Social Media Defence Force

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
User avatar
Oblomov Boblomov
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Mind Crime, SSBM_God

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by Oblomov Boblomov » Fri Nov 13, 2020 1:23 pm

Leader board added to the first page!

Jenuall wrote:Never in doubt :datass:

Let us know the response, I'm sure it will be received well! :slol:


Will do! Getting nervous :shifty: keep looking at Facebook instead of doing work.

Image
User avatar
Hypes
Member
Joined in 2009
Location: Beyond the wall

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by Hypes » Fri Nov 13, 2020 1:28 pm

Oblomov Boblomov wrote:Leader board added to the first page!

Jenuall wrote:Never in doubt :datass:

Let us know the response, I'm sure it will be received well! :slol:


Will do! Getting nervous :shifty: keep looking at Facebook instead of doing work.

You wouldn't get this with socialism

Image
User avatar
Oblomov Boblomov
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Mind Crime, SSBM_God

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by Oblomov Boblomov » Fri Nov 13, 2020 1:30 pm

Err... unexpected twist – the original friend has replied to me instead:

I do think if you put more in, you should get more out though. Don't you? I am not even sure the 80k+ should get sanctioned. I have read that if we took the worlds billionaires (people who can't even spend all the money they have) and sanctioned them, we could all have decent services without anyone really feeling the pinch. I think we just need an earnings/assets cap for the unnecessarily wealthy. The offshore hoarders. I have seen the figures on the growth of the worlds billionaires in comparison to poverty increase and it's clear to me where the problem is.


Is she suggesting that if you pay more tax you get to use the premium NHS wing instead of the one for the plebs, or am I misinterpreting?!

Image
User avatar
BID0
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Essex

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by BID0 » Fri Nov 13, 2020 1:34 pm

Oblomov Boblomov wrote:What is a good response to this:

Work...pay tax on everything you buy pay PAYE national insurance pay vat pay council tax ect ect that’s enough paying in for what is payed out to myself and children in maternity, school, healthcare and social functions such as as police and waste.... socialism works for people who do less than they get out, not the other way around. socialism to me is like been a mug to the rest of society who are allowed to do nothing and reap the benefits of the hardworking.

If you give someone £100, they can go get a plumber to fix a tap, the government takes a % of that plumbers work back in taxes. To simplify it lets just say 20% covers all of your NI/Tax/VAT etc. The plumber gets a customer and £80 of money. The government now has recovered £20 of the £100 they gave out.

The plumber wants to get their hair coloured and trimmed so goes to the salon. It costs £60 and the government takes another round 20% of the transaction giving the salon owner £48 profit. The government now has recovered another £12 of the £100 they gave out, with the money they took from the plumber that's £32 recovered from the £100 they gave away to the lazy person on benefits and the plumber and salon owner have both made a profit for their work with the additional customer they have benefitted from.

The salon owner needs some groceries, so they pop to the local shop and spend their £48 on their weekly shop. The socialist government takes another 20% of the sale (£9.60), the local shop has a new customer giving them £38.40 after the 20% of taxes and the salon owner has food in their cupboards. The government has now recovered £41.60 of the £100 they gave out.

The local grocery shop business owner's car breaks down and takes their car to the mechanic. The mechanic sells the grocery shop owner a new car battery with fitting for £38.40 exactly which is a bit of luck. The government takes 20% of the sale (£7.68) and the mechanic puts the £30.72 in the till. The government now has £49.28 back from the £100 they gave away for free.

The mechanic is heading out for lunch and they go to buy sandwiches at the local coffee shop for the 3 mechanics working their. The bacon sandwich, cake and coffee costs £30 for all 3 mechanics as it's a meal deal offer. The government takes 20% again (£6) and the mechanics get their lunch. The government add the 20% to what they have recovered coming to £55.28 of the £100 they gave away.

So far that lazy benefit scrounger has...

the tap in their house fixed and they helped 5 businesses employing 8 people
the plumber has a new hair style
the salon owner has food in their cupboards
the grocery shop owner has a car that's road worthy again
the mechanic has bought themselves and colleagues lunch and they even have 72p in their pocket
the coffee shop owner has £24 to go spend somewhere next
the government has £55.28 of the £100 they gave originally, with eyes on the 72p the mechanic and £24 the coffeeshop owner have.

If you give Amazon £100, they put the money in an offshore bank account and don't pay 20%. The government loses £100 and the plumber, the salon owner, the grocery shop owner, the mechanic and the coffee shop owner have to close their businesses they've put so much hard work in to and look for a new job at an Amazon warehouse.

Last edited by BID0 on Fri Nov 13, 2020 1:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Oblomov Boblomov
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Mind Crime, SSBM_God

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by Oblomov Boblomov » Fri Nov 13, 2020 1:39 pm

BID0 wrote:
Oblomov Boblomov wrote:What is a good response to this:

Work...pay tax on everything you buy pay PAYE national insurance pay vat pay council tax ect ect that’s enough paying in for what is payed out to myself and children in maternity, school, healthcare and social functions such as as police and waste.... socialism works for people who do less than they get out, not the other way around. socialism to me is like been a mug to the rest of society who are allowed to do nothing and reap the benefits of the hardworking.

If you give someone £100, they can go get a plumber to fix a tap, the government takes a % of that plumbers work back in taxes. To simplify it lets just say 20% covers all of your NI/Tax/VAT etc. The plumber gets a customer and £80 of money. The government now has recovered £20 of the £100 they gave out.

The plumber wants to get their hair coloured and trimmed so goes to the salon. It costs £60 and the government takes another round 20% of the transaction giving the salon owner £48 profit. The government now has recovered another £12 of the £100 they gave out, with the money they took from the plumber that's £32 recovered from the £100 they gave away to the lazy person on benefits and the plumber and salon owner have both made a profit for their work with the additional customer they have benefitted from.

The salon owner needs some groceries, so they pop to the local shop and spend their £48 on their weekly shop. The socialist government takes another 20% of the sale (£9.60), the local shop has a new customer giving them £38.40 after the 20% of taxes and the salon owner has food in their cupboards. The government has now recovered £41.60 of the £100 they gave out.

The local grocery shop business owner's car breaks down and takes their car to the mechanic. The mechanic sells the grocery shop owner a new car battery with fitting for £38.40 exactly which is a bit of luck. The government takes 20% of the sale (£7.68) and the mechanic puts the £30.72 in the till. The government now has £49.28 back from the £100 they gave away for free.

The mechanic is heading out for lunch and they go to buy sandwiches at the local coffee shop for the 3 mechanics working their. The bacon sandwich, cake and coffee costs £30 for all 3 mechanics as it's a meal deal offer. The government takes 20% again (£6) and the mechanics get their lunch. The government add the 20% to what they have recovered coming to £55.28 of the £100 they gave away.

So far that lazy benefit scrounger has...

the tap in their house fixed and they helped 5 businesses employing 8 people
the plumber has a new hair style
the salon owner has food in their cupboards
the grocery shop owner has a car that's road worthy again
the mechanic has bought themselves and colleagues lunch and they even have 72p in their pocket
the coffee shop owner has £24 to go spend somewhere next
the government has £55.28 of the £100 they gave originally, with eyes on the 72p the mechanic and £24 the coffeeshop owner have.

Thanks BID0. Unfortunately, I can see a response to this already: "Yeah but they actually just spend it on fags and booze instead".

