Tuesday, 11 October 2011

Chairman Cameron...

...of the People's Democratic Republic of Airstrip One.

Taxes on everything. Even death. Yes, you have to save up to go on that final journey now unless you let the NHS break you up for spares and your cash-strapped family are going to be feeling some pressure. Pay thousands for a box and a hole to put it in plus an extra tax on top of the taxes already levied on funerals, or send you to the breakers' yard for free. You're dead - what do you think they'll do?

Now this utter cretin Cameron wants to introduce internet controls he claims are for pornography only. If you don't want your internet restricted you will have to sign on to the Pervs Register. For the damn cheeldren, of course, because their parents are too useless and infantile to take any form of responsibility for their offspring.

It will not stop them sending lewd photos to each other in school because they do that with mobile phones and Bluetooth. Not the Internet. Does Cameron have even the remotest grasp of modern technology? Can he really be as absolutely, totally stupid as he appears? I'd rather have George Bush the Talking Chimp in charge. Cameron is far, far less intelligent.

My current publisher also publishes erotica. They have a warning on the site. Does this mean I have to register as a perv just to carry on working? I neither read nor write erotica but it's one of the publisher's lines, and since it sells well, a lot of publishers handle it. How long before bad language is deemed too scary for the feeble population and we can no longer read Devil's Kitchen or Old Holborn?

David Cameron is not even remotely Tory. He is as bad as, if not worse than Blair and the Gorgon. His entire party are happy to leave him unchallenged and to let him run things as if the Lib Dems had won the election. Not one of them can be trusted. Not one. They all have to go.

Except the ones that do this. They might just have a trace of honour and decency left in them.

That Pervs Register will morph into the Subversives Register when Cameron shows his true Stalinist colours and starts clamping down on anyone he wants silenced. Including those in his own party who have to be re-educated. Once the mechanism to turn us all off is in place, watch the sites disappear. Even if you opt-in, you're only opting in to the sanitised version of the Internet. How will you know what's blocked if you can't see it?

Meanwhile the grinning pile of weasel droppings that is Huhne is still in post despite publically backstabbing cabinet colleagues, and he is getting the country ready for this.

How do people this stupid remember to breathe? You could pick the average drug-addled chav out of a sink estate and make him Prime Minister and he couldn't possibly be worse.

When there is snow covering those solar panels and ice in all the windmills, what are you going to do then, Cameron? Give that smug shit Huhne a pay rise? When half the pensioners die this winter, what are you going to do? Tax the brass handles off their coffins while looking all serious and sympathetic? That 80 mph speed limit is going to look a bit silly when everyone has snow chains on.

He wants us to inform on illegal immigrants. Why? He's not going to do anything about them. A vote on EU membership was promised and reneged on. Weasel words on the Human Rights Act and immigration, neither of which his puppet masters will let him touch. He doesn't want to - he wants to pretend someone else is stopping him. His idea of a restoration of civil liberties involves imposing more and stricter laws on us all.

Mention fat tax, death tax, harsher controls, and his piggy little eyes just light right up, don't they? The Chinese are laughing at you, Cameron. Soon you will be held up as an example of how life is worse abroad by the leaders of the DPRK.

I didn't imagine, during the days of the Brown Gorgon, that anyone could be worse. These Tories are worse. Far, far worse.

We expect petty, spiteful laws from Labour. We expect half-baked ideas from the Lib Dems. Now the Tories are worse than both of them combined. The Left like to call the Tories 'the nasty party' but they're all nasty now. All the same, all composed of drooling, gibbering subhuman sociopaths intent on stealing every last penny while watching us die of malnutrition and cold, and then taxing us more when we do.

A vote for any of them is not just a waste now. A vote for any of them is suicide.

Still, it's cheaper than using the gas oven, I suppose.

29 comments:

banned said...

Will nice Mr Cameron be putting all the dirty pictures from antiquity back into the naughty room at the British Museum?

re mini-ice "BRITAIN is set to suffer a mini ice age" With 2012 being the year of Solar Maximum I don't think so.

Angry Exile said...

I've been slowly coming round to Obnoxio's thinking before the election and feeling that we may as well all vote La... La... Jesus, I can barely force my fingers to type this... La-bour. The big three parties consist almost entirely of venal, nest feathering troughers and incompetent cunts, and since all three are certainly led by venal, nest feathering, incompetent cunts that's always going to be what forms the government (helped, of course, by unelected venal, nest feathering, incompetent cunts in the EU and Civil Service). As awful as it sounds and as painful as it will be perhaps the quickest way to break the paradigm is to vote for the most incompetent of the lot in the hope that they'll wreck the whole show sooner rather than later. True, voting Labour would make me want to wash and wash and wash until my skin was raw and I'd hope like hell a surge in support for UKIP over the next few years might make it unnecessary, but failing that the only alternative is more of the same.

Woman on a Raft said...

The Prime Minister also urged firms to take on staff in Britain rather than from abroad,

Does this man not know that we have spent the last 39 years signing treaties which ban the taking of nationality in to account when hiring?

There are a couple of specific exceptions. Lawyers, you won't be surprised to find, are able to protect their status unless Johnny Furriner has passed the local exams.

But in general, even though language can be a method of distinguishing one worker from another, the employer has to show that they are not using it as a method of unwarranted discrimination. You certainly can't reject a worker whose English is good enough on the basis that they aren't a native speaker.

Presumably Cameron slept through the section where Gordon Brown thought it was a tub-thumping winner to say "British Jobs for British Workers" only to be told that a) this was a BNP policy and b) he couldn't do a thing about it legally, and if he tried, he'd probably lose in court.

I too hope for a mass defection to UKIP but I wonder whether they'd be able to handle it.

Angry Exile said...

I too hope for a mass defection to UKIP but I wonder whether they'd be able to handle it.

WoaR, do you mean handle it in terms of the admin involved in lots of new members and actual MPs and so on, or handle it without going as power mad as the usual bunch of bastards?

Bill said...

Cameron A View of. From where I sit. Mostly on the very comfy rattan two seater with coffee/tea/elderflower close by and laptop warming my thighs.

The problem with Dave is he isn't one of us. He is a part of a totally alien political class that has carefully hidden the truth from the people of this land. The aliens are pulling back the curtains because they are confident that even if we see the light we will shy away from it and not see the Alien Utopia the sweat of our brows has created.
I happen to believe they aliens have misjudged things. The little people's resolve is being steeled by the madness that is the alien government which exists to ban and tax everything a living breathing human can do. Change rarely comes from within. Catastrophic change always comes from without. As we are all without the alien government....

RB said...

As to the death tax I love that comment at the article you link to saying that this might bring a whole new meaning to the term "fly tipping". When I go lay me over a fence opposite Cameron's house with my bare arse facing his front door.

As to the internet controls this is being reported as relating to "adult content". What the fuck is that? Who defines it? Why doesn't Cameron just pronounce that any fuckwit parent who allows their kids access to the internet without supervision is entirely responsible for what those kids might encounter. State as mother, father, and conscience. God help us.

Woman on a Raft said...

or handle it without going as power mad as the usual bunch of bastards?

This one, I'm sorry to say, Angry Exile.

On the plus side, there are some excellent UKIP candidates and I've voted for them in the past. But you never can tell how things are going to go when they get in.

sixtypoundsaweekcleaner said...

What shocks me the most is how quickly CallmeDave has shown his true Bilderburger socialist colours. You'd have thought he would have waited a while to lure us all in, but no, he's gone the full monty and exposed himself in double quick time!

Bill Sticker said...

You need a heart of stone not to laugh; Despite having been popular favourites for generations of children, party games including whistles and magnetic fishing games are to be banned because their small parts or chemicals used in making them are decreed to be too risky.

By signing you lot (I'm only an interested bystander nowadays) up to Lisbon, this kind of insanity goes straight onto the statute books without a whisper.

tinks said...

Great post. Totally share your frustration with these lily-livered waster-politicians that somehow know better, yet are so removed from normality, knee-jerking their way along, chasing a few fishpaper headlines, with a general population either too dim or hoodwinked into not seeing the bigger picture.

Sickening meddlesome and likely corrupt somewhere along the way.

smokervoter said...

I see where he is considering a fat tax. It looks like a case of 'nudge turns to shove'.

microdave said...

Top post LI - I showed it to mother who, at the age of 82, has finally accepted what I've been trying to tell her for the last couple of years. I did keep her away from these comments, but she wondered if you were aware of an "Emissions Surcharge" levied on cremations?

What's that you were saying about "Taxes on everything. Even death"

Anonymous said...

"Does this mean I have to register as a perv just to carry on working?"

No, you probably won't be permitted to use the dot-xxx in place of dot-com as you've not yet posted enough pornographic images required to apply for this website enhancement feature.

