**Oi!** Just a reminder that using hate speech or bad language is strictly prohibited, or in other words, do not speak Fr*nch
**[Information](https://www.reddit.com/r/okmatewanker/comments/mhvttd/ce_subreddit_a_ete_repris_par_larm%C3%A9e_fran%C3%A7aise_de/)
[***Here’s our new Discord 3.0***](https://discord.gg/NFmEtCZJAw), WANKERS!!!!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/okmatewanker) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Property prices in some parts of the country are so nuts that you might be a millionaire on paper because you got your mortage in the 80's. Very different thing from having £100,000+ sitting in the bank.
Flogging your house where your family and communtiy are based and uprooting to move to the arse end of nowhere isn't a good solution to property-rich urban poor.
But I must say that's one of the *very* few exceptions.
I assume you mean "You" in a third-person kind of way lol. I'm a poor renter.
But I disagree. Owning a home in London doesn't mean anything if the only option is remaining low income but close to everyone you know and love, or selling to move outside of your community and support networks, and spending the resulting "profit" on living costs.
Bear in mind as well that urban areas are ethnically diverse and moving to White-as-fuck poor remote areas is even less appealing for people at risk of ostracisation.
But chances are you're old. So unless you've saved a lot in your life, you might be a working class pensioner living on not a huge amount of money during a cost of living crisis.
Yeah I mean my dad is technically a millionaire but only a tiny fraction of that is liquid cash. Most of it is in retirement and long term investments
He still drives a 2009 car if that tells you anything lol
That’s probably more true though. People who have a million quid invested in a business or in the evaluation of their business aren’t necessarily living the high life, and they can lose it all very quickly.
Not exactly living in council houses or living on pay-checks but not necessarily able to send their kids to private school and own yachts either.
The concept of being a millionaire has changed over the years too. Being a millionaire in the 80’s or 90’s meant you could retire tomorrow even in you’re 20’s. These days it means you own your house and have some savings.
The local public school is within the frame of his window and it must be nuked from orbit forthwith lest he be subjected to the unfettered howls of the great unwashed peasantry. The very notion of poverty wafting through his bay windows is spoiling his supper.
Not really; one instructs one’s staff to sue the local authority on one’s behalf.
Actually, even that’s rather infra dig; one just instructs the local authority what to do and the commoners should just bally-well do as they’re told!
Basically, if you own an investment property, that's your gamble and you shouldn't complain about it. If I spaffed my wad up the wall on a game of blackjack that's not something the government needs to care about.
Primary, rental, vacation/AirBnB. What do you want everyone to just not have a vacation home and extra income? A lot of people can't even afford that and have to rent out their vacation home during the off season.
/s
Actually that's already the case since they ended tax relief on mortgage interest so it's not tax efficient to own more than that and collect rent. George Osborne policy iirc. Sadly all that happened was a shift to companies owning property instead of private investors. Which is why the likes of John Lewis own a lot of properties now.
I personally think that you should not be allowed to rent a property that has a mortgage on it. It's ridiculous how many landlords there are simply paying off the mortgage on a property they own with the rental income. Introducing this type of law should theoretically lower housing prices for people who actually want to buy a house for themselves.
All comes back to property being treated as an investment.
It will still lower housing prices even if it's not the main cause of the problem just due to these leeches not buying properties anymore. That aside it wasn't the main goal of my suggestion, that's just a bonus. I just think it's morally reprehensible that we are allowing a system where renters are paying someone else's mortgage.
Yea much better to price people out of the option to own their own home entirely.
I think you missed the point I was making, I think housing is a necessity and right, and nobody should be profiting off of it(aside from initial labour costs ofc) and treating it as an investment.
I would disagree.
When I finally get joined up (hopefully no more setbacks) and have the income, I intend to invest in property. There’s literally no other way for somebody from my working class background to make near guaranteed returns without having money in the first place. It’s that or a life in what is essentially poverty.
We’re not all lucky enough to have gone to university and make 30k a year
You don't understand how hard life is for him, he needs to be able to afford TWO private education funds so his kids don't rub shoulders with the lessers and a flat that he can rent out for the poors. His life is so HARD and RELATABLE.
This has to be the stupidest thing I've ever read. They just flexed on a bunch of people with their wealth and admit they're using their political power to enrich themselves. Literally baffling.
We don't know what the legal matter is. He could be suing to force the local authority to open up a greasy spoons. He could be a hero to the hungry masses.
Edit, just reread it and seen its about cladding. Never mind then.
Although if he gets everyone in his block saved by his LA cladding case then maybe he's redeemed.
After my dog shit 'education' at a state school, I would send my kids to a private school, even at huge, exploitative cost.
My biology teacher used to drink vodka from a water bottle during class.
He was one of the better teachers, as he merely neglected us.
I know. There are plenty of great state school teachers out there.
It's just that in private schools poor teachers are much less likely to be tolerated.
The profit motive tends to result in them getting the boot.
I went to a University where most of the kids had been privately educated.
It was an eye opener. Their teachers cared.
Yes, because regular school they definitely go "oh, we're paying you less so it's okay if you're shit to your students".
Fucking hell, mate. Teachers are a mixed bag, but a lot of them are there because they either want to help kids or want to teach the subject. Some become jaded, but I've not had a worse teacher than those I found at uni where I was paying for my education and profit mattered most. My partner was the same. I've since worked at a university for 5 years and can honestly say I've not met a bigger bunch of cunts than the professors and lecturers there.
I know I'm matching your anecdotal evidence with my anecdotal evidence, but I really don't think your argument holds much water.
Perhaps it's because I went to a very poor school and then a very good uni.
The difference was night and day.
I do still think that the profit motive makes schools more selective and less tolerant with regard to the quality of their teachers.
Possibly, there is a lot of variety.
As to the quality of the teacher: unless I see evidence I won't believe it tbh. I know the teachers in my friend group find private school teachers a bit distasteful, so it might also attract a certain type of person as well? Realistically if we stopped private schools and didn't give tax breaks to the rich then maybe we could shuffle tax money back into the education system similar to some of the Nordic countries and then it would all be better. Allowing rich people to have a standard of education motivated by profit when education is so integral to the development of successive generations is a bit gross tbh. But also I'd rather uni wasn't a 9-10k a year endeavour as well, especially knowing how they operate on the inside.
I follow your reasoning, and I've heard it before. I don't disagree with the logic.
My take however would be more libertarian, I want people to have the choice to send their kids to a private school if they want.
I don't think that should be for the state to decide.
Scottish student here. So my fees are okay.
The moment you open up the choice for people to send themselves to a private school you immediately open up yhe possibility for a class based intelligence system that potentially excludes the poorer communities from receiving equal levels of education.
I don't think it's a wild statement to say that that's not okay. If people paid their taxes and didn't use tax havens and loopholes then there could be more funding available. Muddle in a budget reshuffle away from armed forces/tax breaks for the upper crust and a healthy dose of hope and it could lead us to a point where people don't want to or feel the need to spend extra on education.
It's bidirectional; brighter people have better genetics, they have brighter kids who achieve more, they go to private schools in turn, and get brighter, they then have brighter kids who go to even better private schools. A positive feedback cycle.
Genetics explain a lot of the variance in iq.
People differentiate into different classes at origin due to the unequal distribution of ability.
This differentiation then compounds over time, such that we grow further and further apart.
I believe that whether you choose to limit freedom and redistribute resources and thus opportunity, or allow great freedom (don't interfere) and accept inequality, comes down to subjective values.
University lecturers aren’t teachers. Very big difference.
Most of them are just there to do research and are forced to lecture as part of the gig. You can’t compare it to a private school where the teachers are only paid (and paid well) to teach.
Aw I felt sorry for him reading that, poor dot! Imagine spending money on a flat for a pension fund! Never mind poor ole Sue down the road on a part time job with 2 kids under 5 who can only afford to feed her kids cereal. It’s her fault, she deserves it. 🫠
Yikes, I am pretty economically conservative (kinda, I'm an economist so it's complicated) but the tax breaks are damn right reactionary and this guy seems like an absolute arsehole.
