Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-17 of 17 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 21 Sep 2008 08:00:56 BDT
I for one, will not be buying any more Rowling books, why would she give £1 million to the fat cats at hte labour party? If she was feeling that benevelant she should have given it to a worthy cause like ChildLine who struggle to survive with meagre goverment, rather than to some greedy, gluttonous politicians who have nothing better to do than run this country down.

In reply to an earlier post on 21 Sep 2008 14:24:51 BDT
helloworld says:
I agree. I don't believe that the proceeds of this book will go to a charity, so I don't want any of my money to end up supporting Labour! Wtf with saying married couples shouldn't get help either? Why make a distinction at all - we all need help thanks to Gordon the Moron. 'Dame Rowling' is as out of touch with reality as Labour is.

In reply to an earlier post on 21 Sep 2008 23:05:42 BDT
Sylvia Tench says:
What a couple of insightful postings from really clued-up people. Yes, the fat gluttonous cats of the Labour party will no doubt spend it all on luscious grapes and gold-plated sandwiches. And of course J.K, Rowling's lying when she says she's giving the proceeds of her latest book to charity, I'm sure she'll be giving it to Satan himself. If she had any sense she'd give all her money to David Cameron, as the poor impoverished old Etonian is probably down to his last two of or three million. It's a well known fact that J.K. has been friends with Sarah Brown for years, as they run a children's charity together, the evil deluded fools! Actually I expect that's all a front for drug-smuggling or something.

In reply to an earlier post on 22 Sep 2008 12:14:40 BDT
helloworld says:
No I think that Labour will sink this donation into the same big black hole that they have sunk all taxpayers money into. I think that you are also delusional if you think that kids will end up better off because of it. For the record, Rowling is giving the proceeds of the special edition to charity, not this edition. Get your facts right before you bother to comment.

In reply to an earlier post on 30 Sep 2008 17:01:19 BDT
This is nonsense! J K Rowling can do what she likes with her money. Would Mr Slack like us to tell him what he can spend his money on?

In reply to an earlier post on 1 Oct 2008 10:40:02 BDT
F. J. Doward says:
Good for you Wes! Why are people so jealous of others who have worked hard for their success? OK, so we don't all get the lucky breaks, but that is life, get over it. Oh, and just for good measure Mr Slack, use your spellcheck if you can't spell. Read my lips, BENEVOLENT.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Oct 2008 16:34:18 BDT
Whoa, steady on everyone. This thread is getting a bit nasty. Opinions on Jo's actions and the political parties are fine but please don't insult each other. We are all um...an Amazon customer tribe! Argue points, but no insults please! I am a Labour voter but not with any passion, its just a family tradition but on reading of Rowling's action, I was initially like "oh no, what is she doing!?! Dont get involved, girl!". But after reading further on Jo's explanation of her actions, I understood. She grew up with a Conservative ruled Britain and didn't feel they ruled fairly towards the people she cared about such as one parent families such as herself. Added to the fact that she is close friends with Gordon's wife for many years as charity colleagues, long before Gordon was in power. She simply felt that investing in Labour's campaign to stay in power will ensure a system that bodes a better prospect for those she care about. Its her judgement. I dont know if her actions will help that cause but she believes it or at least hopes it. £1 million donation for that hope is in her view obviously a worthwhile act, if it got wasted then she will be sad but at least she tried. If you think about it, donating £1 million directly to a charity (and dont let us forget she also donates a lot to charities directly too) wont be as effective as donating to a system that will improve the prospects for all. Helping to improve the system is far better than to simply help individuals to just survive day to day. Of course its simply her political opinion of which party would be best and she is entitled to give her support. Nothing wrong with that in my opinion.

In reply to an earlier post on 7 Oct 2008 21:23:40 BDT
K. A. French says:
i agree. i hate the labour party but its her opinion and having just read an artical on the guardians website its because labour (aparently) give more money to poorer familes and to sick children, not because she agrees on imigration policies etc.