But they may force you to register as dot-smk - for "witch, witch, smoker".

They may have one called dot-drk for "witch, witch, drinker" soon too.

Leg-iron said...

I can't remember who had the story, it was quite a few months back - but it concerned those medical instruction videos showing men how to check themselves for cancer of the danglies.

Because it involved the male bag of lumps it was restricted to over 18's only even though the high risk group for this form of cancer starts at age 15.

All these parents demanding their kids see nothing that might redden their cheeks will have no cause for complaint when their sons lose parts they needn't have lost.

If only their parents weren't quite so dependent.

Is it excessively cruel of me to look on this as a form of natural selection?

Leg-iron said...

Microdave - isn't there also some scare about mercury from cremations being pumped into the open air? From fillings, apparently.

Almost as scary as someone dropping an eco-bulb in an enclosed space. Oh wait, eco-bulbs are fine, cremations are bad. Forgot to stick to newthink for a moment there.

Leg-iron said...

WOAR - good point. If they all defect to UKIP it'll be the same band of parasites with different badges on.

So that won't help at all.

Leg-iron said...

Heh.

I can't post to the blog at the moment. The posting section is broken.

Must be a coincidence.

Junican said...

Quite right LI and Woar. Hesketh is a Tory masquerading as a UKIP. A nice little take-over bid? You bet! UKIP should have gone public and said, "Sod off, Hesketh. We don't want you!"

What is wrong with these people?

Anonymous said...

WoaR,

I’ve got a feeling that they are allowed to discriminate when filling jobs in the public sector, too. Which would make sense, wouldn’t it? After all, most of these rules, regulations, laws and directives emanating from the EU are mainly intended to destroy private industry. From smoking bans to fat taxes to uncontrolled immigration to the minutiae of every eensy-weensy health and safety rule, it’s private enterprise that primarily takes the brunt and it's private enterprise that ultimately (literally) pays the price. Which is exactly the way the EU want it. All together now ... “Capitalism Bad; State Ownership Good!”

Woman on a Raft said...

@junican

It would, if it applied outside a few defined roles such as the security services. What happened was that a wording was agree which made it sound as if the governments would retain their powers but in practice....

The method is that in general member states are required to abolish discrimination between workers of different states based on nationality. A state can then derogate from this on grounds of public health, public security, or public policy, and exclude from public service. (Art.39(4) now renumbered in Lisbon Treaty to Art.45)

You might think this creates a loophole you could drive a tank through, but when even mighty France tried it the ECJ said no, it's a derogation for a narrow range of exemptions - and the government doesn't say what those are, the Commission does.

France found that it couldn't restrict the number of non-national merchant seamen nor could it reserve jobs in hospitals for French nurses or jobs in schools for French teachers. Belgium found it couldn't define all public services within the derogation, only a few of them on security grounds.

Whilst linguistic tests are valid, those tests have to be relevant to the job - they can't be a fiddle-factor to exclude non-nationals.

The Commission listed the activities it considered within the derogation. I doubt that Britain takes advantage of this, going by some of the comments about UKBA which would probably come within the scope of it.

"The Commission listed the activities that it considered as part of the ‘public service’ (statement 5 January 1988): firstly, the specific functions of the State and allied bodies, such as the armed forces, the police and the other forces of order, the judiciary, the tax authorities and the diplomatic service; secondly, employment in government departments, regional authorities and other similar bodies, and central banks, where staff (officials and other employees) is involved who carry out activities on the basis of a public legal power of the State or of another legal person governed by public law."

(Source: European parliament).

Woman on a Raft said...

Sorry, not Junican - the above is directed to Anonymous at 01:24

microdave said...

I wondered if the surcharge was about fillings - it didn't elaborate further. In dads case it would have been quite substantial!

Regarding "Those medical instruction videos" you may have been thinking of this clip which Max Farquar posted recently (you commented on it).

microdave said...

Mum also wasn't happy that the undertakers bill included a £145 charge for 2 doctors to confirm the death. Don't they get enough of our taxes already? The reason for 2 is because there is no possibility of subsequent querying the cause of death once you've been cremated. One of these was the practice doctor who came round our house shortly after he died, and with our agreement had previously issued a "DNR" (Do Not Resuscitate) notice, so there really wasn't any dispute about why he died. The other went to the funeral parlour the following day. This seems like another "nice little earner"...

Woman on a Raft said...