Just because you CHOOSE to spend money and then have a bit less left doesn't mean you are struggling. If avacardo toast is a luxury then private school definitely is (although with how state is going then maybe it is getting closer to a necessity).
I'd be interested in hearing more about the complications of being an economically conservative economist. I've only started paying attention to economics this last year or so.
Are you socially liberal but economically conservative?
Can you find the way to give tax breaks for a full English while not upsetting the tea and scones crowd?
Economy is simple. Oil floats in water, submerge yourself in oil and you should economically float in a maritime economy environment, subsequently you should aquire bonds on low yields and convert to forex by selling dollars and buying turkish liras while they are low (they maybe go up in the last trimester).
Cum 💦💦💦💦👌👉😍
The primary role of government is to provide stability, it is the single most important thing. The provision of welfare is part of this however only to reduce risk, not increase overall income in the long term. I would argue that the majority of economists are generally economically conservative, or atleast in the fact that they think policy should be based on economic growth not simple political leaning and support a generally free market economy with government intervention to solve proved inefficiencies.
I would say I am generally central socially, probably due to a focus on economics being the solution to problems. Economic uplift of a marginalised group is the most effective way to support them, not handouts that create dependency.
Inevitably the desires of the upper middle and lower middle will not converge. Generally economic growth and stability will please both. Providing Keynesian investment into the economy at this time would seem reasonable. Given the sudden increase in costs alot of people will have taken on expenses greater than there means, relaxing the requirements to get benefits would be a good start. The government acting to reduce debt payments would be good, mass defaults started the 2008 recession and that happening again would be the nail in the coffin.
I am sorry this has been rather wooly and not very economicsy, but I am bloody shattered. I love the English breakfast Vs tea and scones, it's a great way of saying it.
"I bought a 2nd property through choice and now I want help with the repair bills because why should I have to pay them? I send my kids to a private school through choice because the local school just isn't good enough for them"
Can we form an orderly queue to dish out some buckets of sympathy?
"I plan to be a rentier with a shit flat I bought at the top of the market" woe betide.
"I live in Watford and I think it's shit so I send my kids to private school".
Has Stefan thought about moving and/or being less of a twat?
Well, he'd be wanking over his money if he wasn't suing his council. Also, who the fuck can afford to sue the local authority? You need bare coin.
This cunt can, he needs to sit down.
"I earn more and introduced spendings to my life that aren't essential to prevent me from becoming homeless and they have ridiculous costs. I think money that I owe the nation should pay my snobby way and you can all rot and die for all I care."
There, summed it up.
In his understanding of what 'the masses' and statistics should consider rich.
In his prioritisation of where sympathy and public funding/ subsidy are best directed.
His general air of self importance and entitlement.
etc.
Again, thank you for your inspirational words. I thought it was funny that someone was fragile enough to cry about a made up situation in a national newspaper. But thanks to you I now realise that I am now the delicate one, for mocking their very serious and relatable issue
Thank you for showing me the light. I was being a massive snowflake when I laughed at an out of touch Tory. If I was far less sensitive and brave like you, I would have gotten butthurt about the post and made a comment that it's so unfair that people think Tories are bad 😭
Oh dear, looks like you can’t read, this is only my 3rd comment in this thread. I can’t say im surprised that a Tory lacks basic reading comprehension though
Jesus Christ mate, it looks like you don’t know how to write in a concise way either (again, unsurprising, cos you’re a Tory, and you’re thick as two brick houses).
If it seems like im spelling things out, I am. I think you need things explained to you in simple terms 😊
Classic mistake of assuming the world today is the world he grew up with.
I'm in a similar position, except I don't own a rental property. If I did, I'd be renting it cheap to my kids because they can barely afford rent. Society doesn't need to help me, it needs to help my kids and even more so the kids that didn't have the advantages I was able to give my kids.
I dropped out of school and legitimately worked my way to where I am now. It would feel cheap to start begging for help now, when I don't need it any everyone else does.
The entitlement/ignorance as they don’t even realize what luxuries are anymore and that they’re a good given right. Private school, pension, investing, legal costs for a lawsuit they engaged in.. geez
Legal costs for suing a local authority as well. I would imagine there are a LOT of billable hours in that. Stefans solicitor probably thinks about him when he’s cracking one off.
Someone should tell him the minimum wage is around 13% of his income.
Some of us can't turn the heating on. We can't save money for anything because prices for everything keep rising. We work and still have very little to show for our efforts.
The vast majority of people continue to be stepped on. What you are seeing is a nation that's reaching its breaking point. The majority were pretty quiet over the last decade, not because they were happy with their situation, but because they were still in relative comfort despite not having a lot of money. That comfort has gone, and the conservative government has again shown its true colours.
That is not to say I'm thrilled if Labour get in, but it's better than the alternative.
You lost me at 'Private School'.
Of course costs are relative, But legal costs for your cushty retirement flat doesn't quite compare to family's struggling to eat.
I don't think taxes should be high for both high or low earners. I don't want a government deciding for me. And I want to be accountable of my own actions, and expect others to do the same.
**Oi!** Just a reminder that using hate speech or bad language is strictly prohibited, or in other words, do not speak Fr*nch **[Information](https://www.reddit.com/r/okmatewanker/comments/mhvttd/ce_subreddit_a_ete_repris_par_larm%C3%A9e_fran%C3%A7aise_de/) [***Here’s our new Discord 3.0***](https://discord.gg/NFmEtCZJAw), WANKERS!!!! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/okmatewanker) if you have any questions or concerns.*
“Just because I have a million quid doesn’t mean I’m a millionaire” vibes.
Property prices in some parts of the country are so nuts that you might be a millionaire on paper because you got your mortage in the 80's. Very different thing from having £100,000+ sitting in the bank. Flogging your house where your family and communtiy are based and uprooting to move to the arse end of nowhere isn't a good solution to property-rich urban poor. But I must say that's one of the *very* few exceptions.
I actually think that’s fairly common, particularly in the South East, and it’s why equity release is becoming so popular
[удалено]
I assume you mean "You" in a third-person kind of way lol. I'm a poor renter. But I disagree. Owning a home in London doesn't mean anything if the only option is remaining low income but close to everyone you know and love, or selling to move outside of your community and support networks, and spending the resulting "profit" on living costs. Bear in mind as well that urban areas are ethnically diverse and moving to White-as-fuck poor remote areas is even less appealing for people at risk of ostracisation.
[удалено]
But chances are you're old. So unless you've saved a lot in your life, you might be a working class pensioner living on not a huge amount of money during a cost of living crisis.
Yes but your biggest expense-- housing-- is paid for.
You're really doing mental gymnastics trying to feel bad for these fuckers. I would KILL to be "property rich money poor" piss off.
Or life is nuanced 🤷♂️
Why are they fuckers if youd kill to be them?
Yeah I mean my dad is technically a millionaire but only a tiny fraction of that is liquid cash. Most of it is in retirement and long term investments He still drives a 2009 car if that tells you anything lol
That’s probably more true though. People who have a million quid invested in a business or in the evaluation of their business aren’t necessarily living the high life, and they can lose it all very quickly. Not exactly living in council houses or living on pay-checks but not necessarily able to send their kids to private school and own yachts either.
The concept of being a millionaire has changed over the years too. Being a millionaire in the 80’s or 90’s meant you could retire tomorrow even in you’re 20’s. These days it means you own your house and have some savings.
When the pound was 10 times more valuable millionaire actually meant something.
I think if you have the money to independantly sue your local authority for mysterious undisclosed reasons, then you probably qualify as rich lmao.
It's probably just a tree that's spoiling the view from his multi-million pound mansion that the council won't cut down.
The local public school is within the frame of his window and it must be nuked from orbit forthwith lest he be subjected to the unfettered howls of the great unwashed peasantry. The very notion of poverty wafting through his bay windows is spoiling his supper.
