So, a few people have been whingeing – some directly, the more cowardly amongst them not so – about my perceived illiberal stance with regards to benefits and those granted refugee status.
Now, I say ‘perceived’ because I do not see anything particularly liberal about not reforming a system that throws money tax payer’s money at a people unwilling to contribute to society. Sure, the individual(s) receiving that money doesn’t have to do shit for it – in real fucking terms, going to sign on every couple of weeks and if you still haven’t found work, being made to go on a course for a week does not count! – So they’re free to do or not do whatever they want. However, those out working, earning and contributing to the system so that the whole fucking lot doesn’t collapse, have no choice but to give up a large percentage of their earnings to ensure just that. They lack the freedom to wake up at three pm, lounge around in their pant and do fuck all, or do all the things that those people slaving away would rather be doing.
Giving people money for nothing is an absurd ideology that breeds an inherent laziness in the population and a general, deep-seated psychological mentality that someone else is responsible for everything from giving some lippy kid in the street a slap when he gobs on your car to picking up litter from the communal garden at the front of your terrace. This mentality is so entrenched that now, when people do try to do something like clear the street of snow it’s possible for them to be prosecuted. Now that’s a fucked up state of affairs.
I can see people saying these issued are unrelated. These people fail to see that a society is a machine in which each part is reliant on the next – if one part goes tits up then the rest is sure to follow. No one issue is completely independent in our society, in the same way that no one individual can live completely independently within it.
I don’t give a flying fuck where the people come from; it’s inherently unfair for them to receive a boon for not contributing to a system they actively take from. I don’t care if they can trace their lineage back to King Alfred or if they turned up yesterday on the back of a large and previously unknown fucking dolphin – it doesn’t fucking matter. What does matter is that you shouldn’t be able to take when you contribute nothing. That is the way of the parasite.
If you’re in the pub and there’s one tight cunt that continually disappears when it’s his turn to get a round in, what do you do? You are rightly angry seeing as you have been ripped off so either you stop getting his – in which case he is forced to make a contribution – or you remove him from your group.
Why is it seen as bad form in the bar but we let bastards get away with the same shit on a massive scale every fucking day of the week and it’s enshrined in our minds as social fucking responsibility?!
People should have to pay tax for five years (arbitrary figure) before being allowed any type of benefit.* Allowances could be made if the amount of tax paid exceeds (x), I suppose, where (x) is equal or greater than the average 5 year contribution, but that’s a technicality.
If a system such as the above was instigated then it would actually make it an impossibility for people to sit on their arse and get paid for it.
And accepting more people, who haven’t contributed to the system on the back of a miserable excuse calculated to manipulate the hearts of the leftist political-correct fuckwits (who seem to be incessant in their tribble-like breeding!) just takes the piss.
*Incidentally, I do seem to remember DK arguing something similar to this – I would make the comparison but as far as I’m aware, the archives are still unavailable and I had been ranting about this before I stumbled across his blog.
Thursday, 8 July 2010
Wednesday, 7 July 2010
Filthy Smokers Cost NHS Billions
Hounded on the street, discriminated against in society, excluded from public places, refused life saving medical treatment – I’m not going to talk about how smokers have become the last
true minority – we know. We’ve read it repeatedly, can see it for ourselves and the only people that actually disagree are the self-righteous, holier-than-thou white knights rushing in to save us from everything from red meat to carbon emissions. Well, them and people too intellectually devoid to trust anything other than the mainstream media’s paid for position that we’re continually spoon fed. These people I consider one and the same – they are the congregation to the Self-righteous’ church, lapping up every word like holy jism slipping saltily down the throat in the vestry of St Absurdio’s.
What really pisses me off is that I consider myself to be a considerate smoker – by which I mean I won’t blow it in your whiney little face, even if it seems incredibly tempting – and yet still there are those who feel they can tear into me for enjoying a smoke.
My usual response to these people is that I’m harming only myself, I do it away from them and I pay my fucking taxes, so you can fuck right off. And we all know the response: Some half baked idea that the amount that we, as smokers, cost the NHS is far greater than the amount of tax revenue generated by tobacco sales.
Well, according to the Governments own statistics, smokers are costing the NHS £2.7bn http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8490490.stm while the revenue generated by the tax on tobacco products is around £8.8bn! http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/tax_receipts/table1-2.pdf
I’m not going to get into a complex economical debate but I hardly fucking have to!
This is the reason why the government will not make smoking completely illegal. The money they make from it is just too fucking attractive. They’ll demonise those of us who still haven’t quit, who stand in the rain when everyone’s enjoying the warmth of the pub while our mates enjoy the ‘smoke free environment’ (personally I call it a lack of fucking ambience, but there we go) and they’ll cross the street to avoid us like the plague but they’ll still take our cash, thanks . . . and still plough our taxes into advocacy groups: http://fakecharities.org/pages/posts/action-on-smoking-and-health-ash5.php
true minority – we know. We’ve read it repeatedly, can see it for ourselves and the only people that actually disagree are the self-righteous, holier-than-thou white knights rushing in to save us from everything from red meat to carbon emissions. Well, them and people too intellectually devoid to trust anything other than the mainstream media’s paid for position that we’re continually spoon fed. These people I consider one and the same – they are the congregation to the Self-righteous’ church, lapping up every word like holy jism slipping saltily down the throat in the vestry of St Absurdio’s.
What really pisses me off is that I consider myself to be a considerate smoker – by which I mean I won’t blow it in your whiney little face, even if it seems incredibly tempting – and yet still there are those who feel they can tear into me for enjoying a smoke.
My usual response to these people is that I’m harming only myself, I do it away from them and I pay my fucking taxes, so you can fuck right off. And we all know the response: Some half baked idea that the amount that we, as smokers, cost the NHS is far greater than the amount of tax revenue generated by tobacco sales.
Well, according to the Governments own statistics, smokers are costing the NHS £2.7bn http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8490490.stm while the revenue generated by the tax on tobacco products is around £8.8bn! http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/tax_receipts/table1-2.pdf
I’m not going to get into a complex economical debate but I hardly fucking have to!
This is the reason why the government will not make smoking completely illegal. The money they make from it is just too fucking attractive. They’ll demonise those of us who still haven’t quit, who stand in the rain when everyone’s enjoying the warmth of the pub while our mates enjoy the ‘smoke free environment’ (personally I call it a lack of fucking ambience, but there we go) and they’ll cross the street to avoid us like the plague but they’ll still take our cash, thanks . . . and still plough our taxes into advocacy groups: http://fakecharities.org/pages/posts/action-on-smoking-and-health-ash5.php
Too Stupid to Live in Your Own Country? We'll Put You Up!
I’m sorry but this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10180564.stm is just fucking absurd. Being gay is no reason to grant someone refugee status no matter what their native country’s attitude to it is!
I mean, what the fuck is wrong with us? Are we just going to grant everyone refugee status? Fair enough, the guy was attacked – that’s pretty savage – but he was attacked outside his home by a mob for being queer in public. Well, that’s just fucking stupid! With the full knowledge of the reaction likely to be generated by his actions, this guy still decided to act the way he did – we can’t just give refugee status to every stupid cunt!
If you go to a dinner party you don’t turn up in your pants (unless it’s a particularly good dinner party) – you are aware of your environment and – despite whether or not you agree with the conventions – you conduct yourself in a manner befitting to that situation. When not conducting yourself in such a manner is likely to result in being beaten to death by a fucking mob then, I’m sorry mate, you’re a prick.
And the fact that we, as a nation, then turn round and say “Ahh, so you’re a prick? Well, we haven’t got enough of those, why don’t you COME THE FUCK IN, SIT DOWN AND HAVE A FUCKING CUP OF TEA! Don’t worry, it’s on us and you’ll be a star at next years gay fucking pride parade!”
I mean, what the fuck is wrong with us? Are we just going to grant everyone refugee status? Fair enough, the guy was attacked – that’s pretty savage – but he was attacked outside his home by a mob for being queer in public. Well, that’s just fucking stupid! With the full knowledge of the reaction likely to be generated by his actions, this guy still decided to act the way he did – we can’t just give refugee status to every stupid cunt!
If you go to a dinner party you don’t turn up in your pants (unless it’s a particularly good dinner party) – you are aware of your environment and – despite whether or not you agree with the conventions – you conduct yourself in a manner befitting to that situation. When not conducting yourself in such a manner is likely to result in being beaten to death by a fucking mob then, I’m sorry mate, you’re a prick.
And the fact that we, as a nation, then turn round and say “Ahh, so you’re a prick? Well, we haven’t got enough of those, why don’t you COME THE FUCK IN, SIT DOWN AND HAVE A FUCKING CUP OF TEA! Don’t worry, it’s on us and you’ll be a star at next years gay fucking pride parade!”
