Â鶹Éç

On the budget cuts and the big state/little state analysis that has seen people reading huge volumes into the cuts there are continuous slants from the experts:

1. Is there a "perfect size" for the state and what is that size?

If it gets too big it stifles the private sector and if it gets too small then the communal benefits and safety nets are lost.

But there can't be a static figure as economic trends must change the ratio.

We had to make cuts and there is some benefit from the bond markets not seeing us as going down the Greece road to junk status so we have saved money.

2. There are continued attempts to destabilize the coalition and as polls have shown neither voters or leaders are that unhappy so it shows that it is the intent of those that prognosticate that they break the political spectrum down into a nice neat rainbow where the free again and pure Lib Dems slide into Labour control because they are all "progressive".

But they ALL are progressive as even the Tories claim that title and Labour uses it because they can't say - or not say - socialist and they can't use New Labour because of the cabs for hire and the crisis that gave us the need for the budget.

In a coalition where the parties retain their unique distinctiveness nobody will ever be happy with everything. I worry about tuition fees and VAT and I think Trident is not a suitable or cost effective weapon for modern Britain.

I still query that there are no special measures to control the housing market and to close up Repo 105 loopholes and to get close regulation of derivatives.

But I can't see that the Lib Dems have put a foot wrong.

3. The reason that Labour are so shrill and exercised is they have a leadership contest on and they also know that over time it will become clearer and clearer who was responsible for the crash.

They will try to use the "unique global economic phenomenon" ruse but each time a Fabulous Fab reveals more detail about what the banks were trying to get away with it will highlight the abject failure of light touch regulation.

The sovereign debt crisis must mean that we can't be so certain that we could just "grow our way out" - though even I can grasp that we must have a return to healthy and sustainable growth as soon as possible.

4. The media are playing to type and are not adapting to the realities of a coalition in a clear economic crisis where actions are pretty well predetermined so can't provoke debate - rather than a pure ideological motivating force that polarises debate.

You would hope that in Africa the Mugabe's, and the would-be Mugabe's, look at the British attempts to help Sierra Leone show that this is not a colonial power but a power willing to help the weak where they ask for the help.

But then to me they are not so different from the racists that we get over here where if somebody is "indigenous" they are supposedly more British than somebody of a different race born in this country and who is prepared to contribute to and die for their country.

That said such as the BNP are still, I believe, confronted with the issue of non-racial membership rules and despite all of those Euro expenses and the presence of a QC in their ranks they can't take all of their "scientific" evidence to court with the EHRC to validate their racial policies and views.

The English Defence League are so courageous that they all wear back to front balaclavas on camera and are still afraid to reveal their genuine leaders to the world.

Why would that be I wonder?

The thing about being English is we want our flag back from the odious far right and to be proud and patriotic.

But if later today we win in the football then will it be "Rule Britannia" excesses and so on and if we lose then it will create a huge dent in the national mood where optimism will reduce and the "feel good" factor be diminished.

Ultimately though our sense of proportion should say that it is a passionate game and we want to win - but it is just football in a festival of football with many worthy claimants for glory all taking place in a land freed from the chains of racial disharmony and dysfunctional society.

How about an update on the jaw dropping Newsnight piece on the "coat hanger" bomb detectors?

Is the coalition looking at rules that would prevent such an incident recurring and how did it occur in the first place?

#26. from previous page

The respect lesson continues, Brightyangthing, some people are exceptionally slow learners, it turns out.

mim

why are you still pretending 'one-man-gang'?? You already have your next handle "Pure Evil", when are you going to switch over?

on the budget, what actually IS there to say? All the data has been given, most economically aware people who have been following NN know the almost inevitable consequences, and Osborne is going to go ahead with this planned disaster unless he is either sacked by the Prime Minister for gross incompetence and enormous unpopularity, or Govt backbenchers revolt. I wonder if David is looking at Oik and pondering that without Oik around, he would actually have a chance to survive politically for longer than just a couple of months as Prime Minister.

in fact, if i was David, i'd sack Osborne immediately, and ask Paul Mason and 'flicks' from this blog to move into the Treasury to find a way out of this mess that does not destroy the entire social fabric of the UK.

Mr Cameron was courageous enough to stand in front of the Nation and apologise for a massacre by British Troops upon their own population - could he be brave enough to alter course on the economics, he must *surely* see the consequences of these planned cuts!!

we are now truly a Nation Occupied. A Vichy Govt could hardly do more damage to the UK than what Osborne intends.

#5 addendum

I should be able to deal with it myself but considering the increasing numbers of people being attacked and surely fed up, though in a different way, and probably having just enough of the 'pupil's/pupils' behaviour, big burly bullies might have to teach him/them a lesson without me lifting a finger or any other form of participation.

Congratulations to the Captain, no 4 of the English Squad, Steven Gerrard, Jermain Defoe for scoring the goal and of course to the rest of the Team for winning today's game with great style.

Bravo!!!!!!!!!!!

:o) is VERY happy at England's success today!

EDGE OF SEAT AFTERNOON.

First 22 men in RED shirts chasing one large white ball around finally give us something positive - then two men (Manut vs Isner) hitting one small yellow ball on court 18 in SW19 are showing stamina and determination worthy of the championship. Something else!!!!!!!!!

I fall of court completely pooped after 40 something minutes let alone the 8 hours preceding.

As for the budget............. later. I'm busy!


(Goes and sits on naughty step for going totally off topic!) Am I bovvered?

Iran is on war alert over "US and Israeli concentrations" in Azerbaijan

Is there a precedent for NewsNight having to give way to an over running sporting phenomenon??????

Or will bad light be what brings it to a halt.

No losers here.


Pst............. This IS news. This IS History! Wish I'd entered the ballot for tickets this year!

I can tell that the ginger guy is gonna take all the heat...

#10

I thought I should let you know, Brightyangthing, that some of your posts seem to have a calming effect on me. I don't think this is the time or place to go into any detail what it is that makes me uncomfortable, despite my excellent health and strength, but feel that it might be nice for you to know.

mim

General McCrystal new what he was doing. He wishes to expose the Obama administration for what they are. Very easy to spot whats going on with this story. The Â鶹Éç news folk (as usual) are struggling with it though.

#10/#14 - me too!! :)

Why does the media so love whipping up emotions by showing us hard done by benefit claimants with large families, overflowing ashtrays, leather sofa's, gold bling, the falling over piles of strategically placed 'essential' brand name products.

It makes it oh so easy to be sanctimonious.

Who is mandated with teaching about balancing budgets, value for money, paying your way, need coming before want.......

:o) Excellent Jeremy tonight, particularly with the Econimist, Koo (Nomura Bank) and then Balls on the budget - and typically, no-one from the government showed up (not even a statement :p)!
Fascinating film by Allan Little on Sierra Leone - I wish them well.

McCrystal.

Some telling phrases tonight.

"War is bigger than one man!" Yeah? Which ONE Man?

"Questioning?? the Civilian head of the Military - is bad for National Security.@

Who do you take the lead from. The Oily Rag on the bench or the engineer with Coal Face experience?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

The interview with Richard Koo I found extremely worrying. It seems that Labour may be right (and it really pains me to say that), about the level of cuts by the coalition being too great, too soon. As "the eminent Japanese economist" stated, Japans 15 year recession was as a direct result of paying down national debt too quickly, while business and consumers were reducing their debt. We are in an identical situation, and as the preceding analysis from Paul Mason demonstrated, the substantial amount of demand from the Public Sector being removed by the coalition, is to be replaced with exports by 2013, when we are currently a net importer. That simply will not happen. Be afraid - be very afraid.

#15 kevseywevsey

"General McCrystal new what he was doing. He wishes to expose the Obama administration for what they are. Very easy to spot whats going on with this story. The Â鶹Éç news folk (as usual) are struggling with it though."

Democrats?

Look the Â鶹Éç aren't like you and people as they are quite liberal (with a small "l" and totally impartial) so I would think they are probably all on Prozac in your view.

That said John Simpson spent time in Belfast and like you he probably saw rubber bullets hit people and that is a sad thing.

But your view seems to be that that experience is a good thing and and you sound almost optimistic that the peace process will break down and religious divisions cane be "embraced".

Yet John Simpson does not seem to see that despite seeing those rubber bullets bringing home the reality of social strife.

I wonder whether Obama will be looking to your pal "the Griff" for advice?

You know I really doubt that that will happen.

Emergency Budget

-

So the new government is going to stop Labours deficit by 2015-16. But by then government debt will already have grown to £1.3 trillion, and its debt interest repayments will cost around £70 billion a year to service, near 8% or 10% of government income (2015-16).

So from the revenue the government receives, they have to put £70 billion per year aside to pay their creditors this interest payment, if they miss a payment it is classed as a sovereign debt default and then all hell breaks lose.

So what Labour has left us with is a ongoing £70 billion annual tax bill , that can't be used for anything useful and in reality can only be got rid of by inflating it away.

So we need inflation to devalue the 70 billion yearly interest cost before the government regains its lost spending power.

So if we take the BofE inflation target rate of 2% per year and times that by a decade, the £70 billion would, at that future point in time , be worth 20% less in real value , equivalent of £56 billion at today value.

So by 2030'ish the government finances should be back to normal.

Labour Plans , or what there was of them.

They wanted to only half the deficit by 2014-15 , still leaving a £ 70 billion a year government borrowing requirement , reducing that overspend over a further 4 or 5 years (2015-2020).
But that adds another £250-320 billion of government debt, add that to the already accumulated £1.2 trillion debt(2014-15) , increasing government debt near £1.5 trillion by 2019 or 2020.
So in actual fact, Labour plans would have increase the structural deficit , probably to a sum very close to £100 billion of interest payments per year, meaning more cuts in public services and higher taxes over a longer period of time than the new governments plans do.

