To those that dislike the idea of wanting more

I take your point but to be honest if I knew someone was going to give me 86,000 dollars every day I probably wouldn't be too fussed about spending it all, analogy apart though I'm sure their philosophy is the right one although not necessarily related just to wealth creation.

Any suggestions for what you would do that would be "for the good of everyone around" you?

Matthewfalle wrote:

It's not about wanting more or less, its about doing the morally correct thing with that which you have - I can't see Rooney making holistic moral decisions with his £300,000 a week but at least Bill Gates et al are doing something with their masses.

But that's just me ....

Doesn't Rooney support OAP's by supplementing their pensions by paying them for sexual services?

VTech wrote:

Rooney helps several charities.

It amazes me how people attack those who seemingly earn vast sums. Why not be happy for them and think "what if ehh!"

It's not the same thought process in other countries as it is here. We as a nation despise people who excell. We prefer those who fail. Look at sporting stars etc.

As for what I do, I do enough to enable me to sleep easy at night. I could stream off a list of what I think helps others but we all know what would be posted after I did that so let's leave it as I am happy with what I do.

Don't get me wrong on this. Talent, hard work and brains provide the platform and level of remuneration and best wishes to anyone to who wants to get on. I agree on the perception of successful people in this country which is illuminating and rather sad.

However Rooney is a shellfish twat who needs his viewpoint realigning. So what he does his bit for charity? Countless people do so every week.

Apart from the light hearted comment about paying older ladies for sexual services I find his comments reprehensible regarding being booed for a poor team performance during the last world cup. He forgets that the majority of supports scrimped and saved for years to go. They witnessed and abject and lacklustre performance from players who lacked pride, courage and commitment and then criticised the fans for booing the team.

If he was a bloke in a factory he would still be a cunt. Because he has money he still is a cunt. You can be a cunt regardless of income.

We live in a world where a majority of the population live precarious and difficult lives, and -for some of those unfortunates- it is not uncommon for grinding poverty to force people to sell their children into indentured servitude. Where itinerant and poorly paid workers struggle for long hours and in difficult and unsafe conditions to build stadiums where Rooney and his pals will soon run around for a bit. Not a world most decent and sentient people would choose. Getting more invariably means others getting less. So some of us don't want more.

It's a well known fact amongst the offshore tax planners that the film financing industry was an offshore based tax planning route: the loophole was closed (I think offhand) in the last Budget (or thereabouts) much to the chagrin of those involved.

The footy schools were closed once Beckham's days per annum in the US were getting too close to making him US res/dom (his wife's success there and their constant statements saying that they would never leave the US invariably led them into res/dom status although their multiple home ownership in the UK, Monaco and a few other places was intended to show multiple domicillary status).

They were also falling foul (no pun intended) of the IRS' and HMRC's worldwide asset tax regime - although Beckham does pop up to the opening of an envelope in both a)an attempt to keep the fantastically well organised and succesful brand Beckham machine going and b)spread his worldwide days in residence around he came unstuck with a change in the loopholes.

Don't worry about him: his advisors (he uses Farrers for Law amongst others) are brilliant and he will come out of this exceptionally wealthy: his tax advisors just have to stay on step ahead of HMRC. His bankers (Coutts - you may have heard of them) are also pretty good at what they do (although they aren't tax advisors/lawyers etc but they do point you in the right direction).

Most of his charitable work is merely showing a face/name to it all - although he'll forego image rights but through very, very tightly wording contractual terms the asset addition of this to brand Beckham is beyond numbers.
I think that, with all due respect, you are rather viewing the convivially nicknamed Wazza in a brighter light than is the reality: the media does have a knack of papering over the parts that they know the average man in the street won't either read or understand but I'd say, nah, he's not actually clued up on the charitable aspects of it all.

I know the guy who wrote the white and green papers re the closure of the film financing loopholes (I had a beer with him last night) and a few of the Offshore guys so have a pretty good idea of whats going on.

So Mrs Beckham told you her husband's marginal rate of tax?

Has the Bullshyte'O'Meter gone off the scale again?

VTech wrote:

They are a private family and do what they can to remain that way but please understand that he does huge amounts and rarely, very rarely does it appear in the news because that's not what they want

Is this the same private family who sold the rights to their wedding to some sh1tty celeb rag?

VTech wrote:

He isn't listed on an IRS site at all and why would he not want to pay the 8% there ?

What does this mean?

I'm really sorry but I can't help feeling you've fallen for some celebrity story here.

Nice side-step.

Speak for yourself. I only have 1-ply cardboard for my box and the screws to hold the dish up keep ripping out, regardless of how much scented wax I put around them.

Where I'm from they can't afford flyovers. We do want them though, to hang the satellite dish from. So in that vein I'd say I am in the camp that wants more. More 'ply' in my cardboard and flyovers.

I hope I'm not sounding ungrateful. Our box does support a wire coathanger and now we get channel 5.

VTech wrote:

I am aware of coutts. I bank there and it's not as people suggest either, the fact is that they understand banking rather than the main high street guys who come and go within a working system.

quote]

Pre or post 2007?

And anyway, it doesn't exactly have the kudos it used to have. Personally, I bank at C. Hoare & Co. as its the family's bankers. It's a bit more discreet and less footballerists go there. They also serve proper coffee not Nescafe.

I once wrote a policy paper on the banking rules for the FSA and Coutts were involved - I spent a lot of time at the Strand branch and its all really a bit tatty behind the scenes. Very nice guys though, the majority of them. But not for me really.

Matthewfalle wrote:

What people are disgusted about is the amount of money to the level of work ethic ratio.

This is the nub of the issue. I'm all for sportsman earning high wages, as their careers are short. On a broader scale, I have no problem with anyone earning whatever salary they can negotiate.

But how about a little humility from idiots such as Rooney? A little appreciation for the supporters who, as previously mentioned, scrimp and save for tickets and kit that now cost a pretty penny (plus all the other costs associated with being a 'fan').

Okay, these guys appear at a few charity events, a few dinners, a few TV fundraisers. But as a percentage of their free time? I can't see it being that high, apart from a few exceptions.

I do a bit of charity work (could do much more, of course), primarily for injured young sportspeople. One of the guys I know through that work has a disabled daughter, a wife who has been seriously ill, and all the other challenges any family man has. What does he choose to do for a job? Work tirelessly running a charity helping other disabled kids, which obviously doesn't put him in the HNWI bracket. In his (little) spare time? More fund raising activities for related causes. Compare him to Rooney, and I know which one 'does loads for charity' and which one doesn't.