rednose appeal is hosted by many "celebs" who could easily raise the money needed between themselves.do we really need the olympics more than people need life, why not act sensibly and send the 9billion to rednose appeal, just do it once and prob solved.but olympics generates money and greed takes over. london cant cope with the olympics anyway, it will be chaos and on top of 9billion theres the extreeme amount which will have to be spent on security, olympics, a complete waste of money.
2007-03-16 12:43:50 · 14 answers · asked by matured 3 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
hear hear!!! what a sensible idea, the cost of the olympics is scandolous and the maddening thing is we are paying for it. i for one would rather see my taxes go to people in need, the olympics is a luxury we can ill afford.
2007-03-16 12:55:58 · answer #1 · answered by slsvenus 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Why do you not put yourself up for Prime Minister - your solution to the unjust events of the world is totally in tact - but would you feel like that once elected. Seems they promise the world and deliver b.......er all. As for the celebs covering the bill for many issues - couldn't they just - will they no! Why because they are truly so far up themselves that they have got lost. The truth is - one country and it could be us - would only have to make this stand and say as you have and the recognition from around the world would be more beneficial globally than any Olympic game.
PS I would vote for you!
2007-03-16 18:59:48 · answer #2 · answered by deep in thought 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well said, I agree. It also annoys me that a lot of the £9 billion "needed" for the Olympics is coming from the National Lottery so there are a lot of worthy causes that would ordinarily benefit from the Lottery that are now missing out because of the Olympics.
2007-03-16 12:48:58 · answer #3 · answered by qurm_kim 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Oh my goodness.. I do believe you. yet, did everyone see Oprah at present (likely no longer..) yet there have been those team of wealthy white women human beings from a similar church who all followed about 6 African young ones each. i replaced into sitting there observing the finished time, wondering, "yeah, that's tremendous. It replaced into truly fantastic of them to attempt this. yet, inspite of this, what about the youngsters right here in united states waiting to be followed" yet, the priority that aggravated me replaced into how they acted like they were all severe and robust. between the girls human beings suggested, "God gave us this project to save those little ones from the scoundrels. we are Gods messengers." Umm. get over your self lady. i could not help yet imagine of ways those wealthy human beings those days look to imagine adopting an African infant is "the priority to do". at the same time as that's a magnificent issue they're doing - it basically seems to me that a lot of them are understanding getting African little ones like they were a clean coach handbag or some thing.
2016-12-02 02:53:52 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't do Red Nose no more. The presenters get paid more per hour than i could ever dream of donating to charity before i retire. And as long as children end up dead whilst in so called care of social services they are adressing the wrong problems as far as i'm concerned.
2007-03-16 23:39:02 · answer #5 · answered by Part Time Cynic 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
yeah, you are absolutely right.
I remember the millennium dome fiasco I could not afford to take my kids all the way to London and stay in a London hotel.
What percentage of the population is going to use any of these facilities when its all over after two week.
Its not about sport its all about a few people making loads of money at our expense.
2007-03-17 00:44:57 · answer #6 · answered by tinamon357 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I know! Why don't we cancel Christmas for anyone who earns more than 20% of the minimum wage and make them donate money and presents to charity??!!!
Or maybe we could stop all the governments of the world arguing and just put the defense budgets towards food!
Or maybe instead of spending money on our internet access, we could all contribute that money to the red cross and greenpeace and increase their budgets by 10 fold?
Look, the Olympics bring a lot of enjoyment to some of us, give dreams to millions of young athletes and for a fortnight or so every four years, the focus is on competitive sports, not a lot of the negative international news we see daily.
Plus, $9 billion (or whatever the figure) is multiplied several times in terms of local economy. Much money is contributed by companies, not governments and the infrastructures and local resources often benefit the communities for years to come.
Sydney will reep the benefits of the exposure in 2000 for years to come in terms of tourism, and the sporting facilities continue to be used by both large sporting bodies (such as the NRL and ARU) and general public alike.
Complete waste of money? A bit of an over-reaction don't you think....
2007-03-16 13:04:04 · answer #7 · answered by forrest7309 3 · 1⤊ 5⤋
rather have the Olympic money going back into Britain .. i don't mind giving to charadee its my choice .. the Olympics however are not....this country is falling apart and we are hosting the Olympics doesn't make sense to me ...
2007-03-16 12:56:17 · answer #8 · answered by jizzumonkey 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Hoorah Hoorah . . . I thought I was the only one who thought like that. Couldn't agree more!
2007-03-16 12:56:10 · answer #9 · answered by Paula 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
yep...its a f.ucked up world!
but the 9 billion could be soaked up by the NHS alone in no time......its time we started looking inward!!
2007-03-16 12:48:48 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