A quiet period

Light blogging. Back in 2 weeks.

Market Turbulence: Clarification

Lets just remind ourselves why we have the market turmoil, crashing Insurance behemoths, bankrupt Investment Banks, shotgun marriages, nationalised banks, the market flooded with SIVs chock full of junk mortgages with risk weightings beyond the comprehension of Man (and so unmanageable).

The reason we are where we are is NOT due to 

"spivs"

"greed"

or

"fat cat bonuses"

It is all down to one reason and one reason only - the US State apparatus enacted a law FORCING lenders to lend to people who could not pay the loan back and whom they would never have wanted to lend in the first place. This is the source of the junk debt and too much debt in the US in general. This is the reason why vast amounts of SIVs containing unknown toxins were created and thus the market for such junk became liquid enough to enable the contagion to spread to the UK. This was just a natural reaction by the markets to mitigate and cope with the bad debt. This is the reason why institutions sought to insure against the risk and why then AIG was pulled into the miasma. The poison leaked out and contaminated the system.

Because of the law the lending was bad.

Because of the lending the debt was bad

Because of the debt the SIVs were bad

Because of the SIVs the assets were bad

Because of the assets the liquidity was bad

Because of the liquidity the banks were bad

And all, because of the bad State law.

So, before everyone thinks this is a time to "clean up the market", let them remember where the poison came from and who brought it about - The State. Who created the environment that enabled banks in the UK to offload bad debt? The State. Who was happy to see it happen and thus hide their ever increasing borrowing behind "prudent" GDP figures*? The State.

We do need to clean up the financial system - clean out corporatism and State meddling for a start.

EU: Out of Control

A very nice video explaining how the EU, far from helping the environment, is a major force in damaging the environment of Britain. 

Our environment, food prices and energy are under pressure.

Our energy independence has been severely reduced, yet the EU does not care, for it controls our energy policy these days, thanks to the treason of our politicians. The EU does not care if the UK is not energy independent or even "not dependent". Far from it, I suspect, as a country that cannot keep its own lights on is easy to manipulate.

The EU is not our friend, it is an usurper.

Gordon Brown: As unpopular as Neville Chamberlain.

So reports The Telegraph this morning.

Neville Chamberlain signed away the sovereignty of another country, which is bad enough. Gordon Brown has signed away the sovereignty of his own, OUR, country. This makes him more than unpopular. More than incompetent. It makes Gordon Brown a traitor by design, something you could not level at Neville.

In the name of God, GO!

Socialized Medicine - a warning from the past.

A very intersting piece by Ronald Reagan talking about Socialized Medicine in 1961 and how it bootstraps all manner of Socialist thinking and controls into our everyday life. Witness how this happens now with the "cost to the NHS" being used as a cudgel to beat people up over smoking, drinking, diet and exercise, while forgetting that those people are now denied the option over the NHS. They MUST pay for it, so they MUST use it, so they are no longer a customer but a COST. Therefore, to reduce costs they MUST OBEY the State in all manner of ways. 

Wicked is too mild a word for Socialism.

UPDATE: Further to the NHS invasion is indeed the idea of Polyclinics - GPs told where they can and cannot practice. The very nature of the tendering process will move away from independent partnerships to corporate run polyclinics with GPs as employees. Those corporations will be lobbying and once they get their way, vast numbers of people will have NO CHOICE over GP. The State is a monopoly, so everything it touches becomes a monopoly in turn. Healthcare is a monopoly and now it wants to get its dirty fingernails into General Practice, we again shall have a monopoly, a State-sanctioned privately run monopoly, the worst kind.

Please listen to the above, it is only 10 mins long and ends with a statement that even now I fear I will have to tell my son and maybe some day my grandson.

Treason: Sharia "Courts" in the UK

It was hinted and "nudged", but finally the news is out (anything to distract from Gordon's woes, I suppose) that Sharia "courts" are operating in the UK.

This is both treasonous and utterly wrong-headed.

1. The UK operates an adversarial system where one has a right to defend oneself and be judged by a jury of one's peers. This was created for very good reason - Rule of Law. In Sharia, there is no right to speak or present evidence. The "judge" will decide what evidence will be "permitted" and can disregard whatever they feel like. For all its bogus "religious" pretensions, Sharia is Rule by Men, not Rule of Law.

2. Anyone who thinks this will not result in coercion to agree to a Sharia court is naive, a "useful idiot".

3. Anyone who thinks this will not result in calls for any case involving a Muslim or extension to criminal cases is also naive and a "useful idiot".

Now, Sharia as a voluntary arbitration with no force in law is another thing entirely, for that occurs in a multitude of social interactions, not just Sharia. What is now occurring is quite different - a legally enforceable wedge. It is discriminatory, unequal, divisive, Mediaeval and if people want to live that way personally, then it is their funeral, but it is another thing to tarnish what can be described as the best legal system in the world, English Common Law,

by making it recognise a backwards leap.

This is the work of self-loathers, quislings, appeasers. I suspect most Muslim citizens of the UK will be against this too. It is the last thing they need.

The Libertarian Party will kick this nonsense back to where it belongs - a private matter between individuals.

Toyota Plug-in Hybrid Prius is pathetic

Take a look here (video) for the trial of a plug-in hybrid Prius. I must say this really exposes the feebleness of this car's "green" credentials. This is "news"?

It has only six miles of electric range. Yes, SIX. It then takes 1.5 to 2 hours to recharge the battery.

The Prius has always been a monumental dud, but works as an eco ego trip for the owner, who can prance about in a cloud of smugness exhibiting how green they appear, but in truth they are not in the least. Dust-to-dust carbon output, if you worry about such things, is higher than a Hummer, due to the highly complex powertrain.

The Prius has a complex powertrain as it is a parallel hybrid, in that it has both the electric motor and petrol engine mechanically connected to the wheels which, in my view, overcomplicates matters enormously. The petrol engine runs when the electric motor is not powerful enough or you need more range than a trip to your, erm, nearest petrol station. In truth there is no need to have such a feeble electric motor, but I suppose if it were any more powerful the range of the Prius in electric mode would be even more pathetic. It is a shame, however, for such a feeble motor is, unfortunately, incapable of absorbing much in the way of regenerative power. The excellent Mini prototype by PML Flightlink, which I blogged about some time ago, showed what a series/plug-in hybrid could be and the true extent of the energy that can be reclaimed from braking. The Mini has four 160bhp motors, one in each wheel and no friction braking. The 640bhp is needed for the motors to absorb the energy peaks in braking, giving 200 miles range in electric-only operation. In other words the Prius is literally throwing away energy. Not only that, the Mini uses a 250cc motorbike engine to hum away in a corner somewhere to give it 900 miles in total range, such is the effectiveness of the regenerative braking, series layout and motor control technology. Remember, this Mini with a 900 mile range from a 250cc engine has 640bhp on tap. 

The lesson here is that a series plug-in with a small, efficient generator is far preferable to some complicated parallel dinosaur compromise like the Prius. There is no need to keep the petrol motor connected mechanically to the wheels unless you are in the thrall of the various Mafia that runs Engine Management Unit, transmission, brakes, cam profiles and exhaust modelling fiefdoms and related ricebowls - all of which will have little to do of an evening once the ideal steady speed of the generator is arrived at, for who needs a motor that is "responsive" and "flexible" with high revs but low down torque when all it needs to do is convert fuel into electricity as efficiently and as smoothly/quietly as possible? All these roles will become far less glamourous, boys, so get used to it. 

Talking of glamorous, the PML technology has been chosen for the new Electric Lightning. 

This is nothing fundamentally new in concept, for Ferdinand Porsche was involved in one of the first series-hybrid electric sports cars...back in 1908. It could do 70mph, faster than the Prius can today. What makes the Electric Lightning an advance is the light, efficient and highly intelligent hub motors, removing the need for friction braking and the safe, rapid-charging and dense-enough battery technology, which is getting better by the day.

If you want to really understand how people can move to plug-in hybrids, give them a vehicle that actually makes SENSE, otherwise you just skew the results to suit your own parallel agenda.

UPDATE: Patrick, in the comments, reminds us of the EV1 by GM. This is an interesting though depressing situation. GM had, IIRC, a majority shareholding in the battery company that had some nice patents around NiCad battery packs, giving a range up to 150miles. They sold that shareholding to Chevron. I suspect this was not part of an "oil conspiracy" directly, just that GM feared its servicing revenue would be whacked, and correctly, so it decided to sell on to the last company that would want to see the battery tech widely adopted. While this was going on, Panasonic produced batteries that either used or infringed patents now held by Chevron. These batteries were installed in a Toyota RAV4 EV, fully electric vehicle. It had 120mile range, costing around £2 to recharge. Yes, £2. Most of us could survive on 120miles for a commuter car and the RAV4-EV could be upgraded to contain a small on-board generator to take over when battery power flagged, i.e. 95% of our journeys would be electric with overnight recharging and the rare long trips would be assisted by the on-board generator turning the RAV4-EV into a series hybrid. Chevron sued Panasonic and Toyota and the RAV4-EV production was rapidly halted. The chap "liveoilfree" on Youtube has some vids of him trolling around in his 2 RAV-EVs and, in particular, reviewing the Prius and its barking mad powertrain.

Amazing nuggets from C4's Lost for Words initiative.

I was watching with admiration at the changes to pupils in the Channel 4 Dispatches programme the other day, two years on from when they began an experiment to introduce synthetic phonics to an East London school, Monteagle Primary (H. Lynne Thompson).

Two points leapt out at me. One was the bone-headed mentality of the Dept of Schools, Education, Children, Families, Non-judgemental nuclear relationship units not necessarily based upon shared genetic backround, My Little Pony etc. 

Instead of synthetic phonics, costing, for the school in question £27,000 per year for the entire school of 4-11 year olds, they recommend schools to use their chosen one-on-one remedial technique (name escapes me, anyone?) that would have cost £100,000 for each age group, i.e. £100,000 for the 7-year-olds, another £100,000 for the 8 year olds etc etc. The teachers/coaches would need to be specialists, only usable after extensive training and only able to handle 9 kids a year, hence the high cost. 

Note to self: I wonder if  those in DETRiTUS (Dept of Education Teachers, and Regulations in Training, Universities and Schools) who decided this approach have any direct, indirect or other link to the companies who provide such expensive training to those coaches? By contrast, existing teachers can learn synthetic phonics rapidly and teach large groups...

The second, more shocking point was that all the teachers at the school had not been taught how to teach children how to read. I'll say that again another way - Teacher Training College had NOT taught all these Primary School teachers how to teach kids to read. That is like going on a driving course and not being taught about the steering wheel, brakes and accelerator! What is double scary is that few of these Primary Schoolteachers even QUESTIONED the fact that this monumentally important aspect, the very foundation of primary education was absent. The term "Duh!" does not quite cover it. It is, I suspect, a testament to the utterly poor education those teachers got before going to Teacher Training College that is responsible - a lack of critical reasoning and free thinking.

Still, things are being done by a TV Channel that the State does not seem to have a grip on*. Figures. They now look to improve Maths - good luck to them, I am sure they will do a better job than the State.

* It does seem that the State has an initiative on synthetic phonics, but as is so often the case the real message gets lost in all the bureaucracy, turf and ideology and a religious minset adopted, so the resulting plan seems to involve taking delivery of a truck load of FAIL. The State cannot lead. When it follows it tries to barge in front or trip up the leader. Best it just GETS OUT OF THE WAY, eh?

Newtons Law returns: Cambridge pushes back on "social justice"

It is nice to see Alison Richard of Cambridge University speaking out against pressure from Government to pander to its obsession with the bankrupt ideology of "social justice".

Social Justice is an odious term. It is built upon the concept of "social rights" upon which I would not need to improve upon the words of J.S. Mill:

So monstrous a principle is far more dangerous than any single interference with liberty; there is no violation of liberty which it would not justify.

Says it all really. "Social Justice" barges in and demands a University steer away from pure academic excellence to pander to a quota system. 

Underneath the call for "social justice" is the desire to paper over the cracks of the failing State education sector - a "system" is too good a word, I sometimes feel. By forcing Cambridge and other red-brick Universities to increase the number of State-educated undergrads not on merit but on political dogma, on a quota system, will enable the self-deceivers to lie to the general public, to convince them that their dysfunctional social experiment is working when it clearly is not.

The way to have more social mobility is to remove barriers, not to insert barriers directly or indirectly on those who are achieving. The reason why state-educated kids are failing to get to the best Universities is not because they are being prevented or pushed out per se, not because the intake is not capable, it is because of the very nature of the organisations, the curricula, the mindset of educationalists who influence the teachers prevents kids from attaining their full potential. Yes, parents can have an influence, but the Educational system should fix its own problems FIRST before stomping over to blame parents. The best way to increase state-funded pupils is for the State to realise that private schools do well because the school has far less outside control compared to a state school. It knows it only gets paid per pupil and that they are beset by competition on all sides in terms of reputation, quality of output, environment, exam board/mechanism, discipline and facilities. 

The best way to make State funded schools improve is to subject them to similar drivers. A voucher system along the lines of the LPUK would do it, but NOT the way the Conservatives propose. 

Alas, the Tories just cannot get the idea of State meddling out of their minds. I cannot understand why they wish to be in control of when, where and how new schools are formed. Who has been whispering in their ear? If the Tories think they will yield the full advantages, or ANY advantages of a voucher scheme they are very much mistaken in my view. It will allow some to take State funding and top up, yes, but it will do little to introduce a widespread and imminent threat of competition across the entire country. The Tory proposas will inject demand and State funding into the existing private sector but not properly enable on-the-ground nationwide competition. It suggests authorities compete for selection to be ear-marked as an area requiring new schools. Oh, so therefore centralising the writ, to make the centre the arbiter. Nice. It will result in authorities spending time, money and mental bandwidth (sorry) jostling for attention, lobbying in other words. It makes authorities beholden to the centre and, as such, must behave as the centre dictates. I also think the Tory plans will enable more control over the private sector so sooner or later, when it has grown used to the State voucher funded intake, the coup de grâce of getting schools to yield charity status and kow-tow to further State control will occur, for who pays the piper...It will be a shocking betrayal by the Tories - they probably will not do it themselves, but if, after few terms, common sense does not prevail and a Libertarian Party is voted in, New Labour, or whatever pestilential detritus that remains of the opposition, will replace them and do the deed, probably in the first session.

Under the Libertarian Party proposals, EVERY school will know that at any time a new school can be formed in their catchment to take their good teachers and their meal tickets, er, I mean kids. Parents will be able to form new schools. Teachers collectives, likewise. Good Heads frustrated by the constant bureaucracy and massive drain on fiscal flows of the LEA will either move to withdraw from their clutches or set out to form a new school or take over another failing establishment and do it there. Countless children will benefit. As for those kids who have parents who do not care, well, teachers and Heads can always move in on those schools and rescue the children. The local communities and educators therein will know better on balance than any LEA, Government Minister, Union Leader or academic. The Libertarian Party will be the only one that will enable teachers to teach, heads to run schools and for parents to have a reasonable chance to send their kids to a school where they will not have their spirits crushed and their souls dragged down to the lowest common denominator.

I want to see the Libertarian Party decide that the key metrics for any school receiving voucher funding be a steady improvement in pupil attainment in reading, writing and mathematics. For everything else I am sure the nexus of decisions made by parents, teachers and Heads will be best overall. Anything else and you get sucked into the world of State control over young minds. It is the least-bad option, not perfect, just the least bad. It means children will be given the basic tools without the CONTENT being open to meddling by the State.

So, in conclusion, a big thumbs up to Alison Richard. She is striking at the root.

Polly thinks it is because she is "middle class"

Oh dear. Ms Toynbee has failed to get even herself, and thinks the right attack her because she is middle class.

No, Polly, you are attacked because you are a hypocrite and because you are a stranger to reason. You are not defined as "middle class" and that is not why you are despised - that is like saying some people don't like 4x4's because they have "wheels". You consider yourself a liberal, yet you are nothing of the kind, for that is a term hijacked by rancid socialists like you who cannot even admit to themselves what they are. You are part of a self-appointed "elite" who chitter-chat about people they say they care about, but the truth is quite the reverse. You snipe about the actual elite, trying everything to pull them down and so many other cultural or historic traditions of the UK. Your venom for the elite is not in truth for the reasons you imply - that they should fade away - but because you are not part of it and you in fact wish to be.  Socialists the world over rail against "the elite" but in truth it is only the current elite that is their problem, for it is not removal but replacement that is the strategy, replacement with themselves! The second point, re culture and history, reminds me of another reason why you are attacked - you are a self-loather, undermining your own country, no surprise given your heritage.

Self-loathing, hypocritical moonbat is something different from "middle class", especially the kind that dear old Poll really hates, those who have risen from the working class, i.e. "traitors". Well, if you want to know what a real traitor is, Polly Toynbee, take a good look in the mirror.

There, a fourth reason.

Unions call for a 'fair tax"

At the TUC conference we see many barking mad, back-to-the-70's ideas from the Unions such as widespread strikes over wages, calls for increased government borrowing - Jesus wept! - and what they describe as "fair taxes", which is in fact even steeper redistribution.

The barking mad idea that what we need is to entrench any recession or turn it into a full blown depression by expanding the economy via government spending/printing money is so laughable but useful - for is shows how utterly clueless the Unions are.

Back to fair taxes.

There are four alternatives for "fair" as far as I can see.

1. Every adult pays the same absolute amount. 

2. Every adult pays the same percentage of their salary 

3. Every adult pays the same percentage of their expenditure

4. Every adult pays the same percentage of their expenditure excluding essentials  

The Libertarian Party favours the last option, which, by definition, means abolishing income tax, IHT and Capital Gains.

The TUC do not want a fair tax, they want to squeeze the rich. They want Envy Politics. They are wrongheaded. To ask a minority to pay significantly more in both absolute AND percentage terms is a Tyranny of the Masses, pure and simple. 

Result: the rich and companies will LEAVE the UK and the only employers will be the state. Ergo, a "victory" for the Unions as they will have monopoly control over the monopoly employer. The Unions should watch out, though, for once the State gets into a Nationalisation frenzy, it will surely nationalise the Unions themselves as they would be a threat to the monopoly power of the State and, once that happens,  the Unions will become worse than useless for the actual welfare of their members.

I would have thought the Unions would would want to do the sensible thing and assist workers to form Mutual Societies or Co-operatives, especially in the areas where people are said to be most exploited, e.g. Remploy and environs. The workers would then balance the amount of bids they win vs the wages they get - no point having a high wage rate when no bids are won, right?

No, the Unions are not interested in that. For shame.

LSE Conked out this morning.

Oh dear. This event was triggered by the US taxpayer having to bail out a warped experiment in social engineering, namely offering loans using idealistic notions instead of the old mechanism of ability to repay.

Systems should degrade gracefully under overload, NOT crash. Anything to do with using Microsoft technology, praps?

Message to LSE: Haul your provider (Accenture, IIRC) over the coals. Twice.

An elephant has migrated into the room

We have seemingly sensible words by worthies on the topic of immigration, but they appear to ignore the elephant in the room, that of EU immigration. The article as presented by The Times appears disingenuous, intentionally mumble-swerving around the actual issue and pretending that the initiative addresses the core problem. People, including ethnic minorities, have concerns over uncontrolled mass immigration, yet the report only focuses on non-EU immigration, for that is the only area that the UK now has control over, having LOST sovereignty in EU immigration to Brussels. The Times appears to have abdicated, capitulated, is appeasing or outright agrees with this situation.

What is more scandalous is the report is from a body chaired by Nicholas Soames, MP and Frank Field, MP who should know better and use it to make a stink about the lack of control over the UK's borders brought about by the EU.

Uncontrolled immigration plus welfare state = trouble. Of  course, the Federasts want the EU superstate so it is just a "temporary aberration". Well, I was not asked and I am sure the EUdenrat has no intention of asking for it knows what people will say - they will say NO.

The UK needs to restore its sovereignty, restore the relationship with Europe to a healthy, open and sustainable level - that of trading partner for mutual benefit, not a master-slave relationship with control ceded to Brussels. Our MPs and Parliament have NO authority to cede sovereignty to another power, yet they have done it. There exists in English a word for such behaviour: Treason.

Hoe Lee Sh....Big Dog is a commin.

OMFG/WTF!

This is one of the most scary yet fascinating things I have seen in some time. Forget bipedal robots, this quadruped robot/pack animal - BigDog by Boston Dynamics* - is quite something to behold. The Tank and aircraft changed warfare, along with rapid reaction motorised units, and this is part of the new battlefield environment, I should not wonder. Pack animal? I suspect it will go hunting for people very soon. Put a big pair of mandibles on the front and you will scare the living bejeezus out of anyone who sees it scuttling down the street gnashing away.

Reminds me of a Bug from Starship Troopers.


* Cyberdine Systems?

The Patriot.

In times of change, the Patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot. - Mark Twain

It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from his government. - Thomas Paine.

Alex Salmond attempts to sweep tax under the carpet

Alex Salmond, leader of the SNP is playing find the lady, or in this case find the tax, with his plan to switch from Council Tax to a Local Income Tax (LIT).

What this will do is threefold

1. It will consolidate the burden upon the working and middle classes and allow the rich to reduce their exposure. It might have the benefit of relieving those who are not poor enough to get support for Council Tax today, but the money must come from somewhere, so I doubt it. The poor who get relief from Council Tax will either pay LIT, so their costs go UP or they are to keep getting refunds or relief. If the lower income brackets are unaffected while the top can bypass it, logically it means that the 3% will hit the middle and upper middle hardest. As usual*.

