Wear A Red Nose for African Corruption

[Fareast]

Those people who wore a Red Nose recently or otherwise pranced around with tickling sticks........etc.......to raise money for the starving hordes of Africa, might well be surprised at a recent article in the Weekly Telegraph [ 14/3/07----20/03/07 ] by Niall Ferguson.

 

He reports that Comic Relief is funding 4 projects in Ghana for 1.7 million pounds. On Monday last week, the Ghanian government announced a year-long celebration from British Colonial Rule. This will cost 10.7 million pounds. The average daily income in Ghana is 67p.

 

Just before independence, the average Briton earned 39 times the amount that the average Ghananian earned ; after 50 years of self-rule the gap is now 92 times.

 

Maybe the average Brit. knows deep down that it's all a bit of a joke but just loves an excuse to dress up and act stupid, at least once a year ?

[Tony]

Red Nose Day.

 

Altruistic deed or an aid to reminding producers that you still want work?

[Jabberwocky]

Basically its all about getting work for those poor B list performers who are down to their last million quid.

[lubylou]

Basically its all about getting work for those poor B list performers who are down to their last million quid.

 

Like your faves jabber?

The Krankies:hihi:

[babychickens]

it's threads like this that appall me about you lot.

 

red nose day, and other charity events that are regularly sneered at by you bunch of cynical whining moaning tight-arsed individuals, are genuine attempts to make a difference. that the ghanian government wastes money on celebrations rather than feeding people is beside the point - the influence of red nose day organisers is unlikely to reach as far as the senior levels of government, however poor the country in question. one of the things that many charities contend with is fighting to make sure the money they give is used appropriately, but i doubt the red nose day money is going directly towards lots of little flags and parades for a celebration of being no longer british.

 

it is also perfectly possible that b list celebrities can try to rescue their flailing careers AT THE SAME TIME as raising money for charity, the two are not mutually exclusive. at least they're doing something, which i suspect is more than you three (fareast, tony, jabberwocky), although please feel free to correct me if i'm wrong.

 

it's so easy to have a moan and poke fun, isn't it? i sincerely hope that if you actually mean what you've just written that none of you are ever in need of any form of charity.

 

what are you actually trying to achieve with this thread, fareast? i'm going to leave this irritatingly stupid thread now and find something less pointless to do.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/03/11/do1101.xml there's your link. i feel i should congratulate you on your summarising skills, even if i think the content of the article is a bunch of misconstruction parading as jeremy-clarkson-like self-righteousness.

[Jabberwocky]

Oooooooooooooooooooooooooo get her

[Kaizabella]

Off the topic slightly, but still

 

Where my other half works, last friday they were told to either wear red for Red Nose Day or pay a "forfeit" of £2 to the kitty, which would then be donated to charity.

 

Everyone came to work in something red to avoid the "fine", but left feeling like they'd "done something for Red Nose Day"

 

Does anyone else find this a slightly ironic show of the British attitude to Charity?

[Jabberwocky]

I see it like this:

 

A small country has, lets say for arguments sake, a million people.

Famine/war/desease hits and people start to die...

A bunch of has-beens gather together to save their flagging careers and raise enough money to avert the crisis.

The people in the African country now have food, medicines, and start to breed.

A few years later another crisis hits...

There are now one and a half million people...

A bunch of has-beens gather together to save their flagging careers and raise enough money to avert the crisis.

The people in the African country now have food, medicines, and start to breed.

A few years later another crisis hits...

There are now two and a half million people...

A bunch of has-beens gather together to save their flagging careers and raise enough money to avert the crisis.

The people in the African country now have food, medicines, and start to breed.

A few years later another crisis hits...

There are now three and a half million people...

Famine/war/desease hits and people start to die...

A bunch of has-beens gather together to save their flagging careers and raise enough money to avert the crisis.

The people in the African country now have food, medicines, and start to breed.

A few years later another crisis hits...

There are now four and a half million people...

A bunch of has-beens gather together to save their flagging careers and raise enough money to avert the crisis.

The people in the African country now have food, medicines, and start to breed.

A few years later another crisis hits.....

 

Eventually the charity will run out and then millions will die, instead of a few thousand, but its ok, Bob Geldof and co. got a little bit of publicity/

[donkey]

it's threads like this that appall me about you lot.

 

red nose day, and other charity events that are regularly sneered at by you bunch of cynical whining moaning tight-arsed individuals, are genuine attempts to make a difference. that the ghanian government wastes money on celebrations rather than feeding people is beside the point - the influence of red nose day organisers is unlikely to reach as far as the senior levels of government, however poor the country in question. one of the things that many charities contend with is fighting to make sure the money they give is used appropriately, but i doubt the red nose day money is going directly towards lots of little flags and parades for a celebration of being no longer british.

 

it is also perfectly possible that b list celebrities can try to rescue their flailing careers AT THE SAME TIME as raising money for charity, the two are not mutually exclusive. at least they're doing something, which i suspect is more than you three (fareast, tony, jabberwocky), although please feel free to correct me if i'm wrong.

 

it's so easy to have a moan and poke fun, isn't it? i sincerely hope that if you actually mean what you've just written that none of you are ever in need of any form of charity.

 

what are you actually trying to achieve with this thread, fareast? i'm going to leave this irritatingly stupid thread now and find something less pointless to do.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/03/11/do1101.xml there's your link. i feel i should congratulate you on your summarising skills, even if i think the content of the article is a bunch of misconstruction parading as jeremy-clarkson-like self-righteousness.

 

Couldn't agree more. The lengths some people will go to find sprurious excuses to feel superior to whole nations of other people. Pathetic!

[Jabberwocky]

I`ll agree---once you`re able to tell me that my little theory is wrong...