Whatever you views about the Euro or about the EU it cannot possibly be in our interests to sit on the side-lines criticising and lecturing. I cannot think of any post war British Prime Minister,Conservative or Labour, who would have made the mistake of sounding like a petulant politician rather than a statesman.
We are not a member of the Euro zone and we have been increasingly marginalising ourselves from other members of the EU. That is not in the interests of the UK.
We really do need some statesmanship and that means resisting the temptation to lecture and hector.
You completely miss the point.
The point is that the state is bust. That applies all over the Eurozone as well as to the UK
The reason is that you are incapable of admitting to the debts that you have run up.
Greece is just a foretaste of what is to come.
We may not be a member of the Eurozone, but London is one of the principal traders in the currency.
A correspondent suggested last night that opting out of the currency also entails opting out of the EU, according to the terms of treaty (Lisbon?).
If that is so, and I some how doubt whether it would happen to Greece even if they did opt out of the currency, then their problems are rather greater than they might have been just reintroducing the currency.
They might be able to operate a dual currency system, a “LETS” (local exchange trading scheme) currency parallel to the euro, the new Drachma, without offending that particular article of the treaty, if it so exists.
They would all have the choice of which to use at any time of day, the Drach or the Euro. Feeling profligate? splash out with a Euro. Feeling cautious? dig in to your pocket for a Drachma!
Before I forget and before I add anything more on Europe, I would like to tell the world about the ‘statesmanship’ we have as Chief Whip in the House of Lords, Baroness Wheatcroft. Another unelected voice speaking on behalf of the people of this country which we are told is run on democratic principles.
On the radio over the weekend this woman told the listeners that what she saw as the ‘way forward,’ and her tone was unbelievably sneering toward the people she was supposed to be talking on behalf of, is working weeks of ten hours a day six days a week. Not only that, but, her view was ‘democracy was outdated and not a good system for us to live by.’
Well, she would wouldn’t she? She knows she cannot be voted in by the public as she is another one of those put there as an appointment to her masters. And look how and by whom she is paid.
Democracy should kick this one out and have the power to do so right away, unless she is willing, and starting right now, to get off her rump and do ten hours a day 6 days a week in the Lords as a member. And please don’t come back with all the wonderful hours she puts in at drinks parties, dinners and entertaining, as her extra activities. That is an insult to the intellect.
So how about a little statesmanship emanating from the red room, as an example to us all, get rid of those who are unacceptable as mouth pieces.
Like Cameron, she is a Conservative. They are all in it together, as we can see so clearly.
Why should you and I be ‘in it together’ when its politicians who have caused the problem.
Time for some show trials, and standard Stalinist solutions.
Remember, Politicians are all in it together. They made the decisions. They ran up the debts. They are the cause of the mess.
Maude, Baroness Anelay has been the Chief Whip for the Government since 2010.
Could you give the details of the radio programme on which Baroness Wheatcroft appeared? Thanks.
As I understand it, the matter of what makes a ‘statesperson’, or ‘statespersonship’
(as distinct from what makes a ‘lifeplace-leader’, whose main quality must be in their non-workplace lifestyle, and especially in their budgeting thereof, to be emulable by all of the ‘led’ followers)
is a State Matter about the ‘above-the-call-of-political-and-governmental-duty’ individual performance, of members of the ‘Ruling Body’ of a nation-state; and
usually takes place at a high-diplomatic level and with some ‘win-win-win’ outcomes for other nation-states concerned.
———–
Lord Soley contends that we (Britain) have both eschewed (‘poo-pooed’) the Euro-currency,
and increasingly ‘marginalised’ Britain and its People from other European Union member states and Peoples in other life-vital ways.
Lord Blagger’s contention may be right, that
The State is bust (governancially in recession, approaching ‘bankruptcy’).
Yet orating at such a potentially statespersonship level, both LS and LB should have drawn equal attention to the Nation’s Lifeplace Matter, saliently to our dual-need to become increasingly
(1) self-healthing as individuals; and
(2) fit-for-Purpose* as local upwards-feeding democratic neighbourhbood communities.
**.
————–
* I can find no great purpose, constituted and published;
not by Britain; nor by the EU; nor by the United Nations;
certainly no long-long-term sustain-worthy Purpose.
** my paraphrasing in favour of “Participatively Cooperative Democracy” in direct contrast with (the prevailing) “Directively Competitive Oligarchy”.