My Conclusion-
Thinking that debt is a sustainable for the nation is just not credible.

Growth

Growth Markets -

Our closest export market (Eurozone) growth does not look good when compared to world growth (specially in Asia) , but it is my understanding that the UK economy was roughly a 80 – 20 mix , 80% domestic and 20% import export. Of the 20% import and export activity, 50% is with our EU partners and the other 50% is with the rest of the world.

So given the above , I think we should be seeking more export opportunities in the global market place, rather than solely looking to the Eurozone for our future growth.

Rebalancing the Economy In Quick Order -

I think all sides of the political debate agree we need to rebalance the economy , so here is my solution to achieving it.

Create , exempting companies in these zones from paying full company taxes for a set number of years, 25 years with 7 year reviews.
Companies that could qualify for such a prize should have a clear benefit to the wider manufacturing base within the UK.
example: Produce base components needed by final product assembly manufactures in the broader UK and EU manufacturing sectors.

I am sure HM Customs can compile a list of components our companies are already importing, as a start of formulating such requirements for such a re-industrialization strategy.

Benefits

More jobs
More wage taxes being paid
More spending taxes being paid
Cheaper components for the broader manufacturing base.
Healthier balance of trade and balance of payments figures.

This would also provide a opportunity for our Banks and City funds to invest in real wealth creation projects within the UK , rather than the in the housing sector and general debt vending activities of recent years.

And all this would cost the government next to nothing to set up.

So that is what I would do to rebalance the economy quickly, maybe the government will do something similar ?

#17

Brightyangthing

I didn't pay any attention to the objects that you describe as 'essential' so shall have to check tomorrow what you mean but I am one of the claiming benefits feeling a bit guilty, but only a bit, as I do suffer, and I mean suffer, from strange symptoms and feel that if they were to carry on in a work place that this would simply be unbearable. They did start when I was still working for the brain surgeons with most of them coming to my office making all kinds of inuendos, like for example my toilet/bathroom habits. This year that have intensified to the point that they are almost unbearable. If not for my positive nature, rational thinking, riding/flying high on creative streak, health otherwise and strength, I don't know what would happen.

So, until they stop I do not think I shall be able to go back to work though have considered the Â鶹Éç where people are probably aware of what's going on which is always a help.

mim

I probably don't need to stress that I am not an economist and I am sure Richard Koo is not in the least bit stupid.

It would have been helpful on this piece to understand the Koo argument (100 units with 90 in the economy and 10 saved) if bank lending had been addressed as that seemed to be key to his stagflation fears.

To me it seemed that if Vince Cable can make the banks lend money then the money invested in the economy does keep the wheels moving.

The thing that continues to baffle me is that they don't even when there are good comapnies with no risk who should be getting the money.

So provided that he CAN get those wheels turning then all is well.

If he can't then that is a problem.

But it is also unclear to me why if Koo is right and the Treasury Select Committee under McFaul did a lot of work on Japan and the stagflation issue why King of the BoE endorsed the cuts as a necessary move.

At the end of the day if we pull through then Labour will not only have created the fiasco but have failed to offer the right remedy.

If things don't go well I think it is far from clear that the public will trust Labour again in a short 2-3 year window if we assume it all goes horribly and irredeemably wrong.

It would also not be obvious that the public would trust the BoE and certainly not King.

My money still remains with the coalition though I would have been far happier with more back end loading n'all and a more flexible approach as in this economic climate I doubt that it will all be plain sailing.

The Allan Little piece was interesting though the toothy images of Blair unsettles you but I did feel that there was not a lot of evidence in detail that things were going wrong or the UK was drifting into neo-colonialism.

That said I suppose it does surprise that the UK is so enmeshed there but I assume that as it is the state and not a Labour franchise that the coalition may take a new approach.

But I hope that the result is we don't disturb their hard won peace.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

#17: adam smith said that unemployment benefits should "allow the recipient to appreciate the needs of the 'normal' employed wage recipient", or words to that effect. [i know i should look up the quote, but i'm tired! :( ]. This is the 'arch-marketeer', saying that welfare should provide the *necessities* that employed people would expect. Today this would include communication income (such as internet access), transport income (the cost of buses/trains to employment prospects), along with the obvious food/housing/power needs of the household, and even the necessary clothing.

in today's economy, adam smith would also undoubtedly add 'training' to that list.

as for "bling" - the interviewees *knew* the interviewers were coming, and wanted to make #the best impression' for themselves. Of COURSE 'the best' is on display - borrowed even perhaps? Do you seriously imagine that the mothers/families on the bottom of the welfare security ladder have extra money to spend on bling? Of course you don't, that's why you probably mention the "sanctimonious aspect" of the whole report! :)

--or indeed perhaps 'bling' IS more important than internet access? Then make free broadband access a right for people on benefits!!



as for "balancing the budgets", i think its *very* worth remembering that Govt has the ability to 'print money' - this was done to the tune of one and a half TRILLION pounds (£1,500,000,000,000)to "help the Banksters" remember, ALONGSIDE the ability to borrow money through the International Financial Markets.

