Sent to me by a Facebook friend........

This is too true to be funny.

The next time you hear a politician use the word 'billion' in a casual manner, think about whether you want the 'politicians' spending YOUR tax money.

A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but one advertising agency did a good job of putting that figure into some perspective in one of its releases.

A.

A billion seconds ago it was 1959.

B.

A billion minutes ago Jesus was alive.

C.

A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Stone Age.

D.

A billion days ago no-one walked on the earth on two feet.

E.

A billion Pounds ago was only 13 hours and 12 minutes, at the rate our government is spending it.

Stamp Duty

Tobacco Tax

Corporation Tax

Income Tax

Council Tax

National Insurance Tax

Fishing Licence Tax

Petrol/Diesel Tax

Inheritance Tax

(tax on top of tax)

Alcohol Tax

V.A.T.

Marriage Licence Tax

Property Tax

Service charge taxes

Social Security Tax

Vehicle Licence Registration Tax

Vehicle Sales Tax

Workers Compensation Tax

STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?

Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago and our nation was one of the most prosperous in the world.

We had absolutely no national debt.

We had the largest middle class in the world. Mum stayed home to raise the kids, Dad was allowed to discipline kids, A criminal's life was uncomfortable.

What the hell happened? 'Political Correctness', Politicians or both?' I hope this goes around the UK and beyond

At least 1 Billion times.

Makes you think huh?..........

Although I echo the point you are making, I think it's wrong to compare life now, to that of a 100 years ago and make it sound as if it were Rosey back then.

I can't remember the exact age but life expectancy then was about the late 40's, maybe 50 for women. We may have had the largest middle class in the world but (again if memory serves) it was only in the region of 20%. There were masses below the poverty line and albeit I'm too young to remember (i'm not even a billion seconds old) I wouldn't fancy being the last one in turn to get in the tin bath.

Although I echo the point you are making, I think it's wrong to compare life now, to that of a 100 years ago and make it sound as if it were Rosey back then.

I can't remember the exact age but life expectancy then was about the late 40's, maybe 50 for women. We may have had the largest middle class in the world but (again if memory serves) it was only in the region of 20%. There were masses below the poverty line and albeit I'm too young to remember (i'm not even a billion seconds old) I wouldn't fancy being the last one in turn to get in the tin bath.

Yes, but the income disparity between rich and poor was less back then and I hear that's what is really important. I don't personally agree, but that's what they keep telling me.

Edited September 18, 201213 yr by koheesti

We had absolutely no national debt.

The UK has had a National debt, in some guise since 1692

Rose very high during the Peninsular War

Again during WW11 and the subsequent years in trying to hold on to a lost empire

Anyone notice a pattern

I wouldn't fancy being the last one in turn to get in the tin bath.

You were lucky if you had a tin bath! Even luckier if it wasn't used to keep the coal in (when you could afford coal).

Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago and our nation was one of the most prosperous in the world.

When you reap the benefits of underpaid labour and resources from all over the world, it is remarkably easy not to tax your own citizens very much.

Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago and our nation was one of the most prosperous in the world.

When you reap the benefits of underpaid labour and resources from all over the world, it is remarkably easy not to tax your own citizens very much.

Exactly.. And the world was not over-populated like it is at the moment..

..It seems to me that our civilisation has reached the top of the hill, what will happen next it's anybody's guess.

I wouldn't fancy being the last one in turn to get in the tin bath.

You were lucky if you had a tin bath! Even luckier if it wasn't used to keep the coal in (when you could afford coal).

My Grandad used to use a tin bath in front of the kitchen fire after he'd finished working at the pit.

We had absolutely no national debt.

The UK has had a National debt, in some guise since 1692

Rose very high during the Peninsular War

Again during WW11 and the subsequent years in trying to hold on to a lost empire

Anyone notice a pattern

Yes, the Empire got larger and richer after each war it won. Ah, the good old days when to the victor went the spoils, instead of the victor paying for everything for the loser. Imagine, oil wouldn't be $100/barrel, it would be $0/barrel.

Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago and our nation was one of the most prosperous in the world.

When you reap the benefits of underpaid labour and resources from all over the world, it is remarkably easy not to tax your own citizens very much.

Exactly.. And the world was not over-populated like it is at the moment..

..It seems to me that our civilisation has reached the top of the hill, what will happen next it's anybody's guess.

Are we really over-populated? Or does it just seem that way with people moving to cities? If you could stand every man, woman and child up, shoulder to shoulder, the entire world human population would fit in Singapore. Do the math yourself and you'll be surprised how accurate that is.

Edited September 19, 201213 yr by koheesti

I wouldn't fancy being the last one in turn to get in the tin bath.

You were lucky if you had a tin bath! Even luckier if it wasn't used to keep the coal in (when you could afford coal).

My Grandad used to use a tin bath in front of the kitchen fire after he'd finished working at the pit.

There's luxury for you! Not only a tin bath with water in it, but the coal in it as well! God bless all miners.... one of the worst jobs in the world (and yet they fought like mad to keep those pits open).

Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago and our nation was one of the most prosperous in the world.

When you reap the benefits of underpaid labour and resources from all over the world, it is remarkably easy not to tax your own citizens very much.

Exactly.. And the world was not over-populated like it is at the moment..

..It seems to me that our civilisation has reached the top of the hill, what will happen next it's anybody's guess.

Are we really over-populated? Or does it just seem that way with people moving to cities? If you could stand every man, woman and child up, shoulder to shoulder, the entire world human population would fit in Singapore. Do the math yourself and you'll be surprised how accurate that is.

In some parts of the world (Hong Kong, Bombay (sorry Mumbai) for example) it feels like that already.

Well, over-populated or not, it's using up its resources at a rate of knots, it's destroying its 'lungs' (the forests).... and we'll soon be fighting wars for supplies of potable water. Of course, if somebody (could it be in the Middle East?) starts throwing nuclear bombs around, there would be fewer people, but also less usable land. We might be thanking God for the sanity of places like Singapore.

Are we really over-populated? Or does it just seem that way with people moving to cities? If you could stand every man, woman and child up, shoulder to shoulder, the entire world human population would fit in Singapore. Do the math yourself and you'll be surprised how accurate that is.

We are overpopulated in relation to the available resources in the world.

The problem being that there is under-production in many areas where the population is growing the fastest (Far East, India and Africa)

Slow the population in these areas to the European growth rate (around zero) and we can cope. Allow these third-world countries to continue an uncontrolled population explosion and we will all suffer - probably by war in some form or another.

Slow the population in these areas to the European growth rate (around zero) and we can cope. Allow these third-world countries to continue an uncontrolled population explosion and we will all suffer - probably by war in some form or another.

Yep and it seems like nature tries to do just that. Unfortunately, nature does it to people and the rest of the world then give aid to try and keep these people alive. It would be far, far better in these countries to stop sperm and eggs getting it on and turning into people.

Are we really over-populated? Or does it just seem that way with people moving to cities? If you could stand every man, woman and child up, shoulder to shoulder, the entire world human population would fit in Singapore. Do the math yourself and you'll be surprised how accurate that is.

We are overpopulated in relation to the available resources in the world.

The problem being that there is under-production in many areas where the population is growing the fastest (Far East, India and Africa)

Slow the population in these areas to the European growth rate (around zero) and we can cope. Allow these third-world countries to continue an uncontrolled population explosion and we will all suffer - probably by war in some form or another.

Maybe a war, but just as likely a pandemic. Like HIV, which is doing its best in sub-Saharan Africa, but even nastier and less easy to control (yes, I know!). Then the world will find out what a billion is... when the death toll rises that far.

Slow the population in these areas to the European growth rate (around zero) and we can cope. Allow these third-world countries to continue an uncontrolled population explosion and we will all suffer - probably by war in some form or another.

Yep and it seems like nature tries to do just that. Unfortunately, nature does it to people and the rest of the world then give aid to try and keep these people alive. It would be far, far better in these countries to stop sperm and eggs getting it on and turning into people.

Once the people are alive there is a moral responsibility not to let them die. But you are right about prevention - the best humane cure to lower birth rates is to make sure women get a real crack at education. No other variable has as large an impact on birth rates as that one.

More money into secular birth control information, and less to Evangelical, Catholic and Islamic missionaries probably would not go amiss...