Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image


Okay, so I made up the title word but the love of chaos seems to describe our crapolition government to a tee.  Welcome to the Big Society money grab state induced guilt trip philanthropisation of the masses.    The sub-headline of Robert Winnett’s piece in the Daily Telegraph reads:

People will be asked to give to charity every time they use a cash card dispenser or pay with a bank card under government plans to increase philanthropy.

What the…?

Banks are to adopt a system that allows people to make a small donation to charity whenever they withdraw cash.

The Government also wants shops to offer customers the opportunity to “round up the pound” when using a debit or credit card, with the extra money going to charity.

That’s right.  The proposal is that every bloody time you stick your card into an ATM or card reader some fucking electronic guilt goblin will try and snatch your cash if you press the wrong button.  Of course there will be a superlative  inducement to join this national culture of gullible twatishness philanthropy.

Under the proposals, anyone making sizeable charitable donations would get letters from ministers.

Wow!  Letters from ministers, eh?  If there’s ever a national shortage of bum fodder we’ll know what to reach for, won’t we.   But what of the little people?  Those who can’t afford such largesse but who, in total, will give far more than any individual donor?  Well they can just fuck right off can’t they.  No letters for scraping the pennies proles.  No siree.  Unless of course…

Any National Lottery winners who donated part of their windfall to good causes would be publicised on television.

That’s right, they think we’re all publicity seeking whores. What a brilliant idea!  How could anyone refuse?  The last thing I’d want as a lottery millionaire is to let millions of strangers know what I look like and where I live.  But that’s just me.

The plans are unveiled on Wednesday in a discussion paper published by Francis Maude, the Cabinet Office minister, who wishes to foster a culture of charitable giving.

As opposed to the enforced culture of taxpayers billions supporting fake charities and quangoes and even more billions soaked up by the UK’s foreign aid budget.

The proposals are likely to prompt accusations that ministers are hoping charities provide services to compensate for the Coalition’s public spending cuts.

“Likely” is a gross understatement n’est pas?  Absolutely, on the other hand…

Ministers will begin talks with banks in the new year over how the scheme, which operates in Colombia and Mexico, might work.

So the UK government is looking for inspiration from drug cartel afflicted, third world shitholes now…

But sharing experiences can inspire others. “Giving is too often characterised as worthy and selfless, but there’s nothing wrong with doing things for each other and repaying kindnesses”.

Glad to hear it.  So give us a fucking referendum on the EU already.

The Pennies Foundation charity already operates the Coalition’s proposal with retailers such as Domino’s Pizza. Ministers believe that it has the potential to generate “significant new funds”.

There’s already a (fake?) charity in place to rake in the loot administer funds.  What a surprise…

But it’s not going to end with Domino’s Pizza or the weekly trip to Morrison’s.  Oh, no.

Under the proposals, which will lead to plans for legislation in the spring, people could also be prompted to give money when they fill in tax returns or apply for passports, driving licences and other state services. They may also be encouraged to donate over new mobile phone services.

They’ve missed a trick.  How about a donate button in public convenience cubicles?

Mr Maude said the Coalition was not trying to “compel” people to give. But he unveiled two schemes that would offer taxpayers’ money to match private donations.

So no one will be compelled unless you are a fucking taxpayer?  What sort of newspeak insanity is this?  Words fail me…

And do we get to choose where this money goes?  Well no.  But what’s the betting that government sponsored fake charities, already bloated by public funding, will be on the receiving end of this feeding frenzy, laughing all the way to the bank at our expense – a-fucking-gain.

Francis Maude is a prime example of a prokaryotic,  intellectually and morally bankrupt cunt of a politician.  Just like all the other crapolition cunts.  I hope the people who voted for this bunch of deadbeat fuckwits are happy.  Thanks for frigging nothing.


  1. CIngram says:

    I’m prepared to believe many things of Francis Maude, but I’m pretty sure he doesn’t lack mitochondria. On the other hand his ability to talk utter bollocks is quite staggering.

