Thursday, July 19, 2007

Polly: charities steal from my Big Norse Warrior

I shall probably attend to that stupid, mendacious cunt Toynbee's latest excrescence—on why charity is evil and only the government can spend our cash wisely—when I get back, but in the meantime, why not savour the fucking kickings dealt out to the joyless, economically-illiterate bitch by Timmy and the impecunious Greek chap?

In the name of fuck, why doesn't the silly cow go and hang herself? And I wonder if Neil Harding will defend Polly's latest thesis: that people should not give money to charity, only to the state? The answer is probably, "yes."

12 comments:

C4' said...

Is Toynbee also a plagarist as it seems strikingly familiar to this piece of shit:

http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/2007/07/10/how-the-voluntary-sector-gets-it-wrong/

UKIP Youth Council said...

Come on now, it's not as if the government ever wasted our money on needless military spending or on propping up failing businesses....oh wait, that's all they ever bloody do.

Just out of interest D.K what's your take on the whole business of our government gleefully pissing off the Russians?
Any idea how much money British companies are already losing as a result of this pointless diplomatic foot stomping?
If you're one of the many language schools unable to get visas for Russian students at the moment just thank our government once again for screwing up trade with pointless interventionism.

Roger Thornhill said...

I started reading it and the comments but it was just so irritating and irrational.

Polly has totally lost it and so has most of the parasites and authoritarian slugs who have oozed out of the undergrowth at the sniff of some free cabbage.

I might go back and give it a go, but she really is mentally ill, I tell you.

Vindico said...

Ignorant bitch. She really is a waste of oxygen. Get rid of her and think of the reduction in carbon emissions! Mind you her articles can always be recycled as toilet paper!

Roger Thornhill said...

I decided to give her a kicking after all.

She is that certain kind of person that cannot face the truth so consistently engineers to misunderstand and spread untruths. Propaganda, in other words.

AntiCitizenOne said...

> that people should not give money to charity, only to the state?

People don't give to the state. The state extorts. Only 5 people voluntarily paid more income tax last year.

Mr Eugenides said...

AntiCitizenOne, I've wanted to find the stats on that - but was never able to find a website with the number of people who do give more than they are obliged to.

Do you have a source?

Ed said...

Presumably one of those was Polly. Did she donate everything she didn't need to feed her kids with the G. Brown?

Answers on a postcard.

MJW said...

The thing is, she gets paid to write shite because the mindless stupidity of it will wind up those with half a brain, whilst those with the IQ of a pot plant will just agree because the gullible idiots think Pol shares their ideology. As for Pol well the kid's private school fees and second home won't pay for itself!

The Nameless One said...

Excrescence - great word.

Neil Harding said...

Hi DK, dear comrade. Yeah you are right, Polly is spot on once again and I will defend her.

Even in your wonderful US of A, they only give a measly 1.5% of GDP to charity. How on earth are we to fund a decent health service, education etc out of that?

I suppose your answer is; 'lets not bother, the wealthy will be ok and the rest can go hang themselves'.

At the end of the day, this 'small government' idea just doesn't work. Inequality will cost you more as crime soars and society disintegrates. Maybe you guys will be happy living with your tennis courts and swimming pools behind electric fences as we turn into a brutal police state to keep the proles in their place (like they do in Brazil). Personally I think the Scandanavian model of 50% of GDP going to the state and a society at ease with itself is a better option.

If all this wealth accumulated at the top (96% to top 50%) was down to merit, you would have a moral position to defend but you haven't even got that. The market will always distort, people working long hours for less than a living wage, while those at the top pay themselves millions/billions for very little. To you this is all fine and dandy - well I have a message for you - most people disagree and if we had a decent electoral system you lot would have to change your ways significantly to even get a sniff of power. Until that day...I had better keep arguing with you...

guido faux said...

Maybe I misunderstood her artice but she said when you give to charity, the taxpayer is obliged to contribute another 28%.

She is implying that other taxpayers pay the 28% but isn't it actually the case that it's the donor's own 28% that is withheld from the treasury?

When you are PAYE and give to charity you are withholding 28/40% that you have would otherwise have given automatically through PAYE. It's nothing to do with other taxpayers. I assume it's the same with corporate donations.

Was that actually a deliberate distortion on her part?

The whole reasoning is quite self-serving given the £100Ks she earns a columnist. She can avoid awkward questions about whether she gives to charity. However as a previous commenter stated, one can voluntarily contribute to the exchequer. So Polly, how much extra do you give?

Sometimes I really do believe she is a provocateur.