New Laws Make Everybody Richer

By Norton Winston

05.02.2012 - London, Greater London

The rich get richer, the poor get poorer: the problem of how to increase one group in societies' wealth without it affecting another's has been baffling government think-tanks for decades. And at no point has it ever been more relevant than now, during the credit crunch. Apart from maybe other economic downturns. But they are irrelevant, because they are in the past. However, looking back to this very past has provided the Currency Minister, Ian Rogerson, a (-0.44, 0.32) on the "Political Compass" therefore making him ideologically a centrist which somewhat fits in with his position as a member of the Liberal Democrats, with the means of achieving this.

In Parliament today, Mr. Rogerson unveiled his new proposed legislation for dealing with currency. He stated to Parliament that "(o)ne pound, a hundred years ago, was worth more than one pound today", acknowledging that this was due to factors such as inflation. His proposal involved legislating on the value of currency to make it worth the same as the same unit of measurement two hundred and fifty years ago. Thus, everybodies' money becomes more valuable.

In a press release delivered by government spokesperson Vanessa Hole, it was stated that "although this will do nothing to bring about more wealth redistribution and equality, everyone will be much richer anyway, so it wouldn't matter so much. A family earning £60,000 a year would be earning more like what is now 6,000,000 a year - a remarkable improvement!" She also added that this should allow Britain to remove its gigantic deficit almost instantaneously, and also meant that we would probably suffer little if we cleaned the slate on all Third-World debt.

Ms. Hole responded to criticisms that this legislation was "completely and utterly ludicrous on every single conceivable level" by suggesting that "no, it isn't". She refuted further complaints that it is impossible to legislate on the intrinsic value of a market-based currency by stating "watch us."

Buckingham Not Bang For Buck

By Sophie du'Ponce

15.10.10 - Commonwealth of Nations, World

How harrowing it is, that in these difficult financial times, even the Queen is feeling the punch. And this punch is looking set to make the Queen homeless.

It all started with the financial crisis in 2008. What started out as the Recession, became known as the Crevasse. And like everyone else, the Sovereign was under strain and under funded. So she did what any other person in her situation would do; she took out a remortgage on her home.

The situation in late 2008 looked safe. Buckingham Palace is an expensive property. The Queen is known for her good credit rating. And her income made her one of the wealthiest people in the world. But that was two years ago. And over those two years, the Credit Crunch has been transformed into the Credit Crush. And no-one is feeling it more than the queen.

The reason for this is simple. The Queen gives money via taxes to Parliament. Parliament then distributes this money among the people. The people then pump money to the economy. The economy responds by splitting the money between going back to the people and around to the Monarch. This can be demonstrated in this diagram, where the green arrows represent cash flow:

So if something were to happen at any stage of this diagram, the Monarch would be sure to suffer. And this is exactly what has happened.

And now the Queen finds herself in a dire situation. She has had to miss a couple of remortgage payments, and the lenders are not happy. She's been forced into foreclosure. And this means losing Buckingham Palace.

A spokesperson for Buckingham Palace had this to say:

"The circumstances around the repossession of the Palace and subsequent destitution of the Monarch is an unfortunate one, to which we could not see coming, around neither then, nor now"

We don't quite know what this means, but we feel it may be quite important.

The Commissar of the Welfare Right's group SEEB, Harold Monham was not pleased. His opinion on the matter was that this was "outrageous!", and "typical of the fat-cat Tories and their erstwhile Lib Dem allies to allow this to happen!". He went on to further say:

"This is just another in the long legacy of shamelessness enacted in the Crevasse. Another person ' homeless. And we all know why this is. It because t' Tories will only allow this nation's money - which should be going to everyone - to go prop up and line the pockets of their selves and their blue-blooded brethren. Which means the figurative man on the street becomes the actual man on the street!"

When confronted withe the fact that the Queen is in fact one of those "blue-blooded brethren" he talks of, and that it would seem the Tories had not been looking out for her, he declined to further comment on the issue. But he did like to add "in ten or fifteen years time, when ' average man on the street can't even afford a steak-and-kidney pie without that kidney being 'is own, I just 'ope the Tories are happy with their champagne and caviar. I hope they're bloody happy."

In response, the Tory Minister of Science, Simbel Glock, simply said "I probably will be!"