Monday, 4 October 2010




Conference, blah blah blah, I am wonderful, clap me, please;  blah blah blah, David is wonderful, clap me, please; blah blah blah and the ToiletCreepers, they're wonderful too, more claps 4me.

It's quite simple. And fair, too, said the pasty-faced, trust-funded wanker to an audience of redneck lunatic imbeciles who would have cheered a Shetland Pony had it addressed them from the stage; it's quite simple, if you earn forty-five grand you lose the child allowance thingy, but if there's two of you, and you earn  eighty grand, you keep it. There, Simple. And Fair. Do the math.


Dick the Prick said...

Yeah, it's not brilliant. HMRC are lobbying to have every firm etc pay them and then they tax it and pay the wages. Brave new fucked-up world.

mongoose said...

You could not make it up. Have I not said right here that giving people like me that money is just plain stupid. We have it paid into a savings account and have not spent a penny of the 33-child-years-worth. Not a fucking penny! It is now quite a tidy bunch of free dosh - hurrah!

So taking child benefit off the likes of us is an open goal. "I surrender, take it. Give it to poor people." And then they fuck it up like that. Dear, oh, dear. Morons.

Dick the Prick said...

Dear Mr Mongoose.

I dunno if it is that stupid. As you say, chances are your kids are just gonna inherit it. Using that crappy rule of thumb that the greater ones wealth then the greater the propensity to vote Tory (cud be bollox, obviously) then this policy attacks Tories.

To hit their own first before the CSR and the small print where poor people get screwed could be just a tactic to cover his arse; base politics that reaps about £10 billion. Hmm..dunno.

mongoose said...

There are two levels of risk, Mr DtP. Firstly, as you say, they disadvantage their own voter base. That might be stupid or it might be principled and brave. They then screw the deal by offering any couple with the wit an opportunity to massage their personal incomes under the thresholds. In truth, anyone that well off is already doing that to avoid one marginal tax rate.

It's the clumsiness of the implementation which is stupid. Does the saving add up to £10billion? As much as that? I doubt that will turn up.

jgm2 said...

Much as I'll be pissed off by the loss of funds it won't materially change my life. I'll be amazed though if the reported 'savings' of 1bn a year (set against a shortfall of 160bn quid a year) are going to make any change to how utterly fucked the Maximum Imbecile left the UK economy.

Particularly when you consider the additional administration required to marry up Child Benefit with folks individual tax returns. Unless we'll all have to remember to tell the taxman when we get a pay-rise.

As with the 51% tax on 'the rich' by the Maximum Imbecile in the basest of class war moves. I'd be a lot happier if being shafted for over half your earnings would actually solve the fucking problem as opposed to raising, what was it, 2 or 3 billion quid a year extra. Again, a mere flea-bite in a 160bn quid annual deficit. Because, you know, paying over 50% tax is very demotivating. Particularly so when it is purely for lowest-common-denominator class-war based reasons rather than any credible attempt to solve the fucking problem.

jgm2 said...

Actually. Scratch that remark about 51% tax not solving the problem. It's not intended to solve the problem. It's just the government's way of telling you to stop working such long hours and let somebody else have a go.

Dick the Prick said...

It is quite amazing how utterly cack-handed they all are. Considering they've had at least 30 months to be in a position to analyse the economic situation coupled with a reasonable expectation of gaining office; it's a bit of a head scratcher what the fuck they've been up to.

Not just the MPs but the hangers on, the guys who never leave the office. These wasters have been doing some serious bollock juggling rather than working.

What an absolute piece of piss being them 'hard working families' my arse as Rab C may have said.

Caratacus said...

Because I am stricken in years, two things occur to me here: 1 - I started humming "Inchworm" when I read your insightful summary. 2 - my kids are grown and gone so the issue of child benefit does not affect me. Directly.

Indirectly, I never cease to be amazed at just how thoroughly any politician can fuck things up given half the chance.

Still, if he is able to sell turds to a gullible public and convince enough of them that they are eating honeycakes, then he will have the chance to do so for a little while longer yet.

mongoose said...

Would that it were enough to leave to them, Mr DtP. I view it more as their college fund. Christ knows how much it will be come the time. I don't want my kids coming into the world saddled with tens of thousands of quid of debt. In this way, the public purse will have paid for a good bit of it - just like it did for me all those years ago. That's the plan anyway. We'll look at the numbers when it happens. We have a Plan B.

a young Anglo-Irish catholic said...

Thing is, Gideon is a very clever bloke, as much as you may want to punch him.

These 'anomalies' are nothing of the sort. These are deliberate expositions of weird feminist New Labour laws.

Once the cry builds up, there will be new laws floated that allow a married non-working woman to merge her tax free-allowance with her husband and still get the benefit.

Likewise the line that all benefits will be limited to £500 per week. The Guardian walked straight into the trap.

The Gruaniad headline said '£500 is the limit, some families to be £93 per week worse off.'

The bloggers did the math immediately and realised that £500 per week in the hand is £35k per year income. And you don't have to go to work.

CiF was full of red-faced hitherto-liberals, fuming about the unfairness of it all.

Clever boy George. He stopped the 2007 election with a single policy. Today he began to turn the tide of emoting that sees us spend £200bn per year - more than all the income tax and national insurance combined - on the Welfare State.

I can see why you still want to punch him, though.

yardarm said...

Gideon Osborne, another grossly overpromoted policy wonk with an overweening sense of entitlement funded by the Bank of Pater and Mater, lecturing us all on the need to put in a hard day`s work: a subject which he is no more aware of than he is astrophysics. I always have the suspicion that he dresses like a member of the chorus line of Cabaret in his leisure hours.

Don`t be too surprised at the child benefit anomaly: Gideon is in charge of the Treasury; along with the Bank they acted as Gordon`s little wizards, implementing the Brownian Lunacy in all its Ruinous glory; flogging the gold, running up a deficit, expanding PFI, inflating the debt bubble and indulging the banks.

With these clowns in charge sheer executive incompetence is the best we can hope for.

call me ishmael said...

"These 'anomalies' are nothing of the sort. These are deliberate expositions of weird feminist New Labour laws."

Sorry, mr yaic, I don't understand. Do you mean expositions or excisions?

CiF isn't.

Arsebridger, in my view, is the worst, the greediest, the most duplicitous broadsheet editor in history. A better, more realistic sense of the redneck is to be found at the Filth-O-Graph, where at least its editors are plainly in hock to its owners, it's readers to their wimmin-hating, nigger-bashing dicks. Bunchafreaks and friggin weirdos, so to speak.

black hole sunset said...

Dunno about that, Mr YAIC.

Quite aside from the manyfold implications of gosborne's yachting mishap, Team Cam were piss-weak in the run up to the election for reasons which should be all too obvious: They'd have fallen for all that banking sector horseshit just as readily as Scatty McBroon did.

They had no room to talk, and they knew it.

So now they've got two problems; general public sector expenditure, which they probably could've 'cut their way out of', were the national finances merely fucked - as opposed to the terminology stretching state of affairs which actually prevails - and a banking sector collapse of a completely unprecedented size and scale.

What's most rotten in Team Cam is they way they silently accept Brown's blank cheque giveaway to a coven of gurning, shitlicker spivs, as a fait accompli and take as given that the general public must suffer both debts and cuts.

call me ishmael said...

It's the Zombie Banks, mr bhs, and the Zombie economy, you saw it here first, a coupla weeks back.

"Once the cry builds up, there will be new laws floated that allow a married non-working woman to merge her tax free-allowance with her husband and still get the benefit."

Happened almost immediately didn't it? This lunchtime?

a young Anglo-Irish catholic said...

Aye, Mr I, about then it did.

Perhaps I'm exaggerating Mr Osborne's powers.

As for expositions - did I overstretch my limited vocab?

What I was trying to say, was that Osborne wanted to cleverly expose some of the inherent absurdities in what Labour left behind and then let the media ponder it for a while.

For example, this issue of two-worker families getting a massive tax break because women's tax affairs are considered individually, even when they are married or living with their child's father.

Me and her ex-indoors netted a modest £70k between us, but didn't pay higher rate tax.

That is the great middle class tax break. A stay-at-home mother in Nappy Valley with a £70k husband sees a bigger tax bill.

That was one of the points Wallpaper man was trying to lead us all to realising.

That's why I knew that when we'd all argued over the child benefit business, the Continental-style transferable woman's tax break would be floated.

In Germany, a man with two children and a stay-at-home wife gets the thick end of his first 19k Euros earnings tax-free.

There is even a 3k Euro 'commuting' tax break.

The UK's feminist tax and benefits system works against poor people taking jobs and against mothers staying at home, for a few years at least.

Harman's laws are designed to get women into full time work, keep their job open and get the wee kiddies away to full time education asap.

Ever wondered why there's so little discussion about the UK having the youngest school starting age in Europe?

mongoose said...

There is, Mr yaic, a stupidity about it all. We have the most complicated tax code in the whole universe. That's bonkers. As you describe it, Germany is manifestly more sensible. Scrap all the credits, allowances, complications and madness. A man with a wife/partner not working (or obviously vv) and he/she looking after a young kid or two just gets to have a higher income tax threshold. It is so easy that it would not tax little Osborne. And look, God help us, it encourages mum and dad - makes it easier, married or not - to stay together and look after the kids. The feckless and feral, like the poor, are ever with us but benefits life is now so complicated that it's almost a job for them to understand it. But as someone said hereabouts the other day, £500 a week is £35kpa without lifting yer arse from the sofa. That's plenty of Stella, isn't it? Simplify, repeal, strike out, set us free from your mad English rules.

call me ishmael said...

No, sorry, Mr YAIC, your usage of exposition was correct, my fault. And your own and mr mongoose's understanding of taxation obviously far more comprehensive than my own. I think, nevertheless, that you credit Osblow with too much cleverness, unless it is of the idiot savant kind.

The school age urgency has always struck me as bizarre, not just for -for want of a better word - biological reasons, we have always nurtured our young for far longer than other mammals, but for economic reasons, too; it might have been ok in the days of close kinship networks for baby to be left with granny round the corner, but not with a paid baby minder who might be ten sorts of lunatic and whose charges may eat-up any earned income. Getting both parents into work, of course has benefited hugely the so-called building societies, now banks, and the likes of the repellent fuckpig Stewart Rose as parents now toil to pay the exorbitant costs of worthless shitty housing and to dress themselves as though they were all thrusting young executives and not pathetic wage slaves, too timid to piss.

That they fucked up this change in PR terms and that the uneasy leader of the Tories was forced to backtrack seems to be fairly clear, although I am sure it will all pale into insignificance in a couple of weeks. At which point the braying Tory spivs will have to find something to say other than anomalies, dear boy, anomalies; worthless, spiteful, fucking cabbage-brained, shit-eating retards.

a young anglo-irish catholic said...

'anomalies, dear boy, anomalies'


BTW - I reposted my first comment on the Guardian CiF site and it was deleted.

call me ishmael said...

Yeah, me too. I posted about three, a few weeks back, nothing controversial or profane, well received by other readers, deleted with the first light of dawn. You never know, it might be a machine, doing it, but I suspect it's a phalanx of spiteful Metropolitan liberals, lickspittling, like they do, in the Street of A Thousand Arseholes.

mongoose said...

The newspaper sites are worthless. It is all managed and ruthlessly censored. There are also those professional posters who repeat their double-dip, all-in-this-together, hard-working-families, dreary sentences from their dreary, dreary, pox-ridden mouths. It's like "1984" without the funny bits. The good news is that some blog sites - Fawkes' Gaff, for instance - now have these pros whoring themselves about the place, messing up the rhythm and spoiling the kiddies' fun. Mrs Dale too is cruelly undermined by their droning on.