Mayor Boris Johnson declared revellers will be required to pay £10 to attend London’s fireworks display on New Year’s Eve, with just 100,000 tickets being made available to the public.
Last year, about half a million attended, and he stated that such tremendous numbers signified the event was unsupportable.
London’s New Year’s Eve fireworks are phenomenally sought-after, not merely in the capital, but across the world and Boris wants to ensure it remains a reliable, fun and a sustainable attraction for the long-term.
After consulting with partners, they’re introducing ticketing to help manage crowd numbers and create a better experience on the night.
For anybody without a ticket, the fireworks are again being displayed on T.V., meaning you can watch it in glorious HD colour without missing a single second.
Plus don’t forget, there are a lot of other New Year’s Eve celebrations to enjoy in bars, restaurants and clubs across the capital.
You’ll be able to book up to four tickets per person from Friday 26 September.
It was stated that they’re not introducing ticketing to make a gain, and that every single penny that is imposed for the ticket goes straight back into the costs of introducing ticketing, and means the cost of ticketing the event isn’t passed onto hardworking taxpayers.
The thing is that taxpayers will still pay towards it on account of, when paying tax we actually don’t know where our hard earned cash is going, we just accept everything that we’re told. We’re kept informed of what will take place, and we don’t in reality process it in our heads because we accept that’s what it is, and that there’s nothing we can do about it.
We’re conditioned to believe that this tax needs to be paid, and that if we pay it, it will yield to better us. This disappoints me greatly because this is simply not true because our taxes don’t rightfully go to the right places that we expect them to.
Figures disclose just how much hard-working Britons on low and middle incomes have to pay, and tax campaigners state we should get these figures every year.
Numerous taxpayers will be appalled at the thousands of pounds they give with regard to state handouts and town hall pensions.
Families may also be horrified to discover what they stump up for the European Union and overseas assistance.
Here the itemized Treasury figures in the appearance of a tax invoice break down precisely where your money goes on a scope of areas including health, education, police, transport and the environment.
We make payments for migration and border control, and in spite of it, the government is still letting them into our country. Therefore, if they’re still permitting newcomers into our homeland, we shouldn’t be required to compensate for border controls, and seeing as it was our government that consent to them coming in on account of, they were good inexpensive labour, why should we be required to compensate for their ultimate cock up?
We’re as well, paying for broadcast and publishing. If we’re making payments for broadcasting, then why on earth do we still pay for our television licence? It appears that everything we pay for when we pay our taxes we appear to pay double.
It was once when I was much younger that a couple would get joined in matrimony, they would usually both work, and before long they would purchase a house for themselves, and before long they would start a family. There were lots of social housing accessible back in the day before Margaret Thatchers reign on our society, however, some couples decided it would be exceedingly propitious to buy a house so that they had something for their children once they passed away.
And so, acquiring a house was more of an endowment for their children than anything else. Had they had no children, then social housing probably would have been more logical.
Therefore, back in the day a couple would purchase a home as an endowment for their children, and once a couple became too elderly to look after themselves. Many would go into care homes, which at the time were equipped by the republic. After all, you did a day’s work, and you worked hard all your life, at least that was something that you could look forward to, free from apprehension.
Now, 2014, the government would if they could, take the boogers from your grandmother’s nasal cavity if they could get away with it, and those boogers were made of gold.
Nothing is safe, your house is not safe, you’re not safe. 2014, we work, we get married, we purchase hour home, we have children. Once again, we still purchase our homes as an endowment for our children for when we pass on. Only this time when we get old and need a care home, we have to sell what we worked hard for all our lives to finance our care home, and guess what, we still had to pay our taxes.
So what did we actually work for, a home that we just have to sell to be looked after in a care home.
I frequently listen to people saying to one another that they bought their homes, which they’re actually proud of, and justly so. If you obtained your house free from a mortgage, then of course you should be so proud of it, it’s really yours. However, with a mortgage, by reason, it was not ever yours to begin with, it belongs to the bank till you pay off every penny of what you owe on it.
In that time, you could suffer job loss, or even be made redundant, as a large amount of people have been, and are still.
Then it’s taken back by the banks, and all you have to show for it is a big fat nothing, however, people concentrate more on what they have in the moment, than what they could end up with, because we live in our suburban life, with suburban neighbours, doing suburban things, in our Stepford village.
Then the government is dumbfounded when people don’t want to do a day’s work, well it’s not rocket science actually, but the government believes that because you come into this world with nothing, you should go out with nothing.
I know you can’t take it with you, but of course, we do want to earn a living for something that is retained after we’re dead and buried, and of course, most of us want to give that something back to our loved ones, and if not our loved ones, friends maybe, or some sort of organization of our choice, but certainly not back to the money clutching bloodsuckers that is described as government.
Leadership is all about taking what does not rightfully belong to them.
Some people are now declining to pay their tax because they state it’s providing to an unlawful and unethical war overseas, nevertheless, those who regulate the money control the man.
History explains to us that the most efficient way of combating illicit, inefficient or crooked government is to engage in a tax revolt. The refusal of the people to pay taxes, because without the money to compensate for their pursuits, Governments are weak.
Now we get the historic chance to engage in a lawful tax rebellion. Under the laws of war citizens are prohibited from taking part in armed conflict on the side of the attacker and are lawfully obliged to resist orders to support or take part in an unlawful war of offensive.
This lawful responsibility to refuse to comply with illegal orders includes tax demands. If governments use the cash raised by imposing taxes to wage unlawful war or to assault and murder civilians, then under international law a taxpayer’s normal obligation to pay tax is reversed and changes into a liability to hold back tax.