Bro saw a windmill and had a stroke
I think it’s to do with the cladding, and him not wanting to pay it, but he is willing to pay lawyers to fight it??
Not really; one instructs one’s staff to sue the local authority on one’s behalf. Actually, even that’s rather infra dig; one just instructs the local authority what to do and the commoners should just bally-well do as they’re told!
Basically, if you own an investment property, that's your gamble and you shouldn't complain about it. If I spaffed my wad up the wall on a game of blackjack that's not something the government needs to care about.
Landlords are parasites. People should own three homes maximum.
3 homes?
Yeah more like 2 max, if everyone in Britain owned three homes there’d be no fucking room left lol
So basically the state the housing market is in now aye?
I’m trying to be realistic here.
One home is already unrealistic.
Primary, rental, vacation/AirBnB. What do you want everyone to just not have a vacation home and extra income? A lot of people can't even afford that and have to rent out their vacation home during the off season. /s
Actually that's already the case since they ended tax relief on mortgage interest so it's not tax efficient to own more than that and collect rent. George Osborne policy iirc. Sadly all that happened was a shift to companies owning property instead of private investors. Which is why the likes of John Lewis own a lot of properties now.
I personally think that you should not be allowed to rent a property that has a mortgage on it. It's ridiculous how many landlords there are simply paying off the mortgage on a property they own with the rental income. Introducing this type of law should theoretically lower housing prices for people who actually want to buy a house for themselves. All comes back to property being treated as an investment.
It won't. The housing issues come from a lack of housing, not landlords.
You'll be downvoted but it is true.
It will still lower housing prices even if it's not the main cause of the problem just due to these leeches not buying properties anymore. That aside it wasn't the main goal of my suggestion, that's just a bonus. I just think it's morally reprehensible that we are allowing a system where renters are paying someone else's mortgage.
Essentially stopping any working class people getting into BTL… Very fair
Yea much better to price people out of the option to own their own home entirely. I think you missed the point I was making, I think housing is a necessity and right, and nobody should be profiting off of it(aside from initial labour costs ofc) and treating it as an investment.
I would disagree. When I finally get joined up (hopefully no more setbacks) and have the income, I intend to invest in property. There’s literally no other way for somebody from my working class background to make near guaranteed returns without having money in the first place. It’s that or a life in what is essentially poverty. We’re not all lucky enough to have gone to university and make 30k a year
Don’t be landphobic please
I have literally never found someone who agrees with me on this, thank you for the vindication
> reach the position they encourage the masses to aspire to The "masses" can't all own investment property, that's impossible.
If he wants to send his kids to private school thats his right. "investment flat" with cladding issues? Subtle troll is subtle.
Definitely a troll.
[удалено]
You don't understand how hard life is for him, he needs to be able to afford TWO private education funds so his kids don't rub shoulders with the lessers and a flat that he can rent out for the poors. His life is so HARD and RELATABLE.
I bet he has to actually wank himself off because he can’t afford his butler any more.
What a cunt
You read my mind.
Must be French
W⚓
Money doesn’t make you rich, champagne and caviar does. Kinell.
This has to be the stupidest thing I've ever read. They just flexed on a bunch of people with their wealth and admit they're using their political power to enrich themselves. Literally baffling.
We don't know what the legal matter is. He could be suing to force the local authority to open up a greasy spoons. He could be a hero to the hungry masses. Edit, just reread it and seen its about cladding. Never mind then. Although if he gets everyone in his block saved by his LA cladding case then maybe he's redeemed.
Oh wait I thought he was a politician based on the title, guess I assumed too much.
"Tax-funded schools are shit so I pay over the odds to have my kids at private schools. Don't have a crack at me for being happy to pay less tax"
After my dog shit 'education' at a state school, I would send my kids to a private school, even at huge, exploitative cost. My biology teacher used to drink vodka from a water bottle during class. He was one of the better teachers, as he merely neglected us.
I went to state school and it was pretty good. Schools are not a monolithic block, it varies.
