Worse and Worse

Chris Snowdon has a couple of recent articles,  one with celebrity chef Jamie Oliver calling for taxes on sugar, the other with other busybodies asking for the same on meat. The gist of them seems to be that we’re being lined up for ‘sin taxes’ on sugar and meat as well as tobacco and alcohol. And there’ll probably be carbon  sin taxes as well.

What’s going on here is that the government is lobbying itself (through organisations like ASH and Jamie Oliver) to raise taxes. In effect, the government asks itself, “Should taxes be raised on X?”, and then after a ‘consultation’ with ‘stakeholders’ the government says, “Yes. Taxes should be raised.” And so taxes are raised. And then after a few weeks or months, the process is repeated.

It’s state-sponsored theft.

This is why organisations like ASH keep being funded. They provide the justification to raise taxes over and over again, always in the pious knowledge that “It’s the right thing to do.”

No wonder government always get bigger. ASH is actually part of the government. And so is Jamie Oliver.

So what happens when more or less everything is taxed to the maximum, and 90% of the price of anything goes straight into the government’s pockets?

Well, taxpayers will be getting poorer and poorer while the government is getting richer and richer. The cost of living for ordinary people will just keep on rising. Their standard of living will fall and fall. At some point, they won’t be able to make ends meet. They’ll starve. They’ll lose their homes. It won’t be any better for the over-taxed companies they’re working for. They’ll be driven out of business.

In short, the economy will collapse under the enormous overburden of taxation. And what will the government do? It’ll do what it always does. It’ll raise taxes. It’s the only thing it knows how to do.

But once the economy is collapsing, the government tax take will dry up. There won’t be enough money to pay government employees (which by then will be almost everybody). The Smoking Prevention Officers Union and the Sugar Awareness Outreach Office and the Meat Intelligence Agency will threaten to go on strike. But since they no longer bring in any tax revenues, the government won’t yield to their demands. So they’ll all starve too. Everyone will starve. Everyone will become homeless.

As far as I can see, we’ve been living in global recession/depression for approaching 10 years already. And it’s all set to get worse. And worse. And worse.


About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to Worse and Worse

  1. jaxthefirst says:

    The one thing I don’t understand about all this is why they keep bringing in (and heavily funding) all these daft groups. After all, they’re the Government, for goodness’ sake – they can stick taxes (or duty, or excise, or an “escalator,” or whatever they like to call it) on anything they please, any time they please. That’s one of the many powers which they have, and which we, as fully signed-up members (whether we like it or not) of this society have “agreed to,” (leaving aside the Freeman argument for the moment, which is too lengthy to go into here, and possibly a discussion for another day).

    It may be argued, of course, that these groups are there for purely PR purposes – to give the impression that “people want” all these taxes – but given the total disregard which our great leaders show for what “people want” in other areas, which don’t happen to have any particular “charidee” serving this PR purpose, and getting away with it, I can’t see why they bother with any of them. I don’t remember, for example, there ever being a pressure group pushing for duty to be put onto fuel costs – there are some now, of course, but there certainly weren’t any when duty was first imposed. But did that stop them? Certainly not! And did people like it? Certainly not! Were the PTB bothered? Certainly not! Were there widespread riots and civil disorder on the streets in protest? Of course not! Similarly, applying the duty to alcohol wasn’t first started by some Prohibitionist throwbacks demanding it, and groups like Alcohol Concern have only sprung up lately to demand increases to it.

    Everybody knows that the Government’s true attitude is “tax and be damned,” so why do they bother keeping up the charade of being even remotely bothered by public opinion in some areas? And why keep setting up all these new stooges when no-one’s fooled by them any more? From the Government’s point of view, they’d save even more money for their coffers if they simply gave up pretending that they were even slightly concerned with what the public does or doesn’t want and stopped funding the likes of ASH and Mr Oliver and just went ahead and lumped taxes wherever the whim took them. In fact, given what a money-hungry lot MPs are, I’m staggered that someone in Government hasn’t actually realised this yet and simply, at the stroke of a pen, done away with the lot of them. They’d save a fortune!

    • Frank Davis says:

      why do they bother keeping up the charade?

      I was wondering that too. I suppose that it makes them look busy, and doing something to justify the ever-rising taxes.

    • Tony says:

      I think that almost the only time the political class feel they ever have to justify themselves is on programmes such as BBC Radio 4’s ‘Today’ programme. The audience is predominantly middle class and is politically influential in as much as they are, or at least regard themselves as, movers and shakers.

      These people are known as the ‘chattering classes’. Mostly university graduates. A mixture of management, media, housewives and retirees.

      It is my contention that these people are highly compliant, respectful of authority and frankly gullible. That attitude would have been of great assistance to them in gaining academic qualifications and getting on in management and media. I’m not so sure about the housewives and retirees though.

  2. Harleyrider1978 says:

    Couldn’t have said it any truer than you just did Frank. We have been in a depression. Stossell just 40% of Americans are out work who could work there’s just no jobs available to them. Today you have to work 2-3 jobs just to equal one job. Obamacare caused employers to cut hours per worker to 20 hours a week or pay zerocare penalties. Then the massive unemployed were put on SSI and the rules changed so they could work 18 hours a week and not lose benefits. All this simply made the so called unemployed numbers drop but they already dropped as people don’t get counted after the unemployment checks run out. Its all been a massive deception by all the governments. Redefining GDP so it made things look better for the lying politicians and they taxed us into oblivion via regulatory rules that don’t require a vote of congress to raise. My electric bill is now 19 times higher under Obamas anti coal rules than it was in 2007. Everything else is just as bad. We burn wood for heat and save 250 a month in electric heat costs. I get wood delivered to cheap like 30 bucks a rick. I burn when its cold about a rick a week. So far its not been real cold lucky us.

  3. harleyrider1978 says:

    OK Ive read literally every account of the murde and it appears it was over wafflehouses new no smoking policy I told you all about back in April or May. I warned them back then this could happen as I related to them what happened in Nashville over the same thing literally. I was obviously LIED to by the WH VP with his remark the man came into bum a smoke which he obviously was not. He was already smoking just walking in the door and it appears the woman had been so hate filled by new corporate brainwashing over the new policy she gave him to much lets say Mouth.

    He lost his whatever and blew her away.

    Thing Is Ive heard these new Nazis at waffle House who have been hired as regional District Managers and trust me they’ve got the one liners down pat. No safe Level and no we haven’t lost any money going smokefree. Now they got pushed to the wall over one of their own, going Nazi on a smoker who lost control or was a mental case which is yet to be determined.

    Either way it appears waffle Houses own corporate decision to go smokefree is directly responsible for the womans death ad the vile corporate propaganda against smokers they put out to al employees. Like I ive said before our WH is a dead duck thru the week only getting a patial crowd on sat and sun mornings. They cut staff and hours after going smokefree.

    According to WLOX, via Kitchenette, former firefighter Johnny Mount allegedly shot a waitress at a Mississippi Waffle House when she asked him to stop smoking.

    Mount allegedly entered the Biloxi, Mississippi​ eatery at 1 a.m. on Friday morning while smoking a cigarette. When waitress ​Julie Brightwell​ told him people aren’t allowed to smoke inside the restaurant, Mount allegedly took out a 9mm handgun and shot her in the head. She was transported to a nearby hospital, where she later died.

  4. harleyrider1978 says:

    Mount, she said, “was not a monster,” but instead suffered a traumatic brain injury when he was injured in an accident years ago.

    Read more here: http://www.sunherald.com/news/local/crime/article46755840.html#storylink=cpy

  5. harleyrider1978 says:

    The Drum

    Isis hijacks NHS ad to discourage people from smoking

    The Drum

    Jihadist extremist militant group Isis has “borrowed” NHS anti-smoking adverts in a bid to convince people living under its role to stop smoking.


    • harleyrider1978 says:

      The terror group, which is currently encamped across Syria and Iraq, has forbidden smoking under a strict interpretation of traditional Islamic law, reports The Independent. An image Isis posted on social media showed the anti-smoking message that would appear to have taken heavy inspiration from a Public Health campaign in 2013.

      Despite smoking and the sale of cigarettes being banned in Isis-controlled regions, a lucrative smuggling market has emerged to capitalise on the demand. One in five women and six in ten men smoke in Syria alone, according to statistics, a trend reflective across many Middle Eastern nations. Experts predict that the majority of 10 million fatalities from smoking over the next 10 years will come from developing countries.

      It’s not the first time Isis have attempted to curb smoking, with the militant group employing everything from billboards to more extreme measures. Reports have claimed that people caught smoking in places under its rule face instant fines of $65, prison sentences and flogging.

  6. harleyrider1978 says:

    Letter to the Editor: Tobacco plan is disrespectful and unnecessary

    By Letter to the Editor / November 10, 2015

    Chris Sorochin is a former adjunct instructor in Stony Brook’s Department of Linguistics and the current host of WUSB’s “If This Be Treason.”

    It’s been several decades now since college campuses were adult environments, and I guess the move towards becoming an extension of high school continues apace with the “Tobacco Free Initiative.” Will there, I wonder, be signs, like the ones at schoolyards which proclaim them “drug free” and provoke knowing smirks from students past and present? Will roving bands of self-appointed “hall monitors” hand out demerits?

    Chief Deputy to the President Judith Greiman says the new policy is part of a “culture of respect.” I hope Ms. Greiman will forgive me and Stony Brook’s other smokers for feeling considerably less than respected by the new regulations, which would effectively compel us to travel off campus to smoke if we’re not lucky enough to have a car in which to take shelter. Or if we do have a car parked in one of Stony Brook’s far-flung, inaccessible lots.

    If memory serves, didn’t the University Senate vote down this exact measure a couple of years ago? I guess that doesn’t matter, does it? It certainly would be nice to know why the Administration finds this particular bit of unreasonable prohibitionism so incredibly necessary, though. Is it to appease deep-pocketed entities (like Mike Bloomberg or certain pharmaceutical companies) that control research funding and grants?

    Many thanks to the senators who spoke out against this measure. It’s nice to know there are still some reasonable people out there.

  7. Cecily Collingridge says:

    Frank, the public debate over childhood obesity is being skewed. Jamie Oliver should not be vilified unfairly. He’s doing an awful lot to raise the issues and has put forward wide-ranging proposals. Taxation is not the only one. In fact, he said in his oral evidence to the Commons Select Committee on Health, that if his labeling measures to show how many teaspoons of sugar a product contained were enacted, there probably wouldn’t be any need for a tax.

    The real villain is Public Health England who did not publish their Evidence Review (meta-analysis) which has only been given to the government. This means no one else can scrutinise it. Just watch Duncan Selbie, the Chief Executive being grilled by the Select Committee (link below – JO came after him). The chairwoman even used the words “dangerous and patronising” towards the end of Mr Selbie’s evidence session. He should be sacked! PHE isn’t acting independently. WE need to see the evidence-base ourselves and journalists should do a better job reporting this.


    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Cecily your pointing out what is going on,finally the ratz are being exposed and attacked on every front these days. Chris Snowden was right in a year its going to be all over.

    • Frank Davis says:

      “dangerous and patronising” is what I thought Sheila Duffy was, as she ‘petitioned’ the Scottish Parliament.

      Which is why I depicted her as a snake.

      Incidentally, I dug out the email addresses of two of the MEPs, and sent them that picture.

  8. harleyrider1978 says:

    Another one this week against the bans

    Public housing smoking ban really about tyranny

    Wyoming Tribune

    As for the legality of smoking, I believe there’s lots of room for discussion there. However, this is my problem. Why the government discrimination?

    The Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD, is working on new regulations that would bar people living in public housing from smoking.”

    A guest editorial in the WTE on Nov. 21 by the Los Angeles Times argues both sides of the question.

    First, I must confess that I am an ex-smoker. That being said, I don’t verbally or physically abuse someone for engaging in a legal activity.

    As for the legality of smoking, I believe there’s lots of room for discussion there. However, this is my problem. Why the government discrimination? Why shouldn’t poor people be allowed to smoke in their own homes?

    Further thought brings to mind this question: Are the government officials who are creating these regulations subject to the same? Are they banned from smoking in their own homes?

    Here’s a more important question. If these officials can place discriminatory regulations on one class of people, what’s to stop them from over-regulating any class of people they desire to regulate? Is the middle-class next? I think you can bet on it.

    Liberals, in their “compassion,” are facilitating this discrimination. Remember, their excuse is always “we’re doing it for your own good.” Notice, they never say they’re doing it for their own good.

    Believe me, they really don’t give a damn about your own good. This is nothing more than selfish wishes disguised as “good intentions”

    I’ll give you the correct word to describe these actions: tyranny. This government and our leaders are so full of themselves they’re convinced that they are smarter than you and me. You are not smart enough to know what’s good for you. I’ll give them this much, they sure know what’s good for them.

    This is only one example of how tyranny is infiltrating the U.S. government. Liberal Democrats and Republicans promise handouts all day long. What they don’t tell you, until it’s too late, is what strings are attached.

    Our government has stopped preventing strife. It has assumed the role of creating strife. This sounds like a cliche, but: It’s time for a change!


  9. harleyrider1978 says:

  10. harleyrider1978 says:

    Simon Cowell would rather pay £100 fine instead of smoking outside X Factor studios

    Read more: http://metro.co.uk/2015/11/29/simon-cowell-would-rather-pay-100-fine-instead-of-smoking-outside-x-factor-studios-5533010/#ixzz3stlBXBKF

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Remember he said he was quitting for the baby he knocked up in his best friends wifes belly…………Oh how low we have come yet Cowell remains a steadfast smoker.

    • prog says:

      It’d it be more than £100 because the owner of the premises would be liable for £2500. That’s basically why barely anyone smokes in pubs and clubs.. Though, given his high profile it could go either way.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Prog I doubt he pays anything. He owns basically everyplace he does business in.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Toss in a bed and chair and call it your home and you have a few friends over even if its a private production home based operation.

        • David Bunn says:

          Then he’s ultimately responsible and might have to pay the full amount. Unlike for the vast majority of small businesses it’s be a drop in the ocean.

  11. harleyrider1978 says:

    From some folks I knew growing up at the Grand ole opry and the Junior Samples grandpa jones,roy clark

  12. smokingscot says:

    O/T Frank, but I feel you may not know about the newest state in Europe. Liberland.

    And they’re accepting applications for citizenship:

    “Do you want to become a citizen of Liberland? Liberland is currently accepting applications for citizenship, which will be processed in due time.


    Liberland currently needs people who:
    – have respect for other people and respect the opinions of others, regardless of their race, ethnicity, orientation, or religion
    – have respect for private ownership which is untouchable
    – do not have communist, nazi or other extremist past
    – were not punished for past criminal offences”

    Then go on to allow you to apply on-line.


    As one of the core foundations of Liberland is that the payment of taxes will be entirely voluntary, I strongly suspect their 7 sq kms of land area will resemble a poorer version of Monaco. Once they can get international recognition and perhaps access to the land they claim.

  13. Pingback: Liberland | Frank Davis

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.