Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

benefit 'thieves' advert

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
I just wondered if I'm the only one who thought this was a piss take?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FENOAIrHSl8

How blatent can you get? Check out her hoop earrings and PJs. Anyone would think that the government hated women who were obviously on a lower income.
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    lol, wtf!

    I wouldn't even know if my neighbours are on benefits, nevermind picking up the phone and calling some hotline to say 'oi, I think my neighbour's not living alone! omgomgomg!'

    Is this really aired on TV?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yup! http://www.dwp.gov.uk/campaigns/benefit-thieves/ I couldnt believe that it wasn't tongue in cheek at first.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    # By cross-checking the bank accounts of benefit thieves
    # With hidden cameras and mobile surveillance
    # With every means at our disposal

    That's pretty scary actually.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I hate those ads. But I think it's quite right.
    They need people to realise that it's more than just neds that can commit benefit fraud. And being a ned doesn't make you a benefit thief.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And next week another hard-hitting government campaign begins as well...


    page_030_415x275.jpg

    TAX CHEATS AND EVADERS- THEY ARE A BURDEN TO THE COUNTRY.
    SHOP ONE NOW!



    Or maybe not... :rolleyes:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Jaloux wrote: »
    lol, wtf!

    I wouldn't even know if my neighbours are on benefits, nevermind picking up the phone and calling some hotline to say 'oi, I think my neighbour's not living alone! omgomgomg!'
    That's what I thought.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Does your neighbour look happier than you?

    Does she look like she has more money than you?

    Does she have a younger boyfriend?

    Do you resent them every time you meet them?

    Report them for nothing NOW!

    SHOW TRIALS TO BE LIVE ON CHANNEL 4
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Jim V wrote: »
    Does your neighbour look happier than you?

    Does she look like she has more money than you?

    Does she have a younger boyfriend?

    Do you resent them every time you meet them?

    Report them for nothing NOW!

    SHOW TRIALS TO BE LIVE ON CHANNEL 4

    Yusss! I'm well taking my flatmate on this show :p
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Jim V wrote: »
    Does your neighbour look happier than you?

    Does she look like she has more money than you?

    Does she have a younger boyfriend?

    Do you resent them every time you meet them?

    Report them for nothing NOW!

    SHOW TRIALS TO BE LIVE ON CHANNEL 4

    Is this a satire on socialism and class hatred or benefit cheats?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Is this a satire on socialism and class hatred or benefit cheats?

    I was thinking along the lines of New Labour and class hatred, you cheeky monkey :p
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    And next week another hard-hitting government campaign begins as well...

    Or maybe not... :rolleyes:

    Why not? HMRC spends a lot of time, effort and money dealing with them, so if you know anyone committing an illegal act I'm sure they'd love to know off it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why not? HMRC spends a lot of time, effort and money dealing with them, so if you know anyone committing an illegal act I'm sure they'd love to know off it.
    However they spend very little effort and literarlly no advertising whatsoever on fighting the legally dubious, loophole-exploiting, dastardly offshore schemes countless wealthy people in this country embark on in order to deprive the national coffers of as much of their taxes as possible- which often is all of it.

    I am sure the fact that the proprietor of the best selling newspaper in the country is one of the biggest tax cheats ever seen has nothing to do with the government's reluctance to tackle this very serious issue. An issue taht, incidentally, cost the country far, far, far more than all the benefit cheats put together.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    However they spend very little effort and literarlly no advertising whatsoever on fighting the legally dubious, loophole-exploiting, dastardly offshore schemes countless wealthy people in this country embark on in order to deprive the national coffers of as much of their taxes as possible- which often is all of it.

    I am sure the fact that the proprietor of the best selling newspaper in the country is one of the biggest tax cheats ever seen has nothing to do with the government's reluctance to tackle this very serious issue. An issue taht, incidentally, cost the country far, far, far more than all the benefit cheats put together.

    Well what advert would you like? They're doing something quite legal and it doesn't cost the country anything (having enough loopholes actually keeps people in the country paying tax, closing them off sends capital abroad and we get less of it).

    I personally don't care if someone minimises the amount of tax they legally pay, same as I don't care if people claim maximum benefits there entitled too.

    Though I'm happy they crack down on illegal actions (even if sometimes by slightly dodgy methods)
    http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article3431659.ece
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why not? HMRC spends a lot of time, effort and money dealing with them, so if you know anyone committing an illegal act I'm sure they'd love to know off it.
    The police would only be interested at the moment if it was an opposition MP. Even then, they wouldn't bother getting a warrant before searching his house.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    rachie004 wrote: »
    ON NATIONAL TELEVISION?

    I want a paternity test - I don't think I'm your real father!

    Oh but you are...

    What;s that you say?

    GET A REAL JOB AND BE A MAN


    I'm Jeremy Kyle and I like football
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well what advert would you like? They're doing something quite legal and it doesn't cost the country anything (having enough loopholes actually keeps people in the country paying tax, closing them off sends capital abroad and we get less of it).
    You're kidding, right?

    Are you suggesting that if the government closed the loopholes that allow the likes of Tesco or News International to dodge paying hundreds of millions in tax for business conduced from the UK and in the UK, yet channelled to companies in tax havens, Tesco and Rupert Murdoch would close up shop and move elsewhere?

    Yeah right...

    Incidentally, the total cost of tax avoidance to this country is an incredible £25bn per year.

    Compare that with the £3-£4bn that benefit fraud is said to cause.

    And now ask yourself why don't see 5 times as much demonisation and villlifaction of the former as we see of the latter. Or even a similar amount of it.

    I'm sure the thought of an advert that shows a smart dinner party of high-flying executives bragging about their offshore accounts and their brand new Ferraris, and urges anyone present at such dinner to shop those people to the government is as ludicrous as is improbable.

    However the equivalent is being asked of lower class people- even when there is no proof of any wrongdoing taking place.

    Yes, benefit fraud is wrong. But the emphasis put on it is absurd and unjustified, specially when far more costly activities, whether just-about-legal or plain illegal, get little mention or exposure by the government. And of course no mention whatsoever from the benefits-bashing right wing press, most of which is owned by people who are depriving the country's coffers of incalculable amounts of money.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    and it's fraud not theft... not to be pedantic or anything

    one poor example is the tax credits system, they're only paid to low income families, low income jobs often are shift based and so pay varies week to week, it takes time for claims to be reassesed so if everyone done it on a weekly basis, it'd never be accurate anyway.... so you either underclaim or overclaim, if you underclaim, you wont be getting any calls to give u the extra *ahem*
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Nothing useful to add really, but the commentary on this thread has made me chuckle!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Are you suggesting that if the government closed the loopholes that allow the likes of Tesco or News International to dodge paying hundreds of millions in tax for business conduced from the UK and in the UK, yet channelled to companies in tax havens, Tesco and Rupert Murdoch would close up shop and move elsewhere?
    Let's add Guardian Media Group into that list, shall we? Next time you hear them telling the rich to pay their fair share, we'll see them for the hypocrites they really are.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    Let's add Guardian Media Group into that list, shall we? Next time you hear them telling the rich to pay their fair share, we'll see them for the hypocrites they really are.
    Fine by me :)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Incidentally, the total cost of tax avoidance to this country is an incredible £25bn per year.

    Compare that with the £3-£4bn that benefit fraud is said to cause.

    And now ask yourself why don't see 5 times as much demonisation and villlifaction of the former as we see of the latter. Or even a similar amount of it.

    May I suggest that it could be because the former is legal and the latter is illegal ?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    You're kidding, right?

    Are you suggesting that if the government closed the loopholes that allow the likes of Tesco or News International to dodge paying hundreds of millions in tax for business conduced from the UK and in the UK, yet channelled to companies in tax havens, Tesco and Rupert Murdoch would close up shop and move elsewhere?

    Yeah right...

    Incidentally, the total cost of tax avoidance to this country is an incredible £25bn per year.

    Compare that with the £3-£4bn that benefit fraud is said to cause.

    And now ask yourself why don't see 5 times as much demonisation and villlifaction of the former as we see of the latter. Or even a similar amount of it.

    I'm sure the thought of an advert that shows a smart dinner party of high-flying executives bragging about their offshore accounts and their brand new Ferraris, and urges anyone present at such dinner to shop those people to the government is as ludicrous as is improbable.

    However the equivalent is being asked of lower class people- even when there is no proof of any wrongdoing taking place.

    Yes, benefit fraud is wrong. But the emphasis put on it is absurd and unjustified, specially when far more costly activities, whether just-about-legal or plain illegal, get little mention or exposure by the government. And of course no mention whatsoever from the benefits-bashing right wing press, most of which is owned by people who are depriving the country's coffers of incalculable amounts of money.

    You must have missed the demonisation of big business... perhaps because you're the one doing the demonising.

    But yes, companies wouldn't shut up shops, but they would invest less and create less jobs, move offices to other countries and employ less people.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    May I suggest that it could be because the former is legal and the latter is illegal ?
    For starters, the former is morally repugnant. Much more so than benefit fraud, by the standards of any right-thinking person.

    And secondly, the government sees it as exploitation of loopholes and it is working to close them- in other words, to make it completely illegal and cheat-proof.

    It is only just legal, and on a technicality. It is still wrong as fuck.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You must have missed the demonisation of big business... perhaps because you're the one doing the demonising.
    Forgive me for criticising moral bankruptcy, limitless greed and contempt for the wellbeing of the nation.
    But yes, companies wouldn't shut up shops, but they would invest less and create less jobs, move offices to other countries and employ less people.
    Scaremongering and empty threats.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Forgive me for criticising moral bankruptcy, limitless greed and contempt for the wellbeing of the nation..

    :lol: You don't half make me laugh. You read like the Daily Mail with your moral certainty and rightousness
    Scaremongering and empty threats

    Or understanding of economics...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    :lol: You don't half make me laugh. You read like the Daily Mail with your moral certainty and rightousness.
    Let me try to get something straight here.

    I trust you do understand the concept (one of the basic pillars of Western society) of paying taxes on wealth you generate for business or work conducted. You do it. I do it. Most people and small to mid-sized businesses do it.

    When that business or work is conducted from a certain place and to the same certain place (such us for instance, Tesco being based in the UK, conducting business from the UK and selling goods to individuals in the UK) then it is only right that Tesco should pay the full tax due for such business.

    But when such companies embark in deliberate, artificial schemes to register such businesses in tax havens with the sole purpose of avoiding to pay as much as the tax due as possible, it is wrong, amoral, unjustifiable and prompted by greed and selfishness. There are no two ways about it. They are stealing from you and me every bit as much as someone on benefits who is working cash in hand.

    Do you agree that it is wrong to conduct business in the UK from the UK, and try to cheat out of paying the taxes due? Yes/no?


    Or understanding of economics...
    Oh really? Perhaps a more knowledgeable person such as yourself could remind me if the doomsday scenario warnings given by business leaders when the minimum wage was first proposed (in a nutshell: reduced profits will result in an increase in unemployment, decrease in investment, etc etc- the very things you are claiming here) came to be.

    Er... no, it didn't at all. They were all empty threats and lies from greedy bastards trying to protect every last penny of their precious profits.

    So no, I don't buy the bullshit that if mega companies such as Tesco were suddenly made to pay the tax they should be paying for the monumental profits they make, it would have a damaging effect on the economy. I don't need to be the foremost authority on economics to know lies and empty threats when I see them- and nor should you.

    Frankly, I find your reluctance to admit the wrongness of such dastardly and morally abhorrent tax avoiding schemes disappointing. AFAIAC any decent human being should recognise it is unacceptable to do such things, which are prompted only by naked greed.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Let me try to get something straight here.

    I trust you do understand the concept (one of the basic pillars of Western society) of paying taxes on wealth you generate for business or work conducted. You do it. I do it. Most people and small to mid-sized businesses do it.

    When that business or work is conducted from a certain place and to the same certain place (such us for instance, Tesco being based in the UK, conducting business from the UK and selling goods to individuals in the UK) then it is only right that Tesco should pay the full tax due for such business.

    But when such companies embark in deliberate, artificial schemes to register such businesses in tax havens with the sole purpose of avoiding to pay as much as the tax due as possible, it is wrong, amoral, unjustifiable and prompted by greed and selfishness. There are no two ways about it. They are stealing from you and me every bit as much as someone on benefits who is working cash in hand.

    Do you agree that it is wrong to conduct business in the UK from the UK, and try to cheat out of paying the taxes due? Yes/no?.

    Cheating yes, tax minimisation no. Ensuring a healthy economy pays more taxes in the long term




    Oh really? Perhaps a more knowledgeable person such as yourself could remind me if the doomsday scenario warnings given by business leaders when the minimum wage was first proposed (in a nutshell: reduced profits will result in an increase in unemployment, decrease in investment, etc etc- the very things you are claiming here) came to be.

    Er... no, it didn't at all. They were all empty threats and lies from greedy bastards trying to protect every last penny of their precious profits.

