Benefit nation


12 February 2007

One third of homes dependent on benefits

One in three households across Britain is now dependent on the state for at least half its income, it emerged today.

Official government figures showed that more than seven million households are getting most of their income from government handouts.

This is what Socialists want, for households to be increasingly dependent on the government rather than independent and self-reliant. That way they’re easy to push around.

The best way to do this of course is to remove men from families by rewarding women for getting knocked up out of wedlock or for getting a divorce.

In many single-parent homes with two children, the proportion of families that would be financially crippled without state support is now as high as 61 per cent. That compares with just nine per cent in a two-parent home.

See? Remove men from families and they soon descend into welfare dependency and poverty. Yes, women are sooo strong and independent (after all, we all know that single-parent homes invariably equals single-mother homes, and the few single-father households around are also statistically more affluent than the single-mother ones.)

As it states in the article, many people don’t bother improving their situation if they’re getting by on benefits. Why work if you can get paid not to?

It also applies to people like me, who do work but – as I pointed out in the previous post – refuse to go beyond the call of duty and climb the career ladder because, not only is the primary incentive for obtaining wealth (to attract a wife and support her and the kids) gone thanks to insane divorce laws and insane women, but the more you earn the more you’ll be taxed to support the lazy and the feckless. Screw that. The only real incentive left to work hard is to save up to emigrate, although as feminism has long since infested traditional places for Brits to emigrate to (USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) and is beginning to infest other countries (India and Japan for instance) even that plan is not foolproof.

This nation is well and truly getting flushed down the toilet, and before anyone solely blames Labour, the Cuntservetive Party – under the leadership of David “Mangina to the Max” Cameron – will only pull the chain just as hard.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 6:53 PM


At 8:24 PM, Anonymous said…

This is where feminism and socialism meets. After all, women can’t be “free” of marriage without the state paying for single mothers.

It is worth noting that it’s a slippery slope. The more benefits get paid out, the more people end up on benefits. After all, if a man joins the household, the benefits will stop. The more people on benefits, the more support grows for socialist policies.

And all the time, the government has to grow larger to handle all the additional social programs and money.

The end result is that the people become totally dependent on the state. The state cannot handle the burden and has a financial collapse. Finally, the state becomes totalitarian and the country turns into a dictatorship.

It’s not a coincidence that the Nazis were the German National _Socialist_ Party, or that the first tenet of fascism was women’s suffrage.


At 5:52 PM, Anonymous said…

Jesus. You guys are doomed…


At 5:54 PM, Anonymous said…

The only way of stopping this in the UK anyway is to persuade Anne WIDDECOMBE to take on Cameron for leadership of the conservative party.Would men do this?It is questionable but the best option.
Please think about it ,otherwise roll over.Blogs like these are ok but since only about 5% of men are aware of these issues they are just a way of letting off steam and will probably be made illegal in the foreseeable future when the full gynarchy hits town.


At 12:00 AM, Anonymous said…

Gynarchy! Classic! How about cuntunism?


At 1:47 AM, mfsob said…

Cuntservative – I love it. Wonder if I could get that widespread usage here on my side of the pond?


At 7:08 AM, Anonymous said…

Government, in essence, plays the role of the provider-husband and daddy. Fits right in with the feminist Utopian gobbledygook that family configuration matters little. The reality is that it’s one of the first signs of a society spiraling out of control.


At 1:41 PM, FLC said…

There is nowhere left to hide. You hit it on the head, the best plan is to just get by and never get married and especially, never have children.


At 4:24 AM, Anonymous said…

Wait until the muslims take over…the feminists are in for the rude awakening of their lives. Goddamn cunts.


At 12:07 PM, Anonymous said…

Quote:The state cannot handle the burden and has a financial collapse..

I wonder if this is the only result possible,when then the anti-fem ‘end game’ happens.
Nazism was beaten by the’trad old’ countries ,in trouble now, -as discussed many times here.
Nuclear stalemate has pre-empted a re-run of that solution- and the USSR did have a relatively peaceful transition to a freer society away from state despotism.
As seen on the blogs here..even very angry people can still talk sense- with some humour on topic.
One may have a hope that good sense will prevail when the light shines on the real disaster going on.
The media has brainwashed many..the internet could still free us.
Not too many men (esp.’techies’) are real manginas -and they are the only ones to set up and run the state machine !! NOT
I can’t honestly applaud a Muslim ascendance as a solution!
The radical element is even more destructive than feminism and unlikely to get far these days IMO


At 10:48 AM, Candide said…

The best part about being on benefits is that if you DO go out and work and accumulate “excess savings”, your benefits will be cut back. Hence they condition an attitude that is counterproductive to generating wealth. Keeps everyone in their respective social classes.


At 9:10 PM, Anonymous said…

Candide…People do have a moral choice whether to work for a’marginal ‘income or suck on ‘Papa State’ for ever !
This is where they are subsumed as an under class in waiting.
I would suggest they suffer from the same lack of honesty as shown in feminist B/S for decades now.
Perhaps they are related in some devilish way? 🙂


%d bloggers like this: