Tuesday, 18 January 2011

Just exactly how substantial is "substantial"?

I see that the Queen of all things English (and apparently you and me) has "made a "substantial" private donation to the Queensland flood relief appeal, according to a Buckingham Palace spokeswoman"

While initially I was pretty p*ssed off at the hubris in her issuing a press release to tell the world of her generosity - after all, I haven't seen most of the major donors on this list seeking international coverage of their generosity, but then I got to wondering how much she actually donated? 

How much do you reckon would be "substantial"? - $50,000, $100,000, $1 million maybe?

Well within the next four years or so Australia will be spending just 0.5% of it's gross national income on aid programs.  If Queenie were to contribute just 0.5% of her estimated $450 million (USD) net personal worth  her donation would have been $2,250,000 (not accounting for what some estimate as her $17 billion in property holdings worldwide and certainly not accounting for the kids own 'accumulated' wealth).

My guess is that her "substantial" donation was a lot closer to 0.01% of her fortune ($50,000) than to 0.05%.

The sooner we are rid of her the sooner we don't have to put up with this p*issweak attention seeking (let alone the never-ending tripe about her bloody spoilt little children).

No comments: