Reply to: Message for the current (and any subsequent) Governments

[centurian]

Do you want to do a similar spoof on where your taxes go?

That would take a DVD box set to hold the length of the sketch...

[SupremeSpod]

I have noticed that TV adverts for charities seem to be plucking increasingly harder at the heart strings. Personally nothing winds me up more than a charity spending shed loads on TV advertising asking for money.

Surprised no-one has done a spoof version.

"Your two pounds per month could help pay for this child actor's wages"
"Your two pounds per month could help pay for the production company to get the latest HD camera rig"
"Your two pounds per month could help pay ITV/Sky etc. for this advertising slot"
"Your two pounds per month could help the advertising agency's salesman buy his new BMW"

Do you want to do a similar spoof on where your taxes go?

[centurian]

Those guys you see in the street with the bibs on selling you charity for "so much a month by direct debit" you need to pay them for 24 months in the best examples before the end target sees a penny.. It's stupid

I have noticed that TV adverts for charities seem to be plucking increasingly harder at the heart strings. Personally nothing winds me up more than a charity spending shed loads on TV advertising asking for money.

Surprised no-one has done a spoof version.

"Your two pounds per month could help pay for this child actor's wages"
"Your two pounds per month could help pay for the production company to get the latest HD camera rig"
"Your two pounds per month could help pay ITV/Sky etc. for this advertising slot"
"Your two pounds per month could help the advertising agency's salesman buy his new BMW"

[Peoplesoft bloke]

British Leyland in its hey day used to copy a similar model. They had a factory that used to build parts for Standard cars 15 years after they stopped making them. Even though there was some tiny demand for the parts 90% of the bits were put in storage.
.

When was this? I'm having trouble tracking down any reference to it.

Edit

BTW Mercedes still make parts for loads of their cars produced way more 15 years ago.

[Sysman]

It's to line the pockets of the filth that masquerade behind operating costs to skim 80% off the top.

Those guys you see in the street with the bibs on selling you charity for "so much a month by direct debit" you need to pay them for 24 months in the best examples before the end target sees a penny.. It's stupid.

Coincidentally 24 months of payments was the figure someone told me an insurance salesman gets in commission for selling you a pension.

I often annoy them by asking them to do the maths behind what they are proposing and taking away their hourly, commission etc etc.

My personal belief , matches what you say above really - the only way to be charitable is directly, or in a small committed syndicate (like those geordies that take food in trucks to Eastern Europe once a year, off their own backs with the money taken from tins on bars round the toon)

I knew a couple of lasses from student days who did a year out at charities, sponsored by the likes of IBM and ICI. They both told the same sad tale of how little actually reaches the end customer.

I like the idea of the Geordie team doing their own thing. I have restricted my donations to local charities since my third world stint; there's more chance of ensuring the money gets to where it's needed, and you get feedback from the local press when that project gets done.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

You obviously do not like her comments but they are true.

They aren't hers anyway. I dunno where she found 'em but they were from sermons of a US Baptist Pastor - I wonder if she knows the source?

If they are not then argue it dont hide behind cliches and insults.

Coming from you?

Are you serious?

It's a wonder the ground doesn't open up and swallow you!

[Scoobos]

I dunno what to make of that either. When I was working in the third world I really couldn't get my head around the fact that my servant could feed and clothe his family with ten quid a month, yet my mates in the UK were conned into paying the same to support just one kid in Africa.

It's to line the pockets of the filth that masquerade behind operating costs to skim 80% off the top.

Those guys you see in the street with the bibs on selling you charity for "so much a month by direct debit" you need to pay them for 24 months in the best examples before the end target sees a penny.. It's stupid.

I often annoy them by asking them to do the maths behind what they are proposing and taking away their hourly, commission etc etc.

My personal belief , matches what you say above really - the only way to be charitable is directly, or in a small committed syndicate (like those geordies that take food in trucks to Eastern Europe once a year, off their own backs with the money taken from tins on bars round the toon)

[Scoobos]

Pure garbage mate. The man was absolutely ruthless.

Probably still is.

Hint: Who gets control of Berkshire Hathaway when Warren Buffet dies? (all in the name of charity of course...)

I don't really understand this - Bill's my hero by the way.

He was ruthless in business, but business is business.

But the guy has given 33% of his income to charitable incentives since he earned his first 2 million (he is rumoured to have not felt safe until he had 1mil cash banked).