2. It will be a blunt instrument, finally centralising revenue collection and distribution at Hollyrood, for each geography will have a disparity between income tax collected and cost of provision. I suspect areas with many wealthy residents will need less social housing, less police, less damage to council property, lower social services and lower benefits payments per head. How the horse-trading will occur is not clear. If anything it might result in calling a spade a spade and realising that the vast majority of council spending is controlled and dictated by the centre anyway. Alex Salmond might inadvertently be doing the right thing.

3. The true cost will be obscured and local accountability for same will be broken. A flat 3% income tax will finally turn local council fiscal accountability from the residents to Hollyrood. Local people will not be able to use their vote in local elections to influence spending while at the same time it will be "lost" in the income tax system, drawn out slowly like blood by a bloodsucking parasite you do not see in plain view. Some might say this is a good thing, as locals who pay nothing will not be voting in those who promise to spend ever greater sums of other peoples' money on them. However, I do not think this problem will be solved, it will just be placed in another bucket of slops along with a raft of new problems that this proposal creates.

At least this will bring the whole issue of local authority financing back into the arena. Approximately 80% of local spending is financed centrally. He who pays the piper should call the tune. Either collect more locally and have local control and accountability OR collect it centrally and RUN it centrally, without any funding passing through the sticky fingers at a local level - the prime example of this would be Education.

Alex Salmond has not so much upset the applecart as kicked over a full bucket of night soil. The mess will be for all to see, the stink unavoidable, yet it might mean we get a chance to sort out the plumbing once and for all, though I doubt it.



* Can someone explain to me how a middle class person consumes more street lighting, parks or road sweeping? There is a good chance that they do not consume as much educational resources as a group, for some pay twice yet consume once outside the state system.

Gordon Brown: Town Clerk of Britain gets hint of coffee

So the EU has told you that you cannot print off tax coupons issue more "pollution permits" as a backdoor tax on energy companies.

Gordon, that odd smell you now detect is coffee. Wake up and take in a long drag.

NOW do you get the point about loss of sovereignty? NOW do you understand?

The fact is I do not agree with your plan but I DO agree with your right to screw things up do it, even if it is the wrong thing. For sure, the EU should not be the final arbiter on if it is the right or the wrong thing. I do not care if the EU got it right this time, for a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day.

Gordon. Learn. Stop being a traitor and give us a referrendum, then you can do what you want and point the finger at us for any fallout over the Constitution. Go on. We are happy to shoulder the blame.

The Loss of Sovereignty marches forward: EU Court Rulings

Traitors from Britain have supported this scandalous move whereby foreign courts can try us in absentia AND that extradition is AUTOMATIC. 

The combination is very potent and an utter outrage, rendering our courts subordinate and drawing ultimate sovereignty and power to the European level - of course the plan.

I can imagine Federasts from France or Germany proposing such nonsense, or even in Il Duce II*'s Italy. This clearly shows that our administration is infested by lickspittle self-loathers who have absolutely no idea what our freedoms are or why they ever existed. The other alternative is that these traitors are intentionally undermining our system so it can fit into the EUdenrat.

When are these shaved gibbons going to realise that the legal system is there for the protection of the people NOT the convenience of the State!

UPDATE: It seems that our Attorney General, Baroness Scotland has supported the move. No surprise coming from one of my top Traitors (see right). It is an outrage that we have such imbeciles/traitors** in our midst.

* Burlesqueloonie

** Delete where applicable

Government Debt and Hazel Blears

I place economy among the first and most important virtues, and public debt as the greatest of dangers to be feared. To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. If we run into such debts, we must be taxed in our meat and drink, in our necessities and in our comforts, in our labor and in our amusements. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labor of the people, under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy. - Thomas Jefferson.

We have approaching £700bln in government debt and yet that moron, mad Hazel Blears, thinks the government has money in hand to blow on subsidising an already over-inflated property market.

Firstly, Hazel, the government never HAS anything. All it does is hold what was ours, supposedly on our behalf.

Secondly, when you owe £700bln, there is no such thing as spare change to spend. 

Thirdly, your schemes will result in getting your dirty fingernails further into people's lives. Admittedly, your administration is so bankrupt that you can only interfere in 5000 here or 10,000 there. It will be little action at a cost of £1bln, like buying a golden bucket to fend off a flood, but £1bln that would be better spent elsewhere. It will entrench the concept that "The State" will step in, that that State actually has a role at such a level. What next? Well, indeed - this opens the door to even more meddling. It opens the door to keeping this crackpot scheme going. 

House prices need to readjust. Government spending MUST fall. Government debt MUST fall. Taxation has to fall, has to be simplified and must not dampen economic activity.