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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 15-04-2012, 04:42 PM   #41
merlincove
Premier Subscribers
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 28,909
Likes: 425 (247 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thoreau View Post
@ 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.
part of the crux, not all of it.

i agree that public services need to be funded from somewhere - cutting out the waste of money as we have seen through MP's expense accounts and dodgy investments would help, it needs to be re-structured from the top down though, and taxation garnered with means testing as part of the equation.

Even with the 25% deduction for single occupiers, the amount is still to high for some people to meet. If the costs were applied that the worst-off of families could afford without having to struggle that would be a start - and cutting out all the needless expense through those applications of Gvt funds being missused is part of the overal concept of 'making it better, and easier.'

We're living in the 21st century, there is no need for families who work to be on the poverty line, yet so many are.

i know a single parent who goes out to work a 48 hour week and she on a good wage, she has to do at least 20 hours a week overtime just to afford niceties like going out for a meal or a drink once a in a while. She isn't able to go out more than once a month on basic wage, yet she works and holds down a family, she gets working families tax credit and child benefit, but still struggles to find payments to meet council tax - when she is not eligible for those benefits anymore she is worried how she will be able to afford to pay for the living expenses such as gas and leccy etc - and that's without them going up which they likely will. Now she's not freeloading, she doesn't spend or witter money away on extravagant lifestyle, yet she's got the bailiffs hounding her and can rarely meet the £100 a month or so that the council demand of her.

Benifits are not the answer, because they invariably fail the people they are meant to help.

Last edited by merlincove; 15-04-2012 at 04:44 PM.
merlincove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 04:45 PM   #42
undeadcreature
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,679
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thoreau View Post
@ 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.
All those who receive benefits to help pay for council tax still receive all the services that those taxes pay for, as well as those who don't pay it at all.

I would share Merlins view if public services were like phones etc, don't pay the bill and the services get suspended untill the bill is paid but those who live outside their means and say they can't afford the bill still expect to use the services.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dontpushme
sounds like a lame excuse to pay for bad services
Got a better solution?
__________________
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, 04:52 PM   #43
dontpushme
Inactive
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,359
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by undeadcreature View Post
All those who receive benefits to help pay for council tax still receive all the services that those taxes pay for, as well as those who don't pay it at all.

I would share Merlins view if public services were like phones etc, don't pay the bill and the services get suspended untill the bill is paid but those who live outside their means and say they can't afford the bill still expect to use the services.



Got a better solution?
get rid of involuntary, make em work for their money by providing better a better service that people would be happy to pay for
dontpushme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 04:54 PM   #44
thoreau
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,762
Likes: 291 (137 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by merlincove View Post
part of the crux, not all of it.

i agree that public services need to be funded from somewhere - cutting out the waste of money as we have seen through MP's expense accounts and dodgy investments would help, it needs to be re-structured from the top down though, and taxation garnered with means testing as part of the equation.

Even with the 25% deduction for single occupiers, the amount is still to high for some people to meet. If the costs were applied that the worst-off of families could afford without having to struggle that would be a start - and cutting out all the needless expense through those applications of Gvt funds being missused is part of the overal concept of 'making it better, and easier.'

We're living in the 21st century, there is no need for families who work to be on the poverty line, yet so many are.

i know a single parent who goes out to work a 48 hour week and she on a good wage, she has to do at least 20 hours a week overtime just to afford niceties like going out for a meal or a drink once a in a while. She isn't able to go out more than once a month on basic wage, yet she works and holds down a family, she gets working families tax credit and child benefit, but still struggles to find payments to meet council tax - when she is not eligible for those benefits anymore she is worried how she will be able to afford to pay for the living expenses such as gas and leccy etc - and that's without them going up which they likely will. Now she's not freeloading, she doesn't spend or witter money away on extravagant lifestyle, yet she's got the bailiffs hounding her and can rarely meet the £100 a month or so that the council demand of her.

Benifits are not the answer, because they invariably fail the people they are meant to help.
Dont get me wrong give me 5 mins with the budget and there is a lot of superfluous things I would rather cut then benefits - quangos, expenses and tax relief for big business being three I can think of.

I just have a belief in pooling resources together in order to provide the same standard for all - I sympathise greatly for the position your friend is in and would suggest that as she is in receipt of certain benefits she see if she is eligible for council tax benefit as well - now imagine that the services provided for by council tax were on a pay as you use scheme and one of her children has broken a leg and the hospital will not fix it unless she can pay upfront for the service or has insurance to cover it and the insurers agree to cover it...
__________________
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 15-04-2012, 06:54 PM   #45
msbpunk
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 1,099
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bones View Post
just been announced that in ne lincs here 8000 people havnt paid it from 2011, they are concerned and asked why so many, the people responded saying they cant afford it and are spending it more on food and utilities ...

interesting radio broardcast...
Why don't they apply for benefits? If they are below the income level they don't have to pay CT. Then they can spend their money on food, utilities etc.
msbpunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 06:57 PM   #46
msbpunk
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 1,099
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by merlincove View Post
part of the crux, not all of it.

i agree that public services need to be funded from somewhere - cutting out the waste of money as we have seen through MP's expense accounts and dodgy investments would help, it needs to be re-structured from the top down though, and taxation garnered with means testing as part of the equation.

Even with the 25% deduction for single occupiers, the amount is still to high for some people to meet. If the costs were applied that the worst-off of families could afford without having to struggle that would be a start - and cutting out all the needless expense through those applications of Gvt funds being missused is part of the overal concept of 'making it better, and easier.'

We're living in the 21st century, there is no need for families who work to be on the poverty line, yet so many are.

i know a single parent who goes out to work a 48 hour week and she on a good wage, she has to do at least 20 hours a week overtime just to afford niceties like going out for a meal or a drink once a in a while. She isn't able to go out more than once a month on basic wage, yet she works and holds down a family, she gets working families tax credit and child benefit, but still struggles to find payments to meet council tax - when she is not eligible for those benefits anymore she is worried how she will be able to afford to pay for the living expenses such as gas and leccy etc - and that's without them going up which they likely will. Now she's not freeloading, she doesn't spend or witter money away on extravagant lifestyle, yet she's got the bailiffs hounding her and can rarely meet the £100 a month or so that the council demand of her.

Benifits are not the answer, because they invariably fail the people they are meant to help.
And internet woo about jurisdiction, contracts, joinder etc etc is not going to help here either.
msbpunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 07:06 PM   #47
godgoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: 9th floor
Posts: 3,563
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Why don't they buy a council tank with the council tax money and just drive through the council estate, coz they need flattenin!
__________________
Metaphysics by Default Existential Passage http://mbdefault.org/forum/index.php
Metaphysics by Default Existential Passage http://mbdefault.org/9_passage/
<--see my ear? 30%
The Engineer.co.uk

Last edited by godgoo; 15-04-2012 at 07:07 PM.
godgoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 07:09 PM   #48
msbpunk
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 1,099
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dontpushme View Post



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
Such as ...
msbpunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 08:17 PM   #49
dontpushme
Inactive
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,359
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by msbpunk View Post
Such as ...
i suggested one, there are all sorts of skills you could offer to people beyond the one i suggested. of course empowering people wouldn't really help wannabe shrinks, but meh screw em
dontpushme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 08:46 PM   #50
merlincove
Premier Subscribers
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 28,909
Likes: 425 (247 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by msbpunk View Post
And internet woo about jurisdiction, contracts, joinder etc etc is not going to help here either.
Doesn't it?

i have at least a dozen friends, thinking off the top of my head, who have been using that 'woo,' as you call it, and have not paid council tax - some sinse it's prerequisite poll tax days and many more in the last five or more years.....

So, i beg to differ.
merlincove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 09:15 PM   #51
msbpunk
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 1,099
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dontpushme View Post
i suggested one, there are all sorts of skills you could offer to people beyond the one i suggested. of course empowering people wouldn't really help wannabe shrinks, but meh screw em
Ooh get you, put your handbag away. I think you will find promoting self empowerment is central to practicing psychology.

And "shrink" is a reference to psychiatrists, not psychologists

Last edited by msbpunk; 15-04-2012 at 09:16 PM.
msbpunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 09:17 PM   #52
msbpunk
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 1,099
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by merlincove View Post
Doesn't it?

i have at least a dozen friends, thinking off the top of my head, who have been using that 'woo,' as you call it, and have not paid council tax - some sinse it's prerequisite poll tax days and many more in the last five or more years.....

So, i beg to differ.
Have you given their details in the success thread?
msbpunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 09:21 PM   #53
moobs
Inactive
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,018
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by msbpunk View Post
Have you given their details in the success thread?
Details? In the success thread? What a quaint idea!
moobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-04-2012, 09:23 PM   #54
merlincove
Premier Subscribers
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 28,909
Likes: 425 (247 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by msbpunk View Post
Have you given their details in the success thread?
And what details would those be?

That they do not admit to
  1. being a person?
  2. being liable for the charge?
  3. just ignore the letters?

And what proof would be demanded of these points?

How can anyone offer proof that they said 'am i obliged to answer your questions?' to a bailif at the door and no more action was taken?

i guess you'd want a letter from the court or the council, or something like that?

You think courts, councils and bailiffs send out letters proving they have no jurisdiction over a person, that's just silly.

But regardless of what you think and believe, these people haven't paid council tax / poll tax sinse its inception, and neither have they been to court or had charging notices / orders placed upon their properties.

Last edited by merlincove; 15-04-2012 at 09:25 PM.
merlincove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-04-2012, 11:52 AM   #55
britishnick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by firstworldproblems View Post
If you can think of any sane way to make these services optional then I would love to hear it because that'd be damn incredible.

Honestly I'd totally be for Freemen opting out of police and fire protection, garbage collection, etc.

Scenarios like this, that's an ideal system, right?
If you opt out of paying for fire service then that is the risk you take...

Last time I saw a council tax bill the police and fire services was sectioned out... something like £100 (ish) for a year, which I presume is like an insurance policy. You can contract directly with your local fire service in the UK from the way I understand it.
__________________
You all owe me a breathing tax - please pay up: http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=103303
freemanpete: "Freedom can't be spoon fed."
vladmir "Being a Freeman [for me] dosent mean one supports anarchy or no government, but a legitimate and limited form of Lawful government is actually what freemen are seeking, not a corporate dictatorship that is currently hijacked into place."
britishnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-04-2012, 12:12 PM   #56
britishnick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
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.
as above - local fire service costs a bit less than £100 for a year... probably depends on your area.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rumpelstilzchen View Post
Why should everyone else have to subsidise them? Or maybe we could just let them die? Why not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rumpelstilzchen View Post
I say let the trapped victims die if the fee is not paid.
On an entirely related note - A lack of empathy is one of the characteristics of a psychopath... although often they learn to emulate empathy - interesting to note it's a trait shared by many heads of state... you know... the ones who like to weild power, control everyone, force "contracts" on them, punish them for not complying with their will...
__________________
You all owe me a breathing tax - please pay up: http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=103303
freemanpete: "Freedom can't be spoon fed."
vladmir "Being a Freeman [for me] dosent mean one supports anarchy or no government, but a legitimate and limited form of Lawful government is actually what freemen are seeking, not a corporate dictatorship that is currently hijacked into place."
britishnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-04-2012, 12:18 PM   #57
britishnick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hadabusa View Post
britishnick, have YOU, YOU PERSONALLY tried this?
no

Quote:
Originally Posted by hadabusa View Post
dont bring up balonie stories, unsourced, with no names and proof.
yes mum, sorry mum. shall I go sit on the nawty step until I've thought about what a terrible thing I've done?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hadabusa View Post
if you believe in this, do it yourself.
Is that an order? You'll be wanting a bill then ;-)

P.S. sorry to hear about your recent kidnap. I applaud you efforts, that looked like quite a crop.
__________________
You all owe me a breathing tax - please pay up: http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=103303
freemanpete: "Freedom can't be spoon fed."
vladmir "Being a Freeman [for me] dosent mean one supports anarchy or no government, but a legitimate and limited form of Lawful government is actually what freemen are seeking, not a corporate dictatorship that is currently hijacked into place."
britishnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-04-2012, 03:05 PM   #58
jlord
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 589
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by merlincove View Post
And what details would those be?

That they do not admit to
  1. being a person?
  2. being liable for the charge?
  3. just ignore the letters?

And what proof would be demanded of these points?

How can anyone offer proof that they said 'am i obliged to answer your questions?' to a bailif at the door and no more action was taken?

i guess you'd want a letter from the court or the council, or something like that?

You think courts, councils and bailiffs send out letters proving they have no jurisdiction over a person, that's just silly.

But regardless of what you think and believe, these people haven't paid council tax / poll tax sinse its inception, and neither have they been to court or had charging notices / orders placed upon their properties.
That sounds like a pretty big success to me. Maybe you can convince them to post their own stories in the success thread. But why do think it worked for these people you know, but yet others who have tried the same thing have been dragged into to court, forced to pay, lost their homes, etc.?
jlord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-04-2012, 04:36 PM   #59
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 britishnick View Post
as above - local fire service costs a bit less than £100 for a year... probably depends on your area.
I assume you are not suggesting the total cost of supplying a fire service for one year is £100 but that is what it would cost per person per year? But, your OP advises everybody not to pay, so how do you arrive at that figure?




Quote:
On an entirely related note - A lack of empathy is one of the characteristics of a psychopath... although often they learn to emulate empathy - interesting to note it's a trait shared by many heads of state... you know... the ones who like to weild power, control everyone, force "contracts" on them, punish them for not complying with their will...
Irrelevant. A suggestion has been made that perhaps people should only pay for the services they decide to use. You appear to be suggesting everybody should have access to all services whilst at the same time you are advising everybody not to pay. How would you propose those services should be funded? Are you saying everybody should have access to the protection offered by the fire services but no one should pay for them?

Last edited by rumpelstilzchen; 16-04-2012 at 04:39 PM.
rumpelstilzchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-04-2012, 05:04 PM   #60
aulus agerius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,418
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by britishnick View Post
On an entirely related note - A lack of empathy is one of the characteristics of a psychopath... although often they learn to emulate empathy - interesting to note it's a trait shared by many heads of state... you know... the ones who like to weild power, control everyone, force "contracts" on them, punish them for not complying with their will...
But where is your empathy for the unlucky people who turn out to need police or fire services but can't afford to pay for what they need all at once at that moment. As Rumple pointed out, requiring people to pay for those services at the point of delivery leads to the question, will you really refuse to provide the service when someone's life is at stake?

In the US, this happens all the time: no NHS, plenty of people who can't afford health insurance, and plenty of ways to end up in the Emergency Room. In the US, the law requires that hospitals treat emergency cases even if they don't have any way to pay for the treatment. This means, in effect, that the poor get emergency treatment, but at the cost of taking on an enormous medical debt that is likely to bankrupt them or eat up their income for years to come.

That doesn't seem to me to be a particularly good system. In fact, requiring payment at the point of delivery for those sorts of services seems the sort of system Ebeneezer Scrooge would have loved: it leaves the poor to die and "reduce the surplus population" without imposing extra costs on the rich.
aulus agerius 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 07:24 PM.


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