On one hand, it doesn't seem right. On the other hand, if he donating his tax savings to help the poor, it would be better than donating to an over rich government.
2006-09-22 00:34:54
·
answer #1
·
answered by just browsin 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
I think your premise is that it's wrong for Bono to avoid taxes. (but apparently it's legal). He does something wrong in his life, so therefore he's lost his moral authority completely, and it's now actually wrong for him to solicit for charities or even increase the public's awareness of certain problems.
If your reasoning was valid, no organized religion; no church, synagogue, or individual minister or rabbi could ask for donations for charity. No one is without stain, does this mean the unfortunate should suffer?
2006-09-22 00:35:21
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Though it maybe legal and save him money, it no longer gives him a moral right to talk to others about donations and causes. If he were to take all the money he saved and give to charity I would retrack my denoucment of him. But since I have seen no proof and can only guess he saves millions of dollars he can easily be called a hypocrit and can hurt his own case.
2006-09-22 01:17:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by Mark S 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Any legal mechanism to legally pay less taxes is good.
2006-09-22 00:39:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
no it,s not he goes on about the starving in Africa and expects us to put our hands in our pockets why docent he pay tax like the rest of us in the UK that's why he is wealthy and i,m poor i think that he is a hypocrite
2006-09-22 00:40:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by Bella 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Sure, if it's legal. Why not?
2006-09-22 20:10:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by nikkyb_127 2
·
0⤊
0⤋