Conspiracy Talk Archive May 22 2012


Use our posting form to send us conpiracy talk.

22 May 2012 21:07:14
How many people here are running off grid or are looking to run off grid? Why do governments try to make it harder to be self sufficient and to rely on them

Because they earn money out of it.

They tax the energy companies on what they make and even worse they tax you as well, VAT on a bill is a scandel.

People should be made more aware that they can indeed run off grid, I bet the majority of people are too brainwashed to even think of it

Inheritance tax is a scandal, tax on income that has already been taxed, it's like a super-compounded tax. In a lifetime if you guesstimate everything You earn, you probably pay out the same if not more in tax one way or another.

Or too lazy to do it as well.

Yes most tax is just downright evil. Which twisted f***er thought up of VAT anyway.

Inheritance tax again is very bad, unless its on multi millionaires.

Road tax? Terrible.

Road tax... or as the Government likes to call it, Vehicle Excise Duty, is a scandal. Lets take the meaning of the word 'excise'. Excise is an indirect inland tax, usually a specified amount rather than a percentage, on the sale or production for sale of specific goods or as a tax on a good produced for sale, or sold, within a country or licenses for specific activities. So, road use isn't a product for sale or a 'production for sale' item, so how can they justify it? It's that last bit, that's the bit that the government likes to refer road tax as. A license to use the free to the public road in your vehicle. Yet, my drivers license gives me that right in addition to this & I don't have to renew that every year. It's another example of an outdated taxation that the government earns far too much money from to do away with, like Fuel duty. If you remove those two taxes from the economy we simply wouldn't be able to afford things as a coutry. The motorist suffers again.

Road tax is a cabon tax

No but you might not have realised you have to renew your photo part (card) of your driving licence every 10 years as i have just had to

I love the way this thread has been mainly about tax an not one post has a name next to including one I posted, I'd be surprised if even the tax man comes on this site, but you never know.


Why give the suckers a break? Besides if they are that bothered they'd track you down anyway. Tax is pernicious Tax income tax was supposed to be temporary measure to raise funds to fight the war. Only the war was the one against Bonaparte and they realised they were onto too much of a winner so it became permanent. Taxing what one man has earned from their own hard work is nothing more than thievery disguised as good governance.

At the very least do something usual with the money rather than squandering it. Free dentistry would be a start rather than keeping dwellers in comfort watching jeremy kyle on their 50" plasma's chain smoking marlboro's and necking stella whilst they have some excuse for dodging work.

While some dodge work others find it difficult to even get started in a job we shouldnt be categorized

I work for my childrens welfare and also because it good for "a mans well being" i pay taxe's which i hate but..I also own a car have to pay excise which i hate,sick of all the spongers which give this goverment a reason to tax the worker ie state welfare for loose annie and her piss head hubby and seven kids.but i try to offset my own costs by cycling to and from work or whatever.

red blancmonge

Nobody likes paying any kind of tax but how do you propose the country would work without them? We are already running a massive deficit with the taxes we collect now! I have to say having just found this site, I find it good fun but mostly completely ridiculous. People on here just believe anyone who can twist or explain facts to support their own argument and anyone who disbelieves them is shot down. Generally the retort is to watch a certain video as it must be true, because they wouldn't lie or manipulate facts apparently like the real media does! I enjoy the posts guys but please you really do need to get away from your pcs and outside to see the real world! {Ed001's Note - it is easy to run a country without taxing the people who work. For starters, you can tax all money moved out of the country, for whatever reason, which would stop those tax havens being of such use to British natives. Secondly, you can nationalise things such as banks and use the profits mate to run the country. Why can't the nation itself own all land and rent it out? Why should companies and big landholders be allowed to own huge swathes of it? There are 3 very simple methods to make money for the government to use.}

Mmm interesting ed i like what you state.Unfotunatley it is the s**t we are used to until then taxed we will be..

red blancmonge

By the way i do see the real world i cycle around the poxy hole to and from work!!PS also trying to save a little bit of our world as i go on..

red blancmonge

I don't see how any of those suggested alternatives to tax are realistic. I am in the finance industry, a bank manager in fact. I do not earn big money or bonuses and have little regard for my employers due to the way we are now treated. However, the total bank profits would not finance hardly anything. Total profits of under 20 billion old not get far and anyway much of this has to be retained in balance sheets to meet tier 1 credit policy for Europe. An nationalising the banks would be a disaster. Whatever you think of banks they are successful, would you trust politicians with more of your money? It was their policies and mid regulation that caused the banking crisis in the first place. Also, the dividends from bank shares fund most of the publics future pensions, so what would happen there? As far as stopping money go abroad. This may raise some tax, but then if u don't believe working people should pay tax then those people sending monies abroad to avoid it wouldnt pay any here anyway under that policy! As far as land ownership, you forget the investment these companies have made in buildings and infrastructure and the jobs they create. Anyway none of these suggestions would raise anywhere near sufficient to avoid personal tax. Our total deficit is over 1 trillion pounds.

I'm interested in how some can call a bank successful when it nearly brings the whole financial systems of the world to the point of collapse. How is that classed as a success?
For too long now we have been at the beck and call of interest rates, credit scoring, and the banks gambling our money on risky ventures only for the tax paying public to have to bail them out. This is the reason why we have 20% VAT instead of 17.5%. The try and recoup some of the revenue coffers that were used to bail out the idiots in the banking sector who majorly cocked it up. While we as a country continue to fund the scrougers, work-shy and immigrants on the look out for a freebie, the tax situation will not change, whatever guise it is in, but the banks incompetance has made this 10 times worse.
I pay my income tax, my VAT, my Fuel and Vehicle Excise duty, my IPT on insurance & my National Insurance. Don't we think that it's about time we asked for it to stop? The more money we, as consumers, have, the more likely we are to spend it on goods and services in this country, thus helping the economy as a whole recover from the recession caused by the FAILURES in the banking crisis. Here's a thought, instead of making one person a multi-millionaire in the Lotto or Euro-Millions, why not make multiple people millionaires in a game similar to the EuroMillions raffle, and put some money back in deserving peoples' pockets.
Khakipillowslip {Ed001's Note - the guy above is clearly clueless. He has no idea of how much money that the government owes to banks, the money that is causing the country to be in debt. Take over the banks and remove those debts and the country would be in a much better state, it is not about the profits, but the money saved. Banks are far from successful and it was them, and a lack of regulation, that caused the collapse. Only someone completely ignorant of the facts could possibly believe regulation caused any of the problems. He has also massively missed the point on taxing money moving abroad, it is about getting something for this country from those foreign workers, who otherwise pay little in tax, spend next to nothing in the shops and send all their money back home. Plus the huge amounts of money that global corporations move out of the country into tax havens would no longer be free of tax. Someone is just talking out of their backside, with no knowledge of any of the facts on this matter. As for land ownership, no one would be stopping them investing in the buildings, I am talking about the land being rented out, so your point is completely irrelevant and nonsense. No wonder the person above works in finance, they have no idea about financial matters whatsoever!}

As I am clueless perhaps you could explain where you get your facts from? Particularly that nationalising the banks woud save the government debt as it is owed to the banks? Over 40% of government debt is owed to foreign investors, about 30% from uk investors and the rest mainly via the bank of england. The uk investors are mainly pension funds or building societies who buy gilts used to pay pension funds and savers decent rates.

And yes, you may not wish to call banks successfull because you don't like them but ultimately they make large profits and we all need to remember that the banks greed was shared by most of us and our constant borrowing to fund unrealistic lifestyles. The banks didn't force people to borrow the money's they couldn't afford to repay. I agree they shouldn't have sold many of the accompanying products and should have asked people more questions but you can't blame them for everything. {Ed001's Note - you can blame them, they quite clearly had a business model designed to fail, so yes I can blame them for everything. People borrowing beyond their means had nothing to do with the collapse, in fact it is what staved off the collapse for such a long time. Your talk of the govt debt is rubbish, sorry but the debt can be simply paid off, as JFK was going to in the US, with a currency issue. Are you being deliberately obtuse or are you really this stupid? Standing up for the very institutions that caused this mess while trying to blame others!}

You are evading actually providing any facts to support your ridiculous answers. No the government hasnt borrowed from the uk banks and you can check my 'facts' on who te government debt is to at any official websites. You can also look at bank financial accounts. However, in line with most of the 'true facts' on here, I imagine you will tell me that all the official facts are in fact lies made up by the reptilians tha really rule the secret government! I welcome a true debate on this issue but constantly replying I am talking rubbish but providing no evidence for your facts is just childish. You may not want to agree with what I said, but the information is in the public domain. Please direct me to your evidence that the government debt is to uk banks and could simply be written off? {Ed001's Note - I never said that, what the hell are you talking about? Read what I said again, maybe slowly so that you can digest and understand it. I said that any debts not to banks can be easily paid off with an issue of extra currency, the exact same plan that JFK had, right before they bumped him off.}

Is this guy really a Bank Manager?! Talk about 2nd tier of the pyramid. You haven't a clue mate. I work in Finance and see the bigger picture. Ed is spot-on. We should have copied Iceland where the people insisted the banks collapse and enormous debts were written off. The way you speak about your staff too tells me you're hardly an inspiration (thankfully).

Where have I mentioned my staff in any of my posts? Also, the ed stated that the government owed money to the banks which could be written off if they were nationalised. He has not offered any proofs for what he had said. Also, the example of Kennedy is just another conspiracy with nothing to back it up. His legislation regarding silver currency was actually believed to favour the Federal Reserve Bank and was nothing to do with writing off the debt. One mans book suggesting otherwise and that this is why he was assassinated is not proof. It seems that every conspiracy tale is automatically believed without any concrete evidence. Has anyone on here ever considered the big money these conspiracy theorists earn from their books, tv appearances and tours without having to offer any proof! I imagine they all give that money away to good causes! I am not a finance expert, I just work in a bank and get annoyed at some of the rubbish that is written. Once again, if you are sure of your facts then please provide your sources of information. With reference to Iceland, I am sure the majority of the uk population would have been delighted to follow their lead and have the currency devalued, leading there to a 50% reduction in the real value of their salaries. {Ed001's Note - you completely misrepresent anything else said, perhaps you should just try learning to read before spouting lies? Are you trying to tell me that any money owed to banks would not be written off? Are you trying to tell me that the country could not just issue extra currency and use it to pay off any other debts they owe? Can you prove that the nonsense you spout is true? No one suggested following Iceland's devaluation of currency, why are you talking such a load of crap? Why are you talking about JFK's murder being connected? You are the one jumping to conclusions and spouting nonsense with no proof. I merely said he had come up with a plan to issue extra currency before he was murdered, I never suggested any connection, but you are clearly connecting the two. The issue is all in your own head lad. Obviously you must have some doubts and feel there is a connection, or why bring it up when no one else did?}

The guy replying to me said we should have copied Iceland and written off the banks debts and you said in your comment about Kennedy 'before they bumped him off'. That certainly sounds like you are implying that was why he was killed. If not then who are 'they'? {Ed001's Note - don't be so stupid, it implied he was murdered, nothing more. You are trying to make a point where none exists. Why are you asking me who they are? Have you thought that perhaps I said they because it is unclear who did kill him and so I couldn't name who they are? The only thing that is for certain, is that it wasn't a lone gunman that did it. Now please stop trying to make up rubbish from people's posts, perverting what we say does not make you look any less wrong.}