Image
User avatar
BID0
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Essex

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by BID0 » Fri Nov 13, 2020 1:41 pm

Oblomov Boblomov wrote:Thanks BID0. Unfortunately, I can see a response to this already: "Yeah but they actually just spend it on fags and booze instead".

but... I spent ages typing that all out. I hate socialism :x

User avatar
Cuttooth
Emeritus
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by Cuttooth » Fri Nov 13, 2020 1:43 pm

Oblomov Boblomov wrote:
BID0 wrote:
Oblomov Boblomov wrote:What is a good response to this:

Work...pay tax on everything you buy pay PAYE national insurance pay vat pay council tax ect ect that’s enough paying in for what is payed out to myself and children in maternity, school, healthcare and social functions such as as police and waste.... socialism works for people who do less than they get out, not the other way around. socialism to me is like been a mug to the rest of society who are allowed to do nothing and reap the benefits of the hardworking.

If you give someone £100, they can go get a plumber to fix a tap, the government takes a % of that plumbers work back in taxes. To simplify it lets just say 20% covers all of your NI/Tax/VAT etc. The plumber gets a customer and £80 of money. The government now has recovered £20 of the £100 they gave out.

The plumber wants to get their hair coloured and trimmed so goes to the salon. It costs £60 and the government takes another round 20% of the transaction giving the salon owner £48 profit. The government now has recovered another £12 of the £100 they gave out, with the money they took from the plumber that's £32 recovered from the £100 they gave away to the lazy person on benefits and the plumber and salon owner have both made a profit for their work with the additional customer they have benefitted from.

The salon owner needs some groceries, so they pop to the local shop and spend their £48 on their weekly shop. The socialist government takes another 20% of the sale (£9.60), the local shop has a new customer giving them £38.40 after the 20% of taxes and the salon owner has food in their cupboards. The government has now recovered £41.60 of the £100 they gave out.

The local grocery shop business owner's car breaks down and takes their car to the mechanic. The mechanic sells the grocery shop owner a new car battery with fitting for £38.40 exactly which is a bit of luck. The government takes 20% of the sale (£7.68) and the mechanic puts the £30.72 in the till. The government now has £49.28 back from the £100 they gave away for free.

The mechanic is heading out for lunch and they go to buy sandwiches at the local coffee shop for the 3 mechanics working their. The bacon sandwich, cake and coffee costs £30 for all 3 mechanics as it's a meal deal offer. The government takes 20% again (£6) and the mechanics get their lunch. The government add the 20% to what they have recovered coming to £55.28 of the £100 they gave away.

So far that lazy benefit scrounger has...

the tap in their house fixed and they helped 5 businesses employing 8 people
the plumber has a new hair style
the salon owner has food in their cupboards
the grocery shop owner has a car that's road worthy again
the mechanic has bought themselves and colleagues lunch and they even have 72p in their pocket
the coffee shop owner has £24 to go spend somewhere next
the government has £55.28 of the £100 they gave originally, with eyes on the 72p the mechanic and £24 the coffeeshop owner have.

Thanks BID0. Unfortunately, I can see a response to this already: "Yeah but they actually just spend it on fags and booze instead".

Not directly from the producer though.

User avatar
Oblomov Boblomov
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Mind Crime, SSBM_God

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by Oblomov Boblomov » Fri Nov 13, 2020 1:46 pm

BID0 wrote:
Oblomov Boblomov wrote:Thanks BID0. Unfortunately, I can see a response to this already: "Yeah but they actually just spend it on fags and booze instead".

but... I spent ages typing that all out. I hate socialism :x

:lol: it is certainly worthwhile to expose the myopic view people have of how these things work. There are always knock-on effects to everything. People simply don't understand that (as Jenuall pointed out) what benefits society actually benefits us all. Only as strong as your weakest link, etc.

Image
User avatar
Lex-Man
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by Lex-Man » Fri Nov 13, 2020 1:51 pm

Oblomov Boblomov wrote:Err... unexpected twist – the original friend has replied to me instead:

I do think if you put more in, you should get more out though. Don't you? I am not even sure the 80k+ should get sanctioned. I have read that if we took the worlds billionaires (people who can't even spend all the money they have) and sanctioned them, we could all have decent services without anyone really feeling the pinch. I think we just need an earnings/assets cap for the unnecessarily wealthy. The offshore hoarders. I have seen the figures on the growth of the worlds billionaires in comparison to poverty increase and it's clear to me where the problem is.


Is she suggesting that if you pay more tax you get to use the premium NHS wing instead of the one for the plebs, or am I misinterpreting?!


It seems more like an argument of having tax brackets and just come down hard on Billionaires. It doesn't sound very realistic though.

Amusement under late capitalism is the prolongation of work.
User avatar
OrangeRKN
SONM & Cake Sec.
SONM & Cake Sec.
Joined in 2015
Location: Reading, UK
Contact:

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by OrangeRKN » Fri Nov 13, 2020 1:55 pm

BID0 wrote:If you give Amazon £100, they put the money in an offshore bank account and don't pay 20%. The government loses £100 and the plumber, the salon owner, the grocery shop owner, the mechanic and the coffee shop owner have to close their businesses they've put so much hard work in to and look for a new job at an Amazon warehouse.


Yeah but when traditional governments collapse and coorporations fill the void then Amazon is the government so your argument falls apart!

Checkmate socialists

Image
Image
orkn.uk - SW-6533-2461-3235 - @OrangeRakoon - ACNH Howdyfern
User avatar
Oblomov Boblomov
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Mind Crime, SSBM_God

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by Oblomov Boblomov » Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:02 pm

Lex-Man wrote:
Oblomov Boblomov wrote:Err... unexpected twist – the original friend has replied to me instead:

I do think if you put more in, you should get more out though. Don't you? I am not even sure the 80k+ should get sanctioned. I have read that if we took the worlds billionaires (people who can't even spend all the money they have) and sanctioned them, we could all have decent services without anyone really feeling the pinch. I think we just need an earnings/assets cap for the unnecessarily wealthy. The offshore hoarders. I have seen the figures on the growth of the worlds billionaires in comparison to poverty increase and it's clear to me where the problem is.


Is she suggesting that if you pay more tax you get to use the premium NHS wing instead of the one for the plebs, or am I misinterpreting?!


It seems more like an argument of having tax brackets and just come down hard on Billionaires. It doesn't sound very realistic though.

I think reading into the "should get more out" suggests differently. I asked directly, giving the 'premium NHS wing' example as a question but she's doubled-down on the anti-billionaire stance. She also then threw in a comment about how poor people shouldn't give birth and prisons should be worse so people don't want to go to them... I think she's overtaken the other guy for dickhead status now :lol:.

Image
User avatar
Oblomov Boblomov
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Mind Crime, SSBM_God

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by Oblomov Boblomov » Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:03 pm

Oh my god I literally just remembered I sacked this person about five years ago :shock:!

What the strawberry float :lol: I think the fact we've still been friends on Facebook all this time completely passed me by!

Image
User avatar
Knoyleo
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by Knoyleo » Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:05 pm

Who's the callus bourgeois manergerial class capitalist now?

User avatar
sawyerpip
Member
Joined in 2009

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by sawyerpip » Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:08 pm

Oblomov Boblomov wrote:Err... unexpected twist – the original friend has replied to me instead:

I do think if you put more in, you should get more out though. Don't you? I am not even sure the 80k+ should get sanctioned. I have read that if we took the worlds billionaires (people who can't even spend all the money they have) and sanctioned them, we could all have decent services without anyone really feeling the pinch. I think we just need an earnings/assets cap for the unnecessarily wealthy. The offshore hoarders. I have seen the figures on the growth of the worlds billionaires in comparison to poverty increase and it's clear to me where the problem is.


Is she suggesting that if you pay more tax you get to use the premium NHS wing instead of the one for the plebs, or am I misinterpreting?!


