Single people who don't work particularly hard demand tax cuts

[Roach-Rampino]

HARD-working families are not the only ones who deserve tax cuts, according to single people who do barely enough to get by.

Hard-working middle class families are helping absolutely no-one

As chancellor Alistair Darling put the finishing touches to his pre-Budget report, millions of lazy underachievers insisted they would spend the money on X-Boxes and shit.

Tom Logan, a trainee solicitor on his first written warning, said: "As someone who doesn't really care about anything other than spending money, I'm the chancellor's most vivid wet dream.

"The last thing you want is to give the money to some sensible middle-class couple in their late thirties who are at their desks by half-eight and pay attention during meetings.

"All they'll do is pay down their overdrafts, put it in some child trust fund or buy pointless, VAT-free goods like baby food and romper suits.

"On the other hand if you give the cash to me, I'll buy booze, fags, a big telly and an emergency iPod.

"And then I'll take Friday afternoon off 'cause my gran's dead. Again."

Meanwhile the Conservatives have backed the chancellor's plan to give generous tax breaks to low income families who don't vote.


http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/s...-200811171400/

[TwoPlAnKs]

tbh i think said single people have a point

I don't see why I should have to pay for other people to look after the children they chose to have, especially not since most parents seems to dedicate at least 25% of their working day to talking or complaining about their children, then fuck off home at 4.30 to pick them up from somewhere, on the rare occasion that one of their 23 kids hasn't got a cold and they actually turn up at all.

On a less cunty note, I agree that working families should get some tax breaks more so than older people - there are too many people living incredibly easy lives with a paid off mortgage and high salaries, just wishing that they had that sort of money to spend when their kids were growing up and they were both out at work 50 hours a week just to make ends meet.

I suppose its kind of a case of capitalism failing again - you end up having loads of money just before you retire, but none when you actually need it at a younger and older age. As with most places where capitalism fails, eg health care, the government can step in and tax people differently depending on their disposable income rather than total income. Then you'd have to define disposable income, which nobody would ever agree on - I for example wouldn't count buying a people carrier rather than a normal car as a necessary expense, many others wouldn't count buying a car at all as a necessary expense. Drawing that line would be impossible, but I think they are doing an ok job, even if it does fuck me off that the single people are left to cover for those on maternity leave or stay late to finish things that those with kids can't.

[satzzz]

tbh i think said single people have a point

I don't see why I should have to pay for other people to look after the children they chose to have, especially not since most parents seems to dedicate at least 25% of their working day to talking or complaining about their children, then fuck off home at 4.30 to pick them up from somewhere, on the rare occasion that one of their 23 kids hasn't got a cold and they actually turn up at all.

On a less cunty note, I agree that working families should get some tax breaks more so than older people - there are too many people living incredibly easy lives with a paid off mortgage and high salaries, just wishing that they had that sort of money to spend when their kids were growing up and they were both out at work 50 hours a week just to make ends meet.

I suppose its kind of a case of capitalism failing again - you end up having loads of money just before you retire, but none when you actually need it at a younger and older age. As with most places where capitalism fails, eg health care, the government can step in and tax people differently depending on their disposable income rather than total income. Then you'd have to define disposable income, which nobody would ever agree on - I for example wouldn't count buying a people carrier rather than a normal car as a necessary expense, many others wouldn't count buying a car at all as a necessary expense. Drawing that line would be impossible, but I think they are doing an ok job, even if it does fuck me off that the single people are left to cover for those on maternity leave or stay late to finish things that those with kids can't.

Here here (can you tell i'm single???)