‘What happened to statesmanship?’
Lord Soley says that (‘)we need ‘statesmanship’ which means that we must neither ‘lecture’ (pedagogicly, one-way-direct) nor ‘hector’ (loudly bully)(‘)
to which milesjsd asks
“How then can we propagate the benefit of, and appropriate the topic-relevance of, in our scrutiny and problem-solving, such a lecture-note by Professor Baum* quoting from Chairman Mao Zedung (majorly a notoriously bullying and one-way-dictatorial didactogogue) that
(1) (‘) participatively cooperative provision of the lifesupportive necessities of The People must be Government’s prime aim and duty(‘)(jsdm paraphrased); and
(2) ‘practice is the only criterion for truth’
either of which statements could surely be classed as being both true and statespersonlike ?”.
*Professor Baum (USA) for ‘The Great Courses’ in his 48 lectures “The Fall and Rise of China” (currently being studied worldwide).
Lord Soley, Mr Heath did quite a good impression of a petulant politician, don’t you think?
But, to the crux of your argument, the question is not whether the PM should be carping about stuff that indirectly affects his electorate but whether a German Chancellor should be seen to be the one directly affecting Greece.
PS Did you catch Lord Mandelson’s turn at the Leveson inquiry? Your name was mentioned.
Lord Soley, Mr Heath did quite a good impression of a petulant politician,M
He not only made a good impression of petulance. He was petulant. From some images of him with the queen it was fairly obvious that she thought so too!!
———————————
Blagger, at last after five years of it being necessary, Lagarde of the IMF has come out strongly in favour of negative interest rates
for the UK. ABOUT TIME TOO!
Bank accounts with deposits will not receive interest but have a discount for the money being held there.
Money lent to local UK customers for mortgages will not be charged interest, merely discounted repayment of loan.
Gareth Howell will not be in parliament today.
He cannot think of a worse place to be on a fine day, and it’s not the smell of the river, ‘cos they keep the windows closed.
———————–
The fact of a different currency really is irrelevant since UK does so much of its business with the other European countries.
It would be interesting to see the variance between sterling and the euro and the principal causes of it over the last 4 or 5 years; probably fluctuating according to the news on EUMed country economies.
I agree that Cameron does not have statesmanship qualities, and is never likely to have, even though he has tried several times to pick a fight with the lady president of Argentina, who knows her international law back to front and upside down.
As if the Falklands made a stateswoman out of Thatcher, any way.
If anybody would like to sponsor me I’ll take the first ship to Patagonia like all the best Welshmen.
In answer to Lord Soley – I think we still have one or two with Tony Benn the last of a retired old guard. Jim Callaghan was also a statesman regardless of anyone’s view of his government and probably amongst the last of his kind.
Grant Shapps has a bright future providing he does not get lost in soundbites which is the curse of politicians today.
Answering questions directly might bring back a belief in statesmanship.
Maude. Ladtizzy is right. Baroness Wheatcroft is not the government chief whip. She is a Conservative and was formally a journalist but I too would like to know what this programme was.
Edward Heath could certainly be acerbic but to the best of my knowledge he never picked fights with his international colleagues. Attlee could be pretty rude too but again not on the international stage. It is famously said of him that he would never use two words where one would do!
I think my name has been mentioned a couple of times at Leveson. I have given written evidence and have been asked to expand on it in relation to press standards.
My overall point remains that a Prime Minister should remember that we need friends on the international stage and we should think twice before scoring political points when they are indifficulties.
@Lord Soley:
One of the programme’s was BBC4’s Any Questions where Patience Wheatcroft, and I thought she had been introduced as the Conservative Chief Whip in the Lords, said, ‘one of my biggest fears over the Euro crisis is, try asking an Italian to do 6 days a week 10 hours a day.’
Actually, what Dimbleby introduced her as was, she had taken the Tory whip in the Lords 2010. I was listening whilst being busy. However, it didn’t reduce my discontent as I hear it again. You know you politicians and Peers have to make sure people you have speaking on your behalf and selling the policies you want to push know what they are talking about, in real terms. This woman was out of her depth.
You can listen yourself, here it is:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b01hl4hg
The remark regarding democracy not being suitable now, is another programme, which I am looking for. I was stunned when I heard this remark and not a soul took it up or asked what the speaker was getting at.
