Tuesday, 17 April 2012


I saw Tony Blair on TV yesterday. He was in America I think, looking very busy, but had time to stop and talk to the reporters about how our government should not cap the amount of tax you can offset against donations. He has a right to his opinion, but come on, of what importance is his opinion?   Why does the BBC and ITV and Sky need to put a camera in front of him and ask his opinion?   Of what value is it? I think they probably did it to wind up the masses even more.  I think if they'd have got Fred Goodwin that would have got the masses marching.   TB is paid by extremely wealthy people who work and own extremely wealthy companies to discuss how he managed to teflon coat himself and still come out alive and rich, and how they can do the same.   I think even they are in utter awe of his ability to come out on top when really, in a saner world, he wouldn't be where he is today. No wonder Goldman Sachs came out with the comment about doing God's work, I think they had just been lectured to by TB.     I thought it was a joke when news was announced he was being sent to the Middle East on some sort of peace keeping mission.   Then again perhaps they thought by sending him out there someone would shoot him but no one has.      Blair looks increasingly demonic these days although I'm sure he still believes he is doing good work - well he is still alive so I think he must think that - after all those who make the most money only do so because they are worthy of it, yes?  Honest, decent, law abiding, tax paying (well within the law as it is now) transparent types who are philanthropic asking for nothing in return because giving of itself is enough.   And in these times of transparency no one, least of all the wealthy have anything to hide.   Which is of course utter rubbish.   It's always been utter rubbish but at least when we didn't know about it, it didn't wind the tax paying, charity contributing without getting recognition rest of us up so much.    I don't think they should receive any tax relief to give to charities.  I feel there shouldn't be a need for charities if you think about it.  There should be sufficient for the government to give out to those who need it, but then I suppose it would be the government playing God rather than the super wealthy, power hungry who feel they deign to give and hold back when and how they chose.   But at least the government wouldn't ask for a pay back, and there's no super wealthy power hungry people in politics right?  

And any way, I'm told that the super rich give only a teeny weeny percentage of their wealth to charity compared to those on say £30k a year.    I have visited resorts where guests have hired the £10k villas a night and the ones next door not for privacy but for security. These people have money to burn but have also burnt a lot of people on the way to get there. Perhaps that's why TB is in such demand as a lecturer.  They want to know how he's managed to get the tax payer to pay for the other two villas on the side. 

In the meantime, I've found a cure for rich rage.    Think of Tony Blair on a toilet.    I guarantee all emotion will completely leave you.   A sense of utter indifference overwhelms you.   While waiting for the second coming think of TB on the toilet.   Constipated. 

No comments:

Post a comment