Stump thinking

And the idea of a flat tax on all transactions is so unjust it is beyond the boundaries of any credible solution to any problem

From the man who supports the Robin Hood Tax.

31 thoughts on “Stump thinking”

  1. WHAT THE FUCK?!! This is the very man who demanded a tax on ALL inflows and outflows from bank accounts.

    Does he have Alzheimer’s?

  2. I agree, low income earners benefit the most from government largesse so it is unjust if they don’t pay the most tax.

  3. I agree, low income earners benefit the most from government largesse so it is unjust if they don’t pay the most tax.

    I’m not so sure. I reckon, on an individual basis, the people who benefit the most from government largesse are those who occupy senior or middle management positions in government bodies, NGOs, fake charities, and the like.

  4. Who are you, Tim Newman, that you are so wise in the ways of maximum public teat sucking?

    I defer to your wisdom, all such people should pay double tax.

  5. @”Tim Newman
    January 22, 2016 at 1:28 pm

    I agree, low income earners benefit the most from government largesse so it is unjust if they don’t pay the most tax.

    I’m not so sure. I reckon, on an individual basis, the people who benefit the most from government largesse are those who occupy senior or middle management positions in government bodies, NGOs, fake charities, and the like.

    Such people will never be able to pay more in tax than they receive from Government as all they receive comes from the Government

  6. Who are you, Tim Newman, that you are so wise in the ways of maximum public teat sucking?

    Weeeell, I just kind of figured some poor bastard drawing £300 per week dole still has a miserable existence jumping through the hoops, etc. and they don’t get to lord it over everyone else. But the director of a fake charity? He gets a nice car, nice house, status among his peers, gets to lecture the rest of us and fuck up the country as he goes.

    I’m not so sure about double taxation, but a sturdy gallows would suffice.

  7. You’d have to do a total cost/benefits to measure “largesse” anyway. If somebody is on benefits because government policy has rendered them unemployable (minimum wage, general trashing of the free market by central planning, competition from migrants, etc), are they benefiting from largesse?

  8. If somebody is on benefits because government policy has rendered them unemployable (minimum wage, general trashing of the free market by central planning, competition from migrants, etc), are they benefiting from largesse?

    That as well.

  9. “If somebody is on benefits because government policy has rendered them unemployable (minimum wage, general trashing of the free market by central planning, competition from migrants, etc), are they benefiting from largesse?”

    There’s also the fact that the State has also fucked up their free education, giving them a C grade GCSE in basket weaving, a bad attitude to work and personal responsibility, and sentenced them to life on the margins of society.

    But the State is your friend, it gives you free shit…………bit like a drug pusher really, got to make sure the addicts stay hooked, can’t have them escaping now can we?

  10. Yes. Let’s do that.

    You’ll have fun getting people to join the infantry and get endlessly shat on while making the same money as they would on the brew.

    Or don’t the Armed Forces, nurses, air fucking traffic controllers etc work for the government?

    Almost as puerile as Mr Eck’s usual “confiscate their pensions”.

  11. Or, why should Paul Boisser (part from being a scumbag fish head) have to get by on £3,800 per year for his job (plus, of course, his 3* pension, but he could be bumming around on a yacht in the Med and he’d still get that. )

  12. “If somebody is on benefits because government policy has rendered them unemployable (minimum wage, general trashing of the free market by central planning, competition from migrants, etc), are they benefiting from largesse?”

    So they gave no personal responsibility? Whatever?

  13. “There’s also the fact that the State has also fucked up their free education, giving them a C grade GCSE in basket weaving, a bad attitude to work and personal responsibility, and sentenced them to life on the margins of society.”

    Their bad attitudes are a result of their upbringing of which their schooling is but a part. You are blaming the state for all problems just as leftists blame capitalism for all problems. Duh!

  14. Isn’t the bigger point that Ritchie might finally be starting to understand taxing everything repeatedly might not be the best idea? More likely he is just spewing words and has had a 1000 monkeys moment.

    To all of those who are ragging on the welfare system I have a couple questions. From what I’ve read charities in the pre-welfare days were able to cover 10-25% of the needs of the poor. The welfare state inefficiently transfers enough wealth to keep these poor from starving to death or turning to crime. Leaving the moral questions out those that starve can be ignored as they won’t cause any more problems. What is the solution to those that turn to a life of crime? Would the additional jails and police necessary really cost much less than the current system?

  15. Theo:

    “So they gave no personal responsibility? Whatever?

    ‘Have’ not ‘gave’.

    Bring back the preview, Tim!”

    You need to go back to Irony school.

  16. @ LIberal Yank
    “From what I’ve read charities in the pre-welfare days were able to cover 10-25% of the needs of the poor.”
    It depended where you were – some places it was 100% of the needs (not wants) of the poor, others it might be zero. The “parish” was supposed to provide a minimal level for the workless through no fault of their own, but not the workshy – hence the workhouses, devised by some uncharitable persons allocated the job of dispensing charity.
    To answer your question – gaols in a PC age are horrendously expensive, a multiple of the cost of sending the brutes to Eton. Police are expensive and retire at 55 so the cost of their pension adds 50% to their nominal salary. CCTV is the cheap option; before CCTV became efficient the government encouraged “Neighbourhood Watch” where the residents took over watching for burglars, thugs etc, saving them £ms on paying police to do that part of their job.
    May I ask what you describe as poor? Someone with an income equivalent (in Purchasing Power Parity) to my starting wage as a computer programmer or to an Albanian bank manager or to a single mother in a New York ghetto orto an EU bureaucrat? [Clue -that’s in ascending order of magnitude]

  17. Obviously where you live will affect what income you need to have food, shelter health care, transportation and heat. Anyone(or family) that doesn’t make at least 25% more than this total I consider to be poor in my book.

    The problem I’m running into trying to come up with a decent cost-benefits analysis is that different source massage the numbers differently. I have yet to find anywhere that lists all of the costs of the criminal justice system in one place. On the welfare end things are just as bad. While the Cato institute has a broad definition of welfare that gives $1 trillion a year that number was arrived at by picking number that fit their argument. For some reason Medicare is not included while Medicaid is. On the low end of $212 million that the Washington Post claims only direct payments are claimed which also doesn’t tell the whole story.

  18. Bloke in Costa Rica

    My definition of a living wage is if you are not actually dying of hypothermia or kwashiorkor you are earning a living wage.

  19. Longrider / Tim Newman

    ‘the free entertainment will make up for it’

    That’s why I’d alternate between a multi- person gallows and ‘extraordinary rendition’ to ISIS held territory in Eastern Syria – I’d like to see some of these bustards in a video with the new ‘Jihadi John’

  20. “…‘extraordinary rendition’ to ISIS held territory in Eastern Syria…”

    Yup. Hillary Clinton gets to go first.

  21. Mike,

    Set up the crowd funding and they will contribute. There would be enough funds to enable the evil, lying cow to fly first class and enough over to send her bitch of a daughter with her (Peace be upon Charlotte Rampling).

  22. V-P

    “That’s why I’d alternate between a multi- person gallows and ‘extraordinary rendition’ to ISIS held territory in Eastern Syria – I’d like to see some of these bustards in a video with the new ‘Jihadi John’”

    Spare us your violent but otherwise vacuous fantasies. Instead, why not just have a wank while watching an ISIS video?

  23. Theo thank you for the link. I never tried to claim that all the people on welfare would get jobs if it didn’t exist. I know that many of those on welfare are there through poor personal choices.

    What I want to know is what costs more, the welfare system, or the penal system we would have to put in place if we didn’t have welfare?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *