Iād be very very shocked if these billionaires arenāt already donating considerable amount to charities. How they choose to spend the remainder of their money is their own business. Much like it is the business of those Irish people who are doing likewise.
Do you understand the difference between purchases and charity?
Who are you to judge that some people just have a particular taste for certain buildings?
Itās a perfect analogy. People spent crazy sums on keeping footballs on hundreds of thousands of pounds a week when they donāt live anywhere close. People like what they like and are free to give money to that. You want people to pat you on the back because you give money to charity, odd.
What does that even mean? None of that post makes any sense in the context of the series of posts you replied to.
What if itās someone wish to see Notre Dame in person?
Didnāt think of that now did you.
I dont think millionaires donating irked people ā¦ it was the simple Simons in Ireland, at least thatās what @backinatracksuit called them ā¦
Thats even more disgusting.
Yeah - It would be most dying kidās wish - a major oversight on my behalf.
Okay so you think going to see John Cena wrestle trumps wanting to go and see ND, thatās fine.
It absolutely does.
People are donating because they have an attachment to the place.
There is nothing different than spending your hard earned money on a sporting team.
I can only reply to the above and the general commentary on charities. You obviously donāt think itās worthwhile rebuilding it, calling people who get utility out of its existence āsimpletonsā.
Donating is inherently different to spending.
One of the creepiest and most sinister organisations in the world. More creepy than the Catholic Church in fact.
TFK is fascinated with how other people decide to spend their money.
who really gives a fuck?
As I said already. A church burnt down. Move the fuck on and donāt be worrying about whoās going to pay to rebuild it.
Sure if the local church had a leak in the roof theyād have a fundraiser.
1 Like
Deary me.
Again, ND barely charges a cover charge.
People are donating because they are getting something out of it. They might enjoy visiting it, believe in architecture or whatever.
Who should pay for ND if the āsimpletonsā donāt?
Is it a requirement to comment on absolutely everything?? As far as I know nobody donated money to build the stadium, money that could have been given to agood cause, and how much money do you think I spend on trainers? I canāt remember the last time, itās been over a year bar the ones I use for running
How people spend their money is their business. For instance, @glasagusban blows a good chunk of his wages going to see rap concerts - thatās way more fucked up than donating to rebuild a church - but such is life.
1 Like
philanthropists be whimsical, biatches
People spend huge sums to see games in Spurs stadium and watch them on tv. They finance it, directly or indirectly.
ND only charged for two portions of visiting it. You could get in for free. The view from around Paris was free. The cultural and historical significant was free.
People got something from it and decided to give money to help build it again. Absolutely no different to you splurging on your shite of choice.
Youāve made loads of comments about this in a few days while with all the commenting on the Spurs stadium over the last few years you never felt like commenting about your disgust at the waste of money?
Iām not a religious man - but Spurs trying to direct funds away from the rebuilding of ND is pretty low, even for Jews.
3 Likes