Wednesday, June 29, 2011

Gore: Population Needs to ‘Stabilize’ to Prevent Global Warming

Gore: Population Needs to ‘Stabilize’ to Prevent Global Warming - By Nat Brown - Planet Gore - National Review Online

... from its related story at Weekly World News:

Al Gore believes that the sterilization should be voluntary – at first – “women who are evolved will volunteer to be sterilized for the greater good for planet.” BUT, if women do not choose to sterilize themselves, Al Gore believes that the government should force women (under 25) to be sterilized.
“We have to take drastic steps to save the planet. There are too many people – we must take aggressive action or we will all be dead,” Gore said in a speech Monday in New York.
“When the population begins to stabilize and societies begin to make better choices – then women can have babies again.”
I actually have a better idea, and it doesn't involve messing with the reproductive health of women world wide, although it is just as horrible. It's so simple, that I should patent it...

Ready for it?

Euthanize those over 75. In essence, outlaw Great Grandparents.

Now, bear with me here, it's not as horrible as it seems. The essence of everything that's wrong with society comes down to costs. Pensions and health care being paramount. We raise an outcry because we may have to pay a very good pension to bureaucrats for decades after their working life because we don't know how long they will live. We bristle (at least, I bristle) whenever I hear someone advocating the reform of CPP in order to double the payouts to people already on the plan. We constantly have to plan our retirements around the uncertainty of our natural lives. It's generally accepted that the majority of the health care costs for a person come at the end of their life. By implementing this idea, we can avoid all of those costs, all of that uncertainty.

Not only does this serve to reduce costs to the various levels of government, it also serves to help government in another way - there will be a set term for tax deferral vehicles such as RRSPs and RRIFs. You will force people to cash in their tax deferred accounts earlier which will result in windfall tax receipts by the government. These tax receipts can reduce the amount of tax that the average person will pay.

It's generally accepted that someone who passes away in their 70s and beyond have lived a good long life. This is a common refrain, presumably to help the bereaved deal with their loss, but it does ring with some truth. So why don't we lock 'er in as they say? At that age, a person is generally much less productive in society anyways, so why don't we allow them to pass on?

Sadly, this would mean another 12 years of Mr. Gore. I guess there is a downside to everything.

Update:  Since one commenter already missed the point, I would like to point out that this was written with tongue planted firmly in cheek.  The fact that someone mistook this for me actually believing in euthanasia for the elderly means that I have to work on my "dripping with sarcasm writing style".

Woman accused of spraying cops with breast milk

Woman accused of spraying cops with breast milk | Weird | News | Ottawa Sun

One thing's for sure... the kid'll have to spend a couple days on formula while she sobers up.

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Rob Ford No Pride

Rob Ford No Pride : News : SunNews Video Gallery

Why is it so important that Rob Ford shows up to Gay Pride week? What possible reason is there to actually WANT an alleged homophobe at the event?

What could possibly be going through these people's minds to want the attention and the validation of someone who doesn't share that lifestyle? Is it narcissism or lack of self-esteem that makes them crave that attention? Or is it simply a case of the media hammering home their own agenda trying to fix something that doesn't need to be fixed.

See, the math is simple. Mr. Ford is making a choice to continue a long standing family tradition on his holiday weekend. These voters can CHOOSE to not elect him next election. I doubt that the election will hinge on whether he attends the pride parade, but it is a consideration. It's also a consideration that he treats the LGBT community no different than the straight community - that is treats it as equal and no different than anyone else.

... and really, isn't that the whole purpose behind the parade in the first place? To show that the LGBT community members are no different than anyone else?

Friday, June 24, 2011

Regurgitating the Apple: How Modern Liberals "Think"

Regurgitating the Apple: How Modern Liberals "Think" | The Heritage Foundation

What happens is, they are indoctrinated into what I call a "cult of indiscriminateness." The way the elite does this is by teaching our children, start­ing with the very young, that rational and moral thought is an act of bigotry; that no matter how sin­cerely you may seek to gather the facts, no matter how earnestly you may look at the evidence, no matter how disciplined you may try to be in your reasoning, your conclusion is going to be so tainted by your personal bigotries, by your upbringing, by your religion, by the color of your skin, by the nation of your great-great-great-great-great grandfa­ther's birth; that no matter what your conclusion, it is useless. It is nothing other than the reflection of your bigotries, and the only way to eliminate bigot­ry is to eliminate rational thought.
There's a brilliant book out there called The Clos­ing of the American Mind by Professor Allan Bloom. Professor Bloom was trying to figure out in the 1980s why his students were suddenly so stupid, and what he came to was the realization, the recog­nition, that they'd been raised to believe that indis­criminateness is a moral imperative because its opposite is the evil of having discriminated. I para­phrase this in my own works: "In order to eliminate discrimination, the Modern Liberal has opted to become utterly indiscriminate."
I'll give you an example. At the airports, in order not to discriminate, we have to intentionally make ourselves stupid. We have to pretend we don't know things we do know, and we have to pretend that the next person who is likely to blow up an airplane is as much the 87-year-old Swedish great-great-grand­mother as those four 27-year-old imams newly arrived from Syria screaming "Allahu Akbar!" just before they board the plane. In order to eliminate discrimination, the Modern Liberal has opted to become utterly indiscriminate.
A very interesting (and long) read

Update: or watch the video:



h/t: Blog Quebecois and Blazing Cat Fur

Learn to pick your battles

Lest you get a Giant Metal Chicken (Language caution... viewer discretion is advised)...

Thursday, June 23, 2011

Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall recalls legislature to force end to SGEU crop insurance strike

Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall recalls legislature to force end to SGEU crop insurance strike | News Talk 650 CKOM

The first time in a month that we hear a peep out of Mr. Lingenfelter, and this is what we get:

NDP leader Dwain Lingenfelter wants to see the bill before he makes any decisions. He is, however, accusing the premier of playing politics, insisting the government could have avoided the current situation by making a deal with the union at any time in the 21 months they've been without a contract.

"Now in the middle of the flooding he's trying to look like he's saving the day when he could have solved this problem months ago," Lingenfelter insists.

You see, it's obvious that Mr. Lingenfelter has never worked in anything resembling a management position in a company. And this, quite frankly, is reason number 45930 that I never want Mr. Lingenfelter anywhere near the province's tiller or books. To assert that it was just a matter of making a deal with the union shows what he would have done in this situation. He would have caved to their demands. They would have received everything that they wanted, no matter how unreasonable.

Now, factor in that you have a governing party that the unions don't like with their hand on the rudder of the province, and simply making a deal is much easier said than done. Interesting though that the first time we've heard from Mr. Lingenfelter since the session ended would be to obfuscate on whether his party would support a back-to-work bill and then belittle the government's efforts to obtain a fair deal for the taxpayers of Saskatchewan. Makes me wonder whose side he's on.

Private-Public Wage Disparities

Private-Public Wage Disparities: FCPP - Frontier Centre for Public Policy

According to a CFIB 2008 study, taxpayers would save $19-billion a year if publicsector wages were equalized with private-sector ones. And that only includes those civil servants with direct private sector equivalents -in other words, no police, firefighters, etc. were included.

That's an amazing figure.  $19 billion.  That's almost 10% of the federal budget, and make no mistake, the federal budget makes up the brunt of that figure.

The opposition were asking where the $4 Billion hole in the Conservative plans to cut spending are... this is it right here.  The media party should be trumpeting this from every platform they could find... if they had a mind towards really making sure the cuts happened rather than just trying to embarrass the governing party.  Some of Mr. Levitt's proposals on how to change bargaining in the public sector are very interesting:


First, fire the advisors and lawyers who have brought us to this precipice and are comfortable with conceding.

Second, take tough positions at the bargaining table and, if the union strikes (which they are less likely to if they believe this will occur), make sure the cost of the strike is taken out of the employees future salaries and benefits before the strike is settled. With one not-for-profit client I negotiated for, we told the team-sters every time our offer was rejected, the next would be less. On the third offer, they believed us and accepted the reduced offer. The next time they didn't strike.

Third, the government should pass legislation requiring arbitrators to make comparable salary and benefits in the private sector their main criteria. Couple that with provisions requiring them to adjust wages up or down to accomplish that. If that occurred, ordering workers back to work would have teeth.
Read it all

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

On his birthday...



It's appropriate to show some of his most memorable quotes

Re: Kill The Senate?

BACK OFF GOVERNMENT!: Kill The Senate?: "NDP Pat Martin's plan to kill the senate: “ We may not be able to abolish the Senate by constitutional amendment, but we can cut off its bl..."

Secondly, this isn't that bad of an idea for the Tories. So long as the senate refuses to pass reform legislation we can say "fine, we'll cut the taps off."
I would point out to the author that Mr. Harper did start to cut the taps off... not through adjusting salaries which most assuredly would have to go through the Parliament, but by merely not appointing Senators to the chamber. In fact, I suspect that's his plan after the last round of appointments.

In the last appointments, Mr. Harper filled 3 out of 4 vacancies. He never stated why he didn't fill that fourth vacancy, but as others including myself have pointed out - he doesn't need that fourth senator to maintain a plurality if not a majority throughout the next 4.5 years of government. I don't think Mr. Harper plans to fill any more vacancies until he has honestly attempted to get a reform bill through the Senate.

The problem is that the Senators themselves (mostly Liberals) decried the tactic the last time he tried it. They even went so far as to attempt to push a bill through that requested that the Governor General appoint Senators without the advice of the Prime Minister.

Nope, if I were the Senators, I would make minor adjustments to the bill - like amending it to add more years to the term limit, but I would let it pass. There are just some positions that are indefensible.

Crop insurance employees walk

Crop insurance employees walk

Alan Evans, chair of the SGEU negotiating committee, said the province's offer of 1.5 per cent, two per cent and two per cent pay increases over three years, for a total of 5.5 per cent, is unacceptable.

The SCIC said the union has formally withdrawn its initial wage demand of 7.75 per cent over three years and now has no monetary demand on the table.

You know? I can understand when the sides are 10% different and nobody is budging that a strike may or may not be appropriate. I don't understand why they can't just negotiate, both sides move and get it done.

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

You know it's wet when...


I wonder how the artist feels about this addition to her art.

Monday, June 20, 2011

Darth Vader, Star Wars

First the article (Top 10 Worst fictional dads ever):

#3 - Darth Vader, Star Wars

As Darth Vader, a half human, half cyborg who relishes his attempts to control the galaxy, Anakin Skywalker was the deadbeat dad. He waited years before entering the lives of his children, Luke Skywalker and Leia Organa, and when he did, his involvement was mostly as a sinister dark overlord attempting to kill them. So the next time your father cuts off your driving privileges, just be glad he didn't cut off your hand and immediately reveal the paternity-test results.

and then the rebuttal:

For almost 20 years, Darth Vader didn't even know he had children. Did you know that, TIME Magazine? Did you uncover that in your research? But unlike so many other deadbeat dads, the moment he found out, he took responsibility for his son, even saying on camera, "Luke, I am your father." He didn't even ask for a paternity test. Would the third worst father ever really do that, TIME Magazine?

But you should read it all

Friday, June 17, 2011

A politician gets to the root of the CWB issue...

"We want to give farmers in Western Canada the same options as farmers in Ontario have."
-Gerry Ritz

It's a short hit with audio from Mr. Ritz.  Definitely worth a look.

Cops not probing murky MP costs

Cops not probing murky MP costs

Liberal Leader Bob Rae said police are free to investigate the matter once it is in the media, but it may not be necessary in this case.

"If you find that a mistake was made or you find that there was a genuine misunderstanding of what the rules were and how they were to be applied, there are many situations in the workplace as well as elsewhere where people say ‘Well, this doesn’t look to us like a police matter,’ " he said.

Hmmmm

Why has the Conservative Party been taken to court over "In and Out".

It's a simple thing - if it's illegal, then it should be prosecuted. One would think, however, that racking up 5 years of rental expenses (at about 20Gs per year) would be more than a "misunderstanding". Maybe some of the MPs who "misinterpreted" SHOULD be punished in warning to the rest of their colleagues.


Thursday, June 16, 2011

Riots erupt in Vancouver after Stanley Cup loss

Gallery: Riots erupt in Vancouver after Stanley Cup loss

Whether you like it or not, THIS is what happens when there aren't enough police officers on hand cracking skulls and dispersing the crowd.

I wonder when the first outcry of police brutality will surface...

Country would lose money to privatize the CEEB

From the Globe and Mail:

A privatized CBC that would commission less Canadian content, spend more money on foreign programming and compete more heavily with existing broadcasters for ad revenue would generate only $1.16-billion in overall economic activity. Meanwhile, the economic impact of redirecting the CBC’s grant back into general revenues would be $1.8-billion, assuming the money was used according to the government’s current spending profile. But other private broadcasters and media would take a $500-million hit to their economic impact as they faced a new commercial competitor. So Deloitte’s final measure is that privatization would leave the Canadian economy with a loss of about $1.3-billion – or, in the language of the report, the CBC’s net value added is $1.3-billion.
Now, I'm sure that Deloitte did the evaluation based on established methods, and I have no doubt that they had no political motivation.  I question the CBC's motivation for requesting this study, but they are acting in their self-interest, if not mine.

Here's the thing though - Deloitte is assuming that the CBC would continue on exactly as it is currently operating, and that the industry would suffer if the CBC had to compete for all those dollars with everyone else.  Deloitte also assumes that the government wouldn't do something with that additional $1.1 Billion like doing a big fat corporate tax cut that will create jobs and additional economic activity.

Rbairos has it correct:

Lets think this through:

The government takes a 1.1 billion of your tax dollars to generate 1.3 billion in economic activity.  I wonder what economic activity *we the private sector* could generate with A BILLION dollars annually?  Since when has the government *EVER* outperformed the market in anything?
I'd like to see what their study would say about how the economy does with an extra billion dollars in the hands of people who invest and grow.

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

And now... another Epic mealtime



"Are you serious?"
"Dead Serious."

The Paul Martin Guide to Cutting Deficits

The Paul Martin Guide to Cutting Deficits: FCPP - Frontier Centre for Public Policy


Most importantly, the Chr├ętien-era Liberals were able to balance the
budget, "not with large tax increases, but with substantial cuts in government
spending." Federal spending as a percentage of GDP went from 18% in 1993 to 13%
in 2009. And the Canadian economy prospered because of it.

During this period, the unemployment rate fell from a high of 11.4% in 1993
to 6% in 2007, according to Statistics Canada. Moreover, as the government cut
spending, more resources were freed up for the private sector. As a result,
Canada experienced high growth rates of 4-5% between 1997 and 2000.




Let's give credit where it's due... If it wasn't for Mr. Mulroney's maneuvering to get the GST through the Senate and to get NAFTA done very little of that growth would have happened, regardless of the government's spending levels.


Sure, when a government makes cuts that deeply, it is a strong signal to business that taxes won't go up and that now is a good time to buy that new piece of equipment, however the switch to the GST did more to take a tax burden off business than any amount of government spending cuts will do.

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

The pettiness of the media, a juxtaposition

I have to agree with BC Blue on this topic.  I just spent the whole afternoon listening to newscasts every half hour where the pompous, self-righteous jackaninny on the radio lead off with this story in that "uh-oh, look what the bad boy did now" gossipy tone.  And in reality, this is as much of a story as a local story in Saskatchewan not too long ago.

Now, it's not a perfect juxtaposition, but the concept is still there.  On the national stage, Mr. Harper is paying the commercial rate for plane tickets for his daughter and himself to travel to Boston for the game tonight.  Of course, he needs to take security with him wherever he goes and as such it's likely cheaper to take the jet that is there for his use in order to haul all of them rather than actually flying commercial.  It's actually entirely likely that the commercial rate that he'll pay would cover the fuel and pilot costs for the 6 hour round trip.

Now, compare that to our story in Saskatchewan, where the Leader of the Opposition was caught with his CVA vehicle in Colorado, where it was driven and left there with his wife and daughter while he flew back to attend the Legislature.  Now he says that he reimburses the province fully using a mileage rate, and that it was perfectly normal for him to use his fuel card to fill up the car, however there is something that didn't sit right with me.  As I mentioned in the post, if that were true, it would have been at least as cheap, if not much cheaper, for Mr. Lingenfelter to just rent a vehicle in Colorado for use down there rather than taking his CVA vehicle with him.

Now the difference between these situations?  The Conservative is smeared repeatedly during news casts all day while not a peep is said during newscasts about the NDP Leader of the Provincial Opposition.  In fact, the only way that I heard about it was through the morning talk show where he replayed the news conference and discussed it for a half hour.  In both situations, the politician was acting within established policies.  The only real difference in the principle was that one was a Conservative and the other NDP.

Gormley was right - it wasn't worth pursuing by the press when it was the NDP Leader in Saskatchewan, and it most certainly isn't worth mentioning with the Prime Minister.

Tuesday, June 7, 2011

If a strike becomes the death blow for a business

Should the striking workers get employment insurance?

Mail volumes dropped by as much as half since strikes started: Canada Post

All this strike is really doing is pushing people to alternative methods to ensure that their correspondence arrives in a timely manner. The only people who are using mail are those that have to use mail. When your volume drops by half during a strike, it isn't because people are necessarily sympathetic to the union cause, it's that they have had enough with an underperforming pseudo-crown corporation that costs more to deliver less service. The true test will be how much of that volume comes back post-strike.

Monday, June 6, 2011

Puzzling Economics In Teachers' Union Negotiations | Canadian Taxpayers Federation

Puzzling Economics In Teachers' Union Negotiations Canadian Taxpayers Federation

The teachers union will argue that it’s difficult to pay teachers based on performance because many factors impact a student’s grade that are beyond a teacher’s control. That’s true, but at the same time, mankind has walked on the moon. Surely we can come up with a better model that’s fair for teachers and taxpayers; and is better than the status quo.

If you pull aside a teacher you respect and ask them who the best teachers are in their school, they can tell you. So why not make peer evaluation and principal observation part of the criteria?

One thing is for sure, the system needs a shake-up. It should begin with an economics lesson for the teachers’ union and a new pay system to help the best teachers out there.
 Just an addition to Mr. Craig's point here.  It isn't just peer evaluation and principal observation that will break the current model and allow for merit pay for teachers, you need to also survey parents.  Yes, some parents may have an axe to grind, and yes, there is more to a child's performance in school than just the teacher's actions.  That being said, there ARE ways to reward and encourage young go-getter teachers without also rewarding the lazy and uninspired.  You can set steps based on evaluation of peers and administration, you can set a portion of the step based on evaluation by parents, you can set part of the step based on the results in the classroom (ie average advancement of students based on standardized testing), you can add bonus amounts for each activity led.  You can include lunch and recess supervision as part of the 6 hour work day.  You can ensure that all teachers can write off the supplies they purchase and use in their classrooms.  There are a lot of ways to reward behaviour which is helpful to the students and the employer while penalizing the behaviour which is unhelpful.

Of course, that isn't what the union wants - to allow anyone to be punished for their behaviour, but this is how it works in the real world. 

Saturday, June 4, 2011

Dad goes cyber-begging for house

Sun News : Dad goes cyber-begging for house

The Maloneys and their daughters, ages two and four, have lived in a three-bedroom townhouse in London for nearly five years. It doesn't have a fully fenced backyard, their yard backs onto a busy roadway, and rent is $900 a month -- a payment that gets harder to reach every week, Maloney said.
A laid-off manufacturing plant worker, Maloney went back to school to become a registered nurse. But the bills started to pile up, so the 29-year-old took a job as a personal support worker.
The family tried getting a mortgage, but were rejected because of what he called "stupid mistakes with credit cards" when he was younger.
And so, in desperation, he turned to the Internet, setting up a blog asking for someone to buy his family a modest house.
"I'm willing to risk extreme embarrassment for even the smallest chance that someone would see it," he said.
First off, he's renting a 3 bedroom townhouse for $900, and he's complaining about it?

Seriously?

And the only issue is that it isn't fully fenced? Really?

I can't imagine the mindset that a person has to have to beg for someone to buy them a home rather than to do the heavy lifting involved in acquiring one for themselves, if that's what they need. I can't imagine what goes through a person's mind to expect someone else to pay for your mistakes rather than finding a second job and supplementing your income to afford the house you're in. I can't imagine what goes through your mind that makes it all right to beg for someone else to fix your problem when the solution may be to find a 2 bedroom house with a fenced backyard and force your children to share a bedroom.

The fact is that a couple with suitably flexible full time jobs could work minimum wage and earn enough to pay $900/month for rent, as long as the rest of their lifestyle is limited. They could own and operate 1 vehicle, and they can buy their food in bulk like any other family. Steak becomes "tube steak", and eating out becomes a treat rather than a regular occurrence. They can do the heavy lifting of repairing their credit so that when things turn around for them, they can purchase a home of their own. If they're REALLY having trouble, this is the type of situation that social housing (at least in Saskatchewan) is designed for, however in Saskatchewan they wouldn't pay much less on monthly rent. All of these are suggestions which could have been done before turning to cyber-begging.

I weep for a society where it's acceptable to beg for someone else to solve your problem, but I am glad that his wife is mortified - it gives me hope for the future. I would like to say one more thing to Mr. Maloney though:

There are plenty of high-paying jobs in Saskatchewan. All he needs to do is look.

Friday, June 3, 2011

Chances Are....

Fellow contributor Aldo writes:

I heard Adler this afternoon, and Menzoid made a joke about the hick part of Saskatchewan....


It actually ticked me off...


I started thinking...


To you all Torontoans that like to make Saskatchewan the butt of your jokes....


Chances are...


The next time you put gas in your car... chances are... it is from Saskatchewan.
The next time you eat a piece of bread or eat pasta... chances are... the wheat is from Saskatchewan.
The next time you grumble about the deficit... chances are... it wasn't because of Saskatchewan.
The next time you fertilize your lawn... chances are... the potash is from Saskatchewan.
The next time you look at your diamond ring... chances are... the diamond is from Saskatchewan.
The next time your CFL team is beaten... chances are... it was because of Saskatchewan.

Posties walk off the job in Winnipeg

Posties walk off the job in Winnipeg | Winnipeg | News | Winnipeg Sun

The strike began in Winnipeg because that's where Canada Post began its modernization program with high-tech mail processing systems.

The union blames Canada Post's modernization program for health and safety problems and has made sick leave a major issue in the negotiations.

A couple of weeks ago, I had a discussion about unions with my uncle. For years, he was highly placed in Health administration, not to mention at Ipsco (which he described as having the toughest union in North America), and as such, I assumed that he didn't look very favourably on unions. I got schooled on that day, and listened to his arguments, but one of my counter arguments was that unions get in the way of businesses doing what they need to do to survive.

Nowhere is that more evident than with Canada Post. To specifically point out that they are starting a strike in the heart of Post's modernization program speaks volumes to the true motivation of the workers and the union in this negotiation. The fact that CUPW won't go out on general strike also speaks volumes about what they think their chances will be to get a satisfactory resolution from Canada Post.

From their point of view, I get it. They see Canada Post becoming less and less viable as email, electronic services and the internet begin to take over the market place, giving customers instantaneous service virtually free as internet has become commonplace in the home. They see this and they're scared as heck, and really, who can blame them? Will it be too far off where people can willingly opt out of a mailing address due to the decreasing use of "snail mail"? Personally, I only check my mailbox every week or so, and of the mail that is actually useful to me, most of it goes unopened as I can already access the information on the internet. Few of the packages I receive through the mail can't be received via courier - whether it's DHL, Loomis, Purolator, FedEx or the like.

I get that by CUPW doing a general strike, they run the risk of the public finding out just how irrelevant Canada Post actually is. This puts the union in a much worse bargaining position both now and in the future, and forces them to accept much less than they would otherwise accept. This is the failure of the union - that no matter how benevolent the union can be, they can't get blood from a stone. If the company or the management can't afford what is being asked for, the union can strike all they want but they won't get it.

An interesting use of moving sidewalks...

Thursday, June 2, 2011

U2: disagree with the politics, love the music

The U2 show I attended last night reminded me why some bands are timeless.  I can say without a shadow of a doubt that I enjoyed the evening, even with the minimal preaching that Bono did.

But something bothered my girlfriend after the show.  We agreed that as minimal as the preaching was, U2 is a band that feels very strongly about some of their causes and makes no bones about using their popularity to promote those causes.

What got the girlfriend though, was how they achieved that popularity in the first place.  This is a band that supports Greenpeace, and yet uses the resources of a small city for each and every tour stop they make.  This is a band that uses up to 450 semis to transport their stage and setup (and keep in mind that they, like many other big acts, have 2 set ups to allow for faster turnarounds on their shows).  This is a band that sucks up enough electricity during each concert to power a small city for the day.  This is a band that makes no bones about flying around the world to tour and to meet with world leaders while supporting an organization which seeks to limit the amount of resources each person uses.  All of these didn't sit right with my girlfriend.

What didn't sit right with me is that for all the lobbying of world leaders, for all the social activism, for all their so-called power, you never hear of U2 putting any skin of their own into those games.  You never hear of them using some of their own money to solve these problems.  This, despite the fact that their tour grosses $10 million per night and netted them $130 million in earnings for the year ended June 30, 2010.

It would be very easy for them to bump their ticket price by $10 with the extra money going directly to a specific cause (like the One campaign among others).  This alone would have seen contributions of $30 million for the last measured year.  Alternatively, they could pressure Ticketmaster or Live Nation to give the option to donate with each ticket purchase, allowing those who want to donate to do so, and those who don't to not be forced to donate.  They could also consider giving 10% of their own net to their causes just to make sure that it looks like they are doing more than talking.

In the end, it's good that they are talking about their causes, but talk is cheap.  Their tour is a huge platform to talk, but if they aren't willing to put their own money and resources on the table, why should we?