Universal Credits and the shortcomings: are you really on our side?

The Universal Credit system. The great shakeup to Britain's benefit system. It's aim seems to be primarily, from what those talking heads propose, a simpler system. It does look simpler. I have always preferred working on the internet, and if you are stuck on the temping plateau, it's easier than calling up every time your situation changes - this I'll admit.

 

I also understand the logic behind monthly payouts and the need to manage your own rent payments. Having the same monthly payment system both in and out of work makes sense and it's likely that it'll make people a little more ready for that system.

Of course not everyone has the luxury of a constantly buzzing, ultra-fast broadband connection, and most libraries are closing down, so where people are supposed to go to sort out their claims is a bit of a conundrum. It also seems distracted by the minor fiddling with sums, rather than tackling major issues - and the major issues are not with the benefit system itself.

The real issue - the glaring issue - is that none of this is really on the side of people who want to work. For the government to be on the side of those who want to work they would need to force businesses to adhere to a living wage. This would be a wage that can realistically sustain a person. This is a wage that we, as tax payer do not need to subsidise. In effect, without a living wage, our tax money goes toward supporting a corporation/businesses, some that make billions in profit every year. So how does changing up the way benefits are claimed fix this issue?

The argument is that if we meddle with companies they won't want to set up here. They won't want to set up offices, outlets or operations here, and so won't bring work here. But the question is, do we want them here if ultimately a percentage of wages they create are coming from taxes - taxes which evidently a fair few companies neglect to pay.

The argument continues that companies provide higher paid jobs too. True, but why is the gap between rich and poor growing so quickly. It's because those at the top earn far too much and those at the bottom earn far too little. So, by ignoring this issue on pay, we not only up the tax bill, we promote inequality and promote businesses that act as, at least in part, a drain on society.

So, don't just play around with the benefit system, since that's simply cosmetic. Instead, introduce and force on business a living wage. They can afford it. It's hard to argue that those multi-billion pound enterprises can't, especially when companies like Tesco make it painfully obvious through a blasé failed attempt to take on the American market and casually tossing away £1. To be honest, if needs be they can take the money from those at the top. Those at the top tend to sit on their money which is part of the reason economy is stagnant. Those that tend to spend more (the middle and lower) are blighted with far less.

We shouldn't bend to business, because it's pointless if their setups do nothing to promote growth. Get tough, but not with the poor and the powerless who bear none of the means to create wealth. Businesses should not treat the world like their own personal playground. For this system to work, there needs to be responsibility, and if responsibility no longer exists, then there must be rules.

Despite the current claims of the right wing press, it's not the fault of the poor. Unless businesses actually operate to bring wealth to a country, not simply to amass wealth for a select elite, the fault falls at their feet. Our politicians should remember it's their job to represent us, not the corporate member's only club.

Happy 420, Ladies and Germs

I will write my own piece on this, but for now, enjoy the genius of Bill Hicks.

Paying for another man's porn

Apparently we are skint. Incredibly skint. Dangerously skint. As a nation, we are way more skint than me. I'm lucky enough to have some pennies left over to keep me afloat since travelling, but the nation - God no! We have to borrow from international loan sharks, that's how bad it's got. In fact, the international loan sharks that are threatening to break off Cornwall if we don't pay up soon. This is why we hear about all these grumblings regarding Cornish independence, it's simply in case the sharks come a'calling and the government need a good excuse... though I'm not sure who they are giving the excuse to, us or the loan sharks.

 

Anyway. We have no money. This is what has lead to so may 'inevitable' cuts in services, loss or jobs in the public sector and pay freezes too. Just recently, there was announced a cut of £11.6 million to the Art's Council. They were completely and utterly 'unavoidable'. It's either arts, or keeping pensioners fed and warm, you heartless, arty bastards.

 

Fair enough. You told me. How ashamed I feel for doubting your noble cause, because you see, what I thought was... Oh, wait a minute...

 

It seems the government have found an extra £10 million in funds, just lying around the place. You see, these Eton boys have never been too careful with their pennies. Loosing them left right and centre. They don't want to look like stingy little penny pinchers when the fellow big boys are around - so long as it's not public spending. What's a couple of cool mills to me, old boy?

 

You see, in an orgy of Orgueil and caviar H'orderves, he got a little carried away and threw countless wads of the treasury's money in the air to impress his friends from the city. When they asked if he'd get in trouble he was keen to remind them he was totally in charge of the money, that it may as well be his money, and even if he lost some, he could replace it with his own. Check him out.

 

Of course, he's not willing to replace with his own. However, he's not a great drinker, is little boy George. His constitution has developed much like his face - and that would be not much further than a 14 year olds. So he quite forgot about the £10 million that fell down the back of the radiator. It's also quite likely that his imagination has the same whimsical fantasy to it as a 14 year old, so when he saw the money he thought the Thatcher fairy had put it there, and the Thatcher fairy isn't one for helping out the people -

 

Their damned entitlements, being human doesn't mean you get compassion! That kind of rubbish will bring the abstract of this nation to its knees!' That is what the Thatcher fairy likes to say.

 

- So obviously, what the Thatcher fairy had put it there for was a Thatcher festival. A festival to worship the goddess of both plenty and famine, of wealth and poverty. The all in one deity, perfect in a modern world, who arbitrarily bestows riches on some and inescapable destitution on others. The rich sit in their heavenly towers while the poor starve below.

 

Yes, this is a great idea for this money I have found behind the radiator, thought little boy George. And do you know, that's just what he did...

 

I suppose you could say the money is going toward pensioners. Well, one pensioner. Well, one ex-pensioner. A dead pensioner essentially. Because the dead ones are naturally more important than the living ones who face cuts on fuel allowances, bus passes and TV licences. And we've already spoken about those whinging arty bastards. Wasting time on creating things of beauty or trying to suss out those ultimate conundrums regarding the essence of existence. They should be making money, that's the essence.

 

It would be nice to take comfort in the possibility that the rich were paying for this, the very rich, those that got rich on Thatcher's ticket. But hell no they're not. They had their taxes cut to the tune of £54000 (what my Dad made, before taxes, in a year) and that's if they even pay their tax at all.

No, it's the norms who are paying for it, half of whom... probably more than half of whom... hate her. All those families who had their communities ruined those people, and their sons, daughters. They have to foot the bill too. Isn't that a bit of a slap in the face, can no one see that?

 

See, that's why I can see why people want to party over her death. I'm not going to party over her death, but I can see why people would want to. Strike a little balance perhaps? £10 on a party in her memory, why not a tenner on beers for a party of good riddance.

 

Essentially what is happening here is that this money is going to be put to the very good use of allowing some Tories to indulge fully in their necrophiliac fantasies until their little right hands are red raw and blistered. While impossibly virtuous thing are read about this polarising figure, they will sit in a circle and wank to each other, dreaming of a time when they could (figuratively) fuck the people - the invariable act of sociopaths.

 

Now, there are plenty of sites out there, like Youporn and Xvideos. I'm sure you can find some Thatcher lookalikes on one of those sites and it won't cost anyone £10 million.

 

Oh well, I'll be at work tomorrow... trying to pretend that a percentage of what I earn isn't going towards this charade. I should have stayed abroad.

 

Couldn't we have privatised it? Who came up with that plan? I liked that idea.