Should the Govt have a greater responsibility to create employment and grow the economy (ie receive tax income from either the private or public sectors), OR to 'balance' an artificial budget that is entirely controlled by International Finance and Multi-Nationals??


...i'm sorry, but this "financial market" is so anything *BUT* free, what is REALLY required is to 'balance the books' through investment in new growth and employment, to create the tax-inflow that can shrink the budget deficit.

what Osborne has done is to destroy the infrastructure of Social Spending to create Growth for the future (such as social/public education), in order to enable the wealthy to continue with their unlimited avarice.

imho.

what this Govt *should* have done, and what the Greens campaigned upon, was Govt investment in new industries, in supporting new cooperatives/capitalist partnerships, in *raising* taxes upon the wealthy, banks, and multi-nationals, in supporting industries and retail of UK-owned companies, rather than following 3rd World Imperial economic policies intended to create a permanent state of Indebtedness to Banksters for the population of the United Kingdom.


--- well, *unfortunately*, we got the Bankster 'Osborne'...!


brighty, 'balancing the household budget' can include investing the necessary amount to get the main bread-winner to find work. I just don't see this in this Budget, it is far more about punishing those who are already victims of an economical structure that *rewards* those who purchase and exploit the hard-work of others, rather than providing decent income from hard-work by individuals through the partnership structure.

it is most unstomach-worthy to hear the disgracefully wealthy claiming 'the problem' was caused by social benefits, instead of their own greed and narcissism. And even more unstomach-worthy to have that Greed and Narcissism represented and defended by the Chancellor.

but hey - we all *really* wanted a TORY Govt, right?? :/

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I've outgrown you, housey, or perhaps have always been far ahead of you, but didn't know how to verbalise it. Here I am, on my own, while you using science, engineering, machinery, hoards of men, women and children and rather than getting closer in order to /re/gain any affection, you're getting further away from achieving your goal with every moment that passes.

Your strategy is not working. Whatever satisfaction you seem to rely on is purely mechanical.

So much to say, so little time and space. I have no time for party politics. All as bad as one another. All a different seriously flawed skewed in one direction or another fiscal policy. The problem with this subject (The Economy, employment, social welfare) is it is so very complex, so emotive, so inter related that you cannot select out one issue and solve it without impacting a whole nother set of issues. So I shall pick holes in the bits that leap out at me in full and certain knowledge that there will be other valid arguments against. I have in this matter, some sympathy with government, regardless of its colour and breeding.

Btw #28 I know a pistache when I see one. But am feeling playful and provocative so don’t care.

Take this statement from the Orkadian one. #28

“.... greater responsibility to create employment and grow the economy�

See, this is one of those statements I simply don’t get the measure of. It’s mostly false. Pointless jobs (nothing much being MADE and no NEED being fulfilled) created to enable people to earn money in which to buy ‘stuff’ mostly pointless, imported and with a 5 year or less self destruct/out of date button inbuilt. Then you create more pointless promotional jobs in order to convince us all that our lives are worthless unless we have the latest Oki Koki 2000 with all the flashing lights, bells, whistles and what not. Then you need to create ‘disposal’ jobs to get rid of the same tat a year down the line when it has failed to live up to our expectations, make us rich or happy or is now ‘so last year dahling’.....

Meanwhile kids have kids because they know no better or think it’s the only way to get on housing ladder or because they are craving love and attention but they don’t see it because even the have not’s have so much ‘stuff’ they can’t understand real value.

And this one .........

“.....Do you seriously imagine that the mothers/families on the bottom of the welfare security ladder have extra money to spend on bling?�

Define bottom! Define Extra! I see daily many on welfare with more than a car load of kids with ear piercings, dyed hair, designer trainers, sweets and snacks, and gardens full of swings, trampolines and the likes. There will be others with greater need, quietly and unobtrusively trying to make do, make wise choices, delay their gratification and applying a different set of values. That is largely why I asked about the selection criteria of the models presented most frequently.
Unemployed (and the need to give people employment) has been mentioned a lot. Employment (worth) is key to the individuals self worth and value. Apparently.

If so, why do so many with ability to work choose only paid (and paid a certain level) employment. Does that not indicate that it is the monetary reward that is uppermost. There is litter on the streets, there are clubs and voluntary groups needing help, there are charity shops, there are parks needing tended, there are cars or windows to be cleaned, gardens to be maintained ...... All of these activities require little training, equipment and could be offered at very low prices or even free if the ‘feel good’ factor were all that was needed. And local employers would jump at someone with such evident determination and initiative WHEN jobs were needed filling. Slave labour or opportunity and self advancement????

(Take it as read that this sweeping statement acknowledges that food, housing and all those NEEDS have to be paid for - I am not addressing the basic human needs - the size of the state should be determined by the size of genuine needs)

We need to be able to support but not encourage (to remain) those in worst circumstances. Neither reward nor penalise the children born to women/men who don’t understand or care about who pays for their ‘desire’ to procreate. Yes, we can all see deep seated needs to be needed and loved at play some times; alongside the dolly to play with syndrome.

Then we have the ‘money and stuff’ is what they want/need syndrome. How do we get across the message to the haves and have nots once and for all that STUFF seldom makes us happy. Worth does. Value does and I tell you now that unless one can find a way of ‘teaching’ people first and foremost that you have to find it within and NOT expect society or external factors to make you feel good we are on the wrong foot. It is giving rather than taking and having that fulfils us.

WANT is just a four letter word. As are: CARE, NEED, LOVE, WORK
What would JC (Jaunty) say/ do? If we all thought about and tried to be Good before we tried to be successful or wealthy then who knows?

Finally, from Pauls excellent piece last night,

WHAT exactly is it we are going to be EXPORTING like mad over the coming months/years? Who will make it? Where? With what raw materials? Acquired How? At what cost to the environment? What NEED will the end product fill?

I shall slink quietly away to my play pen and hope someone gives me back the toys I have been throwing out all morning!

ANYONE BUT..........

#28

".....but hey - we all *really* wanted a TORY Govt, right?? :/"

Ummm, No. Most that I know of applied a similar approach to the one my neighbours are currently adopting re the World Cup.

Anyone BUT Engla....(oops) Labour.

And who was responsible for that turn of events. The media perhaps? NuLab themselves with a machine gun aimed at their feet, safety catch off?



Following on from #32

“....Social Spending to create Growth for the future (such as social/public education), in order to enable the wealthy to continue with their unlimited avarice. “

Is a wealthy class/business ownership (after all do they not deserve reward for the risk and often losses) 100% wicked?

Is fair really desirable, achievable; or even fair? I note in many area of life that the harder one tries to be fair to all the less chance there is of being fair to any. Should we not look at JC’s favoured measure again and all try to be Good instead. If we were good we would not over consume resources, jealously horde our gains want much more than we need or could readily consume, waste so much, value so little....... we would share, give of ourselves and our resources, share our wisdoms and culture/ethics and make opportunity available to others whilst supporting them and holding open the door.

A rich man in a big house who gained it through a successful business may well offer employment to others willing keen and able to perform certain tasks but NOT with the level of ability that he has. If he offers a decent (?????? How subjective/regional is that????) remuneration and benefits has he not given back.

Now this

“......was Govt investment in new industries, in supporting new cooperatives/capitalist partnerships, in *raising* taxes upon the wealthy, banks, and multi-nationals, in supporting industries and retail of UK-owned companies, “

I whole heartedly buy into. Remind me now how many green candidates stood a cat in hell’s chance. And what other mainstream parties had such vision and the ability to carry it through without first scything through the status quo.


It is all too complicated. One size does not fit all.
I know some who have and most of them are very socially responsible, giving, supportive and inclusive whatever that is supposed to mean. I know some who claim to ‘have not’ anything except what is aided to them. They conveniently forget time and energy as assets. And few choose to give of that. Yes, I know there are huge emotional keys to (lack of) self worth but I suspect there are as many rotten no hopers who only want hand outs as there are real ‘takers’ who only want to get rich off the back of whatever costs them the least. That may well be the closest we can get to an ‘equal’ society.

Imbalance is rife as is exploitation but neither know any barriers. Neither the rich (in money or spirit) nor the poor are intrinsically all good or all bad and it’s usually the mugs in the middle who take the biggest hit.

Who decided that a hedge fund manager/commodities trader was worth more than a doctor who is worth more than a scientist/engineer who is worth more (only slightly) than teacher who is worth more than a nurse who is worth more than a child minder who is worth more than a non working mother who is worth more than the man who empties the bins of all of the above?

If we put the hourly rate of all of the above together and divided it equally would we all be happy?

Guess what I think...........................

#32: ...actually, i'm not entirely sure what a "pistache" is, but it might very well have been one anyway. :)

and "Orcadian" also - is that a compliment, or an insult? My juries still out on that one, but i took it as a general compliment. Certainly compared to some other things i get called here, it sounds positively benign! ;)


"See, this is one of those statements I simply don’t get the measure of. It’s mostly false. Pointless jobs..."

i am in total agreement about the trinkets and disposable junk comment you make, but that was not what i was talking about. We clearly DO need to manufacture some items - surely it would have been better for the UK had we built and purchased UK made railway carriages, for example? Or what about clothing? Surely its far better to purchase UK made clothing that has labour regulations instead of slave-labour from Asia/US Prisons? Then there is PCs - the UK used to be a world leader in home computing, yet in large part due to Govt non-support, we now import most advanced electronics (Aerospace is the only field we export in in high tech - and that absorbs INCREDIBLE amounts of State subsidy). We require Govt support to establish new technologies in sustainable energy, in home insulating, in low-loss electricity cables etc, - we are still an advanced nation, and we NEED certain items, it is not all disposable crud. And i firmly believe, as do most economists worthy of the title, that Govt CAN have a huge role to play in such economic growth.

the Grameen Bank is a superb example of what small amounts of capital available for normal people to set up local cooperatives can make to an economy.

and yes, equally 'disposal' requires labour, requires investment (unless we are simply to bury it and poison our Land for generations to come, until *they* clean it up and recycle it), and creates new materials for future use. The jobs are there to be needed, to be filled, what is required is a Govt that cares about providing employment and economic growth for ALL.


"I see daily many on welfare with more than a car load of kids with ear piercings, dyed hair, designer trainers, sweets and snacks, and gardens full of swings, trampolines and the likes."

the 'problem' with this is not that some people on benefits are able to achieve a basic lifestyle (and i'm *quite* certain that the majority on benefits are not living the life of the Banksters), but that wages have deliberately been squeezed downwards for the last 30 years, so that now even a full 40hour week on minimum pay is barely enough to even pay the rent. These besuited millionaires bemoaning about 'the welfare trap', and blaming it all on the 'high' (ROFL) levels of benefit, are usually also the ones trying to drive down wages even further, cutting pensions, working rights, - forcing the working poor onto an income barely above the survival level of benefits.

to *really* end 'the welfare trap', wages need to go up (the 'Living Wage' should be base-line, not a ceiling!), and workers rights need strengthening. Even people who are 2nd generation permanently unemployed would actually prefer to work and have a higher living standard... IF they HAD a higher living standard from working!! I am certain 100s of thousands of even the 'underclass' would be ecstatic to go work on cooperatively owned permaculture farms, growing their own food through hard work, feeding their families themselves.

it all ties together - by the Govt putting resources Grameen Bank style for new cooperative ventures, the higher levels of respect and income from such jobs will attract people to work there. But if benefits are forced downwards, it is not a particularly large stretch of the imagination to realise that soon afterwards wages will be depressed even further to match the new level.


"Employment (worth) is key to the individuals self worth and value. Apparently."

it is certainly *one* of the keys to feelings of self-worth.


"If so, why do so many with ability to work choose only paid (and paid a certain level) employment. Does that not indicate that it is the monetary reward that is uppermost. There is litter on the streets, there are clubs and voluntary groups needing help, there are charity shops, there are parks needing tended, there are cars or windows to be cleaned, gardens to be maintained ...... All of these activities require little training, equipment and could be offered at very low prices or even free if the ‘feel good’ factor were all that was needed. And local employers would jump at someone with such evident determination and initiative WHEN jobs were needed filling. Slave labour or opportunity and self advancement????"

this requires a LONG answer, but i shall try to summarise:

Thatcher/neo-liberals attempted to destroy the "Society".
To work whilst on benefits is to almost demand that the State noses its way through every part of your life, and is always looking for ways to stop your benefits.
Unemployment Offices are more geared towards enforcing petty regulations to once again cut the recipients benefit payments, rather than having a 'quick sign' policy (as there used to be), and using the time instead to match 'clients' with possible employment, paid or voluntary.
To grow up in a benefit-zone, is to be imbued with the depressive behaviour (it is normative when everyone else is doing/feeling the same) that prevents individuals from being proactive. And again, instead of the State trying to *help* break that cycle, it uses coercion that only turns away benefit recipients from working together with the State to find eg voluntary work.

none of this of course is determinate, but it all has an effect. If we actually had a Govt that transparently *cared* about its citizens, that was investing in growth, in higher wages, training, workers rights, then that would create a 'wave-front' of positive change that would sweep the Country. Instead, we can all see that the Bankster Gravy-Train is rolling onwards (rolling over *us*!), and we have a Govt that would prefer to destroy the Welfare State rather than to get the filthy rich to pay back some of their usually ill-gotten gains in taxes.

when everyone *is* feeling the pain, then there can be a feeling of "we're all in it together", and everyone mucks in. But when it is so very clear that this is nothing more than a continuation of the policies that has made the UKs Wealth Gap greater than any time in living memory, - people feel rightly aggrieved. And much less likely to voluntarily choose to spend their time helping others.

--the old saying "Rot at the Core Spreads Outwards" explains a great deal about the malaise currently afflicting the UK.

"How do we get across the message to the haves and have nots once and for all that STUFF seldom makes us happy. Worth does. Value does and I tell you now that unless one can find a way of ‘teaching’ people first and foremost that you have to find it within and NOT expect society or external factors to make you feel good we are on the wrong foot. It is giving rather than taking and having that fulfils us."

yes! Well, preventing companies advertising during kids TV hours would be a good start. Preventing adverts altogether would be even better, but that requires a longer-term project to change our entire method of paying for media.


"WHAT exactly is it we are going to be EXPORTING like mad over the coming months/years? Who will make it? Where? With what raw materials? Acquired How? At what cost to the environment? What NEED will the end product fill?"

financial services, obviously. What else would a progressive, sane, advanced Country export...? lol.

we certainly have a lot of incredibly ignorant and totally useless economists lying around, perhaps we could sell *them* off to other countries? Many of 'our' Politicians could join them as well!!