    What is this really, I hear someone say, but an endorsement of the little box you often see next to the till in shops and banks, or what they do at Tesco (I think) where they give you a green thing for every $x (no pound sign on keyboard) you spend and you drop it a bin for the charity of your choice? A lot, actually, because in the case of Tesco’s it’s them who pays, not you; you just tell them who you want to get the money (yes, if they give a lot it will affect their prices in the end but that’s not the point here). And in the previous case the box is just there; you drop a few coppers in if you want, and you know where it’s going. No pressure, to coin a phrase.

    And in neither case is your choice, or your or Tesco’s money, or your moral and social sense, being nationalised by some ponce so he can get on the tele and pay of a few more of his friends. A big difference, I think.

  2. Jeff Wood says:


    Still, to cheer you up, I am sure that all readers here will appreciate the current Telegraph Gallery of the Solar system. There are some beautiful shots, from Nasa and others. Towards the end, when the viewer is softened up, people appear.

    (The first pic is not properly captioned: it is Mars.)

    I do not apologise for being off-topic: you are the audience for whom to post this:

  3. NickM says:

    Charidee is voluntary.

    I didn’t vote for this lot of fuckwits. I might have voted for a Conservative Party that was you know conservative. I definitely would have voted for a Liberal Party that Gladstone would have grokked. No option here. I wrote on my ballot the words, “Fucking Boo!” I am not responsible for this absurd titteration. That’s a multiple iteration of tits by the way. That’s Little Nicky and iDave building a fucking IKEA play-pen – which they did the utterly useless cunts they truly are. Oh and VAT is going up to 20%. Like we haven’t fucking suffered enough? Cut taxes and herd anti-social workers off Beachy Head. Oh, and anyone in government who isn’t up for a 500 fast-jet airforce ought to be rogered to death with a mooli. And yes, that’s the RAF alone. The Navy needs another hundred.

  4. Sam Duncan says:

    “Any National Lottery winners who donated part of their windfall to good causes would be publicised on television.”

    “Charity suffereth long and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself unseemly.” St Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, that is. Just saying. For myself, there’s nothing they could threaten that’s more likely to put me off doing something than telling me I’ll end up on telly.

    “The proposals are likely to prompt accusations that ministers are hoping charities provide services to compensate for the Coalition’s public spending cuts.”

    I like that “accusations”, as if it’s a bad thing. Of course charities should be doing much of what the goverment does, but it can’t shake that urge to control and direct, can it? Speaking of which…

    “Mr Maude said the Coalition was not trying to “compel” people to give.”

    No, but he’s going to compel people to take part in the Scheme, right? As CIngram says, this is nationalisation of private charity. Is there anything conservative or liberal about this coalition?

  5. RAB says:

    I didn’t vote for the cunts either.

    If I give to charity, which I do, I want to know exactly where my money is going and how effectively it will be used. Consequently I dont give to any of the major and Govt approved charities.

    The Govt know well that opting out of something is a lot of hassle, so people generally let things ride. The amount is small so people just dont notice their pockets being picked.

    When I joined the Civil Service in the 70s, Union membership was considered automatic. You had to fill in some forms to stop your subs getting taken out of your salary every month. Most people just dont bother.

    If you do (and I did) you get looked at funny. Aha ! not a comrade then?

    It will be the same with this. What? you want to opt out of giving to Charridee? You evil heartless bastard!

    Let’s call this what it is shall we… Another fuckin tax!

  6. Ed P says:

    Since Looters made off with taxes on taxes (fuel, etc.), Moochers want a piece of you. (See Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged for these terms.) I will not give a single penny to this sordid fake charity business.

  7. DeNihilist says:

    If I read this right, you guys will be giving whether you wants or not. It appears to me, that the article says that the government will match these new charitable funds with taxpayer money! LMFAROTFP! And you guys gave the world democracy?!?!?!?!

    Here in Canuckazstan, we get to wright off I believe 50% of our registered charitable donations up to a certain amount from our taxes. But of course it is 100% if donating to a political party!

    There use to be a certain hobo that had his spot at a certain stop light (he died recently). Always happy, always full of 1950 jokes (one of them using the word dictaphone – :) ), he was my charity. Never issued a charitable tax form, but at least I knew that all of my charity was going to him and his needs whatever they might have been.

  8. Brit in Bogotá says:

    The charities I have seen displayed on the cash machines here in Colombia are usually for the benefit of servicemen injured in the violence here, or for emergency responses for events such as the recent flooding. There are a limited amount of official benefits from the government, so the donations actually serve a purpose in this context.

    The UK is in a different situation though as it is not involved in an internal conflict, and there are already benefits for most things. The cynic in me sees this as a way of either funding fake charities so that the government can distance themselves from them, or to fund real charities freeing up ‘government’ funds to go to the fake charities. I will be pleasantly surprised if I am proved wrong.

  9. Lynne says:

    Jeff Wood – thanks for the lift. Those pics are awesome. 😀

    DiNihilist – you read it right. :(

    RAB – I won’t be feeling guilty about saying no. It is not the cuntulent government’s job to interfere with the ethics of how I dispense my loose change. On that point they’ll be told to fuck off – with extreme prejudice. I support local charities only. It’s easier to monitor how the cash is used. At the first sign of diversity co-ordination and/or climate weaselling being promoted above human or animal welfare the tap will be turned off.

    CIngram – what makes you think an animated sack of shit contains mitochrondria? 😉

  10. […] part of their windfall to good causes would be publicised on television. But I must admit that Lynne over at CCinZ has said everything I wanted to say, and probably better. Go read. Comments […]

  11. Lynne says:

    RNS – the link and mention in dispatches is greatly appreciated. Thanks. 😀

  12. The Jannie says:

    Maybe Dominos Pizza will be given some of the handout to hire staff who can cook edible food?

  13. NickM says:

    Re Hobo and home. Lynne & DeNihilist. Yup. The phrase “charity begins at home” is an odd one. But Lynne nails it. You see a lot of nasty people such as the BNP twist that phrase to mean “Fuck Africa” but the truth is what that saying really means is charity is most effective the more personal it is. Like your hobo DeNihilist or Lynne giving to a local cause. It doesn’t of course have to be strictly local. My wife worked with a Malawian lass who wired money to her gramps. I will lay any odds that that money was better used than anything mega-charity does. I Goddamn know it was better spent than anything UK Gov does with 0.7% of our entire GDP and I will be buggered sideways with a mooli if it ain’t better spent than by the EU, UN or similar. Indeed I know it was. He bought chickens. Take off the small fee Western Union charged and everything else went into his smallholding and ultimately into his pot. Of course this lass was paying UK tax. Now OK some of that did some good. 0.7% is also roughly what the RAF costs but some of it went on foreign aid. I have never wired money but let’s say it costs 10%. That is still a supremely targeted 90% charitable endeavour and I will bet you dollars to donuts that did more sodding good than the monies this lass was handing over to UK Gov in tax for them to spend in the third world on her behalf. Because there is fuck all left after Grace Mugabe has bought a new frock. Big Charidee is about supporting some shocking types and giving upper middle-class kids something to do on a “gap” year. UN-ish charidee – think Cancun – is…

    Look at it this way. This is not redistribution from the wealthiest nations to the poorest. Though… But from the least corrupt to the most corrupt. But if we accept my thesis that the best form of aid is individuals like that lass sending her gramps money for chickens then taxing us for aid essentially means fewer chickens for the fella. That is the horrid reality. More people will starve in Africa because of this and that will mean more “aid” which will mean more starvation or deaths from pissant diseases and the cycle will continue and it will all be spent on presidential gin palaces. Recall the Ethiopian famine of ’85. Turned out that the ineffably corrupt gov there was importing not food, not medical supplies, but single malts to keep the army on side. Don’t get me wrong. I like a nice whisky as much as the next fella but it would be bitter in my mouth if all I saw around me was famine. I’d rather drink Bells.

  14. Eddie Willers says:

    We already have this scheme in widespread use here in Mexico.

    In supermarkets (and other private stores) you are encouraged to offer your bill to be rounded up, and the difference donated to the store’s preferred charity – usually something to do with poor, orphaned children. Each store/company administers this scheme themselves and different stores support different charitable efforts. At ATM’s, a central government collects the donation and it is usually passed on to emergency relief funds for the victims of natural disasters within Mexico.

    Organized charity (and government welfare) is very thin on the ground here – we have the Red Cross, St Vincent de Paul, the Salvation Army and that’s about it. I get the impression that folk would do more if they trusted the organizations administering the funds – which would automatically disqualify any form of central, state or local government.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *