those who really CAN'T afford it!
It made me think of others in her financial position who do the same thing... they go out there and say "look how great I am helping raise money for this or that"... KNOWING they are taking it from those who can least afford it.
Is it just me? Or is there something wrong with this picture?
Oh, I realize that many contribute also.. but I also know many who contribute and DON'T use their "celebrity" to ask those of us not wealthy to share what we do have.
Why don't they just get their other "wealthy" friends together and give a big contribution ?... yeah.. now that would make me look at them in a different light!
I guess it just bugs me that someone who couldn't possibly spend the amount of money they have in their own lifetime... to ask those who don't have it to help with money that they don't have to spare, but do it anyway.
This says much about those who do contribute.. but what does it really say about the multimillionaire who only contributes because their financiers say to so they get a tax break?? If they are truly into a certain charity then figure out how to get the big bucks from big businesses and wealthy people!
I have no idea why this struck me today. I guess I just heard her say that they raised alot by her dancing, and my mind just went , "excuse me? whatever the amount you raised thru those of us who are barely making it, I'm sure you could have given them without batting an eye!"... and for some unexplained reason, that thought bothered me.
So.. now that I've gotten that off of my chest... how was your day?
'till next time...
See Feline Friday below...
posted by DesLily | 11:26 AM
6 Comments:
Mills was dancing for herself...just herself to get sympathy and increase here "celebrity" status. I have no time for the woman...false leg or not!
I agree with your sentiments, Deslily.
You are right and I hadn't thought about that. Wow, I like her even less now than before, when she had screwed over Sir Paul.
I also agree with Lee. She was working for public sympathy for herself.
Chris
My Blog
Oh okay, I'll play Devil's advocate.
I don't know what money she already gives to charity, but if it is a considerable amount, maybe she just liked having another avenue to bring in more money for her charity. She might also have felt that since she's from England, doing an American show would bring in American charity $$. American's are known for being extrememly charitable so she might have been able to raise more here than at home.
Or maybe she just likes the attention. *shrug*
When I first went to work in non profits, I was struck by the statistic that people in lower income levels give a greater percentage of their income than people in upper income. At first that might be taken as: "Well of course, ten dollars is greater to someone poor than to someone rich." And that's my point. And it is your's too. Soliciting charity form all of us, no matter who the celebrity, always makes me suspicious.
Stewart is certainly right about one thing: anytime a celebrity solicits money be very suspicious. I've had the dubious honor of working in Hollywood and a person with straightforward motives is beyond hard to find.
SQT: they are hard to find, I was fortunate to know "one".. (as for her american dancing.. that was surely for sympathy of being "the bad guy in the marriage")
I have no doubt many really want to help their charity, along with tax write offs.. but they never seem to focus on the wealthy for the bulk of their money.. Stewart is right in that the poor give until it hurts, where the rich don't..but the wealthy have the "power" to get something done moreso then the poor. (be it actors/ sports/ businesses) And I'm sure we don't hear all they do.. maybe it was "her" that bothered me more, I dunno lol.
Post a Comment
<< Home