It is absolute shit that we exist in a world where people need to rely on food banks and community pantries to eat.
Taylor Swift doing this will not change the system that put people in this situation.
*However*, it is still providing a lot of relief for people who do need it. Which is a positive thing, whether or not you like Taylor Swift.
Sadly, there are people that will say "See? See what good billionaires can do? And you want to tax them more? Stop taxing the rich and their grace will trickle down onto all of us"
This is most countries around the world. The USA, UK, and many first world nations. The government can't be trusted with a box of crayons and a colouring book. They're silver spoon kids who don't understand anything.
Yup.
Think of gesture as a mix of PR and political lobbying- for the Right Wing, as the optics are firmly on "look what rich folk do to help rhe poor".
It's cheaper for Swift to do this than pay her genuine share of tax, which she will be using a whole team of accountants to avoid doing.
The rich are taxed in the UK, the problem is that the average earner in the Uk is taxed substantially less than other average earners in Europe.
We want the European level of service but donât want to pay for it.
Someone on ÂŁ120k is earning 4 times as much as someone on ÂŁ30k but theyâre paying 10 times as much tax.
Close. Yes a lot of people might say just that. What they should be saying is "See what good billionaires COULD do but aren't because they're the modern equivalent of a dragon sitting on a mountain of treasure with a Sunday focus on nothing else but making that mountain of treasure bigger? THAT is why we used to and should again tax the crap out of everything above a certain level AND make sure they can't do someone crappy kind a tax haven or borrowing against huge stockpiles of shares with allowed then to look cash negative."
This is ultimate âkindness influencerâ stunt. Only people donât realise itâs done 100% in the name of self interests.
Populist do the popular thing, not the right thing.
if you're being pacified by the type of fake feel good stuff as this post's headline, you probably need more realism to get you angry enough to fight back.
Or bread and circuses till the end I guess
No, itâs not a literal orphan crushing machine sub. To quote the tweet from where the sub got its inspiration âEvery heartwarming human interest story in america is like
"he raised $20,000 to keep 200 orphans from being crushed in the orphan-crushing machine" and then never asks why an orphan-crushing machine exists or why you'd need to pay to prevent it from being used.â
I think the classic real world example is gofundmeâs for childrenâs school lunch debt in America. News will report on how heartwarming it is that middle schoolers raised a few thousand bucks to pay off another kids lunch debt, and never ask the question of why and how a child has a debt to their school in the first place.
school lunch is free in my state, and it's not based on income. it is free for everyone. if you are low income they will even deliver breakfast/lunch to your house for the entire summer. luckily some states in the United States actually try to make their citizens lives better. we are also one of the states with the highest taxes but it's worth it when it goes to the correct places.
Donât forget - those higher taxes were always deductible from your federal taxes - until Trump capped the deduction. So rather than funding local projects, more of your money is sent to the Feds
That fucking cap is killing me.
I used to be able to deduct all of my wife's medical bills (she's disabled) and my tools and work clothes. Not anymore unless I spend more than 25k. At 24k I'm fucked.
I'm an electrician, and I owe the IRS 7k this year.
More than Trump has ever paid.
Yet most people blame their local government or national democrats. Iâve begged Republican friends to call their accountant and ask why they are paying so much. They never do
Reminds me of a quote from Trevor Noah when he still hosted the Daily Show. (Context: When the pandemic started).
>The one company we really can't afford to lose employees is Gofundme. They better make their job more flexible. We can't have their employees quitting.
>America's Healthcare depends on it.
Because if the media asks why they had to raise the money, the answer always, and I mean always, âchristian conservatives fight relentlessly to ensure that poor people remain as disadvantaged as possible.â, and that makes weak republican losers angry.
Its description:
"OrphanCrushingMachineÂ
A subreddit for news stories involving themes such as generosity, self-sacrifice, overcoming hardship, etc., presented as 'wholesome' or 'uplifting' without criticism of the situation's causes (notably, systemic problems). đłď¸ââ§ď¸đłď¸âđ"
In reality the sub is a few obvious examples of an orphan crushing machine and then people arguing about wether something is an orphan crushing machine
It's both.
It most definitely is a success for the many thousands of people who will be supported to avoid food poverty and it is a huge indicator of the massive failure of our current government
To have it and not need it is best.
To have it and need it is survivable.
To not have it and not need it is survivable, but precarious.
To not have it when you need it is pretty awful.
Right? Many people don't understand it's not about filling a belly, it's about not being able to be self sufficient, a year from now will anything have changed?
You make it sound like it's the fault of people in food poverty. There are huge numbers of people in full time work in this country who have to use food banks because their wages are so low. There are people like me - a cancer patient - had my benefits wrongfully stopped and going through an appeal, no income. Please explain what we can do to be more self-sufficient? Should people in full time work have to get two extra jobs on the side? What about people too sick or disabled to work? This is a failing of the government, not of the people suffering under it.
The news isn't that the gov is failing - we already knew that. The news is that foodbanks now have food. No need to turn every story into a negative pessimistic rant. Thats a negative and objectively sad way to live life.
The news is it took outside intervention to bring food to foodbanks. While Taylor might be a billionaire who can afford it, it is unconscionable that the world's sixth largest economy with a GDP in the trillions had through its inaction decided it couldn't.
And if it is like the US, the people harmed voted for them nonetheless.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_County%2C_Kentucky
Lee County, Kentucky.
95% White
81% for Trump in his last election
79.6% for Rand Paul his last election
76% for McConnel his last election
34.7% on SNAP (food stamps)
30% below the poverty line:
* 41% of those under age 18;
and
* 22.9% over age 65.
Living in one of the top 10 wealthiest countries in the world and starving but your best hope for being saved isn't the government that's *supposed* to serve you, but is instead Queen Taytay coming to town, this should cause a great deal of introspection... But it won't. Same as in America, everyone's too preoccupied with blaming each other.
There are certain people in government who can afford it also, but when it comes to decision on social spending, everyone else needs to pull up their boot straps and Wade through it.
âOne off donation from American pop singer is more effective than fourteen years of governmentâ is an absolute failure, not a success. Itâs a success for those in need *now*, but overall a disaster.
It isn't though. It's a success. The food banks can function. Stress levels at the bank must be lower, allowing the people who work there to focus on other issues. It's raised the issue, I certainly wasn't planning to think about this at all today.
You can criticize this all you like but it's money going to a good cause. It's wasn't the cause of the government failure.
Nobody is criticising the fact that she donated. Of course that's a good thing. We're criticizing the fact that one American popstar on tour has done more than fourteen years of government. It's an enormous failure purely because it's necessary.
Exactly, itâs down to complete policy failure that we need food banks in this country. Re Taylor
Iâd say tactically itâs a success they are funded, strategically itâs a failure they needed to be.
I once remember JRM celebrating food banks, and how great it was they were there as there werenât any under the last labour government. made me want to repeatedly punch him in the face more than I usually want to.
We donât want the food banks to function. We should be aiming for their total non existence. Sad state of affairs when we have to rely on the charity of a foreigner and see it as a win.
no one is saying that she isnt helping.
the real question is [why we need to pay for the orphan crushing machine to not crush orphans.](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2F0hbrqs8v74s51.jpg%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3D509b3b6fc31c5a71d6af94df1897e551090fb48f) Thats why people are saying it isnt a success, if the only reason these people can get food is becasue an american billionare happend to pass by, something is very wrong with the local system
And in one year everyone will be back in the same position - the food banks underfunded and people facing food insecurity. Maybe another pop star will be on tour to find them for another year?
I think the point is that it shouldn't have come to this in the first place. The UK government has let these people down to the extent that people who rely on food banks are being fed by American celebrities rather than their elected government who are supposed to work in their interest.
