Who is going to tell Mr. Cameron & Co? It seems the perfect solution to save a big fat wad of money.

The Urine test (This was written by a rig worker in the North Sea - What he says makes a lot of sense!)

I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit.
In order to earn that pay cheque, I work on a rig for a drilling contractor. I am required to pass a random urine test for drugs and alcohol, with which I have no problem.
What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test.
Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a benefits cheque because I have to pass one to earn it for them?
Please understand that I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet.
I do on the other hand have a problem with helping someone sit on their arse drinking beer and smoking dope.
Could you imagine how much money the government would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a benefit cheque?
Please pass this along if you agree or simply delete it if you don't.
Hope you will pass it along though, because something has to change in the UK , and soon!

I almost shudder when I think about this vileness being forwarded around cyber-space with gay abandon. Needless to say, I replied to my friend's email pointing out that the guy sounded like a Daily Mail journalist, Conservative voter and tbh, a complete tosser.

Trigger Andy's opinions being forwarded in emails and people thinking it's a good idea? There is a pestilence upon this land

@ curtaincat

The funny thing about that spoof article is how close to the bone it is. On the scary side, there are enough 'poor people' who think the same. Only they are too dumb to realise that they are 'poor people' too.

Funnily enough, a mate of mine forwarded this email to me today. It sounds suspiciously like TriggerAndy who enjoyed a stint of trolling on the DIF. I don't know if anyone remembers him. Didn't he also work on a North Sea oil rig and spout this kind of objectionable shite?

This is the email...

No it isn't. It is a comparatively small cost. Compared to say the burden on the tax payer of the Olympics:

"A Sky investigation has revealed the final cost for the Games will be more than £12bn.
However, associated costs could make the bill as high as £24bn - a staggering 10 times the original estimate." Source Sky News

Or say queenie's recent party:

"The cost to the taxpayer for the London Olympics could hit £11 billion ($17.4 billion), rather than the expected £9.3 billion ($14.7 billion), according to a recent government watchdog report."

Just those two one off events amount to nearly 18 years of plumbers being paid in cash and not declaring it based on the £2 billion figure given in the article.

No it isn't. It's a comparatively small cost:

"In the UK's case £69.9 billion is lost on a yearly basis in what the Tax Justice Network call the "shadow economy." source New Statesman.

Let's not forget that the plumbers are not taking their cash overseas. They are ploughing it back into the UK economy daily.