The procedure was beefed-up after the Shipman murders where his ability to sign death certificates and quickly have his victims cremated made it impossible to tell how many he had offed.

The cremation does indeed require two doctors to agree the cause of death and the second one is supposed to raise the alarm if they suspect anything. The CAB advise there is a charge for this, but not how much it is. Note, it is the second signature which is chargable.

Ring the surgery and see how much they charge to come out and give a second signature. Tell 'em it's for future reference. There's no rule that it has to be at a funeral parlour. There is no legal obligation to use a funeral director.

That way at least you'll know how much of this the funeral director is taking, which you might regard as a fair price or you might not.

microdave said...

@WoaR - Thanks for the info.

Junican said...

So the State says that the Undertaker has to ensure that two doctors have certified the cause of death. Note my words: The State forces Undertakers to do something that is not their problem. The cost of the certification is passed on to the estate of the deceased.

Why should not the beneficiaries refuse to pay that bill? They pay the Undertaker to sort out the detail of the burial, and not the requirements of the State.

Hubris (overconfidence) by unaccountable people pervades the State at this time. That is one of the reasons that our political system stinks.

Macro-economics is really simple. Once the absolute basics of human life are provided for (being food and water, shelter (which includes clothes, being just 'mobile' shelter), warmth and society), anything else does not matter. It does not matter what people do, whether it is weather forecasting, making jewellery, or playing musical instruments - it really does not matter. What then becomes important is the amount of money in circulation which is required to facilitate transactions. Thus, the situation arises where actual 'activities', like 'manufacturing', become less important than the money involved. Thus, the City of London (the money capital) becomes the most important thing.

Fine....until THE ABSOLUTE BASICS (food, water, shelter, warmth and society) become infected. Once that happens, chaos ensues. All of the edifices, previously assumed to be immortal, collapse. Why do you think that the ancient castles became ruins? The answer is that their upkeep interfered with the basics, at the time, and that THE PEOPLE were not prepared to pay. Note well that it is at the point where THE PEOPLE are not prepared to pay that 'Society' becomes important.

The above impacts upon smoking bans and such. These things are lovely to many people - until they impact upon THE BASICS - of which, SOCIAL INTERCOURSE ('Society') is one.

Society is ceasing to exist, and politicians are leading the way to that extinction.

At this time, the likes of ASH ET AL have, in the recent past, leached off the general public. But it is becoming obvious that their influence is actually damaging THE BASICS.

Woman on a Raft said...

So the State says that the Undertaker has to ensure that two doctors have certified the cause of death.

No. As mentioned, there is no obligation to use an undertaker. It is just that the registrar won't now issue a certificate enabling the crematorium to go ahead unless they've seen the cause of death independently verified by a doctor who is not the original signatory. The registrar will give you the paper authorization if you like; but not till they are sure that a second doctor has had a chance to raise an alarm if necessary.

You can arrange this yourself; the first signatory is obliged to find you a second signatory if you request one.

It's cludgy - how independent is the second signatory - but that's what people wanted after Shipman murders where even when people were already raising doubts, it wasn't picked up in any meaningful fashion.

There is a cost involved in getting a separate doctor's opinion. Whether that should be paid for by the NHS is debateable; Depends whether you regard it as an option the bereaved should pay for or if it is in the wider interest for general taxation to pay it.

Whether £145 is a reasonable charge is debateable. Much depends on if the doctor is being paid. If it turns out the funeral director is charging £100 for a phonecall and the doctor takes £45 and is signing without bothering to do the check which was the whole point in the first place, then it is a poor show. Or maybe that's the real cost of storing a body, on which they are entitled to charge enough to make a profit.

Personally, I'd like to see a published flat-fee a doctor can charge so that relatives can see how much, if anything, their undertaker (if they use one) is charging on top.

However, just this once the state is not the ogre. It's just trying to make sure that another serial killer doesn't wiggle their way in.

microdave said...

"Personally, I'd like to see a published flat-fee a doctor can charge"

The BMA site quotes an amount of £73.50 + 56.4p/mile travelling allowance.
It does say this may be subject to change, as it is based on 2007 figures which can be re-negotiated locally.

This page says that signing a death certificate IS part of a doctors normal duties, however a cremation requires further checks and is not...

Woman on a Raft said...

Many thank, microdave.

£145 doesn't sound too bad in that context although I'm still undecided as to whether the second signatory should be funded publicly. The procedure was for public protection beyond the individiual interests of any deceased person.

opinions powered by SendLove.to