Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Lawful Rebellion / Non Compliance / Sovereignty

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 14-04-2012, 11:42 PM   #21
dontpushme
Inactive
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,359
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rumpelstilzchen View Post
I'm guessing it would cost a few grand for a fire engine complete with crew and cutting equipment to attend a serious motor accident and to cut injured victims free. Maybe the fire crew should refuse to assist until the families of those trapped have stumped up the fee. Why should everyone else have to subsidise them? Or maybe we could just let them die? Why not?
ban cars? solve 3 problems with one action, no more car pollution , no more mangled car wrecks, and no more pedestrians run over
dontpushme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-04-2012, 11:44 PM   #22
dontpushme
Inactive
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,359
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rumpelstilzchen View Post
I agree. The better off areas would continue to pay for bin collections and the chavs would continue to live in their own filth.
the chavs will probably have a stronger immune system for it and no longer require the services of the glorious nhs

Last edited by dontpushme; 14-04-2012 at 11:45 PM.
dontpushme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-04-2012, 11:49 PM   #23
rumpelstilzchen
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: the End of The Forest where the fox and the hare bid each other goodnight
Posts: 6,221
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dontpushme View Post
ban cars? solve 3 problems with one action, no more car pollution , no more mangled car wrecks, and no more pedestrians run over
You want to start banning things? Enforcing your desires on others against their wishes? No chance. People are free to purchase cars if they wish. I say let the trapped victims die if the fee is not paid.
rumpelstilzchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-04-2012, 11:52 PM   #24
thoreau
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,762
Likes: 291 (137 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dontpushme View Post
they are just excuses used to justify your belief system, human kind lasted a good few thousand years without 'dustbin men' , the 'nhs', the 'police', the 'fire service', and mobile phones for that matter. all of a sudden the human race can't exist without dustbin men? is this some kind of devolutionary regression of human dna that i missed out on?
We did indeed live for a few thousand years without such services - and why was the fire brigade as it is now brought into being? because not everyone could afford to pay to have their fires put out? why was the nhs started? to ensure everyone was given the opportunity to receive medical care - these services sprang up through the lack of equality inherent in society. Freeman on these boards have claimed that the basic tenet for their view includes that all are equal - pay as you go is not policy that allows equality.

You also fail to take into account the way that we live nowadays compared to how we once did and the population rise that has occurred.

Quote:
ban cars? solve 3 problems with one action, no more car pollution , no more mangled car wrecks, and no more pedestrians run over
And who would ban and enforce the ban?
__________________
Go confidently in the direction of your dreams! Live the life you’ve imagined.HENRY DAVID THOREAU
Strong minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, weak minds discuss people - Socrates
No amount of security is worth the suffering of a mediocre life chained to a routine that has killed your dreams - Maya Mendoza
thoreau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-04-2012, 11:54 PM   #25
rumpelstilzchen
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: the End of The Forest where the fox and the hare bid each other goodnight
Posts: 6,221
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dontpushme View Post
the chavs will probably have a stronger immune system for it and no longer require the services of the glorious nhs
Well you only have to visit a chav estate to see they do appear to enjoy living in squalor. An old mattress in the front garden is almost obligatory.
rumpelstilzchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 12:10 AM   #26
moobs
Inactive
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,018
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dontpushme View Post
they are just excuses used to justify your belief system, human kind lasted a good few thousand years without 'dustbin men' , the 'nhs', the 'police', the 'fire service', and mobile phones for that matter. all of a sudden the human race can't exist without dustbin men? is this some kind of devolutionary regression of human dna that i missed out on?
Nobody is claiming that without government services all of humanity would collapse. The idea of government services is to help the public. You might not think they're doing a very good job, but in the time before societies and governments formed, people lived brutal lives filled with hardships. People today complaining about their council tax would have seemed like a joke to them.
moobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 12:34 AM   #27
dontpushme
Inactive
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,359
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rumpelstilzchen View Post
You want to start banning things? Enforcing your desires on others against their wishes? No chance. People are free to purchase cars if they wish. I say let the trapped victims die if the fee is not paid.
i was just thinking outside the box, their solution = everybody pay for a service incase, my solution = get rid of root cause

Quote:
Originally Posted by thoreau View Post
We did indeed live for a few thousand years without such services - and why was the fire brigade as it is now brought into being? because not everyone could afford to pay to have their fires put out?
i read somewhere everything belongs to the banks ultimately and that people have a right to use it, can't remember where and if my memory is a little sketchy on the subject

Quote:
why was the nhs started? to ensure everyone was given the opportunity to receive medical care - these services sprang up through the lack of equality inherent in society.
erm i got my doubts about that, from my research the nhs came out of the eugenics era as a way to stop the lower classes from out breading and over running the prefered classes

Quote:
Freeman on these boards have claimed that the basic tenet for their view includes that all are equal - pay as you go is not policy that allows equality.
i never got into this subject because of taxation, but for what its worth i don't mind contributing to something that benefits humanity

Quote:
You also fail to take into account the way that we live nowadays compared to how we once did and the population rise that has occurred.

And who would ban and enforce the ban?
not me

Last edited by dontpushme; 15-04-2012 at 12:34 AM.
dontpushme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 12:43 AM   #28
ich_dien
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 54
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dontpushme View Post
ban cars? solve 3 problems with one action, no more car pollution , no more mangled car wrecks, and no more pedestrians run over
So how the f*ck am I supposed to get to work at 3am in the morning?
ich_dien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 12:49 AM   #29
dontpushme
Inactive
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,359
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ich_dien View Post
So how the f*ck am I supposed to get to work at 3am in the morning?
got usable legs?
dontpushme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 12:54 AM   #30
rumpelstilzchen
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: the End of The Forest where the fox and the hare bid each other goodnight
Posts: 6,221
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dontpushme View Post
i was just thinking outside the box, their solution = everybody pay for a service incase, my solution = get rid of root cause
Right, so your solution is to introduce laws the effect of which is to prevent potential harm?
I see.

Last edited by rumpelstilzchen; 15-04-2012 at 12:56 AM.
rumpelstilzchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 01:06 AM   #31
dontpushme
Inactive
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,359
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rumpelstilzchen View Post
Right, so your solution is to introduce laws the effect of which is to prevent potential harm?
I see.
no, i was suggesting an alternative, here's another alternative, instead of charging every single person money incase mr car driving person gets mangled in their car, why not make mr car driving person pay a little extra taxation (say through fuel or road tax) to cover themselves incase the worst happens, now the mr car person has the option of contributing or not,

if the fire brigade turn up and mr car driver has no tax disc or a type of fuel that indicates he never payed the extra fuel tax, then the fire brigade can go back to the station and rest easy knowing mr car driver took his chances
dontpushme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 11:48 AM   #32
undeadcreature
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,679
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dontpushme View Post
no, i was suggesting an alternative, here's another alternative, instead of charging every single person money incase mr car driving person gets mangled in their car, why not make mr car driving person pay a little extra taxation (say through fuel or road tax) to cover themselves incase the worst happens, now the mr car person has the option of contributing or not,

if the fire brigade turn up and mr car driver has no tax disc or a type of fuel that indicates he never payed the extra fuel tax, then the fire brigade can go back to the station and rest easy knowing mr car driver took his chances
But those extra taxes that motorists are burdoned with go to central government and are used to fund expensive houses and illegal wars etc, not local government to fund roads, fire service or anytihng else that benefits the one paying extra.

At the moment, public services are free at the point of need for everyone, payment is sorted out seperately through compulsory taxation. Anyone who can't afford council tax is entitled to have it paid for them.
__________________
The problem with a revolution is that you always end up back where you started and ultimately........ bugger all changes....
undeadcreature is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 01:23 PM   #33
dontpushme
Inactive
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,359
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by undeadcreature View Post
But those extra taxes that motorists are burdoned with go to central government and are used to fund expensive houses and illegal wars etc, not local government to fund roads, fire service or anytihng else that benefits the one paying extra.
'burdened with' made me lol, nobody forces motorists to get a vehicle nor use them

Quote:
At the moment, public services are free at the point of need for everyone, payment is sorted out seperately through compulsory taxation. Anyone who can't afford council tax is entitled to have it paid for them.
sounds like a lame excuse to pay for bad services
dontpushme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 02:41 PM   #34
merlincove
Premier Subscribers
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 28,909
Likes: 425 (247 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rumpelstilzchen View Post
You want to start ........ Enforcing your desires on others against their wishes?
This is exactly what the Gvt do - enforce their views and wishes upon others, often against the consent of the others.

shot yourself in the foot there rumples?



you see if people started doing what the Gvt do, ie creating debt from thin air (poll tax / council tax) and stealing from people (the gvt call this taxation) without consent, then they are enforcing their views and actions upon others, effectively opressing others. Which is considered a crime, and rightly so. But when the Gvt do it, and the lackeys of the Gvt support it, it is somehow ok - infact in your world view it is wrong to even question the Gvt's ability to enforce their will upon others, because it's for the good of society, lol if it weren't so tragic.

Last edited by merlincove; 15-04-2012 at 02:42 PM.
merlincove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 02:45 PM   #35
merlincove
Premier Subscribers
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 28,909
Likes: 425 (247 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ich_dien View Post
So how the f*ck am I supposed to get to work at 3am in the morning?
Do you pay a fee to clean up the waste that your car creates?

Do you pay for the health care of those who suffer from polution?

If the Gvt issued a taxation fee of, say £1200 per year to help pay for polution and the effects on people's health, would you support it?
merlincove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 03:14 PM   #36
rumpelstilzchen
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: the End of The Forest where the fox and the hare bid each other goodnight
Posts: 6,221
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by merlincove View Post
This is exactly what the Gvt do - enforce their views and wishes upon others, often against the consent of the others.

shot yourself in the foot there rumples?
I would have thought it was obvious my post was pointing out the hypocrisy in dontpushme's "alternative solution".

Perhaps one thing that should be looked at is council housing. I agree with dontpushme in that those who do not use certain services should not be forced to pay for those that do. If some people wish to take advantage of council housing, those same people should be the ones who must pay for their construction and upkeep. I have no desire for a council house and I do not see why I should contribute towards their cost. Those that use that service should pay. Any repairs required should be paid for by the tenants and no one else.
Libraries too. I can see nothing wrong with a pay as you go scheme. Obviously only those who could afford it would use libraries, but you have to ask yourself, does it really matter? Is it of any great concern if poor people do not get access to free books? I would say not. Internet access in libraries should be charged at full market rates. Why should those of us who pay for internet access at home subsidise those who want to use the internet for free? Diabolical.
As for street lighting and verge cutting I would imagine those in better off areas who take more pride in their properties would probably continue to pay for those services in order to keep their neighbourhood smart. The chav estates on the other hand would probably be populated by people who don't want to pay so it would be a simple matter to turn the street lights off in those areas and allow the verges to take nature's course.
Let the market decide.

Last edited by rumpelstilzchen; 15-04-2012 at 03:23 PM.
rumpelstilzchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 03:15 PM   #37
merlincove
Premier Subscribers
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 28,909
Likes: 425 (247 Posts)
Default

So, what about those families who are on the poverty line, and below it, who can not pay their council tax / poll tax?

Single occupiers are eligible for a 25% reduction in fee, but as a single parent, working part time, what happens if they can't afford to pay the £90 - £100 per month on top of rising energy costs, mortgage payments / rent payments etc?

Typically on a £1200 charge they are billed for £900 - it might not seem like much, but finding that £90pm can be the difference between having food on the table or not. These people can't afford holidays, they barely manage to make ends meet without the threat of court action and bailiff attendance for not meeting the demands made of them by the gvt who are meant to serve them.

So, where does that leave them?

The courts don't want to know, they are not interested in cant's, their only desire is to fire out court liability orders, instructing bailiffs who add to the woe through incurred costs for attendance and court costs etc.

That 25% reduction is then effectively swallowed up by applied costs.

The more the bailiff attends then the more the cost escalates.

Come the next financial year, those single parents are greeted by a new council demand, on top of the agreed payments with bailiffs if that is the route they chose to take for the arrears from last year.

Bailiffs are taking possessions - real tangible goods on the back of a made up and created debt, and they have the weight of the law to back them. and beyond this people have been imprisoned for their choosing not to obey court orders and council demands - again, they are losing something that is important to them, their liberty, for choosing to apply free choice to something they either see as oppressive or can not afford to pay, the gvt are effectively taking time form people (time that could be shared with loved ones and family) for daring to say 'no' to their word - taking something tangible on the creation of fictional debt.

And it's amusing how many people here laugh when a fmol gets prison time, how they mock and use it as a stat to shore up the Gvt's resolve to take the rights away from the common man / woman - that someone who fights for their rights is victimised through the court, it is sad that some here find that amusing, and a mark, trully, on their character as human beings.

Bailiffs are seizing cars and 'chattels' to pay for a debt that was purely created and enforced through Gvt application.

And even if a family can afford to pay the debt / council tax, the fact remains that their hard earned money, accumulated by a persons hard work is taken from them to pay a debt they never agreed to. The gvt are taking a persons time and energy and money (real tangible effects) - and calling it legal because they make the law that gives them the right to do it.

Ok. i know several people who have applied fmol directs toward not paying council tax. I'm unsure if any have applied the use as given in the OP to effect, but the main drive of their none compliance is not accepting that they are liable for the debt and standing under the concept that they are not persons.

These people choose none-compliance not out of a greed or a need to 'freeload,' but they choose none compliance because they can not afford these imposed debts and because they do not agree with the amount of taxation being applied.

I know people who have chosen a stance of none compliance since the poll tax was introduced in the 80's - and through the various changes through council tax etc still do not pay this extortionate fee.

Not one of these people have ever been imprisoned or had a liability order affixed to their properties.

Some have chosen to simply ignore the taxation demands, others have written 'fmol letters' and asked to pay a proportionate breakdown of costs according to their usage.

If people could afford council tax, if the council tax was considered fair and affordable and the monies collected could be seen to be being put to good use, then people may be more inclined to pay. when we see Gvt scandals on expenses, lost credits through dodgy investments, poor roads, tightening public services etc - we can start to understand peoples willingness to say 'no, enough is enough.'

Not paying this tax is a way of saying 'no' - and if enough people say 'no' then it might just make a difference.

It's a little surprising that rather than challenge an unfair system, and support others' right to challenge it, so many in this sub forum choose to lambaste and shout down those challenges, and rather than say 'no Mr gvt,' they ask how far they should bend over. And then say 'thank you man.'

Last edited by merlincove; 15-04-2012 at 03:22 PM.
merlincove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 03:18 PM   #38
merlincove
Premier Subscribers
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 28,909
Likes: 425 (247 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rumpelstilzchen View Post
I would have thought it was obvious my post was pointing out the hypocrisy in dontpushme's "alternative solution".
While it as obvious, it also highlighted the hypocracy of your own possition in supporting a regime that applies force to its own will - and how you consider that measure right on one hand but wrong on the other - my point

When the Gvt ban something is it ok, or when they issue an act to enforce others to their will, is it all well and good? But for others to suggest it....... oooh, can't have that?

Status quo eh?


Last edited by merlincove; 15-04-2012 at 04:12 PM.
merlincove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 04:25 PM   #39
dontpushme
Inactive
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,359
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rumpelstilzchen View Post
I would have thought it was obvious my post was pointing out the hypocrisy in dontpushme's "alternative solution".
i notice you didn't post comment on my second alternative solution, you wouldn't happen to have a car by any chance?

Quote:
Perhaps one thing that should be looked at is council housing. I agree with dontpushme in that those who do not use certain services should not be forced to pay for those that do.
i never said certain services

Quote:
If some people wish to take advantage of council housing, those same people should be the ones who must pay for their construction and upkeep. I have no desire for a council house and I do not see why I should contribute towards their cost. Those that use that service should pay. Any repairs required should be paid for by the tenants and no one else.
Libraries too. I can see nothing wrong with a pay as you go scheme. Obviously only those who could afford it would use libraries, but you have to ask yourself, does it really matter? Is it of any great concern if poor people do not get access to free books? I would say not. Internet access in libraries should be charged at full market rates. Why should those of us who pay for internet access at home subsidise those who want to use the internet for free? Diabolical.
As for street lighting and verge cutting I would imagine those in better off areas who take more pride in their properties would probably continue to pay for those services in order to keep their neighbourhood smart. The chav estates on the other hand would probably be populated by people who don't want to pay so it would be a simple matter to turn the street lights off in those areas and allow the verges to take nature's course.
Let the market decide.
i also said 'for what its worth i don't mind contributing to something that benefits humanity' all you've suggested fall into this category.

By contribution though, in the final equation, i don't think paying some lame council money would really help, i prefer to think of something that will actually help people, enhance peoples quality of life and broaden their horizons.

for example i do a bit of dj'ing and think that such techniques could actually help people rise from the pits and give them some self-esteem, and in return seeing people empowered would actually make me feel like i've contributed something of real value to human civilization. (of course i wouldn't force this service on anybody, it would be completely voluntary)

eg skillz that would help people progress and grow, not charity payouts that keep people down

Last edited by dontpushme; 15-04-2012 at 04:31 PM.
dontpushme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 04:29 PM   #40
thoreau
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,762
Likes: 291 (137 Posts)
Default

@ merlin - that is why those who are on low incomes get council tax benefits - you can even get council tax benefit if you have less then 6k in savings - but the crux of the matter it appears by your post is that you do not see why people should have to all put money into a pot and have it spent on services that they do not neccesarily use themselves but instead to ensure that a certain standard of service is available to all.

I may think that things are mismanaged - I may think that governments and big business are corrupt - but for me working together to ensure that all have a basic standard of services is important - whether it be via taxation or via working together on a smaller community scale to get things done.
__________________
Go confidently in the direction of your dreams! Live the life you’ve imagined.HENRY DAVID THOREAU
Strong minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, weak minds discuss people - Socrates
No amount of security is worth the suffering of a mediocre life chained to a routine that has killed your dreams - Maya Mendoza
thoreau is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:20 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.