What someone does with their own money is their own business as long as it is not hurting anyone else. With this said, I am sure she passes herself off as a leftwing liberal. Hate posers and agree with the spirit of your point of view. Roughly From the Talmud I think. If I am not for myself, who else will be for me. If I am not for others what am I.
Kim could have saved a lot of children in her own country or anyplace in the world that she chose. However, that is not what she chose to do--nor do we know what she does with the majority of her money or if she has any charities that she normally supports. The problem with providing aid to "save" starving children is that many times money provides only temporary aid that often makes the situation worse. In addition, if someone sends that aid overseas, many times aid is stolen by corrupt governments that have a vested interest in keeping their people in poverty. I agree--the wedding was a fake and she should not be admired for it. However, boycotting here is worse than useless. She produces nothing and is famous only for famous. Give her more attention and she'll continue to rake in the cash being paid to attend parties. Ignore her and eventually her 15 minutes of fame will expire.
I really don't want to spend any time researching that particular waste of breathable air but I have to wonder if she paid for the champagne or if the network that produced the wedding episode of whatever show she is on paid for it.
Good point. Rich Liberals tend to like to spend other people's money. Saw her x video. Great body but little skill. Amazing how rich talentless people are getting richer on so called reality tv.
She's a reality-TV "star"... along the lines of Paris Hilton. Both have videos of themselves having sex with their boyfriends on the internet, and probably dvds lol. Both are semi-famous for being semi-famous... and not much more than that lol I'm pretty sure her father was one of O.J. Simpson's lawyers (Kardashian). Her "new daddy" is Bruce Jenner... from the Olympics I think.
These type of things also amaze me. How much does one person need? How much money do you need to live comfortably? We have become a prideful people and watch while others starve. I cannot tell you how disappointed I am in the many people around me that live luxurious lifestyles and watch others down the street go hungry. We have got to change. But what should we do? Well, what I do is my part and lobby for giving more away? It barely makes a dent, but soon there will be others that do the same thing and one person can make a difference. I just don't see it anytime soon, do you?
And who is to decide which person has too much? Who is to decide which person does not have enough? Who is to decide what is "comfortable?"
A truely fair and impartial person or group of people is preferred... so no radicals need apply. Someone familiar with the effects of poverty, it's nuances, as well as what it takes to live comfortably without the want for food, shelter, clothing, and health... someone like that is necessary. I can do that... how much does it pay?
I think the more interesting questions are how it gets decided and under what circumstances and what will follow from it.
She is about as liberal as a common lamp post. If she says anything liberal it is Hollywood chic. She and her ilk are, I think, a disgrace, but they are kept in play by the good old American public. You can't blame the left for this one, although I know you will.
I've little hope for that as you must be rich to get elected to anything anymore, either that or sell your soul to rich people for their money. Politicians don't legislate anymore, they campaign. The government is actually run by those bureaucrats we love to hate so much.
