Scroungers, just scroungers, do you admire them?

[erebus]

Don’t we all hate spongers, people that abuse and exploit the system, for nothing more than personal greed. They want to give nothing but feel they are owed it all, and take, and take and take, not caring of the effect it has on the economy or the rest of us.

 

But there are spongers and spongers, and those unemployed, even with housing benefit to top up their carefree lifestyle on under £70 a week, for doing nothing whatsoever. We would all like around £70 a week to spend on ourselves, give to charity, but not the scroungers, they should surely be made to suffer and humiliated as unworthy to mix with the rest of us.

 

Well as stated there are the poor undeserving scroungers, and the ones that really screw the system, and by screw I mean make all of us pay dearly for their addiction to pure unadulterated greed. So insatiable greedy scroungers are in my mind worse than the benefit lot, who in a decade we will call beggars, as they will be CUT out of the system.

 

The links below are about a type of scrounger, many feed off the state, having contracts and such swallowing up the tax take, we all contribute to, and give nothing back, and in some cases charging us all for letting them screw us. With this lot we all loose, cuts to schools, health, infrastructure, in fact everything we use and need to live our daily lives. They also create the unemployed, by not employing people as profit, and bonuses are far more important than being part of the community. The community can and is told to “sod off!!!” in no uncertain terms.

 

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/tax/9905450/Dozen-FTSE-100-firms-paying-no-tax.html

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2287216/Revealed-One-UKs-companies-pay-tax.html#ixzz2MNnRhYC8

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2287216/Revealed-One-UKs-companies-pay-tax.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

 

On the other hand you might think its fine for spongers and cheats to grab while the rest of all burn. Surely you can justify and possibly agree its right that in the analysis of the latest annual reports and accounts of all the companies in the FTSE 100 found that 47 companies gave no obvious figures for tax paid in Britain. Of the 53 who did, 12 showed they paid no tax at all and, of these, six actually received a tax credit.

 

I have to admit these scroungers make the benefit fraudsters seem like saints, as at least they are just trying to survive and feed their kids and such, in most cases.

[TJC1]

Spot on.

 

Corporate scroungers are 10 times worse than benefit 'cheats'.

[MrSmith]

Spot on.

 

Corporate scroungers are 10 times worse than benefit 'cheats'.

 

Apart from Corporate scroungers provide employment and stuff we like to buy, whilst benefit cheats contribute nothing at all.

[TJC1]

Apart from Corporate scroungers provide employment and stuff we like to buy, whilst benefit cheats contribute nothing at all.

 

Even benefit cheats are spending money in the economy so this is not true. They contribute something.

If corporations paid proper amount of tax it would wipe out the deficit. Starbucks not paying tax yet opening more shops so we buy more coffee, then keeping money away from the UK economy in tax (that we generated for them) is 'scrounging'.

[Dromedary]

whilst benefit cheats contribute nothing at all.

 

Of course they do, they give lots of bitter people something to complain about to feel good and help certain sections of the gutter press to sell news papers and make money. They also help politicians to con the public with their inaccurate lies so they can stay in power.

 

In any case the number of benefit cheats is unknown as if they were known then they would not get any benefits.

[MrSmith]

Even benefit cheats are spending money in the economy so this is not true. They contribute something.

If corporations paid proper amount of tax it would wipe out the deficit. Starbucks not paying tax yet opening more shops so we buy more coffee, then keeping money away from the UK economy in tax (that we generated for them) is 'scrounging'.

 

When you reduce the spending power of one group of people by taking money off them to give to another group of people, you haven’t helped the economy.

Many things increase in price when they are in demand, food and fuel being good examples, so it turns out they also contribute to higher prices for everyone that does contribute.

[Cyclone]

Even benefit cheats are spending money in the economy so this is not true. They contribute something.

Spending money that the government would spend anyway on something else.

They contribute nothing, they make no economic contribution to the country.

If corporations paid proper amount of tax it would wipe out the deficit.

Blame the government, they define what "proper" is.

Starbucks not paying tax yet opening more shops so we buy more coffee, then keeping money away from the UK economy in tax (that we generated for them) is 'scrounging'.

It's following the law that the government created.

They also employ thousands of people, who they pay, who spend money and pay tax. They pay rent, they buy materials, all of which is taxed, they charge VAT which is paid to the government.

[ricgem2002]

Spending money that the government would spend anyway on something else.

They contribute nothing, they make no economic contribution to the country.

Blame the government, they define what "proper" is.

It's following the law that the government created.

They also employ thousands of people, who they pay, who spend money and pay tax. They pay rent, they buy materials, all of which is taxed, they charge VAT which is paid to the government.

if these companies also payed tax at the same rate as normal people just think what the outcome would be

[TJC1]

When you reduce the spending power of one group of people by taking money off them to give to another group of people, you haven’t helped the economy.

Many things increase in price when they are in demand, food and fuel being good examples, so it turns out they also contribute to higher prices for everyone that does contribute.

 

A corporation isn't a group of people. It's a fiction. They don't 'spend' in the economy like people do. They make pre and post tax profits. People within the corporation get paid a salary. The salary is taken out as a cost before profits are posted. So in effect taxing profits doesn't change the spending power of people who work in corporations.

 

The company should pay tax on profits. Simple.

 

---------- Post added 03-03-2013 at 14:55 ----------

 

Spending money that the government would spend anyway on something else.

 

They don't save that money do they? just by going down the shops and buying a newspaper and some fags is contributing to the economy. 1. the shop owner and shop 2. taxes.

 

---------- Post added 03-03-2013 at 14:59 ----------

 

if these companies also payed tax at the same rate as normal people just think what the outcome would be

 

Yeah, giving with one hand and taking with the other is the expression!

[monkey69]

its not about tax, its the banks who are acting like trolls under the bridge, when the government prints billions of pounds they give it to the banks in the hope they will distribute that throughout the Monterey system. but as we all know they just hang on to it, so instead of those billions going around the system they are just sitting in the banks vaults being used by them to operate shady deals, (like libor). and of course the money laundering operation for the drugs barons. then the people in the (real economy) have to go to peer to peer lenders to get the funds they need to expand their own business.

Osborne and his ilk are in league with the banks to keep syphoning off this money to their supporters, thats why he and cameron are still in power. they have screwed the "recovery" right up. the worst triple dip recession in recent history. that takes some doing!!. but they are still in power (for now)