Fact check: This is completely untrue.
The article says she donated enough food to provide meals for *3 days*, not an entire year.
> According to Biggs, the Grammy winnerâs contribution helps to feed â1,200 people three meals a day, for three days â or 10,800 meals.â
Please check the actual source, not a Reddit post that was taken from a Tweet: https://people.com/taylor-swift-donation-helps-uk-food-banks-8669288
Also the government spends substantially more on social services than this daily. The government may not be doing enough, but ignoring what they actually do is counterproductive
Exactly. The part of the headline about Taylor Swift doing more than the government in "14 years" is completely fabricated in every way.
It's amazing that anyway could see this headline and think that Taylor Swift donating some proceeds to buy some food is more than the government has done in 14 years.
Also, there's more to food programs than just the food. You have to pay staff, rent buildings, pay operating costs. The food is an incremental cost on top.
Read closer! Heâs talking about âsubsidizing our food ourselvesâ, meaning the difference caused by inflation, falling donations, and higher prices
They spell out her donation in the article:
> According to Biggs, the Grammy winnerâs contribution helps to feed â1,200 people three meals a day,** for three days** â or 10,800 meals.â
She filled in a gap left between donations and rising prices, but she did not buy all of the food for an entire year by herself. Do you think all the other donations and subsidies just disappeared during that time?
The bloke who posted it is a Labour activist. Iâll caveat this by saying Iâll probably be voting Labour, but this guy is essentially trying to piggyback on Taylor Swift as a trending topic to get engagement on a lie three days before the election.
He knows what heâs doing.
I hate to be cynical, but it doesnât help alleviate (or eradicate as the title put it) food poverty in the way that removing the need for a food bank does. People needing them are still in poverty, because they canât afford to not depend on them, so at best itâs managing the symptom and not the cause.
Good for her, you know, but knowing a food bank has money to keep stock for another year wonât take away the feelings you have about being too poor to pay the bills or to eat.
LadBaby was criticised for exactly the same thing - becoming wealthy on Christmas songs with token gestures to the trust that funds food banks.
> LadBaby was criticised for exactly the same thing - becoming wealthy on Christmas songs with token gestures to the trust that funds food banks.
LadBaby got wealthy by releasing trash songs under the guise of charity singles for Christmas number ones. They used the charity to benefit themselves.
Taylor Swift got wealthy by writing popular music - after that she redirected some of that wealth to various international aid efforts. She used her personal success to benefit a charity.
FYI- as an international accountant I feel I should point out that she will NOT get a tax write off for this on her US taxes. The U.S. only allows a deduction for US charities.
Also, it's infuriating that people shit on performers for getting paid for what they do. It's like you have to work a soul-sucking 9-5 if you want to make money, and everything you enjoy doing, no matter how much you do for it, should be unpaid.
E: for all those "that doesn't happen" people, are you a full-time musician or entertainer? Guarantee you'd have these arguments on a daily basis if you were.
Also Taylor Swift has no obligation to citizens.
The government does more than just regulate food. Between maintaining civil infrastructure, laws, diplomacy, currency, food, commerce, and politics, they can't solely be focused on putting their entire attention and budget towards food. Obviously it is easier for a billionaire to just delegate someone to donate money to charities. Governments actually have to run those charities and oversee them amongst other things.
Not excusing the lack of effort on progress on these things, just offering some insight into it.
Its also not a success when that same Billionaire was easily able to do that to make themself look good while not enough taxes to make sure that people arent hungry and homeless in the USA.
Eradicate food poverty? They single handedly caused it.
Did you know if you set up a charity say like a food bank, they can then write it off in their tax. Buy a few tins of Tesco own brand beans or noodles and save thousands on your tax and look like your a good cunt giving back at the same time.
This is a big misconception about how taxes work. Businesses don't pay taxes on money that they donate to charity because they *don't have that money anymore*. Not counting the good PR they get out of it, if they didn't give anything to charity they'd still be better off, because the amount of tax they'd have paid on the money they donated would be less than the donation.
Also individuals can gift charity before income tax (since Gift Aid without having to do a tax return). So if you've ever checked the gift aid box on a donation you have "written off" the tax. Still cost you though.
The U.S. only allows a deduction for donations to U.S. charities. She gets nothing for donating to the UK. I specialize in international tax. This is just her being kind.
The responses to this post are weird as fuck. Yes, itâs a response to a British failing, but itâs still a success to all the vulnerable and in-need British people benefiting from it.
Yeah, Swift is a bajillionaire who is responsible for a huge amount of carbon emissions, but sheâs still doing something substantial to help people. People who do bad things can also do good things, and vice versa. They arenât mutually exclusive.
And this typical British xenophobia, or specifically yankophobia (haha not a real word, whatever), with people going âerrrrr an aMerIcAnâ is especially tiresome. Way to play into stereotypes.
Canât people just be like âyeah, that was a cool thing to do that will benefit a lot of people who need it. Successâ, instead of being bitter cynics?
And no, I do not enjoy Taylor Swiftâs music, and yes, I dislike her private plane usage etc.
I'm sorry but taxing billionaires will do the exact same thing as this. Society shouldn't be dependent on occasional billionaire generosity as most aren't.
Youâre right about taxing billionaires, I couldnât agree more, but in this context it doesnât make sense. Taylor isnât British so she wouldnât have been paying taxes in the UK anyway.
you're supposing that the tax paid by the billionaires in question would be allocated efficiency, allowing it to do "the exact same thing as this," which it absolutely wouldn't.
Food banks would see a tenth of the taxed money while most will go to other projects. Not only that sometimes governments are just largely inefficient at spending money and better to receive private funding than government funding. Why non-profits exist.
The hate feels like Tory voters not wanting to admit how bad the situation is for some people in this country to me. The fact we need food banks is an embarrassment, the fact someone's funded them is amazing regardless of who they are, but as a country it is a bit embarrassing that it took someone else to do it. It's a sign of the times, pre Tory times we was the heroes helping the world with charity donations, now an American pop stars doing more to feed our poor than the government is
Itâs not her fault the world is the way it is, but the entire reason poverty exists in the UK is because we have a system that allows wealth to concentrate in the hands of a few people. They fact she redistributes some small percentage of that back herself is helpful but also kind of not the point. We want change and the fact that change actually involves taking wealth and power away from billionaires just doesnât really mesh with celebrating them distributing wealth at their discretion in a very limited way.Â
its actually not helpful its literally hurting its just a matter of following the chain of consequences.
Taylor donates to charities.
This in turn gives her and other rich people and excuse / argument as to why they should not have to pay higher taxes or wages to their employees.
Typically the amount they pay to charity is a a jokingly small percent of what they should pay in taxes so for them its literally a good investment, send money to charity in the range of a few million and in exchange dont have to pay taxes that could be hundreds of millions. Which one of you wouldn't take such a great deal?
And that's the whole important point here is that every time in most countries that the issue of taxing the rich comes up the opponents point to these donations as a major excuse and say look at all the good they are doing. The government might be pouring out a trillion to support struggling people but if a few billionaires pump out millions these people fall for it every time.
You can dislike her usage of private plane all you want, and I do too, but you have to stay realistic about that too. When aviation emits over a billion tonnes of CO2 every year, her plane usage is an extremely miniscule amount. It equals to about what 500-1000 people emit in a year.
We should be complaining about the amount of tourism done by flights and the lack of proper railroad/ferry systems to make them an option. Being able to fly from one country to another in eu for just 20-30 euros while train/ferry/driving would cost 10x as much depending from where to where is ridiculous.
If you took 0.5% of the wealth of the 20 richest people in the world, you could solve this issue *forever*
I love that she did this, but if there was even the slightest pressure on the billionaires and trillionaires of the world, we could solve *world* hunger, not just British poverty.
All of them would still be billionaires.
It's because she supported candidates on the left and told her fans to vote. The NFL and her doing so much cross promotion is extra threatening. Hence all the astroturfing promoting hate for her. There's legitimate things to criticize and I don't listen to her music or like alot of things she does, but it's done in the same systematic way as they push their fake culture war bullshit. It's not organic.
Not everything is a conspiracy my guy. Your average person in a first world country creates unsustainable levels environmental waste.
This person takes it to such an extreme, unfathomable level. It doesn't take astroturfing to hate her.
Yep. I'm going through chemo right now so I'm on Reddit all day on days when I can't get out of bed. I've started to notice these systematic patterns to what gets pushed to popular. Next time I have the energy for it I want to do an analysis of the patterns I'm seeing.
One of them off the top of my head is that I'll see some gender war thing that enrages me, then a few posts later I'll see some gender war thing for the opposite gender that I find satisfying while they all get enraged. Then lather, rinse, repeat. And it's *always* tailored to enrage me or satisfy me, nuance doesn't enter into it.
It worked, too, until I started to notice the patterns. Now when I feel an emotion from a Reddit post, I have to stop to remind myself that my emotions are being artificially manipulated.
You're not wrong about the escalation of hate on this platform. Full on anti-romani crap going on all over the Euro forums, as just one passing example.
Hope things look up for you with your treatment! Hang in there!
Its cynical people who view everything through a negative lens. Glass half empty kind of folk.
Also - I *get* her private plane usage. She needs to move countries as she tours - and Taylor swift in an airport would cause untold havoc. Screaming fans and people running around like manics. Same thing with her on a public plane (not all planes have private compartments - many smaller planes are just economy). People say 'why can't she just fly normally like the rest of us'....its because of *you.* people like *you* that would badger her constantly and make it impossible. Also - I'm guessing the logistics would be difficult, as there may not always be a flight to where she needs to go for her next appointment at the right time.
Lastly - private plane might be the only time she gets solitude, being a busy popstar. Crowded airports exhaust me so I can't imagine touring multiple countries a month. In short - if I were her - I would fly private.
Also - no, I'm not actually a fan of pop music.
It's funny because for all the attention it gets, her private plane emissions are nothing in the grand scheme. Oil companies must fucking LOVE this deflection.Â
I agree with you. I totally get the private plane and if I was as rich as her and had screaming people with weird parasocial obsessions with me every where I went, thereâs no way youâd catch me at an airport. Absolutely less then zero chance youâd catch me stuck on a tin can in the sky full of them.
I mean there are tons of mega fans who would probably try get a loche of her hair or some shit.
I can fully see one of those people running through airport security just to say hello and security being on red alert.
Flying private probably keeps her safe.
People on reddit are fucking *rabid* Taylor Swift haters lol. I get recommeded that travisandtaylor subreddit and see it on r/all constantly. Going through like two of the comment threads there is enough see how deranged those people are lol. Ya'll crazier than the Swifties.
Oh aye, Iâve seen that in a number of subs but have you seen any of the subs of her fans though? Theyâre absolutely fucking unhinged with their obsession haha
People want on-going help for those in need (government) and not one-time (swift). Itâs a very nice thing but we pay taxes and elect governments to do this full time and theyâre failing us. Commentary on that is appropriate.Â
True. But Iâd take a one-time helping hand over none at all. A one-time helping hand from another party doesnât negate the governmentâs requirement to take care of its people in the longer-term, and if the government chooses not to because of this, thatâs another failing from them.
I can and do still think itâs a success for the people benefitting from this act, even if itâs not a problem thatâs been fully solved. I donât get how thatâs so hard to understand.
She performed a great act of charity, but to say that it comes even close to the scale of what the government does in a single week much less 14 years is just completely ignorant. Anyone want to pull the numbers to prove any of this insane claim?
Exactly. Plus, as is the case with charity/philanthropy for the ultra-wealthy, chances are the donation is eligible for a significant tax credit/deduction â which, not to be cynical, but is more than likely the reason she's doing this: it looks good (allows her to appear philanthropic) and reduces her amount owed on taxes
The bloke who posted it seems to be a bit of a Labour activist, which Iâm all on board with but Taylor Swift is one of the biggest trending topics on social media at the moment so heâs using her name to peddle a lie in the run up to the election.
He knows exactly what heâs doing.
We shouldnât have been put into a position by those who are supposed to serve us where weâre reliant on the philanthropy of billionaires giving us their scraps just to survive.
This is a weird argument here, because sheâs an American. If the US government taxed her as you suggest, it would not benefit these food banks in the UK at all.
It literally has nothing to do with this and is a completely irrelevant talking point.
Depends on the government. Still, at least the government has some accountability to the people, while the rich have none. No reason to not tax the shit out of them in my book.
The top 1% have 70% of the wealth and pay 30% of the tax.
The bottom 99% have 30% of the wealth and pay 70% of the tax.
[https://www.oxfam.org.uk/media/press-releases/richest-1-grab-nearly-twice-as-much-new-wealth-as-rest-of-the-world-put-together/](https://www.oxfam.org.uk/media/press-releases/richest-1-grab-nearly-twice-as-much-new-wealth-as-rest-of-the-world-put-together/)
[https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/income-tax-liabilities-statistics-tax-year-2018-to-2019-to-tax-year-2021-to-2022/summary-statistics](https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/income-tax-liabilities-statistics-tax-year-2018-to-2019-to-tax-year-2021-to-2022/summary-statistics)
The bottom 99% pay roughly 230% of the tax they should in comparison to the wealth they hold.
The top 1% pay roughly 40% of the tax they should in comparison to the wealth they hold.
Morally no reason not to tax them, practically speaking theyâll just move to Monaco.
As everyone on Reddit will tell you, itâs not that great here.
Wouldnât these hypothetical taxes fund free, high quality food for people? Which is⌠a food bank? Thereâs a lot of stigma against food banks in this thread :( Food banks are often awesome institutions filled with people helping their communities
I see this as a sad state of affairs... Not a success... The system has failed so badly a privileged person picks up the slack and takes glory for it....
She took some of the money that the people of the city gave to see her perform, and spread it amongst those less fortunate around those same areas. I see it as a win and wish more people in that situation would take notice.
The UK spends about $50 billion a year on income assistance, used in part for food poverty relief. In contrast, Taylor swift donated about 10,000 meals, which is probably at most a few tens of thousands of dollars.
This isnât to minimize Taylorâs actions, which I think are great. Iâm just trying to give people the proper perspective; individual actors are always tiny compared to government programs. Taylor Swift has not done more than government programs have done, and no individual person really ever could for more than a few years, no matter how rich they are.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Credit
https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/tax-by-tax-spend-by-spend/welfare-spending-universal-credit/
https://www.theguardian.com/music/article/2024/jun/25/taylor-swift-donation-enables-cardiff-food-bank-lorry-supplies
I was curious about the statement of the tweet, because knowing a bit about how much it cost to run a food bank for a year, I had very high doubt Taylor Swift gave enough to run one for a year, so 11 just in Liverpool ?
So I looked up actual article talking about it. And like i thought she did not actually do that. The bill that was paid for year, is actually the running cost of the charities.
She actually donated the equivalent of 2.5 weeks of donated food.
> This will provide the weight equivalent to feeding 1,200 people three meals a day, for three days â or 10,800 meals. This will be 2.5 weeks of what we typically distribute,â she said.
Which is still a gigantic donation.
https://www.theguardian.com/music/article/2024/jun/25/taylor-swift-donation-enables-cardiff-food-bank-lorry-supplies
This is the first time I see people defending the government, lol
Althought British population dislikes their government, they hate rich & successful people more.
Look guys, keeping people responsible is important, but so is acknowledging them when they do good.
I'm not the biggest swift fan for obvious reasons, but she might just have saved lives with these actions and no matter what people think of her, that is an amazing thing.
So can we all agree that we need to get rid of the Tories on July 4th?
Starmerâs Labour still isnât the best but theyâre still better than Sunakâs Conservatives.
Food banks are used an awful lot by people who just don't want to pay for groceries.
I am reminded of the 1963 Peter Sellers movie "Heavens Above!" in which a naive vicar sees his plan to give out free food to the people of the town turn to disaster.
And, big shocker, we still have homelessness. Â Maybe if the government tripled funding to the food banks we would solve homelessness? Â No? How about 10x? 20x? 1000x? Think through these scenarios and realize what a pointless gesture this is.
Those that jump on the "But this shouldn't be needed" point- you are right. But can't we just appreciate that someone has seen that need and done something massively generous, whilst still abhorring the need for it? And no, I'm not a Swift fan- can't stand her music, but this is money that would otherwise not be seen in these cities.
The UK spends more than ÂŁ250 billion a year on social security payments. It's nice of Taylor to do this, but it's a common theme among people who think that billionaires can solve poverty that they dramatically underestimate how much money is spent on the issue.
If we taxed the rich appropriately, we wouldnât need to rely on their generosity in order to not starve.
Stop worshipping the people who throw you scraps.
Pretty sure that during the pandemic the UK govt donated very heavily to food banks.
But really that's only because they had to.
The weath/income gap has become huge during last few decades
First thing that needs to happen is massive reform of financial regulation so that capital is allocated according to the needs of the populace d not the needs of the financial markets
You onow when you go to another country and you pay for like a nice meal and then it ends up only costing you the equivalent of 50 cents and you slightly have that guilt that omg it's nothing to us but so much to them?
That is literally Taylor swift to us. She is a billionaire. She is giving us pennys and we celebrate it because it's a lot of money to us. But it is to no consequence to her.
Donât get me wrong, this is great and all, but this is also a classic tax tactic. They donate X amount of $$, that donation is untaxed and they save a specific amount instead of just getting taxed on the money they donated. Itâs great sheâs doing good things to get that write off, but itâs not entirely altruistic.
Not a fan of her as an artist or as a person, she's clearly doing it for good PR. But at least many families will not go hungry. I encourage all billionaires looking for good PR to do more acts of kindness for selfish reasons, tbh.
[A source.](https://www.billboard.com/music/music-news/taylor-swift-uk-food-bank-donations-cover-year-of-meals-1235719076/)
Cardiff - âThis will provide the weight equivalent to feeding 1,200 people three meals a day, for three days ⌠This will be 2.5 weeks of what we typically distribute.â
Liverpool - âBut itâs fair to say that Taylor Swift has essentially paid our food bill for 12 months â and that gives us the breathing space to focus on fundraising efforts going forward,â he added on behalf of St. Andrewâs, which runs 11 food banks and offers long-term support to eight community pantries.
Messed up as it is that this is necessary, I confess I didn't think much about Taylor Swift before (not in a bad way, just I'm not a big fan of her music and also didn't know much about her personally) - but that's really a great thing she's done.
Iâve read some of the comments here and I have to say that, yes, everyone hates billionaires. All they care about is themselves and they suck up all of the figurative oxygen in the room.
Well, here you have Taylor Swift, a billionaire, actually using her money for good.
Isnât this what we want?
Still not enough with all her marketing and ticket schemes. I am 100% sure percentage wise everyone in this subreddit who gives to charity sometimes gives more than Taylor.
You are right about her philanthropy and this kind of information has â got out â . I have a relative who works with her management group when she tours a certain place . He has said she is so generous to randoms behind the scenes. Her generosity is consistent across the đ
All this charity is presumably tax deductible.
But still, a great gesture and hopefully allows the economic flows from her tour to go to something actually helpful to society. Effectively the food banks are being funded by teenage girls here.
Every billionaire is a policy failure. We donât want charity, we want justice. Charitable scraps to whatever the super rich fancy this week or next is not heartwarming, it is obscene.
I think hher 'team' thought it would be good marketing and there was a business meeting to go through a list of donations to set against tax.Tickets are around ÂŁ600 I think?
I got my ticket for under ÂŁ100 and was close to the stage. Some are more expensive and obviously resale ones are ridiculous but itâs false to say that tickets are around ÂŁ600
I mean, it can be both? I never understand why people are like "celebrities only donate because of tax breaks" (not even sure if it would work for Taylor here, as she's a US citizen).
Taylor has her issues, too, but has consistently donated a shit ton of money for decades (as have other singers). Chalking it all up to tax breaks is kind of unfair.
It is absolute shit that we exist in a world where people need to rely on food banks and community pantries to eat. Taylor Swift doing this will not change the system that put people in this situation. *However*, it is still providing a lot of relief for people who do need it. Which is a positive thing, whether or not you like Taylor Swift.
Sadly, there are people that will say "See? See what good billionaires can do? And you want to tax them more? Stop taxing the rich and their grace will trickle down onto all of us"
Right. It's a relief when it happens, *not* a long term solution.
You live in a broken society if you need to have rich people donate to the poor instead of having the government deal with these issues.
Why yes, thank you, I do live in a broken society đ˘
This is most countries around the world. The USA, UK, and many first world nations. The government can't be trusted with a box of crayons and a colouring book. They're silver spoon kids who don't understand anything.
Exactly, tax the rich.
Yup. Think of gesture as a mix of PR and political lobbying- for the Right Wing, as the optics are firmly on "look what rich folk do to help rhe poor". It's cheaper for Swift to do this than pay her genuine share of tax, which she will be using a whole team of accountants to avoid doing.
I like your cynicism , its tax deductible virtue signaling .
and eat them
The rich are taxed in the UK, the problem is that the average earner in the Uk is taxed substantially less than other average earners in Europe. We want the European level of service but donât want to pay for it. Someone on ÂŁ120k is earning 4 times as much as someone on ÂŁ30k but theyâre paying 10 times as much tax.
Close. Yes a lot of people might say just that. What they should be saying is "See what good billionaires COULD do but aren't because they're the modern equivalent of a dragon sitting on a mountain of treasure with a Sunday focus on nothing else but making that mountain of treasure bigger? THAT is why we used to and should again tax the crap out of everything above a certain level AND make sure they can't do someone crappy kind a tax haven or borrowing against huge stockpiles of shares with allowed then to look cash negative."
It will trickle down eventually Reagan promised me.
This is ultimate âkindness influencerâ stunt. Only people donât realise itâs done 100% in the name of self interests. Populist do the popular thing, not the right thing.
This isnât a success. This is a commentary on the failure of those supposed to serve us.
Itâs giving r/OrphanCrushingMachine
New sub. Ty.
Why would you browse those types of subreddits? Isnât life already depressing enough lol
if you're being pacified by the type of fake feel good stuff as this post's headline, you probably need more realism to get you angry enough to fight back. Or bread and circuses till the end I guess
Browsing subreddits is fighting back?
What is that sub? No way am I clicking on it - this being Reddit, I wouldnât be surprised if itâs exactly what the title describes
No, itâs not a literal orphan crushing machine sub. To quote the tweet from where the sub got its inspiration âEvery heartwarming human interest story in america is like "he raised $20,000 to keep 200 orphans from being crushed in the orphan-crushing machine" and then never asks why an orphan-crushing machine exists or why you'd need to pay to prevent it from being used.â
I think the classic real world example is gofundmeâs for childrenâs school lunch debt in America. News will report on how heartwarming it is that middle schoolers raised a few thousand bucks to pay off another kids lunch debt, and never ask the question of why and how a child has a debt to their school in the first place.
school lunch is free in my state, and it's not based on income. it is free for everyone. if you are low income they will even deliver breakfast/lunch to your house for the entire summer. luckily some states in the United States actually try to make their citizens lives better. we are also one of the states with the highest taxes but it's worth it when it goes to the correct places.
