2/2 and the taxes they contribute to corporate welfare… the total wealth they transfer to the owner class is £1,287 per month.
So… for every £1 of money the average person earns that goes toward the unemployed and migrants, £99 goes towards providing a passive income for the wealthiest in society.
Which parasite represents the bigger problem?
Furthermore… if someone makes minimum wage rather than the average wage, their tax burden is proportionally far lower. This means roughly £1,100 per month is still transferred to the owner class via their rent, corporate checkout margins, and labor value, compared to just £2 per month going toward official asylum support. In other words, 550x more of what they earn goes toward installing secondary helipads on a billionaire's yacht than goes toward helping someone learn English, so they can properly integrate with “are culture” of establishment pedophilia, football hooliganism and gay bashing.
1/2 I deeply resent paying for parasites, so let’s dig into the actual figures:
Based on 2026 data for a median UK earner on £39,000… here is how their money is divided between the jobless.
The government funds unemployment from a general pot of tax. On a £39,000 salary, the average persons pays approximately £5,286 in income tax and £2,114 in National Insurance, plus an additional £1,666 in VAT on what they’re likely to spend on taxable goods & services… totalling £9,066 in direct tax.
People claiming financial assistance due unemployment account for roughly 1.2% of government spending, of which £109 per year is collected from the average person’s taxes.
Undocumented migrants and asylum seekers, together account for roughly 0.5% of government spending, of which £45 per year is paid from the average person’s taxes.
That’s a total of £154 per year (or £13 per month), from the average person.
To put that in perspective £607 from the average person’s annual tax bill is spent on ‘defence’… which largely contributes to creating refugees in the first place.
Beyond that, there’s the issue of wealth transfer to the owner class (those who subsist off a passive income, funded entirely by us). Wealth flows to these shareholders, landlords, and lenders through three distinct channels:
A - what we produce while at work;
B - where we live; and
C - goods & services we consume.
Economists use the "Capital Share" of the economy to measure how much of the value produced by workers is kept as corporate profit, after all costs are accounted for. In the UK, this aggregates to 30% of total economic output. If someone’s salary is £39,000, they are *generally* producing about £55,700 worth of value… depending on how profitable that business is. The additional cost of employing them, in terms of pension, sickness, holidays, ENIC, and other benefits (totalling 34.1%) comes to £13,300. The remaining £3,400 goes to the business owners as profit [NOTE: this is an aggregation across the entire working population, and individual circumstances can differ quite dramatically. Someone could be contributing a lot less… or a lot more.]
For an average earner, housing usually represents the largest transfer of wealth to the owner class. If someone rents the average UK property (approx. £1,300/month), they are transferring a massive portion of their post-tax income to a landlord. Even if they have a mortgage, a significant portion of their repayment is interest. Either way, only 40% of the payment is representative of the actual value they’re receiving, with the other £9,360 they fork over each year (on aggregate) provides a passive income for someone else.
The UK taxpayer also unwittingly subsidises corporations to pay their employees less than they can live on, since the government issues tax credits to low paid workers, totalling £40Bn per year. This equating to £90 per month of the average person’s taxes… all of which goes towards larger profits and ultimately helps fund passive incomes.
The average person pays 7x as much in corporate welfare as they do to the unemployed and undocumented migrants combined.
After tax and rent/mortgage, they’ll have roughly £16,000 left to spend on food, energy, and goods. Every purchase includes a profit margin for the owners of those companies. While margins vary (3% for supermarkets, up to 80% for energy distribution), the average net profit across a typical "shopping basket" is roughly 10%, meaning £1,600 per year goes towards providing a passive income to someone else.
Together, the money flowing through channels A,B, and C total £15,400 per year, or £1,287 per month.
When we combine these figures, the scale of where our money goes becomes clear:
The average person contributes £13 per month to support the unemployed, undocumented migrants & asylum seekers.
And, between the value they produce for their employer, the rent/interest they pay to live, the profits they pay at the checkout
Oh, the sheer moral outrage from Yvette Cooper and the UK Government. Truly appalled by a tasteless video, are we? How noble. After quietly nodding along through months of mass slaughter in Gaza, entire neighbourhoods turned to rubble, and Lebanon getting bombed to hell, now you’ve suddenly discovered “basic human dignity”? Must’ve been a real shock to the system when the PR optics involved some kneeling activists instead of just more dead kids and flattened hospitals. Selective conscience is a hell of a drug. 🙄
@KemiBadenoch Just so I understand this correctly: Muslims [supposedly] don’t feel at all threatened by the far right accusing them all of being rapists at the Unite the Kingdom rally… but the people calling on Israel to slow blowing children to smithereens are antisemitic hatemongers?
Governing a country largely populated by half-witted bigots, is going to take a lot more than promoting pedophile adjacent cronies to positions in international diplomacy. You’ll need to implement some hard-hitting populist policies… starting with decriminalising the N-word, and burning drag queens at the stake.
@jk_rowling The gentile woman who used thinly veiled antisemitic imagery in her children’s books snidely accusing a Jewish man of antisemitism for not being precise enough in offering condolences?
What a time to be alive.
The only part that I’m offended with is the comprehensively debunked economic justification that underpins it. If you think you understand economics, then I’m happy to walk you through this in baby steps. If you’re really brave then I’ll happily debate you on it. Required reading is:
Some Cambridge controversies in the theory of capital
By G. C. Harcourt.
This book isn’t opinion or ideology; it simply details the 15 year long Cambridge Capital debates between the foremost economists of the time, still many of the most respected names in their field.
The reason you’ve never heard of this is that it’s been airbrushed from history.
Perhaps learn about its conclusions before you start explaining to us who deserves what and why.
@suziegeewizz Do the Palestinians also deserve their own land, now that they’ve also been holocausted? Somewhere they can feel safe, where this can never happen again?
I nominate the UAE.
@PRSforMusic Thanks - read it, and if I understand correctly, it appears as though you’d collect the royalties, hold onto those for a few years, then ultimately distribute them to other rights holders… which by my reckoning are mostly large corporations???