EAT THE RICH : SERVE WITH SAUCE

So, the ConDem collision are going to war on the poor, no surprise there. Who has the least chance of a coordinated response, other than an uncoordinated riot, which may, eventually happen, than the unrepresented, marginalised and completely misrepresented benefit claimant. Lets get this straight, the levels of basic benefit in this country are scandalously low, it is without doubt that, as with the pollution levels in London, were they to be tested against the many legal documents that the UK Government has signed up to at European level, they would be found to be in breach of those undertakings. I can assure anyone that is listening : it is not possible to live in dignity and pay your bills on the basic £64.50 a week that a person under 65 is allowed without any other income.

The recent changes have widened the gap, which I have never heard or seen coherently explained, between the state pension and the so-called Job Seekers Allowance. There is to be a re-linking between the state pension and inflation, broken by Thatcher ( turn around and spit ) and outrageously not reinstated during 17 years of Presbyterian-minded City sycophancy of the Chancellor and then Prime Minister Brown, ( turn around and weep). The new rules are that the JSA, a basic unemployment payment, is going to be linked to some obscure index that is consistently lower than than the already inadequate one they were using. So, while the payments made to over 65s will be somewhat closer to the real world cost of living, the basic benefit available to those under 65 will fall from its already historically lowest level since its inception in 1912. Then it was about 22% of the average male earnings in manufacturing. In 2008 it stood at 10.5%, this change will mean it falls even lower. The idea that this can be justified by maintaining work incentives is absurd, and amounts to systematic punitive neglect and social irresponsibility.

What is the difference in need between 65 and 64 if one is unwaged? How many Civil Servants are employed, or is it outsourced, to make these arcane calculations? We are talking about reducing a basic entitlement that is already inadequate, in London, as there is no adjustment for region, it is at a truly ridiculous level , the weekly amount is about the cost of a meal and a drink for a parliamentary assistant in a gastro-pub in the vicinity of Westminster. It is a disgrace.

Rather than cutting the basic rate it should be increased to a level where it is useful and made universal. Scrap all the hideous Victorian paraphernalia of means-testing, now done largely by private profit taking companies, introduce a simple, adequate income that all citizens are entitled to and that would prevent millions falling into the clutches of money lenders, bailiffs, Courts and all their outrageous charges which serve only to rack up the money going from the poor to the well-off with absolutely no social stabilisation or general benefit. Lawyers will get rich (and occasionally get mugged) and walls be built higher but if this ignorant, ill-advised and frankly ridiculous group of ex-Etonian millionaires who have clearly never known any financial hardship continue down this particular path, even against the wishes of the arch-capitalist America as presently governed, they will find, sooner or later, that even in this politically temperate country, with the BBC holding hands with whoever is in the job, and its grotesque and unrepresentative mainstream press that operates as a commercial parasite on the back of a hideously unfair system and a sickening money sucking City of insider dealing, banking open season, with its overpaid same school appointees, with its endless diversions : the football and the lottery,( always on a Saturday, the day that used to be the day off and one to organise working people ) the ridiculous royal family and their myriad hangers on, even the continual myth of rock /pop music being the voice of the people,( Brian May on top of Buckingham Palace, Michael Eavis and the Prince of Wales, ‘Sir’ Mick Jagger ) that there could be a bit of a punch up, all no doubt immortalised on a million cameras.

Eventually, if the CONDEMS and of course, the banks that you own, do not get it then it will get you.

Eat the rich, trouble is, they taste disgusting.