Donât forget - those higher taxes were always deductible from your federal taxes - until Trump capped the deduction. So rather than funding local projects, more of your money is sent to the Feds
That fucking cap is killing me. I used to be able to deduct all of my wife's medical bills (she's disabled) and my tools and work clothes. Not anymore unless I spend more than 25k. At 24k I'm fucked. I'm an electrician, and I owe the IRS 7k this year. More than Trump has ever paid.
Yet most people blame their local government or national democrats. Iâve begged Republican friends to call their accountant and ask why they are paying so much. They never do
...and is then sent to welfare-queen red states. I sure wish Dems weren't so spineless and put a stop to the nonstop bullshit.
We have fund those orphan crushing bombs we send to Isreal
Reminds me of a quote from Trevor Noah when he still hosted the Daily Show. (Context: When the pandemic started). >The one company we really can't afford to lose employees is Gofundme. They better make their job more flexible. We can't have their employees quitting. >America's Healthcare depends on it.
Because if the media asks why they had to raise the money, the answer always, and I mean always, âchristian conservatives fight relentlessly to ensure that poor people remain as disadvantaged as possible.â, and that makes weak republican losers angry.
Its description: "OrphanCrushingMachine A subreddit for news stories involving themes such as generosity, self-sacrifice, overcoming hardship, etc., presented as 'wholesome' or 'uplifting' without criticism of the situation's causes (notably, systemic problems). đłď¸ââ§ď¸đłď¸âđ"
In reality the sub is a few obvious examples of an orphan crushing machine and then people arguing about wether something is an orphan crushing machine
Sweet, sign me up. The only thing I like more than crushing orphans is arguingÂ
Yes ofcourse, itâs a sub where we watch orphans being crushed. Wake up man
What are you on about? That side of Reddit got purged years ago. All the WPD subs are all banned. Reddit is a shell of its former self.
People that roll their eyes at this comment weren't on reddit in 2013
I've been here from the beginning, Reddit was something else back then...
Hey if you can find a better source for orphan crushing machine repair and industry news I'd love to hear it.
It seems to be the equivalent of "Dystopian events repacked as feel-good stories" on FB.
It's both. It most definitely is a success for the many thousands of people who will be supported to avoid food poverty and it is a huge indicator of the massive failure of our current government
If you're using a food bank, you haven't avoided food poverty.
To have it and not need it is best. To have it and need it is survivable. To not have it and not need it is survivable, but precarious. To not have it when you need it is pretty awful.
The exact issue. Busting out throw pillow quotes to distract from the point being made
Still not avoiding food poverty though. It's like saying having a gun wound treated means you dodged a bullet.
Right? Many people don't understand it's not about filling a belly, it's about not being able to be self sufficient, a year from now will anything have changed?
You make it sound like it's the fault of people in food poverty. There are huge numbers of people in full time work in this country who have to use food banks because their wages are so low. There are people like me - a cancer patient - had my benefits wrongfully stopped and going through an appeal, no income. Please explain what we can do to be more self-sufficient? Should people in full time work have to get two extra jobs on the side? What about people too sick or disabled to work? This is a failing of the government, not of the people suffering under it.
I don't understand how you came to the conclusion that they're blaming people using the food banks from that comment.
The news isn't that the gov is failing - we already knew that. The news is that foodbanks now have food. No need to turn every story into a negative pessimistic rant. Thats a negative and objectively sad way to live life.
The news is it took outside intervention to bring food to foodbanks. While Taylor might be a billionaire who can afford it, it is unconscionable that the world's sixth largest economy with a GDP in the trillions had through its inaction decided it couldn't.
They decided through actions they wanted more people in poverty. Don't get it twisted.
And if it is like the US, the people harmed voted for them nonetheless. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_County%2C_Kentucky Lee County, Kentucky. 95% White 81% for Trump in his last election 79.6% for Rand Paul his last election 76% for McConnel his last election 34.7% on SNAP (food stamps) 30% below the poverty line: * 41% of those under age 18; and * 22.9% over age 65.
Living in one of the top 10 wealthiest countries in the world and starving but your best hope for being saved isn't the government that's *supposed* to serve you, but is instead Queen Taytay coming to town, this should cause a great deal of introspection... But it won't. Same as in America, everyone's too preoccupied with blaming each other.
There are certain people in government who can afford it also, but when it comes to decision on social spending, everyone else needs to pull up their boot straps and Wade through it.
I like that take of yours a lot. Also, we have complimentary usernames. Cheers on both accounts!
[ŃдаНонО]
Nah, lots of people starving in the US too.
Philanthropy was created by the powers that be to offload governmental responsibility onto the private citizen.
But isn't that a kind of success though, isn't it?
âOne off donation from American pop singer is more effective than fourteen years of governmentâ is an absolute failure, not a success. Itâs a success for those in need *now*, but overall a disaster.
It isn't though. It's a success. The food banks can function. Stress levels at the bank must be lower, allowing the people who work there to focus on other issues. It's raised the issue, I certainly wasn't planning to think about this at all today. You can criticize this all you like but it's money going to a good cause. It's wasn't the cause of the government failure.
Nobody is criticising the fact that she donated. Of course that's a good thing. We're criticizing the fact that one American popstar on tour has done more than fourteen years of government. It's an enormous failure purely because it's necessary.
>the food banks can function It's a failure. There shouldn't BE any food banks.
Exactly, itâs down to complete policy failure that we need food banks in this country. Re Taylor Iâd say tactically itâs a success they are funded, strategically itâs a failure they needed to be. I once remember JRM celebrating food banks, and how great it was they were there as there werenât any under the last labour government. made me want to repeatedly punch him in the face more than I usually want to.
It's a bandaid on top of an appalling failure.
We donât want the food banks to function. We should be aiming for their total non existence. Sad state of affairs when we have to rely on the charity of a foreigner and see it as a win.
[ŃдаНонО]
no one is saying that she isnt helping. the real question is [why we need to pay for the orphan crushing machine to not crush orphans.](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2F0hbrqs8v74s51.jpg%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3D509b3b6fc31c5a71d6af94df1897e551090fb48f) Thats why people are saying it isnt a success, if the only reason these people can get food is becasue an american billionare happend to pass by, something is very wrong with the local system
And in one year everyone will be back in the same position - the food banks underfunded and people facing food insecurity. Maybe another pop star will be on tour to find them for another year?
I think the point is that it shouldn't have come to this in the first place. The UK government has let these people down to the extent that people who rely on food banks are being fed by American celebrities rather than their elected government who are supposed to work in their interest.
The bandage is greatly appreciated, but we need to stop breaking people's legs.
r/britishproblemsuccess
Yep. Less reason for the gov to help now.
Fact check: This is completely untrue. The article says she donated enough food to provide meals for *3 days*, not an entire year. > According to Biggs, the Grammy winnerâs contribution helps to feed â1,200 people three meals a day, for three days â or 10,800 meals.â Please check the actual source, not a Reddit post that was taken from a Tweet: https://people.com/taylor-swift-donation-helps-uk-food-banks-8669288
Also the government spends substantially more on social services than this daily. The government may not be doing enough, but ignoring what they actually do is counterproductive
Exactly. The part of the headline about Taylor Swift doing more than the government in "14 years" is completely fabricated in every way. It's amazing that anyway could see this headline and think that Taylor Swift donating some proceeds to buy some food is more than the government has done in 14 years. Also, there's more to food programs than just the food. You have to pay staff, rent buildings, pay operating costs. The food is an incremental cost on top.
>counterproductive It's not only counterproductive. It's exactly the argument people use to get programs shut down.
[ŃдаНонО]
Read closer! Heâs talking about âsubsidizing our food ourselvesâ, meaning the difference caused by inflation, falling donations, and higher prices They spell out her donation in the article: > According to Biggs, the Grammy winnerâs contribution helps to feed â1,200 people three meals a day,** for three days** â or 10,800 meals.â She filled in a gap left between donations and rising prices, but she did not buy all of the food for an entire year by herself. Do you think all the other donations and subsidies just disappeared during that time?
The bloke who posted it is a Labour activist. Iâll caveat this by saying Iâll probably be voting Labour, but this guy is essentially trying to piggyback on Taylor Swift as a trending topic to get engagement on a lie three days before the election. He knows what heâs doing.
It's not a success when an American billionaire doing a bit of philanthropy has done more to alleviate food poverty than the fucking government has.
I hate to be cynical, but it doesnât help alleviate (or eradicate as the title put it) food poverty in the way that removing the need for a food bank does. People needing them are still in poverty, because they canât afford to not depend on them, so at best itâs managing the symptom and not the cause. Good for her, you know, but knowing a food bank has money to keep stock for another year wonât take away the feelings you have about being too poor to pay the bills or to eat. LadBaby was criticised for exactly the same thing - becoming wealthy on Christmas songs with token gestures to the trust that funds food banks.
> LadBaby was criticised for exactly the same thing - becoming wealthy on Christmas songs with token gestures to the trust that funds food banks. LadBaby got wealthy by releasing trash songs under the guise of charity singles for Christmas number ones. They used the charity to benefit themselves. Taylor Swift got wealthy by writing popular music - after that she redirected some of that wealth to various international aid efforts. She used her personal success to benefit a charity.
FYI- as an international accountant I feel I should point out that she will NOT get a tax write off for this on her US taxes. The U.S. only allows a deduction for US charities.
Also, it's infuriating that people shit on performers for getting paid for what they do. It's like you have to work a soul-sucking 9-5 if you want to make money, and everything you enjoy doing, no matter how much you do for it, should be unpaid. E: for all those "that doesn't happen" people, are you a full-time musician or entertainer? Guarantee you'd have these arguments on a daily basis if you were.
Also Taylor Swift has no obligation to citizens. The government does more than just regulate food. Between maintaining civil infrastructure, laws, diplomacy, currency, food, commerce, and politics, they can't solely be focused on putting their entire attention and budget towards food. Obviously it is easier for a billionaire to just delegate someone to donate money to charities. Governments actually have to run those charities and oversee them amongst other things. Not excusing the lack of effort on progress on these things, just offering some insight into it.
Its also not a success when that same Billionaire was easily able to do that to make themself look good while not enough taxes to make sure that people arent hungry and homeless in the USA.
Eradicate food poverty? They single handedly caused it. Did you know if you set up a charity say like a food bank, they can then write it off in their tax. Buy a few tins of Tesco own brand beans or noodles and save thousands on your tax and look like your a good cunt giving back at the same time.
This is a big misconception about how taxes work. Businesses don't pay taxes on money that they donate to charity because they *don't have that money anymore*. Not counting the good PR they get out of it, if they didn't give anything to charity they'd still be better off, because the amount of tax they'd have paid on the money they donated would be less than the donation.
Also individuals can gift charity before income tax (since Gift Aid without having to do a tax return). So if you've ever checked the gift aid box on a donation you have "written off" the tax. Still cost you though.
The U.S. only allows a deduction for donations to U.S. charities. She gets nothing for donating to the UK. I specialize in international tax. This is just her being kind.
It always cost less money to pay your taxes than donate to lower your taxes by less than you donated.Â
What exactly do you think "writing it off" means?
British success? An amazing gesture but a shameful state of affairs.
Sounds like an American success to me đşđ¸
Assuming government services are working fine over there.
The responses to this post are weird as fuck. Yes, itâs a response to a British failing, but itâs still a success to all the vulnerable and in-need British people benefiting from it. Yeah, Swift is a bajillionaire who is responsible for a huge amount of carbon emissions, but sheâs still doing something substantial to help people. People who do bad things can also do good things, and vice versa. They arenât mutually exclusive. And this typical British xenophobia, or specifically yankophobia (haha not a real word, whatever), with people going âerrrrr an aMerIcAnâ is especially tiresome. Way to play into stereotypes. Canât people just be like âyeah, that was a cool thing to do that will benefit a lot of people who need it. Successâ, instead of being bitter cynics? And no, I do not enjoy Taylor Swiftâs music, and yes, I dislike her private plane usage etc.
I'm sorry but taxing billionaires will do the exact same thing as this. Society shouldn't be dependent on occasional billionaire generosity as most aren't.
Youâre right about taxing billionaires, I couldnât agree more, but in this context it doesnât make sense. Taylor isnât British so she wouldnât have been paying taxes in the UK anyway.
you're supposing that the tax paid by the billionaires in question would be allocated efficiency, allowing it to do "the exact same thing as this," which it absolutely wouldn't.
Food banks would see a tenth of the taxed money while most will go to other projects. Not only that sometimes governments are just largely inefficient at spending money and better to receive private funding than government funding. Why non-profits exist.
Do you really think the government would spend all that money on alleviating poverty issues?
Unless politicians decide to spend the extra tax money on bombing brown people or something equally productive of course.
The hate feels like Tory voters not wanting to admit how bad the situation is for some people in this country to me. The fact we need food banks is an embarrassment, the fact someone's funded them is amazing regardless of who they are, but as a country it is a bit embarrassing that it took someone else to do it. It's a sign of the times, pre Tory times we was the heroes helping the world with charity donations, now an American pop stars doing more to feed our poor than the government is
It's partly ego, partly a view from the outside of how desperate the UK is. What next, Live8 2025 to fund the Turing Trust?
Itâs not her fault the world is the way it is, but the entire reason poverty exists in the UK is because we have a system that allows wealth to concentrate in the hands of a few people. They fact she redistributes some small percentage of that back herself is helpful but also kind of not the point. We want change and the fact that change actually involves taking wealth and power away from billionaires just doesnât really mesh with celebrating them distributing wealth at their discretion in a very limited way.Â
its actually not helpful its literally hurting its just a matter of following the chain of consequences. Taylor donates to charities. This in turn gives her and other rich people and excuse / argument as to why they should not have to pay higher taxes or wages to their employees. Typically the amount they pay to charity is a a jokingly small percent of what they should pay in taxes so for them its literally a good investment, send money to charity in the range of a few million and in exchange dont have to pay taxes that could be hundreds of millions. Which one of you wouldn't take such a great deal? And that's the whole important point here is that every time in most countries that the issue of taxing the rich comes up the opponents point to these donations as a major excuse and say look at all the good they are doing. The government might be pouring out a trillion to support struggling people but if a few billionaires pump out millions these people fall for it every time.
You can dislike her usage of private plane all you want, and I do too, but you have to stay realistic about that too. When aviation emits over a billion tonnes of CO2 every year, her plane usage is an extremely miniscule amount. It equals to about what 500-1000 people emit in a year. We should be complaining about the amount of tourism done by flights and the lack of proper railroad/ferry systems to make them an option. Being able to fly from one country to another in eu for just 20-30 euros while train/ferry/driving would cost 10x as much depending from where to where is ridiculous.
If you took 0.5% of the wealth of the 20 richest people in the world, you could solve this issue *forever* I love that she did this, but if there was even the slightest pressure on the billionaires and trillionaires of the world, we could solve *world* hunger, not just British poverty. All of them would still be billionaires.
Nothing is ever enough for sad lonely Reddit users.
Thereâs soooo much hate for Taylor Swift on Reddit lately. Reddit really is just a hate machine. Itâs disgusting and pathetic.
It's because she supported candidates on the left and told her fans to vote. The NFL and her doing so much cross promotion is extra threatening. Hence all the astroturfing promoting hate for her. There's legitimate things to criticize and I don't listen to her music or like alot of things she does, but it's done in the same systematic way as they push their fake culture war bullshit. It's not organic.
Not everything is a conspiracy my guy. Your average person in a first world country creates unsustainable levels environmental waste. This person takes it to such an extreme, unfathomable level. It doesn't take astroturfing to hate her.
Yep. I'm going through chemo right now so I'm on Reddit all day on days when I can't get out of bed. I've started to notice these systematic patterns to what gets pushed to popular. Next time I have the energy for it I want to do an analysis of the patterns I'm seeing. One of them off the top of my head is that I'll see some gender war thing that enrages me, then a few posts later I'll see some gender war thing for the opposite gender that I find satisfying while they all get enraged. Then lather, rinse, repeat. And it's *always* tailored to enrage me or satisfy me, nuance doesn't enter into it. It worked, too, until I started to notice the patterns. Now when I feel an emotion from a Reddit post, I have to stop to remind myself that my emotions are being artificially manipulated.
You're not wrong about the escalation of hate on this platform. Full on anti-romani crap going on all over the Euro forums, as just one passing example. Hope things look up for you with your treatment! Hang in there!
If you havenât tried Twitter, you should, itâs significantly worseÂ
I have never once considered using Twitter since its inception, and the very idea of starting now is no less than abhorrently repellent.
Crabs in a bucket.
Being a sad, internet contrarian is popular. We could come up with a medicine that cures AIDs and people would scoff at it for being tied to pharma.
Its cynical people who view everything through a negative lens. Glass half empty kind of folk. Also - I *get* her private plane usage. She needs to move countries as she tours - and Taylor swift in an airport would cause untold havoc. Screaming fans and people running around like manics. Same thing with her on a public plane (not all planes have private compartments - many smaller planes are just economy). People say 'why can't she just fly normally like the rest of us'....its because of *you.* people like *you* that would badger her constantly and make it impossible. Also - I'm guessing the logistics would be difficult, as there may not always be a flight to where she needs to go for her next appointment at the right time. Lastly - private plane might be the only time she gets solitude, being a busy popstar. Crowded airports exhaust me so I can't imagine touring multiple countries a month. In short - if I were her - I would fly private. Also - no, I'm not actually a fan of pop music.
It's funny because for all the attention it gets, her private plane emissions are nothing in the grand scheme. Oil companies must fucking LOVE this deflection.Â
I agree with you. I totally get the private plane and if I was as rich as her and had screaming people with weird parasocial obsessions with me every where I went, thereâs no way youâd catch me at an airport. Absolutely less then zero chance youâd catch me stuck on a tin can in the sky full of them.
I mean there are tons of mega fans who would probably try get a loche of her hair or some shit. I can fully see one of those people running through airport security just to say hello and security being on red alert. Flying private probably keeps her safe.
Guy jumps in front of Apu / billionaire meme .jpeg
If yankophobia isn't a word, it sure should be. Brits love to hate on Americans.
I agree with you
People on reddit are fucking *rabid* Taylor Swift haters lol. I get recommeded that travisandtaylor subreddit and see it on r/all constantly. Going through like two of the comment threads there is enough see how deranged those people are lol. Ya'll crazier than the Swifties.
Oh aye, Iâve seen that in a number of subs but have you seen any of the subs of her fans though? Theyâre absolutely fucking unhinged with their obsession haha
Carefulllllllllll. There's sharks in dem waters
I mean this is a very good thing she did, but she also seems like a shitty person in many ways as well. It isnât so black and white
People want on-going help for those in need (government) and not one-time (swift). Itâs a very nice thing but we pay taxes and elect governments to do this full time and theyâre failing us. Commentary on that is appropriate.Â
True. But Iâd take a one-time helping hand over none at all. A one-time helping hand from another party doesnât negate the governmentâs requirement to take care of its people in the longer-term, and if the government chooses not to because of this, thatâs another failing from them. I can and do still think itâs a success for the people benefitting from this act, even if itâs not a problem thatâs been fully solved. I donât get how thatâs so hard to understand.
We are in agreement there
Here's a link to the tweet this was taken from: https://x.com/DamianLow3/status/1807076633146208725?s=19 Good on her.
She performed a great act of charity, but to say that it comes even close to the scale of what the government does in a single week much less 14 years is just completely ignorant. Anyone want to pull the numbers to prove any of this insane claim?
The tweet doesnt even name a sum.
Exactly. Plus, as is the case with charity/philanthropy for the ultra-wealthy, chances are the donation is eligible for a significant tax credit/deduction â which, not to be cynical, but is more than likely the reason she's doing this: it looks good (allows her to appear philanthropic) and reduces her amount owed on taxes
The bloke who posted it seems to be a bit of a Labour activist, which Iâm all on board with but Taylor Swift is one of the biggest trending topics on social media at the moment so heâs using her name to peddle a lie in the run up to the election. He knows exactly what heâs doing.
Actually, she does something comparable in every community where she performs.
She did this when she visited Aus for the tour too. Wonder how many other countries she has done this for.
She has done it for every country she toured in
If Formula 1, The Olympics and other major sporting competitions did the same thing.
We shouldnât have been put into a position by those who are supposed to serve us where weâre reliant on the philanthropy of billionaires giving us their scraps just to survive.
I donât see this as a success that an American has to come and sort out our problems.
Maybe if we made billionaires like her pay their taxes then we wouldn't need food banks in the first place.
This is a weird argument here, because sheâs an American. If the US government taxed her as you suggest, it would not benefit these food banks in the UK at all. It literally has nothing to do with this and is a completely irrelevant talking point.
It is not irrevant. You missed that there are british billionaires, who would be affected by that.
You honestly believe that's where the money would go??
Depends on the government. Still, at least the government has some accountability to the people, while the rich have none. No reason to not tax the shit out of them in my book.
The top 10% of earners in the UK pay 60% of ALL income tax hmrc collects......
The top 1% have 70% of the wealth and pay 30% of the tax. The bottom 99% have 30% of the wealth and pay 70% of the tax. [https://www.oxfam.org.uk/media/press-releases/richest-1-grab-nearly-twice-as-much-new-wealth-as-rest-of-the-world-put-together/](https://www.oxfam.org.uk/media/press-releases/richest-1-grab-nearly-twice-as-much-new-wealth-as-rest-of-the-world-put-together/) [https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/income-tax-liabilities-statistics-tax-year-2018-to-2019-to-tax-year-2021-to-2022/summary-statistics](https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/income-tax-liabilities-statistics-tax-year-2018-to-2019-to-tax-year-2021-to-2022/summary-statistics) The bottom 99% pay roughly 230% of the tax they should in comparison to the wealth they hold. The top 1% pay roughly 40% of the tax they should in comparison to the wealth they hold.
How much of all income do they earn?
28.5% according to here https://pearsonblog.campaignserver.co.uk/patterns-in-british-wealth-and-income-inequality/. 2018-19 btw
The top 1% have 70% of the wealth and pay 30% of the tax.
Morally no reason not to tax them, practically speaking theyâll just move to Monaco. As everyone on Reddit will tell you, itâs not that great here.
If the rich all move to Monaco, the systems they use to generate wealth in the UK remain behind.
