And I Thought The US Was Spending Money on Stupid Things..
March 31st, 2009
|
| Share |
The current “economic stimulus” package involves the US bleeding out copious amounts of money into all kinds of questionable things. From “alternative energy” to federalized telecommunications projects and paying off the debts of people who spent more money than they had and should have known better, the dollars gush from Uncle Sam’s jugular faster every day.
But I’m glad to find out that the US is not the only county that spends government money on questionable and downright silly projects. Take the UK for example…
Psychic couple’s £4.5k boost from government
A COUPLE have received £4,500 of taxpayers’ money from a government-backed scheme to help set up a business as psychic mediums.
Paul and Deborah Rees, who say they can put people in contact with dead relatives and offer training to clairvoyants, want to set up a scheme to get people in Wales back into jobs.
However, the decision to use public money to fund this business has provoked some criticism.
Mark Wallace, of the Taxpayers’ Alliance, said: “It defies belief that when really serious companies are going under, in part due to their high tax bill, taxpayers’ money is being spent on this kind of mumbo jumbo.
“We have got to make sure that every penny of taxpayers’ money is spent to best effect and there are some companies out there crying out for tax relief.”
Mr Rees, aged 40, of North Cornelly, Bridgend, said: “We went through a lot of business plans and red tape where they needed documentation and eventually we had our funding.”
Click here to debate this story at Planet Swansea.
Mr Rees said his wife recently helped two parents contact a son who was killed in a hit-and-run accident.
“The evidence she gave to the mum and dad they could not dismiss, because it was so personal to them,” the father-of-two said.
“If your heating breaks down in the winter you have someone fix the boiler, if you lose a son, you have a medium.”
Wow. Just Wow. Excuse me while I pick my jaw up off the floor. It’s bad enough that these scam artists are out there taking advantage of grieving families and clueless old ladies with their own funds, but tax payer funding? This might actually be worse than tax payer funded homeopathy clinics… and prior to reading this I might have thought that nothing could be worse than tax payer funded homeopathy clinics!
Of course this brings up all kinds of further issues ranging from government sanctioning of bogus claims to government intervention for the promotion of religion. Honestly, I don’t know what the policy is in the UK on topics of government involvement in religious matters or promotion and funding of religion. Regardless of the religion aspects, this is a very bad use of public funds. If the government is going to be putting any money toward small business grants, there should at least be some kind of discretion in terms of what kind of operation can receive this kind of free-money handout.
Somehow I doubt that anyone will be going “back into jobs” through this kind of scheme. It’s not like this couple is planning on setting up a factory, they’re planning on setting up a fortune telling shop!
Apparently the couple’s current buisiness is a website-based gig that they run from their home. I’m not going to provide a link to it here, because, I kid you not: When I went to their website, I got a malicious page warning stating that the website had been determined to be a distributor of malacious software. So just in case someone here has a non-secure web browser, I’ll refrain from putting in a hyperlink. (search for the couple’s name if you want to find their site).
Finally, from the Daily Mail, here’s the ultimate in ridiculous soundbytes from the couple
Mr Rees said: ‘People who feel their tax money has been wasted should remember that if they’d lost a child they would go to a medium to get peace that their loved one has passed safely and is in a better place.
‘Our job is to provide substantial evidence to bring ease to people’s grieving.’
At least this issue has gotten some attention and suitable outrage. Welsh Assembly member Jonathan Morgan “It is an utter disgrace”. I couldn’t have said it better myself. On another bright note, this incident has apparently lead to calls for an investigation into the awarding of grants. Hopefully, when all is said and done, this ridiculous decision will be reversed and these scammers won’t get a penny.
This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 31st, 2009 at 10:07 pm and is filed under Bad Science, Culture, Just LAME, Paranormal, Politics, religion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
View blog reactions
March 31st, 2009 at 11:01 pm
This is a n outrage of course, and is typical of any program like this that isn’t monitored properly. However I suspect that depending on the wording of the legislation, they might have been able to make a case for discrimination or something similar had they been refused. I’ve seen government grants payed out for some very strange things in my time, things that were not much better than this.