Monday, 5 July 2010
The Ongoing March of the Bubble-wrap Brigade
The health and safety fuckwits are on the march once more: Parents threatened with social services’ intervention if they do not supervise their children’s bike ride to school: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1291970/Couple-threatened-social-services-children-ride-bikes-school.html and rugby - in schools at least – to undergo a face-lift whereby the scrum is outlawed because someone might get hurt: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/10501327.stm. What the fuck?
In the first case, I applaud this couples wish to enable their children a degree of freedom and self-sufficiency which they themselves enjoyed. In the latter, all contact sport can be dangerous – it is refereed to minimise that danger, although a small percentage of injuries will, no doubt be sustained.
In both cases, am I seriously being told that the children would be ‘safe’ if these factors were removed? If the answer’s yes, then these fuckwits have got their heads buried so far in their own arses that it’s a wonder they don’t just pop out of existence. Kids cycling to school alone are apparently at risk from ‘stranger danger’ (a term which I incidentally loathe due to it’s insinuation that every stranger is some dirty mack-wearing paedo whose single track mind is to find a vulnerable child to show some puppies to) and traffic accidents. Heh – well, we’re all at risk of being mowed down as soon as we step out of our front doors. The fact that these kids are cycling through back streets minimises this in as much as it can be minimised. As far as the strangers are concerned, there’s a chance that everyone at meet might not have the most honourable intentions, but is this a reason to stop their interaction with the rest of humanity?!
As far as possible injuries sustained during contact sports goes; I’m sure most people will agree that children are far more likely to injure themselves and each other when not engaging in a game that, while is a good outlet for physical aggression, is regimented and refereed.
What really fucks with my head with these two stories, though, is that we’re continually bombarded by a certain section of the population, that unless we cycle everywhere and play sports and eat our vegetables and wash behind our ears, we’ll all die before we’re thirty and be reprobate souls until we do. . . and then the same bunch of interfering cuntlords (there’s more than a little overlap) comes along to tell us we can’t do it after all because we might hurt ourselves.
The only way the possible dangers in the above situations could be avoided is if children – like smoking – are banned from public places and raised in isolation until such time as they can be released in to the community without being carried off by a nonce or skinning their knees after a fall (mental anguish, possibility that the wound might get infected with plague or some such).
Instead of wasting time on traditionally normal, ‘moral’ (whatever that is) and generally upstanding behaviour, why can’t these glorified excuses for curtain twitchers stop interfering in the normal lives of normal people and help some poor bastards that actually need that help?! While time’s wasted on these pathetic charades the kids that really need it are just going to go wanting. . .
In the first case, I applaud this couples wish to enable their children a degree of freedom and self-sufficiency which they themselves enjoyed. In the latter, all contact sport can be dangerous – it is refereed to minimise that danger, although a small percentage of injuries will, no doubt be sustained.
In both cases, am I seriously being told that the children would be ‘safe’ if these factors were removed? If the answer’s yes, then these fuckwits have got their heads buried so far in their own arses that it’s a wonder they don’t just pop out of existence. Kids cycling to school alone are apparently at risk from ‘stranger danger’ (a term which I incidentally loathe due to it’s insinuation that every stranger is some dirty mack-wearing paedo whose single track mind is to find a vulnerable child to show some puppies to) and traffic accidents. Heh – well, we’re all at risk of being mowed down as soon as we step out of our front doors. The fact that these kids are cycling through back streets minimises this in as much as it can be minimised. As far as the strangers are concerned, there’s a chance that everyone at meet might not have the most honourable intentions, but is this a reason to stop their interaction with the rest of humanity?!
As far as possible injuries sustained during contact sports goes; I’m sure most people will agree that children are far more likely to injure themselves and each other when not engaging in a game that, while is a good outlet for physical aggression, is regimented and refereed.
What really fucks with my head with these two stories, though, is that we’re continually bombarded by a certain section of the population, that unless we cycle everywhere and play sports and eat our vegetables and wash behind our ears, we’ll all die before we’re thirty and be reprobate souls until we do. . . and then the same bunch of interfering cuntlords (there’s more than a little overlap) comes along to tell us we can’t do it after all because we might hurt ourselves.
The only way the possible dangers in the above situations could be avoided is if children – like smoking – are banned from public places and raised in isolation until such time as they can be released in to the community without being carried off by a nonce or skinning their knees after a fall (mental anguish, possibility that the wound might get infected with plague or some such).
Instead of wasting time on traditionally normal, ‘moral’ (whatever that is) and generally upstanding behaviour, why can’t these glorified excuses for curtain twitchers stop interfering in the normal lives of normal people and help some poor bastards that actually need that help?! While time’s wasted on these pathetic charades the kids that really need it are just going to go wanting. . .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)