I don't know of any other (80's onwards) who's donated such a huge proportion of their income.

I stand to be corrected, but I really hope I'm not - I lub Mr Gates

[Sysman]

Philanthropists like Gates become philanthropists when they 'Make it'

like we throw a few quid in the penny bottle, they throw a few million at their 'pet' passion
I havnt met any in real life


except one bloke.
I had this mate in Liverpool, he was in the Militant tendancy, we were both on the dole in our thirties. He was always skinter than me

then one day I found out, accidentally, that he was sending money every month to the starving kids in Ethiopia
I never knew what to make of that

I dunno what to make of that either. When I was working in the third world I really couldn't get my head around the fact that my servant could feed and clothe his family with ten quid a month, yet my mates in the UK were conned into paying the same to support just one kid in Africa.

[Sysman]

You are wrong.
I see lots of people who take, take take.
I see lots of people who think there is a bottomless pit of wealth that its their right to draw from
I see lots of people who simply do not make the connection between benefits and other peoples efforts

I think that some of this is what burns the right wingers. it burns

I'm not @rsed personally, I am not particularly political, but I am having to deal with one of the takers right now
and I dont see no rich fckng tapestry. I see vindictive stupidity and entitlement

Are you now working for my last permie boss or the one before that?

[Sysman]

My worry with the super rich is that to become super rich you have to be quite selfless, there are exceptions, such as philantropists like Bill Gates, but the majority become so driven and single minded wealth generators that theres simply not enough to go around.

Pure garbage mate. The man was absolutely ruthless.

Probably still is.

Hint: Who gets control of Berkshire Hathaway when Warren Buffet dies? (all in the name of charity of course...)

[xoggoth]

The problem is the land was stolen as all land in private ownership has been

I was going to say "you ghastly old commie" OG but, thinking about it, you are right.

And revolution, rather than evolution, is the problem with almost everything mankind does. Too fast, too soon, ruins every grand endevour. Human pride by our leaders, a desire to go down in history, has buggered every desirable goal there has been. A united Europe, a united world, totally f*cked by all the egotists, who want to push through in decades what would work well if we only took centuries.

[Old Greg]

You have still avoided a number of my questions by trying to move the debate. First of all public sector services- do we expect them to perform to the highest of standards if not why not?
You said that socialism created wealth and now you are saying it acts as a balance to capitalism. You have avoided answering the question yet again and you still cannot or will not explain how enterprise will flourish and how people will be incentivised to start businesses. These businesses are the ones that create the wealth that should be redistributed for the benefit of those who
perform tasks that are not especially financially rewarding.
I am not comparing capitalism with socialism as I think the two entities should work in harmony. My view is that capitalism is stymied and socialism as exercised by your lot is destructive. Capitalism should be encouraged and socialism should work for the benefit of the poorer sections of society.
And if the John Lewis model works so well how come there are so few enterprises that follow it?
My locusts analogy was no cliche it is a clear illustration of my point- albeit extreme.

But how can I debate with you?

I haven't avoided the questions about the public sector because you didn't ask me. Now you have raised them, yes they should perform well.

I said work created wealth. I said socialism didn't create wealth. How can I reason with you if you are saying that I said that socialism creates wealth.

People will be incentivised to create businesses because it's socially worthwhile. Perhaps you believe human nature is inherently selfish?

Socialism is not exercised by my lot. Where is this socialism?

Other companies have not moved to the John Lewis model because it would not be in the interests of the share owners. That is not about the model's effectiveness.

I'm off to bed.

[Old Greg]

you can do better than that. You must have some plan ???

why not use mugabes plan


take the guy who has the farm, the guy who paid for the seed , the training, the taxes, who did the planning and hired the labourer

then sack him or shoot him or kick him out, then give the farm to labourer.

well, that worked , didnt it

The problem is the land was stolen as all land in private ownership has been.

Mugabe's solution was nuts because it moved control to a different bunch of owners, who had no expertise.

Most evolutionary as opposed to revolutionary models looks to transition the change in ownership ever a period of time and use that time ti widen the expertise.

[EternalOptimist]

If John Lewis can manage it, I'm sure a farm can.

you can do better than that. You must have some plan ???

why not use mugabes plan


take the guy who has the farm, the guy who paid for the seed , the training, the taxes, who did the planning and hired the labourer

then sack him or shoot him or kick him out, then give the farm to labourer.

well, that worked , didnt it