Quote Comment
April 1st, 2009 at 3:40 am
They won’t get the money. Every time something like this hits the news the bad PR and calls for investigation mean they quietly go away because everyone is outraged. Possibly they’ll get some money out of the political party’s funds to shut up instead of government funding. It just makes me wonder how many of these do happen that are equally useless but not ridiculous enough to get the attention of the newsmedia and be outed. It’s the ones you don’t hear about that are the problem
Quote Comment
April 1st, 2009 at 11:46 am
As a Welshman I’m outraged…I’m also outraged that you accidentally spelled South Wales as South Whales
Quote Comment
April 1st, 2009 at 12:18 pm
WoodEngineer said:
sorry about that
Quote Comment
April 1st, 2009 at 11:14 pm
I’m not actually surprised by this sort of thing and I think you have the emphasis on the wrong part.
The problem would seem to be less “The government is spending tax payer dollars _on psychic business_” as much as it should be “The _government is spending tax payer dollars_ on psychic business”.
The problem it would seem is that the government thinks it is qualified to make a decision about what is a business worth investing in. Worse yet, it is doing it with money taken at gun point from one party and handing it over to another. That is theft AFAICS.
The problem here would seem to be the government intruding into areas is shouldn’t, not what they are spending the money on. Would it really be any better if the money was being spent on something you liked ?
If it is ok for the government to take money from one person and “redistribute” it to others like this, then inevitably the people to benefit from such largess are not always going to be people you approve of the money going to.
You are outraged that tax dollars would be spent in this way, but you seemed to take exception to “creationists” in Texas daring to ask for some accountability in what their kids are taught based on the fact that they are paying taxes for the “privileged” of having their kids “indoctrinated” into something they disagree with. Doesn’t that strike you are the tiniest bit hypocritical ? Or it ok to do it in one case because you’ve decided they are wrong and so shouldn’t be allowed to have a say in an education program they are compelled to pay for at gun point ?
Quote Comment
April 1st, 2009 at 11:31 pm
Jason, I agree with you, but honestly, this is not really something that seems to be winable these days. I’ve never seen such support for psuedo-socialist policies in my life, even to the point of wanting to federalize much of the private sector and an apparent belief that the government can tell companies what is and isn’t right for them to do even to the point of micromanaging who they pay what and what kind of benefits they give their employees. I mean there seems to be a belief that it’s perfectly fine to tell companies that if they hire someone they must give them full health insurance at no cost and continue to provide it to the person even after they’ve been fired or laid off and that if they can’t afford it then the government should pay.
But I digress…
This is an example of this that is exceptionally blatent and generally shows the problem. The psychic end of it makes it get the attention.
But to take a closer look at it: This is a grant program for “back to work” and to “create jobs” by providing small buisiness with direct handouts.
Now rememeber something: This here is not a new small buisiness. These idiots were running their stupid little website scheme from their house already. So they get free money to “expand” it.
So think about what this means. If I lived in the UK, I could say this website is a buisiness, because it has earned me about twenty bucks from ads I used to have and then get a grant of free money to “expand the buisiness” which might include things like a new computer… which I’d kinda like anyway or new stuff for my “office” which is the same as my bedroom..
Quote Comment
April 1st, 2009 at 11:45 pm
@Jason
The British government acts quite differently to the American one, we are a far more socialist society (given I haven’t lived in the U.K. for going on 8 years now). Health care and everything else is provided by the government which we pay for in taxes. Now as tax payers we don’t want that money going to crazy people running scams out of their houses. So no i don’t think it’s hypocritical at all to be outraged where this money is going.
The government buys and sells public companies as it sees fit (such as the trains which have been bought and sold quite a number of times over the years). I see no problem with it, the British public have definitely benefited from the government owning businesses. This form of government really seems to work well for us and you will see American in the next 100 years or so heading more that way.
They do screw up from time to time however like everyone else and thats when the public has to step up and make the government fix it’s mistake..I would say that this is a mistake. This is also the reason I support the crazed hooligans who destroyed that RBS today it’s an effective way to let the government know “look buddy you’ve screwed up”.
Quote Comment
April 1st, 2009 at 11:48 pm
Fair enough. I agree this is essentially a scam on what was probably a well intentioned program.
Although I remember hearing something about good intentions have something to do with paving and pitchforks.
It is scary that people are so ill-educated and short sighted that they buy into these sorts of hand out schemes as a good idea. Although it is the UK and the government has made a habit of building a “welfare state” that aims to reward bad behavior as much as possible.
It is only going to get worse in the US as well. Why work hard and be productive when being lazy gets your rewarded for being “poor and downtrodden” while being hard working and industrious gets your penalized for being “a fat cat”.
Quote Comment
April 1st, 2009 at 11:53 pm
Hi WoodEngineer, actually I live in Australia. I live under this sort of a “welfare state” system. I actually hate the way irresponsible behavior is rewarded by funds taken from me at gunpoint.
But i’d still disagree even if it was being funneled to people I agree with. Theft is never an appropriate way to fund something.
I mean, who are you to say that this is an unreasonable means of distributing government largess ? I’m sure you could find other tax payers who would be supportive of it. Is that really a proper criteria ? It would seem the problem is not who the government is giving money to, but that the government is seeking to short circuit a much better means for deciding how people choose to spend/invest their money.
Why would you ever expect someone else to spend your money with more care than you do ?
Quote Comment
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:14 am
I’m quite happy with the government taking it out in taxes..until you’ve paid out 500 dollars to go to the hospital in an ambulance you quickly start realizing holy sh*t we need a government healthcare system. I had to show them I had insurance before they even let me on the ambulance as scary as it was it got me to thinking what if I didn’t have insurance? would they have just left me? I feel that yes they would..they turn people away from hospitals here everyday.
Then the hospital bill struck I paid over 5000 dollars out of my own pocket and then insurance covered the rest of it..and I have a really good insurance plan imagine if I hadn’t had that 5000 it was completely unexpected incident most people simply can’t afford to pay that much on top of the insurance they already pay.
Also if you don’t help the lowest of classes then they will just turn more to crime than they already do..it’s a big domino effect that eventually ends in them literally taking your money at gun-point..only they don’t mind pulling the trigger..desperate people never do.
Many people aren’t poor because they are lazy there are many circumstances that end in someone being below the poverty line. One of my uncles for instance has a bad heart, he worked beforehand for 20 years in the steel industry, he can’t work and in the united states he would not be eligible for disability(which is still a pittance might I add) in the U.K. he has a council flat and a public transport card so he gets to ride the bus and trains for free and some money to buy food. And then there are those that simply aren’t intelligent enough or raised poorly who simply never have it on their horizon..they can dream of making money but they know they never will..McDonalds is the best some people can hope for.
Yes I agree with you there are lazy people but you can’t take it out on everyone for a few bad eggs.
Quote Comment
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:30 am
Actually I disagree with you there WoodEngineer. Why is taking care of the poor like that the governments job ?
Private charity will always do a better job with less funds in a more accountable manner. And if funding is an issue then encourage private giving more fully by allowing it to be a 125% tax deduction (or something like that depending on how much you wish to encourage it).
Having the government hand out the goodies actually creates a mentality that what is being given is a right and it breeds an entitlement mentality. This is not good for anybody and there will always be those who abuse the system, worse yet, the system itself will encourage people to freeload from it because the system is not accountable to the people being forced to contribute to it.
If you voluntarily contribute to a charity (even if there is an extra tax break for you as a result as I suggested above) then you have a say in how the money is spent. If you don’t like what the charity does you can vote with your wallet. The government “charity” though gives you no such option. The government turns up, shakes you down for what it wants and then gives the money to someone else, even if it is to support something you find objectionable.
Much better surely to get rid of the middle man and let the people decide how to give their money to charity directly.
As for “causing more crime” by not doing it. I’m not sure that is true. The indolence and entitlement mentality it fosters is likely to cause more problems long term than not letting them suckle at the government teat ever would. And it least if the person was “forced to turn to crime” at least they would be doing some work to earn the money instead of just being sent a check while they sat around watching TV.
Yes I am a little cynical and find the whole thing frustrating. So keep in mind there is probably a bit of hyperbole in the above.
Quote Comment
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:29 am
I have to go to bed – it’s getting late where I am now.
My issue with government social programs is that they tend to be extremely bloated and take enormous amounts of money.
If “government health care” was limited to paying for critical care for the dirt poor so they won’t die of something treatable, then that’s fine with me. If “Government financial aid” was limited to a barebones program to provide those who have lost their job with just enough so they don’t starve while they try to find another, then that’s something I’d deal with too.
That is how it was originally sold: A small program to take care of the most needy and just to keep people from dying for lack of basic care.
That’s not what it is now though… the social programs now dominate the government’s expendatures.
They have become the biggest part of the government’s job and thats baaaaad. Government is supposed to first and foremost “Govern” meaning to maintain order and safety so that the people can exercise their rights freely and safely. If it were intended to do other crap it would be called the “Take care of you cradle to grave”-ment.
Social aid is probably a necessary evil but it should always be kept to a MINIMUM. If the government paid about 5% of what it does now into that kind of thing, I’d happily shut up about it.
Quote Comment