Pistache? #34

Add an S, change the ch for a K and separate into two words. You have the subtle title of a small volume of satirical pieces by Sebastian Faulks.

Orcadian (ORKadian)

Thought we agree a while back that Mindy's Housemate simply has to be Mork (calling Orson) from Ork. Certainly not an insult. I must have been about the right age to have wanted to be Mindy.

I merely enjoy the opportunity for sensible, mature debate that doesn't rely on name calling and judgements based on hidden persona and doesn't hold difference of opinion against the holder. A relative rarity. Just don't expect a Christmas Card.

As for exporting our economists, financial sector and politicians, that may work on a transportation vessel if you know of any remaining lands suitable (or not perhaps) for colonisation under chain gang circumstances.

But surely we need to come up with something somebody else will be prepared to pay for. Not even the most corrupt African despot would want these charlatans??????

I take all your points on board, yet cannot yet put all ills in one ballot box or despatch box. As you say, canker from the inside out slowly kills all limbs and then slowly eats the core. But if we hope to re build a caring civilised society surely blaming the state, whichever state and doing ess o dee all about it but sit with head in hands just gives them even more power to destroy.

Brighty: got the "pistache" now LOL :)

- but no, it wasn't a pistachio tree, more of an Oak, imho. :P

also got the orcadian reference, can't believe i didn't spot it, to be honest. ...Must be thinking about other things. ;) My own early childhood crush was on the medical officer in Space 1999! :wub: :D

christmas card, christmas card... do you mean 'Sol Invictus Day' card?? Well,i don't really hand out cards anyway, so i take no offence at not getting one from you. :) xx


so maybe we could send the politicians and economists to america, where their cardboard degrees and and spin-worship is still being appreciated. Or perhaps they could be recruited by MI5 to be suicide bombers in Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland for The Noble Cause of Financial Destruction and Ruin. Just about all most of them are worth, imho.


on political change - if we do NOT manage to achieve change through the ballot box, through our democratic structures, then the alternatives are generally quite bloody and destructive. There are undoubtedly some in the ranks of the UK Elite who are not only *hoping* for such Troubles - they seem to be actively striving for such a social conflict. Dark Side? You bet.


mim, another poem for you:


to scream into a mirror is to be screamed back at.
Homo Sap and Society are not nice animals.
damage they the most vulnerable, Pacifism beaten out.
Bloody Murderers, Rapists, Child Abusers, Torturers,
Those who starve others to death, entomb and abuse,
build Concentration Camps, Ethnic Cleansing,
WMD used on civilians, media tame Howling Monkeys,
protesters locked up without rights.

GAIA crumbling under the assault,
Bees are leaving, Forests slaughtered
rivers dead, seas dead, oceans *dying*,
land poisoned, groundwater drought, air toxic.
Food artificial, water with added depressant,
the Human Race on a suicidal course
All for the sake of 'control' and 'profit'.

wind a toy-soldier up and watch it walk,
blame it for what it bumps into blindly
blame it for its intended ignorance.
Gulliver wonders if he is dreaming,
the Lilliputians stab and stab,
standing back laughing as innocents get harmed
argue "must not tell him the truth", pig-eyes gleaming,
their reward from the State expected.

'Blame the messenger' an old refrain,
ignorance blissful and preferable
silence the cats as plague spreads
Aboriginal Wisdom murdered.
Convictions without trial, no evidence admitted
even in Pre-Roman days suspects were told of the charges
a Society lost its way, wars in other Lands,
wars against its own people, wars in
the Hearts and Minds. Wars against Nature,
War a first choice, not a last.

scream into a mirror, and watch yourself scream back.
Blame/Hate me if you want, but look at your own reflection first.

God loves every atom in this 'Verse,
GAIA cares only for survival of Life.
God is Love Eternal,
GAIA is life and death entwined.
All dies in GAIA,
ALL live forever in God.
GAIA cares not for individual suffering.

the Gods have always been most terrible Taskmasters.
But never as Corrupt as the Egos of the Righteous.

as this thread is no longer really active,. i might as well try to place some of the older deleted posts here, and bearing in mind the World Cup antics, perhaps its apposite:

----

Subject:
Friday 5 February 2010

Posting:
"What impact will this dark day in British politics have on the upcoming election and public opinion? "

--where is this 'Dark Day'? OK, its a bit silly that a footballer's private affairs were paraded through the British Gutter Press (somehow this is "in the public interest"!), and so we lose this gifted footballer as Captain.

- a decision the French are no doubt wondering why whenever sex is mentioned in British Society everyone starts screaming, ranting, and behaving like Catholic Inquisitors in search of witches? Our Gallic cousins no doubt regard infidelity as a *prerequisite* for being Captain...

of course, it seems millions of grown French-men are absolutely scared witless by the scary sight of women with some of their faces covered, ergo perhaps they have their own stupidities and childish hysterias?