Each of the wars fought since 2001 in opposition to Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya is unlawful. Not only does the use of armed force break the Treaty for the Renunciation of War and the UN Charter, but by murdering 1million adults and 450,000 children, the leaders and taxpayers of Coalition, NATO and ISAF governments committed murder, war crimes, crimes in the face of humanity and genocide.
It may come as a shock to numerous law abiding inhabitants that, under international criminal law and the legal doctrine of joint enterprise, every British, NATO or ISAF inhabitant who has paid tax since October 2001 is technically an accomplice to the war crimes, offences in the face of mankind and genocides perpetrated by ISAF Governments toward the Afghan people and is criminally subject for imprisonment, prosecution and punishment as a chief offender.
You will be pleased to know however that the enactment renders relief for taxpayers who were misled into believing the war was lawful and ignorantly supported the offences. Providing you stop your support in the offences at once and hold back all taxes from your government and its representatives you will not be disciplined for helping and assisting the crimes.
One efficient way of holding back tax from Parliament and Government is to place all tax payments into escrow accounts retained by a third party such as a bank or a court.
The money cannot be made public to the tax collector till the terms of the escrow are met.
In this case, because members of Britain’s Parliament and Government have dishonored the laws of war and perpetrated severe offences toward the Afghan, Iraqi and Libyan people, the terms of the escrow can be set to guarantee that the money will not be handed over till such time as all ISAF Parliaments and Governments have stopped the war with Afghanistan, ended the use of coercion, discharged the troops and commenced criminal proceedings toward those accountable for war crimes.
War is basically an immoral thing. Its results are not restricted to the belligerent states alone, but influence the whole world. To start a war of attack therefore, is not only a universal crime. It is the highest international crime varying only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated wickedness of the whole.
In judicial procedure, it is an offence of accessory to murder for a person to aid an action of murder by a third party by furnishing the perpetrator with the means for the empowering of the crime.
The method can be anything which the murderer uses to perpetrate the offence, such things as the weaponry, the weapons training supplied to the perpetrators or assassins, the getaway vehicle, the raw materials, tools and stocks required for the delegation of the offence, the housing, offices and facilities put to use to organise the crime, and the most significant means of all, the money to pay for everything linked with the crime.
By using taxpayers’ money to enlist, prepare, equip, supply and pay HM armed forces to partake in illicit wars and armed assaults in which innocent Afghan, Iraqi and Libyan citizens were murdered entirely because of their nationality, the United Kingdom Government perpetrated genocide and ignorantly implicated all United Kingdom taxpayers as accomplices to the worst offences known to humanity.
For all these reasons taxpayers are lawfully obliged to decline to pay tax and to continue to refuse to pay tax till the United Kingdom Government halts the killing, stops its unlawful wars, ceases all forbidden use of armed force, starts criminal proceedings against British war criminals, stops purchases of armament, eliminates all employment in HM Armed Forces, decommissions weaponry and military tools and substantiates conclusively that it is abiding by war law and the terms of the UN Charter.
We have been commemorating New Year’s Eve in London for many years, and will presumably continue to do so, but of course, presently, it is not sustainable to continue this unless we’re charged for it, then it becomes sustainable. Unless the government is making money off us, then we are not sustainable, and we’re not worthy of pleasure unless we’re paying for it, and the government is generating a profit.
The entire thing is about an economic accumulation, to obtain funds, whatever the damage, even if it denotes sacrificing another human life, because if you’re living, and you’re not sustainable, then the government can’t feed off you like parasites. They freeload off you, and give nothing in return, however, we still continue to live in our little suburban lives, and we continue to endure, to scrape by, and all the time attacking one another because that’s what the government wants us to do.
Human cultivation has been the most lucrative, and destructive. Human society can’t be logically understood till it’s looked at for what it is, a set of farms where human farmers own human cattle. However, some people get confused because governments provide healthcare, water, education and roads, and consequently envisage that there’s some kindness at work.
We’re permitted certain freedoms, and hence believe that our government defends our liberties. Nothing could be further from reality. In your country, your tax farm, your farmer allows you certain liberties not because he’s interested about your freedoms, but because he wants to extend his profits.
Under the Democratic representation, direct slave ownership has been re established by the Mafia model. The Mafia seldom owns businesses directly, however, sends thugs around once a month to thieve from the business owners.
So you are allowed to pick your own occupation, which lifts your productivity, and consequently the taxes you can pay to your masters. Your few liberties are protected because they’re lucrative to your owners.
To keep the tax livestock securely in the compounds of the ruling divisions is a three phase method.
The first was to brainwash the young through government schooling. As the wealth of democratic nations grew, government schools were universally forced upon in order to dominate the thoughts and intelligences of the livestock.
The second is to turn citizens against each other through the creation of the dependent livestock.
It’s extremely difficult to control human beings directly through coercion, but if human beings think that they’re free, then they will yield much more for their farmers. The best way to preserve this illusion of freedom is to put some of the livestock on the payroll of the farmer. Those cows that become reliant on the existing chain of command will then assault any other cows who point out the violence, hypocrisy and immorality of human ownership.
Freedom is slavery, and slavery is freedom, and if you can get the cows to attack each other whenever anybody brings up the reality of their situation, then you don’t have to spend nearly as much time controlling them directly, because anybody who demands freedom from ownership will say that will harm your fellow cows, consequently shifting the moral liability for the destructiveness of a violent system to those who call for real freedom.
The third stage is to devise persistent external intimidation, so that the terrified livestock clings to the safekeeping of the farmers.
Economic freedoms produce money, and the money allures more thieves and political freeloaders, whose greediness then ruins the financial freedoms. The government that starts off the smallest will invariably end up the largest. This is why there can be no viable and sustainable alternative to a truly free and peaceful society.