Thursday, 22 December 2005

How to get poor, and how to get rich again

New blogger Lindsay Mitchell genuiinely wonders why we aren't broke. Good question. Just look how much we're costing ourselves! Who cares, says 'Who Cares' -- another new blogger: Let's regulate our way to prosperity. Don't stop with the minimum wage: let's go the whole hog and pass an 'End Poverty Bill.' Who could possibly object?

Linked Posts: Why aren't we broke? - Lindsay Mitchell
How to regulate your way to prosperity - Who Cares?


  1. Just proving that we are wicked, wicked people who couldn't possible be trusted with tax cuts.

    Or indeed, control over anything!

  2. I see Mitchell only allows blogger people to comment - so I will say it here.

    She seems to have problem with women. Her post on child support is one of the most appalling I have ever seen -

    The argument was that men were financially responsible for their children whether or not such fathers were part of the family household. This was surely a profound mistake. Men’s responsibility is to be committed parents who look after their children by actually living with them...

    Making a man pay for the upkeep of his children in such circumstances simply because he was the biological father was unfair and inconsistent.

    This is pure bullshit. I don't know what group of losers she is associated with - maybe Men's Rights or some such - but any man with an ounce of integrity is happy to pay for the upkeep of his children - whether he lives with them or not.

  3. She appears to me, to be saying that women should look to breeding with men of integrety.

    Not reproducing with all & sundry and expecting the taxpayer to bail them out for their bad choices.

    In other words, get it right of their will be unpleasant consequences.

  4. Hey Oswald. You know I like you - but I think she is bashing women on her blog- and offers no solutions either.

    Sure we would all like men with integrity.But it takes two to tango.

  5. And I intend to get all the benefits I can - so the anti-DPB brigade like Mitchell can bite me.

    Since our famly has paid 6 figure tax bills for years I am entitled to get some of it back.

    So there Lindsay Mitchell. When YOU have paid such tax you can lecture me about deserting husbands and leeching off the state - sob.

  6. Indeed, it IS an attack. A great many of these women deserve to come under attack, as do the deadbeat males that are as much a part of the problem!

    Having followed Lindsay's writings on the subject for a few years now, IMO, she is more anti the 'DPB as a way of lifestyle' women. I don't recall her saying banish it totally, but reform it.

    Too many use it as a career, not as the intended safety net.One reason your family has been paying outrageous tax bills!

    I have often written on the subject of 'bludging beneficeries'
    I'm refering to exactly those- not to the person maimed or incapacitated. Not to the person between jobs, nor the abandoned wife who will soon be working again.

    I attack the bludgers- the no-talent 'artists', the junkies, the lazy and the useless by choice. If peoples see fit to include all benificaries in my attach, it is their lack of comprehension that has caused them to see it that way.

    I can't speak for Lindsay- her beliefs are her own, but when you look at her writing in the same light as mine- well, make up your own mind!

  7. Hi Ruth

    It is easy enough to create an account (free) which would enable you to comment on my blog. I'm certainly not barring anybody.

    I'm not interested in men's rights and I'm not interested in women's rights. The only rights I care about are those of the individual and they are few.(I will post an article I wrote about "men's rights" at my blog).

    You actually illustrate what is wrong with the welfare system when you mention your "entitlement". I work with beneficiaries in a voluntary capacity and see that the culture of entitlement is pervasive, corrupt and value-destroying. It saps the strength out of people.

    You said I have no solutions. Initially I would pare back the state's involvement by making the DPB strictly temporary. I don't have a problem with people using welfare as a stopgap. Once reduced to that level it should be privatised ie people can take out insurance against the risk of a relationship breakdown. Just as people take out insurance against loss of earnings.

    It is not a woman's right to have children at the expense of the taxpayer.

    Thanks for your comments Oswald.

  8. Well said Lindsay! And Ruth....? The indignant bludger look is soooooooo pathetic!


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.