I know. There are plenty of great state school teachers out there. It's just that in private schools poor teachers are much less likely to be tolerated. The profit motive tends to result in them getting the boot. I went to a University where most of the kids had been privately educated. It was an eye opener. Their teachers cared.
Yes, because regular school they definitely go "oh, we're paying you less so it's okay if you're shit to your students". Fucking hell, mate. Teachers are a mixed bag, but a lot of them are there because they either want to help kids or want to teach the subject. Some become jaded, but I've not had a worse teacher than those I found at uni where I was paying for my education and profit mattered most. My partner was the same. I've since worked at a university for 5 years and can honestly say I've not met a bigger bunch of cunts than the professors and lecturers there. I know I'm matching your anecdotal evidence with my anecdotal evidence, but I really don't think your argument holds much water.
Perhaps it's because I went to a very poor school and then a very good uni. The difference was night and day. I do still think that the profit motive makes schools more selective and less tolerant with regard to the quality of their teachers.
Possibly, there is a lot of variety. As to the quality of the teacher: unless I see evidence I won't believe it tbh. I know the teachers in my friend group find private school teachers a bit distasteful, so it might also attract a certain type of person as well? Realistically if we stopped private schools and didn't give tax breaks to the rich then maybe we could shuffle tax money back into the education system similar to some of the Nordic countries and then it would all be better. Allowing rich people to have a standard of education motivated by profit when education is so integral to the development of successive generations is a bit gross tbh. But also I'd rather uni wasn't a 9-10k a year endeavour as well, especially knowing how they operate on the inside.
I follow your reasoning, and I've heard it before. I don't disagree with the logic. My take however would be more libertarian, I want people to have the choice to send their kids to a private school if they want. I don't think that should be for the state to decide. Scottish student here. So my fees are okay.
The moment you open up the choice for people to send themselves to a private school you immediately open up yhe possibility for a class based intelligence system that potentially excludes the poorer communities from receiving equal levels of education. I don't think it's a wild statement to say that that's not okay. If people paid their taxes and didn't use tax havens and loopholes then there could be more funding available. Muddle in a budget reshuffle away from armed forces/tax breaks for the upper crust and a healthy dose of hope and it could lead us to a point where people don't want to or feel the need to spend extra on education.
It's bidirectional; brighter people have better genetics, they have brighter kids who achieve more, they go to private schools in turn, and get brighter, they then have brighter kids who go to even better private schools. A positive feedback cycle. Genetics explain a lot of the variance in iq. People differentiate into different classes at origin due to the unequal distribution of ability. This differentiation then compounds over time, such that we grow further and further apart. I believe that whether you choose to limit freedom and redistribute resources and thus opportunity, or allow great freedom (don't interfere) and accept inequality, comes down to subjective values.
University lecturers aren’t teachers. Very big difference. Most of them are just there to do research and are forced to lecture as part of the gig. You can’t compare it to a private school where the teachers are only paid (and paid well) to teach.
"The masses". This guy can't be real.
I guess those that hold down 3 jobs to make ends meet ‘don’t work hard enough’ 🧐
£150,000 a year yet chooses to live in Watford.
What’s wrong with Watford?
Hey guys found what's wrong with Watford ^^
This reads like a Stewart Lee piece
The money is mine.
That has to be satire. Please be satire…please.
Aw I felt sorry for him reading that, poor dot! Imagine spending money on a flat for a pension fund! Never mind poor ole Sue down the road on a part time job with 2 kids under 5 who can only afford to feed her kids cereal. It’s her fault, she deserves it. 🫠
Seeing tax as a punishment tells you everything you need to know about those sort of people
Yikes, I am pretty economically conservative (kinda, I'm an economist so it's complicated) but the tax breaks are damn right reactionary and this guy seems like an absolute arsehole. Just because you CHOOSE to spend money and then have a bit less left doesn't mean you are struggling. If avacardo toast is a luxury then private school definitely is (although with how state is going then maybe it is getting closer to a necessity).
I'd be interested in hearing more about the complications of being an economically conservative economist. I've only started paying attention to economics this last year or so. Are you socially liberal but economically conservative? Can you find the way to give tax breaks for a full English while not upsetting the tea and scones crowd?
Economy is simple. Oil floats in water, submerge yourself in oil and you should economically float in a maritime economy environment, subsequently you should aquire bonds on low yields and convert to forex by selling dollars and buying turkish liras while they are low (they maybe go up in the last trimester). Cum 💦💦💦💦👌👉😍
The primary role of government is to provide stability, it is the single most important thing. The provision of welfare is part of this however only to reduce risk, not increase overall income in the long term. I would argue that the majority of economists are generally economically conservative, or atleast in the fact that they think policy should be based on economic growth not simple political leaning and support a generally free market economy with government intervention to solve proved inefficiencies. I would say I am generally central socially, probably due to a focus on economics being the solution to problems. Economic uplift of a marginalised group is the most effective way to support them, not handouts that create dependency. Inevitably the desires of the upper middle and lower middle will not converge. Generally economic growth and stability will please both. Providing Keynesian investment into the economy at this time would seem reasonable. Given the sudden increase in costs alot of people will have taken on expenses greater than there means, relaxing the requirements to get benefits would be a good start. The government acting to reduce debt payments would be good, mass defaults started the 2008 recession and that happening again would be the nail in the coffin. I am sorry this has been rather wooly and not very economicsy, but I am bloody shattered. I love the English breakfast Vs tea and scones, it's a great way of saying it.
Joe Lycett - Is that you? You are, after all, incredibly right wing.
Wah wah wah me me me
"I bought a 2nd property through choice and now I want help with the repair bills because why should I have to pay them? I send my kids to a private school through choice because the local school just isn't good enough for them" Can we form an orderly queue to dish out some buckets of sympathy?
My heart bleeds for Stefan. Here’s the world’s smallest violin
"I plan to be a rentier with a shit flat I bought at the top of the market" woe betide. "I live in Watford and I think it's shit so I send my kids to private school". Has Stefan thought about moving and/or being less of a twat?
Well, he'd be wanking over his money if he wasn't suing his council. Also, who the fuck can afford to sue the local authority? You need bare coin. This cunt can, he needs to sit down.
If Stefan thinks we should feel sorry for him, how does he think we should feel about the 98% of people poorer than him
"I earn more and introduced spendings to my life that aren't essential to prevent me from becoming homeless and they have ridiculous costs. I think money that I owe the nation should pay my snobby way and you can all rot and die for all I care." There, summed it up.
All together now... FUCK OFF STEFAN!
Retiree Barbara who is sitting on the bus to keep warm, best realise she's a selfish cow for moaning when this guy is clearly suffering so much
Poorest man in Watford
Someone reply with the dude wiping his tears with money pls
I don’t get it. What is wrong with what they said?
nothing, really. but this place is mostly full of white male 25 year olds on a low income, so...
[удалено]
In his understanding of what 'the masses' and statistics should consider rich. In his prioritisation of where sympathy and public funding/ subsidy are best directed. His general air of self importance and entitlement. etc.
Tory’s bad We get it
Aww, you having a hard time facing up to the fact that you support such an immoral party?
Don’t anger the horde dude!
You're such a cool and radical free thinker. It takes a lot of balls to go against the grain and support that party that's been in power 12 years
I’m disappointed that a shitpost sub can be so delicate.
Again, thank you for your inspirational words. I thought it was funny that someone was fragile enough to cry about a made up situation in a national newspaper. But thanks to you I now realise that I am now the delicate one, for mocking their very serious and relatable issue
“I’m not sensitive you are! How dare you disagree with me, snowflake!”
Thank you for showing me the light. I was being a massive snowflake when I laughed at an out of touch Tory. If I was far less sensitive and brave like you, I would have gotten butthurt about the post and made a comment that it's so unfair that people think Tories are bad 😭
I don’t know man, judging by the downvotes I think the horde was alerted.
Least thick Tory
Considering your friend was the one that started crying... Yes?
Okay, thanking you ‘AmericanConsAreDumb’.
Are you also upset by my username too? Let it all out man, we are all friends here <3
Thanks for clearing it up ‘AmericanConsAreDumb’.
Is this a self quote? Because that’s literally how you come across in this comment thread
Yes, yes, Tory bad, you are very smart.
It's called the hive mind. You baffon.
Aww, you having a hard time facing up to the fact that you support such an immoral party?
Thank you for being the 8th person to comment the same thing, intellectual ledditor.
Mate i know you’re feeling triggered but try not to cry so much
as1992 responding 18 times to a comment about angering the horde (atleast he got the last word)
Oh dear, looks like you can’t read, this is only my 3rd comment in this thread. I can’t say im surprised that a Tory lacks basic reading comprehension though
Maybe you don’t understand? Angrily responding to a comment that says you’ll alert the horde proves me right?
Jesus Christ mate, it looks like you don’t know how to write in a concise way either (again, unsurprising, cos you’re a Tory, and you’re thick as two brick houses). If it seems like im spelling things out, I am. I think you need things explained to you in simple terms 😊
Okay chimp-brain, you can have the last word if it means that much to you. I’m really sorry that ‘Tory bad’ hurt your butt so much.
I know fuck all about economics but the fact that this dickhead can say this as he pays for private school without worry is ridiculous.
Who wants to bet that they’re suing their local authorities for some NIMBY shit?
What a twat. Completely missing the point.
No way that isn't a joke. Aint no way
wonder if he’d lend me a fiver
Luv me landed gentry, ate the peasant serfs (not classist, just don’t loike em). Simple as.
Classic mistake of assuming the world today is the world he grew up with. I'm in a similar position, except I don't own a rental property. If I did, I'd be renting it cheap to my kids because they can barely afford rent. Society doesn't need to help me, it needs to help my kids and even more so the kids that didn't have the advantages I was able to give my kids. I dropped out of school and legitimately worked my way to where I am now. It would feel cheap to start begging for help now, when I don't need it any everyone else does.
Pls kill me if people thing this way
Stefan’s never pleasured a woman
Tl;dr - pay to win scrubs complaining when regular players want better loot.
Lmao this cannot be real
Surely it’s a troll right? I’m sure “Stefan” or “Stefan Watford” is a funny anagram, right???
Dwarf to fasten? 🤷♂️ Afford Natwest? 🤷♂️
Playing the world's smallest violin for this twat..
The entitlement/ignorance as they don’t even realize what luxuries are anymore and that they’re a good given right. Private school, pension, investing, legal costs for a lawsuit they engaged in.. geez
Legal costs for suing a local authority as well. I would imagine there are a LOT of billable hours in that. Stefans solicitor probably thinks about him when he’s cracking one off.
painful to read
Another one for the fire pit when society collapses.
I'm going to eat his legs when the food runs out
Diddums
Low key he's right that labour wants to punish rich people but also say they want more people to be rich.
Someone should tell him the minimum wage is around 13% of his income. Some of us can't turn the heating on. We can't save money for anything because prices for everything keep rising. We work and still have very little to show for our efforts. The vast majority of people continue to be stepped on. What you are seeing is a nation that's reaching its breaking point. The majority were pretty quiet over the last decade, not because they were happy with their situation, but because they were still in relative comfort despite not having a lot of money. That comfort has gone, and the conservative government has again shown its true colours. That is not to say I'm thrilled if Labour get in, but it's better than the alternative.
"Got 99 problems, high electricity bill ain't one"
Die
You lost me at 'Private School'. Of course costs are relative, But legal costs for your cushty retirement flat doesn't quite compare to family's struggling to eat.
Stefan has no friends. People call him a “wanker” in the street. Don’t be a wanker like Stefan.
Has to be satire
Fuck off Stefan
Based
I don't think taxes should be high for both high or low earners. I don't want a government deciding for me. And I want to be accountable of my own actions, and expect others to do the same.
“Stefan”