Route-Rant 1

An article about welfare recipients, the Daily Mail and Queen Liz 2. Enjoy. :)

0Likes
0Comments
477Views

1. Route-Rant 1

I speak for myself when I profess, unashamedly, that my favourite game this summer (far surpassing balloon volleyball across the living or quick-fire hands of Blackjack, which may or may not have ignited some borderline ASBO-ish intra-family brawls in our household) was “count the number of times the BBC can say the name “George” in their stagnating minute-by-minute cover of the Royal birth before I shave off all my hair and tattoo “GOD LOVES AN ANARCHIST” across my forehead.

Good Summer. Huh.

Perhaps it's the fact that the birth of one human child was mistaken for the second coming. Maybe it's that half-wit, Michael Gove, who changes his mind about the education reform more times than my Mother does whilst deciding on a pair of shoes. Maybe it’s the pernicious propaganda that brandishes all welfare recipients under the same derogatory title, making the rich richer and the poor poorer. Or maybe it was George Osborne- a people’s man and heir to his father’s multi-million pound fortune. 

Dig out your face-paints. This got real. 

But, before I embark upon route-rant, there’s a special corporation I’d like to exhibit my profound gratitude to. An homage, if you will. Come up on stage for us, Daily Mail. Come on. That’s it. Take a bow, fellas. You deserve it.

You’d have us all believing that this country has been crippled under the weight of work-shy, big-spending, socially parasitic scroungers, wouldn’t you? The undeserving poor are to blame for their poorness… but of course, if you’re a member of the “deserving” poor then it’s all different.

You’re royally pardoned.

It’s hardly fair that some working-class trash should be tucking into a re-run of Judge Judy at home whilst the rest of the country are working a 40 hour week. And for what? To pay their taxes to these scroungers? Bah, I say! Inexcusable, you say! Abolish the welfare state, the government say!

Hang on.

How about we kick some myth-ass here?

Welfare cuts have become extremely popular, (call Cameron “David Scissor-hands”), particularly amongst the young and the poor and the unemployed.

Weird.

Don’t they need support the most?

Despite what Mr. Mail over here would shove down your throat, less than one percent of all welfare recipients are fraudsters. Little over ten percent goes to the unemployed. Ninety six percent of people claiming housing benefits are actually in employment too, to divert away from the unemployed stereotypes. People with disabilities have had a £500 million cut to their allowance since 2010, just to throw that into the mix. Then there’s us. The young people. Almost 1 million of us are out of work. And the next time you’re at your Nan’s house, check behind her sofa for loose change because pensioners receive almost fifty percent of all benefits towards their winter fuel allowance.

Please note: I do not endorse stealing from Grandmothers. Or stealing Grandmothers, for that matter.

The conservatives abolished rent control in the late 1980s. Those guys (ehem, Boris Johnson) just love pushing those prices up. The poor should not be characterized through Jeremy Kyle’s circus or the menagerie of reality TV. It’s fine for the crimes of a vast minority of those who abuse the welfare system to be immortalised, but the Bankers who stole millions from us have disintegrated into the fibres of history. Which is why we’re all in this mess.

Remember, Daily Mail?

And then, Daily Mail, there’s your timeless glorification of the Royal Family. Baby, baby, baby, old lady, bladder issues, bladder issues, bald patch, old lady, naked prince, pregnant lady. But don’t worry. You’re not the only ones although it would take too long to list every guilty royalist-fuelled newspaper-come-television broadcaster out there. Sure, the family have had their dark moments (cough, cough), but they’re so quaint and quintessentially British! But let’s turn the tables. The Royal family don’t work, per say, excluding the odd few “bright young things” that stick-it to the establishment. They don’t pay taxes. They spend an awful lot, really. So just run it by me again: who are the scroungers?

Let’s move on entirely. Although I’m impartial to Mrs. Thatcher (never knew the woman) I will say this: she has left a legacy, whether it’s appreciated or not. The baron North, the disintegration of care-in-the-community, the imposition of poll tax, a ten thousand pound state funeral, courtesy of the tax payer. And I never got my free milk in primary school. Anyhow, my point is that riots were a little less senseless under her reign. I condone rioting, but at least people weren’t setting bins alight just to steal rice from Tesco in 1981. Even the “stop the war” riots didn’t get far. They didn’t stop the war. Men and women died in Iraq. And protesters got some pretty long jail sentences. We are afraid of the consequences of standing up for what we want because it requires effort and even then it would probably end bottoms-up. So no more riots. No more protests. They don’t do much good.

I suppose that the conclusion I am trying to draw is that I’m pretty tired of the same old news. Cuts, Bankers, Babies, Scroungers. No one is going to take action anytime soon. And any political parties that may have once had the potential to create some sort of narrower class gap/ higher wages/ happier people/ impromptu dancing in the street are simply spewing out rhetoric and whining about how everyone else’s laws are flawed and unjust.

Yeah.

Tell me something I haven’t heard.

Join MovellasFind out what all the buzz is about. Join now to start sharing your creativity and passion
Loading ...