So its a fairly bad day for john terry, and possibly England, and certainly for the notion that there is something left called "a private life". Its a good day however, in that regard, for cynicism and hypocrisy - after all it is to be most expected that as per usual, those screaming and foaming the loudest in a paroxysm of moral hysteria are hardly the most spotless characters themselves.

after all, they ARE journalists...!! :D


and then it is a Good Day that BaE has not only been investigated properly, but also fined - and the political machinations *yet again* of the Tony Brown govt revealed to the public - and the realisation (hopefully) that all this began under Thatcher, that NuLabour are merely carrying on the tradition, and would no doubt hand the torch on to any Camoronite govt. So that's actually good.

as for the thieving MPs - yes, amusing attempt - "Parliamentary Privilege" - not going to work, never ever. They are being charged because of their crimes, how can THAT be a bad thing? It may be boring to see it all over again - but its necessary. Politics is not all hanging war criminals, sending mentally disabled people to corrupt courts in the US for non-crimes, selling off of all our assets, or indebting us to banks for the foreseeable future, its also watching smug, arrogant and over-confident 'Leaders' sweating it because they know the People are watching, and its Election Year so they actually have to care about what we think.

-yeah now i think about it, this IS a Bad Thing, but then again, - i'm sure they'd just find some other topic to make vacuous comments about, so no difference really.

yup, corrupt MPs getting busted = Good Thing.

SOOOooooo... where's all this terrible Badness then? :)


--------------

from /blogs/newsnight/fromthewebteam/2010/02/friday_5_february_2010.html

----

--this was the reply i sent to NN blog-mods regarding what was wrong with the above post:

dear newsnightproductionblogmoderator, i have no objections to rewriting, as long as i can ask for the cause, and change the content myself. This is infinitely preferable to the newstatesman's policy of either full deletion without apology or reason, or else blatant editing without permission. So i thank you. Also, i would prefer not to step into legal territory myself... ;)

so could you be more specific about which part of this post was offensive enough to withdraw? I can spot a number of possible candidates for offence, but not enough to be withdrawn. Is it the potential for a mob of howling wapping editors after my head, or the horde of frenchmen running away from nuns in abject terror?

yours,
Gnu.

-

(originally i had used "spit" instead of "wit" in a sentence - i can only presume, rereading it, that *that* was cause for its deletion!)

---------

and on the banning of "gnuneo", here is the letter i sent. No particular reason to publish it here, except that it never got through to the mods, and sometimes its nice to show appreciation. :)


"dear mods, thank you for removing that posting. There was no harm intended to anyone, but i see later on (after watching sat's doctor who) that some harm may have come from it.

i'm glad you are here. :heart:"


...ps, could you unblock "gnuneo"?

and the last to be deleted:

----

Tuesday 22 June 2010

Posting:
hello all, been away. :)

(but not to somewhere as exotic as Scotland. :( )

yesterday i received this notice from Auntie, so this is a repost from a long ago post, but relevant perhaps to last night's NN report/discussion on AFghanistan. It was in origin a response to a report on NN monday /17/5/10, about the numbers of UK female troops becoming pregnant, and heroin use amongst the UK soldiers in Afghanistan.

the post was also an attempt to make sense of the situation there, because it is only through understanding what is actually happening, and what can be achieved, that British troops can leave - or stay with honour.

i changed only one word.

"Subject:
Monday 17 May 2010 (gnuneo)


#15: people constantly placed in situations where their *very existence and life* is imperilled, often start to lose the conventions of 'normal' society.

it is hardly surprising then, that some of our soldiers are dabbling - and getting addicted to - the local drugs. Especially when there is a complete dearth of good ideas from our Political masters how to end this conflict. It is VERY easy to throw stones back here from 'Home' - i wonder how *YOU* would behave under similar circumstances?

Our troops, both men and women, are facing extraordinary challenges *every single day*, perhaps some of our soldiers DO take drugs to escape from the awful Reality that faces them, and some women get pregnant, perhaps to get out, quite probably just because accidental pregnancies happen, but it is not THEM i would criticise, it is the poodles we have in Power, not only for sending there without any clear mandate, plan, or intention of improving the lives of Afghans (which would have made our troops more secure), but that they STILL DO NOT HAVE ANY IDEA HOW TO END THIS SLAUGHTER ON ALL SIDES.

these are normal human beings from our culture who have been ordered to KILL other humans, and you are shocked some get pregnant or take drugs??

i wonder how long Blare, camoron and that whole bunch would last in Afghanistan without heading for a pipe or two to get to sleep at night?

--have you considered, if we had spent the same amount of money on sending our military there instead in investing in new fairtrade cooperatives, raising living standards for normal Afghans, what chance would the extremist Taliban have to control the Hearts and Minds?

shocking thought, using Peace and Prosperity to create Peace and Prosperity. Almost makes a person wonder if some at the 'top' of our society are benefiting in some way from all this military expenditure?

i think its better to blame the blameful, not the blameless. And our troops should be getting support, not blamed for the Hell they have been sent to create."