A similar logic should be applied to the 646 greedy little pigs in the House of Commons.
Next week, Head Pig Hattie Harperson will haul herself to her feet and, eyes glittering with self-righteousness, inform MP's exactly how their cosy little lives are about to be shattered.
Yes, MP's are going to hear - as if they hadn't been thoroughly leaked already - Sir Christopher 'Ned' Kelly's proposals for a brave new world of expense policies.
This chilly and austere regime will include a ban on claims for mortgage interest on a second home, a ban on employing partners and relatives, abolition of the 10-grand-a-year-for-stamps 'communications allowance', and will stop MPs who live within an hour of Westminster claiming for second homes.
Hell, there's nothing wrong with any of that shit, the nation cries.
But MP's are slightly less delighted. In fact, they're squealing like pigs whose swill has been whisked from beneath their hungry noses.
Swinging his swill-spattered chops angrily from side-to-side, Sir Stuart Bell gives us the benefit of his opinion:
"The house would want to look at these recommendations very carefully, they will want to debate them and have the opportunity, should they so wish, to amend them."
Oh, would they? Would they fucking really? "..should they so wish, to amend them" - can't you just hear the fucking arrogance, the disdain and the overwhelming sense of entitlement packed into those words?
Here's an alternative suggestion, Sir Stuart: fuck right off, the lot of you.
You can 'look at these recommendations very carefully' for as long as you want. Stare at them until you're blue in the fucking face, if it pleases you. You can 'debate them' among yourselves all night, if you've really got nothing better to do.
But what you're not going to do, you greedy self-regarding bastards, is 'amend them'. We don't care what rules you'd like. You're going to abide by these rules.
But it's not sinking in, is it? Unnamed senior MPs have apparently warned that "there will be a major revolt" if Ned Kelly gets his way in one particular area, and removes the cash bung - the 'resettlement grant' - paid to the 112 MPs currently planning to stand down. "MPs will not accept that being withdrawn," said one.
What? If the 112 MP's who are stepping down - mostly because the fuckers know they won't be re-elected following their egregious expenses fraud - don't get a nice lump of cash to help them on their way, there will be a 'major revolt'? They 'will not accept that'? Oh yeah? What will they do? Step down? No, wait...
And, MP's, you're not going to get to vote on whether or not the recommendations are implemented either. Gordon Brown has already said - mainly for the sake of his own ruined reputation - that MPs will "have no right to vote" on the new expenses system. He wants this done, dusted and out of the way, so he can carry on saving the world and stage-managing the UK's now nearly unique recession.
Oohhhh, they're not happy about that. "Not democratic", "We have a right.."
But, as Anna Raccoon points out, they shouldn't be surprised. The Proceeds of Crime Act has been stealthily extended until Local Councils, the Rural Payments Agency, the Financial Services Authority, Transport for London, the Royal Mail, fuck, just about anybody can grab hold of our wallets and take our money as and when they feel the need.
Where were the protesting MP's then? Not in the house, 'debating' and 'amending', where they? No, tucked up in one of the many sumptuous beds we bought them, in one of the houses we paid for, watching the flat screen TV we bought them, remote control in one hand, Kleenex in the other.
You didn't vote then, little piggies, and you're certainly not going to vote now. You can't be trusted, see? You've been caught with your fat little trotters in the till, so you don't get the right to decide whether we're going to padlock it.
Bad luck, piggies. There's no more swill, and the abattoir van is coming up the drive for some of you.
And we really don't care what you think about it...