    So no, I don't buy the bullshit that if mega companies such as Tesco were suddenly made to pay the tax they should be paying for the monumental profits they make, it would have a damaging effect on the economy. I don't need to be the foremost authority on economics to know lies and empty threats when I see them- and nor should you.

    Frankly, I find your reluctance to admit the wrongness of such dastardly and morally abhorrent tax avoiding schemes disappointing. AFAIAC any decent human being should recognise it is unacceptable to do such things, which are prompted only by naked greed

    frankly it was set at such a low level it only really hit the margins, but they were right in saying it was important to get it at that level.

    However, if you're right and the companies are saving £25bn a year in tax, that's probably ensuring profits, keeping thousands employed and allowing investment in people and capital. They loose that money it's a short term boost for the HMT, but a long-term decline in UK profitability and ability to raise revenue.

    Actually I'd personally prefer cutting Corporation and income Tax and reducing some of the 'loopholes', but I guess that may be politically unacceptable
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Cheating yes, tax minimisation no. Ensuring a healthy economy pays more taxes in the long term.
    It has bugger all to do with ensuring a healthy economy.

    Come on now Flashman for christ's sake.

    frankly it was set at such a low level it only really hit the margins, but they were right in saying it was important to get it at that level.

    However, if you're right and the companies are saving £25bn a year in tax, that's probably ensuring profits, keeping thousands employed and allowing investment in people and capital.
    No it isn't. Tax is linked to profits. If £25bn of tax is beinig avoided every year, it means is not being paid for the generation of many, many hundreds of billions in collective profit. Thus, no jobs or investment would ever be at risk, on account on the companies in question having extraordinarily healthy amounts of profit to cover it all even if they were paying the tax they should.

    Whichever way you want to window dress it, it has nothing to do with a healthy economy, it has no justification other than pure greed, and it would have no impact whatsoever on the economy were those taxes to be paid as they should.

    Actually, let me correct that. It would have a big impact on the economy. The country would have shit loads more money to invest in hospitals, public services, and indeed to finance tax cuts.

    So in fact next time you feel unhappy about the high taxes you pay, blame the greedy bastards who deprive the country of money that could be used to lower your taxes, instead of blaming the government.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    It has bugger all to do with ensuring a healthy economy.

    Come on now Flashman for christ's sake..

    of course it does...

    No it isn't. Tax is linked to profits. If £25bn of tax is beinig avoided every year, it means is not being paid for the generation of many, many hundreds of billions in collective profit. Thus, no jobs or investment would ever be at risk, on account on the companies in question having extraordinarily healthy amounts of profit to cover it all even if they were paying the tax they should

    Business retain profits for investment. Other profits goes to shareholders who invest, either through savings, direct investment or spend.
    Whichever way you want to window dress it, it has nothing to do with a healthy economy, it has no justification other than pure greed, and it would have no impact whatsoever on the economy were those taxes to be paid as they should.

    Actually, let me correct that. It would have a big impact on the economy. The country would have shit loads more money to invest in hospitals, public services, and indeed to finance tax cuts..

    No it wouldn't. Otherwise the Government would close the loopholes - a bit of bad publicity from the Guardian would more than be oightweighed by the votes pouring in from those who've had tax cuts and better services. Govts don't do it because they realise it doesn't work.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No it wouldn't. Otherwise the Government would close the loopholes - a bit of bad publicity from the Guardian would more than be oightweighed by the votes pouring in from those who've had tax cuts and better services. Govts don't do it because they realise it doesn't work.

    The government does close loopholes

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/government-clamps-down-on-firms-using-pound1bn-taxhaven-loophole-741002.html

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/property_and_mortgages/article3486248.ece

    http://www.labourhome.org/story/2007/9/26/17423/9522


    But the moment one loophole is closed, another dastardly scheme is created elsewhere.

    And don't believe there isn't phenomenal political pressure from the rich and powerful against any such moves. We live in a country in which governments are unfortunately far too receptive to the wishes and opinions of media moguls. One of the biggest tax avoiders in the entire world is Rupert Murdoch, depriving this country alone of hundreds of millions. Combine that with threats from scumbags to leave the country if they are made to pay the tax you and I have to pay (only they are about 50,000 times richer than we will ever be, but never mind- the poor things!) and you have a government afraid making too many waves. It's amazing they sum up the guts to close the odd loophole every few years...
Sign In or Register to comment.