It seems some Blogging Tories just don't understand compasionate capitalism. To them generousity and business don't go hand in hand or else they would understand the following axioms;
a) rock & roll is a business
b) rock & roll musicians are businessmen
c) business is capitalism
d) rock stars are capitalists.
Since the time of the Beatles Apple Corp. and the Moody Blues Inc., this has been the case.
Bono gets richer still
Bono buys piece of capitalist rag
So why all the fuss, if Bono buys into Forbes magazine, while lobbying to end poverty. What? Did you forget Kellog, Hershey, Owen, and yes Engels. They were compasionate capitalists, social reformers. Heck what Bono is doing is no different than Gates.
AIDS Funding: Gates Steps Up as Rich Countries Step Back
In fact the intelligent business man recognizes philanthropy is good for business and social stature. Which is why the robber barons of the fin de siecle during the Guilded Age in America invented it. To give back to the community some of their ill gotten gain. Oh and it's good for a tax break.
As the old adage goes one needs to make money to spend money, or was it visa versa. Bono is spending and investing his money well, and putting it where his mouth is. He is using his capital for social good. Ironic he should be criticized for doing the right thing as a hip capitalist by the right.
Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Bono, Gates, compasonate, capitalism, hip-capitalism, rock&roll, business, donations, poverty, AIDS,
These are probably the same whingers who think a right-soc dem like Soros a communist. Their hostility to any sense of decency on the part of the wealthy is, in my opinion, one more proof that the whingers are basically sociopaths.
ReplyDeleteBono is a good musician and pretty good at capitalism to boot. While his apparent concern for the plight of the third world appears sincere, he also knows that if he keeps his name in the news he will sell more records/CDs/DVDs.
ReplyDeleteI suspect that you and many of your readers would be the first to discount the motives of multinational corporations that tout their records of social/environmental responsibility. Certainly, such efforts do not directly contribute to the bottom line. Nonetheless, they are investments in reputation with an expected future payoff. Is Bono's motivation any different?