In reply to an earlier post on 7 Oct 2008 21:26:48 BDT
K. A. French says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Oct 2008 18:58:45 BDT
Indigo Peas says:
I wholeheartedly agree with Professor Potter; my initial thoughts on this were "oh, no, what has she done and why?" and I did feel an initial drop in my esteem of her. But like Professor Potter, I soon realised that once again Jo has proved how awesomely brave she is. Risking public ridicule and criticism would have been inevitable. Making the £1 mil donation and the statement justifying the donation would ensure the world took note of what she wanted to say. Either action alone would not have done this. Regardless of which party got the money, EVERY party took note and now, with any luck, they will ALL realise that in order to win public support, they need to support single parents, not bung them all in one stereotyped box in blind ignorance, and judge and condemn them.

So regardless of which party comes into power, Jo's £1mil donation reaches much further than directly paying this amount into any charity for single families (although she has done this too in many shapes and forms).

We all know Jo has always been a passionate, ACTIVE supporter of causes which strike a chord with her. Before she was rich and famous, she supported with her time and efforts. Post HP, she has done this with her time, efforts, money and name. For those who bother to research the facts, it should be obvious by now that she is no fool, and she is no coward.

I stand in awe.

In reply to an earlier post on 10 Dec 2008 16:06:17 GMT
J. Kennedy says:
I don't support Labour either but I would never tell someone what they should do with their own money. She worked bloody hard for it, she can do what she likes. Besides, I believe if you donate a huge amount like this you must declare it. Perhaps she didn't mind telling everyone, but it may have been because she had to.

In reply to an earlier post on 16 Dec 2008 20:18:25 GMT
Last edited by the author on 16 Dec 2008 20:21:17 GMT
Running Man says:
Actually helloworld, I am afraid that you are wrong on this one. A donation of 1.62 is made to the charity from the sale of the standard edition. (Even WH Smiths who where selling it for 99p when you bought £15 of other stuff are still making this donation). If you had checked you would have found that JK Rowling donates a huge amount of money to charities she supports and in any case I agree with other posters who say that she has every right to do whatever she wants with her own money.

In reply to an earlier post on 18 Dec 2008 21:15:25 GMT
I think that the responses of some of the people on here are incredibly narrow minded and thoughtless. Trying to attack Jk Rowling because she has chosen to do something with her own money is senseless, the money raised from her charity books goes straight to the fund she set up to donate massive amounts to worthy causes, and the amount of effort, work and money that she has put in to charity work is amazing and commendable, and what she does with her own money is nothing to do with that. You can all attack her if you want, but i remain "Jk Rowling's man, through and through."

In reply to an earlier post on 19 Jan 2009 03:15:53 GMT
G. Lyon says:
Dear Indigo Peas. You say that JKR is not a fool or a coward. She is both. A fool for writing such trash and a coward for not trying to write some decent literature.

Oh and everyone, we ARE told what to do with our money. The government spend our money, it is called TAX, and the people who vote for different parties are deciding who will be in power and therefore what our money is spent on.

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Jan 2009 20:57:20 GMT
Laura says:
Excuse me, since when did JK Rowling give money to the labour party? the back cover of 'The Tales of Beedle the Bard' says (I quote) "£1.61 from the sale of this book will be donated to the Children's High Level Group" and then "The Children's High Level Group (CHLG) campaigns to protect and promote children's rights and make life better for vulnerable young people" See, nothing about labour, the government, or politics!
And I don't think JK Rowling is thinking of writing any more books as I believe she said they will be judged against Harry Potter.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Mar 2009 20:26:51 GMT
[Deleted by the author on 6 Mar 2009 20:28:13 GMT]

Posted on 24 Apr 2009 21:17:11 BDT
J K Rowling can do what she wants with her money.
She doesn't need anyone telling her what to do.
So she supports Labour So what? Does it really matter?
I think you're being pathetic even talking about not buying her books just because she gave money to certain people...
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Participants:  15
Total posts:  17
Initial post:  21 Sep 2008
Latest post:  24 Apr 2009

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions