ChatterBank1 min ago
Who Finds This So Called "funny Man" In The Least But Funny?
51 Answers
http://
Regarding all those other protesters, I wonder how many of them are tax payers?
Regarding all those other protesters, I wonder how many of them are tax payers?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
Why? Was he trying to be funny on this occasion ?
When he is performing, I find him quite amusing.
Taxpayers? They might all be; Brand certainly is; and you must have heard of 'champagne socialists'. Never heard of champagne anarchists, but these may not be anarchists as such. But taxpayers or not, we all have the rights of citizens; I was not aware that it was a qualification for being a citizen that you proved you were a taxpayer. And it would be hard to find someone who didn't pay tax at all, even if it is only VAT.
When he is performing, I find him quite amusing.
Taxpayers? They might all be; Brand certainly is; and you must have heard of 'champagne socialists'. Never heard of champagne anarchists, but these may not be anarchists as such. But taxpayers or not, we all have the rights of citizens; I was not aware that it was a qualification for being a citizen that you proved you were a taxpayer. And it would be hard to find someone who didn't pay tax at all, even if it is only VAT.
I don't find RB funny in person, although his writing has made me laugh out loud.
Regardless of his appeal as a humourist, I find his willingness to use his considerable intelligence and erudition to engage in debate about important issues to be entirely valid.
As for the requirement to be a tax payer in order to be involved in a demonstration - I am not sure that is valid at all.
Regardless of his appeal as a humourist, I find his willingness to use his considerable intelligence and erudition to engage in debate about important issues to be entirely valid.
As for the requirement to be a tax payer in order to be involved in a demonstration - I am not sure that is valid at all.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Brand is an odious ponce of a man, the sort you would punch in the face outside the pub.
//Russell Brand has career earnings of about £15million, so I am guessing he has paid a lot more tax than you have ever done AOG. //
You would hope so Gromit, but whats the betting he has a few 'legal scams' going on ?
//Russell Brand has career earnings of about £15million, so I am guessing he has paid a lot more tax than you have ever done AOG. //
You would hope so Gromit, but whats the betting he has a few 'legal scams' going on ?
I do not find him funny at all.No denying his intelligence though, even though he might be self obsessed. Not really the point though, is it? Are you saying he does not have the right to protest/demonstrate, AoG?.
The reason he is especially in the news right now is because of his interview with Paxman, and the subsequent open letter exchanges with another comedian whose name I forget.
Brands point is that he does not vote;that the electorate have become apathetic about voting ( and voter numbers support that notion); that all MPs from all parties form an elite completely out of touch with the electorate; and that regardless of which party you are voting for, very little changes for your average man in the street. And I can see his point. Personally, I do not think the answer is to simply not vote, but it could be quite convincingly argued that the existing system requires some reform.
An option on the voting form to vote for "none of the above", for a start. Mandatory voting. A quorum of votes required to elect a representative, to encourage the democratic process.
And some more radical and a wider spectrum of political parties, with MPs who better represent the electorate ( although to be fair, UKip have tried that, with some rather mixed results)
The reason he is especially in the news right now is because of his interview with Paxman, and the subsequent open letter exchanges with another comedian whose name I forget.
Brands point is that he does not vote;that the electorate have become apathetic about voting ( and voter numbers support that notion); that all MPs from all parties form an elite completely out of touch with the electorate; and that regardless of which party you are voting for, very little changes for your average man in the street. And I can see his point. Personally, I do not think the answer is to simply not vote, but it could be quite convincingly argued that the existing system requires some reform.
An option on the voting form to vote for "none of the above", for a start. Mandatory voting. A quorum of votes required to elect a representative, to encourage the democratic process.
And some more radical and a wider spectrum of political parties, with MPs who better represent the electorate ( although to be fair, UKip have tried that, with some rather mixed results)
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.