The more you put in the more you get out... Isn't that completely missing the point :lol:

User avatar
Oblomov Boblomov
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Mind Crime, SSBM_God

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by Oblomov Boblomov » Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:14 pm

Knoyleo wrote:Who's the callus bourgeois manergerial class capitalist now?

I have a vague memory of her telling me she understood why it happened and she didn't blame me for it :slol:. Think it was even longer than five years ago actually.

sawyerpip wrote:
Oblomov Boblomov wrote:Err... unexpected twist – the original friend has replied to me instead:

I do think if you put more in, you should get more out though. Don't you? I am not even sure the 80k+ should get sanctioned. I have read that if we took the worlds billionaires (people who can't even spend all the money they have) and sanctioned them, we could all have decent services without anyone really feeling the pinch. I think we just need an earnings/assets cap for the unnecessarily wealthy. The offshore hoarders. I have seen the figures on the growth of the worlds billionaires in comparison to poverty increase and it's clear to me where the problem is.


Is she suggesting that if you pay more tax you get to use the premium NHS wing instead of the one for the plebs, or am I misinterpreting?!


The more you put in the more you get out... Isn't that completely missing the point :lol:

If it was through an 'indirect' lens it could be brought right back round to our viewpoint, but I'm pretty certain she means literally pay in more and directly receive better services. :fp:

Image
User avatar
sawyerpip
Member
Joined in 2009

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by sawyerpip » Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:21 pm

Oblomov Boblomov wrote:
Knoyleo wrote:Who's the callus bourgeois manergerial class capitalist now?

I have a vague memory of her telling me she understood why it happened and she didn't blame me for it :slol:. Think it was even longer than five years ago actually.

sawyerpip wrote:
Oblomov Boblomov wrote:Err... unexpected twist – the original friend has replied to me instead:

I do think if you put more in, you should get more out though. Don't you? I am not even sure the 80k+ should get sanctioned. I have read that if we took the worlds billionaires (people who can't even spend all the money they have) and sanctioned them, we could all have decent services without anyone really feeling the pinch. I think we just need an earnings/assets cap for the unnecessarily wealthy. The offshore hoarders. I have seen the figures on the growth of the worlds billionaires in comparison to poverty increase and it's clear to me where the problem is.


Is she suggesting that if you pay more tax you get to use the premium NHS wing instead of the one for the plebs, or am I misinterpreting?!


The more you put in the more you get out... Isn't that completely missing the point :lol:

If it was through an 'indirect' lens it could be brought right back round to our viewpoint, but I'm pretty certain she means literally pay in more and directly receive better services. :fp:


Those billionaires she wants to clamp down on would presumably be receiving the Uber-premium version of everything? They'll have the best doctors and best education money can buy. They'll be allowed to use the private airways to travel instead of slumming it on the road like the rest of us. Sounds like a revolution.

User avatar
Knoyleo
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by Knoyleo » Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:25 pm

From each according to their ability, to each also according to their ability.

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by Moggy » Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:25 pm

Knoyleo wrote:Who's the callus bourgeois manergerial class capitalist now?


:lol:

Image
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by Moggy » Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:26 pm

Oblomov Boblomov wrote:Thanks BID0. Unfortunately, I can see a response to this already: "Yeah but they actually just spend it on fags and booze instead".


You forgot the flat screen TV and iphone. :capnscotty:

Image
User avatar
Oblomov Boblomov
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Mind Crime, SSBM_God

PostRe: Social Media Defence Force
by Oblomov Boblomov » Fri Nov 13, 2020 2:31 pm

:lol:

Viva la Revolution! :toot: It's over, we can all go home now.

Moggy wrote:
Oblomov Boblomov wrote:Thanks BID0. Unfortunately, I can see a response to this already: "Yeah but they actually just spend it on fags and booze instead".


You forgot the flat screen TV and iphone. :capnscotty:

Because watching live TV would directly fund the Marxist-Leninist BBC :x.

Image

Return to “Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Errkal, Grumpy David and 125 guests