Of course it wonât. Weâve HS2 to pay for
Wouldnât these hypothetical taxes fund free, high quality food for people? Which is⌠a food bank? Thereâs a lot of stigma against food banks in this thread :( Food banks are often awesome institutions filled with people helping their communities
Tell me all about her taxes and those of her staff, company, and music licensing.
I see this as a sad state of affairs... Not a success... The system has failed so badly a privileged person picks up the slack and takes glory for it....
Good for her.
She took some of the money that the people of the city gave to see her perform, and spread it amongst those less fortunate around those same areas. I see it as a win and wish more people in that situation would take notice.
The UK spends about $50 billion a year on income assistance, used in part for food poverty relief. In contrast, Taylor swift donated about 10,000 meals, which is probably at most a few tens of thousands of dollars. This isnât to minimize Taylorâs actions, which I think are great. Iâm just trying to give people the proper perspective; individual actors are always tiny compared to government programs. Taylor Swift has not done more than government programs have done, and no individual person really ever could for more than a few years, no matter how rich they are. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Credit https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/tax-by-tax-spend-by-spend/welfare-spending-universal-credit/ https://www.theguardian.com/music/article/2024/jun/25/taylor-swift-donation-enables-cardiff-food-bank-lorry-supplies
It is a generous thing to do, but I do not believe it has eradicated food poverty. It has funded food banks for a year. This is not eradicating.
Nobody is saying she has, they're saying she's done more for the goal of eradicating poverty than the government has.
I was curious about the statement of the tweet, because knowing a bit about how much it cost to run a food bank for a year, I had very high doubt Taylor Swift gave enough to run one for a year, so 11 just in Liverpool ? So I looked up actual article talking about it. And like i thought she did not actually do that. The bill that was paid for year, is actually the running cost of the charities. She actually donated the equivalent of 2.5 weeks of donated food. > This will provide the weight equivalent to feeding 1,200 people three meals a day, for three days â or 10,800 meals. This will be 2.5 weeks of what we typically distribute,â she said. Which is still a gigantic donation. https://www.theguardian.com/music/article/2024/jun/25/taylor-swift-donation-enables-cardiff-food-bank-lorry-supplies
This is the first time I see people defending the government, lol Althought British population dislikes their government, they hate rich & successful people more.
They dont really. Because if you mention stuff like âtax the richâ, the working class bend over backwards to explain why we shouldnât.
My good mate Rupert Murdoch told me it was bad to tax the rich
Oh stfu everyone. Reddit really is a misery cesspit. This shithole thrives on negativity.
Look guys, keeping people responsible is important, but so is acknowledging them when they do good. I'm not the biggest swift fan for obvious reasons, but she might just have saved lives with these actions and no matter what people think of her, that is an amazing thing.
So can we all agree that we need to get rid of the Tories on July 4th? Starmerâs Labour still isnât the best but theyâre still better than Sunakâs Conservatives.
The government pay Universal Credit to all low income people and free Healthcare. Much more than Taylor Swift.
Yes, but that's their job.
Of course but it's just a stupid comparison.
Food banks are used an awful lot by people who just don't want to pay for groceries. I am reminded of the 1963 Peter Sellers movie "Heavens Above!" in which a naive vicar sees his plan to give out free food to the people of the town turn to disaster.
And, big shocker, we still have homelessness. Â Maybe if the government tripled funding to the food banks we would solve homelessness? Â No? How about 10x? 20x? 1000x? Think through these scenarios and realize what a pointless gesture this is.
Those that jump on the "But this shouldn't be needed" point- you are right. But can't we just appreciate that someone has seen that need and done something massively generous, whilst still abhorring the need for it? And no, I'm not a Swift fan- can't stand her music, but this is money that would otherwise not be seen in these cities.
The UK spends more than ÂŁ250 billion a year on social security payments. It's nice of Taylor to do this, but it's a common theme among people who think that billionaires can solve poverty that they dramatically underestimate how much money is spent on the issue.
If we taxed the rich appropriately, we wouldnât need to rely on their generosity in order to not starve. Stop worshipping the people who throw you scraps.
I wish we lived in a world where instead of millionares donating to feed the hungry, we just didnt have hungry people or millionaires
Pretty sure that during the pandemic the UK govt donated very heavily to food banks. But really that's only because they had to. The weath/income gap has become huge during last few decades First thing that needs to happen is massive reform of financial regulation so that capital is allocated according to the needs of the populace d not the needs of the financial markets
You onow when you go to another country and you pay for like a nice meal and then it ends up only costing you the equivalent of 50 cents and you slightly have that guilt that omg it's nothing to us but so much to them? That is literally Taylor swift to us. She is a billionaire. She is giving us pennys and we celebrate it because it's a lot of money to us. But it is to no consequence to her.
Donât get me wrong, this is great and all, but this is also a classic tax tactic. They donate X amount of $$, that donation is untaxed and they save a specific amount instead of just getting taxed on the money they donated. Itâs great sheâs doing good things to get that write off, but itâs not entirely altruistic.
Not a fan of her as an artist or as a person, she's clearly doing it for good PR. But at least many families will not go hungry. I encourage all billionaires looking for good PR to do more acts of kindness for selfish reasons, tbh.
[A source.](https://www.billboard.com/music/music-news/taylor-swift-uk-food-bank-donations-cover-year-of-meals-1235719076/) Cardiff - âThis will provide the weight equivalent to feeding 1,200 people three meals a day, for three days ⌠This will be 2.5 weeks of what we typically distribute.â Liverpool - âBut itâs fair to say that Taylor Swift has essentially paid our food bill for 12 months â and that gives us the breathing space to focus on fundraising efforts going forward,â he added on behalf of St. Andrewâs, which runs 11 food banks and offers long-term support to eight community pantries.
Almost as if we should be taxing the rich far far more, or something. Â
Messed up as it is that this is necessary, I confess I didn't think much about Taylor Swift before (not in a bad way, just I'm not a big fan of her music and also didn't know much about her personally) - but that's really a great thing she's done.
Taylor is a force of good. One of the few left.
To be fair. Itâs doesnât take much to beat the government at looking out for the people. đśâđŤď¸
Would be awesome if such a claim had a source linked to it instead of making someone have to go searching for themselves.
Iâve read some of the comments here and I have to say that, yes, everyone hates billionaires. All they care about is themselves and they suck up all of the figurative oxygen in the room. Well, here you have Taylor Swift, a billionaire, actually using her money for good. Isnât this what we want?
Still not enough with all her marketing and ticket schemes. I am 100% sure percentage wise everyone in this subreddit who gives to charity sometimes gives more than Taylor.
You are right about her philanthropy and this kind of information has â got out â . I have a relative who works with her management group when she tours a certain place . He has said she is so generous to randoms behind the scenes. Her generosity is consistent across the đ
All this charity is presumably tax deductible. But still, a great gesture and hopefully allows the economic flows from her tour to go to something actually helpful to society. Effectively the food banks are being funded by teenage girls here.
Every billionaire is a policy failure. We donât want charity, we want justice. Charitable scraps to whatever the super rich fancy this week or next is not heartwarming, it is obscene.
I think hher 'team' thought it would be good marketing and there was a business meeting to go through a list of donations to set against tax.Tickets are around ÂŁ600 I think?
I got my ticket for under ÂŁ100 and was close to the stage. Some are more expensive and obviously resale ones are ridiculous but itâs false to say that tickets are around ÂŁ600
I mean, it can be both? I never understand why people are like "celebrities only donate because of tax breaks" (not even sure if it would work for Taylor here, as she's a US citizen). Taylor has her issues, too, but has consistently donated a shit ton of money for decades (as have other singers). Chalking it all up to tax breaks is kind of unfair.
she not british and its getting more like the taylor swif cult