In the meantime, here is another talk on Europe and the crisis ‘we all’ face by my favourite economics Prof. Richard Wolff. He has the grasp of the matter that we need to grip here. Not idealistic jargon flung at us by unelected peers who see themselves as soothsayers for the great unwashed.
This is in two parts, so I will put up both of them. They are not too long.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtGB8rN_Mq4
And number 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cL_S5h5N4bc
More to come in a later post.
Maude, thanks for the link on the radio prog. If I may set down Baroness Wheatcroft’s exact words, “One of my fears over Europe is try asking an Italian, or telling an Italian, to do six days a week, 10 hours a day. I am not optimistic.” Further, the context was in relation to her recent visit to a Jeep plant in Ohio where the unions have agreed to this pattern of work, after the successful and earlier implementation of a 10hrs/four day week.
I picked up her contrasting the union co-operation with employers in the US and their counterparts in Italy, a point of fact (data from OECD is as reliable as it gets).
For me, American Marxist economists are up there with tanning booths – perhaps Lord Soley can comment with all due authority.
@Lady T:
What you think about working 10 hours a day six days a week is for you to mull over and should you feel that is up your street, then get to it. The Italians do not require this ‘unelected’ mouthpiece to suggest their lifestyle or their connection to family and quality of that existence is anything other than ‘the natural order.’ What she was alluding to, as you have taken the message completely out of context, was the British may be foolish enough to accept what we have in store, but those Europeans are not so easily worked over. In a nutshell, this is what she has on the cards for the British worker and their futures. I hope the public realise it and take it on board soundly. She is grossly presumptive in her audacity to assume anything Italians, or British come to that, may or may not be willing to sacrifice. Which is the point I was getting at. She feels this is the way forward here and her words, as you have put them are correct, she wants 6 days a week not 4 and ten hours each day. Does she do that in the Lords on our behalf for which she is amply paid by the tax payers? If not, she should consider it fast, example is always the best teacher. And what a comfy lifestyle that is in comparison to the workers in the factories she wants to belittle as non performers.
More importantly, can you please express your feeling, not your thoughts on what Ms Wheatcroft has on the mind, on being robbed by the Capitalists you support? It has brought down Western standard of living to barely above third world expectations. On top of that, giving it to those who already have enough for a hundred lifetimes is more than greed, it is lunacy to contemplate. Would you like to see any of those culprits brought to justice and extradited to whatever hell hole they can dig up, so that they will suffer akin to the man in the street? Clearly, you are expecting to fund their misdeeds in perpetuity? No regulation, no taxation, simply stomp all over the proletariat is the way to go.
You people on that side of the spectrum want to forget and forgive those con men as they already begin to speak seriously of whether warfare with Iran is legal. And do you want to wager that if it isn’t they will hastily bring laws in to make it so. And, yes, this is very interlinked with the original opening thought. Austerity fits in really well with war and killing for the benefit of those who dwell in the Hamptons and Belgravia.
The American Unions have, like ours here, deserted their cause and the people who pay their wages for fear of personal destruction. Time they got off their rumps and learned how to negotiate for those they claim to stand for.
And don’t play the game of, ‘you must be a communist or a socialist or some other low life, to suggest our wonderful thieves at the top are anything other than holy.’ That kind of thinking seeps down from a hereditary position of privilege. Which is why this country needs a completely new party and way of thinking to take over the running of this state. By people who will concentrate on quality of life rather than concentration of wealth. And to do that without the added baggage of a Marx theory on subjugation through politically correct imposition.
Which is why this country needs a completely new party and way of thinking to take over the running of this state.
==============
Give the electorate control. Cut out the cancer of Westminster with its profiteering.
Maude, clearly, we have different thought on what Baroness Wheatcroft meant and there’s not much point in repeating my opinion.
That said, I have looked more closely at the number of hours worked at Jeep and there is evidence that one of the days worked has been voluntary overtime, as has the number of hours per day. It appears that this is not untypical of the auto trade in the US and has directly led to thousands of extra jobs in plants making VW and Japanese models. (There are hundreds of thousands links from a variety of the usual media and blogs debating what this means, and varying in tone.)
In contrast, auto workers in Italy are, quite literally, queuing up to strike which will lead Fiat and others to look for a more flexible workforce outside of Italy.
My personal work ethic is simple. You may or may not know that I own a business. I work seven days a week, 52 weeks a year, and have done for many years. True, that’s up to me but is pretty typical for those with micro businesses.
When I was an employee I was paid a salary, rather than by the hour. This was shorthand for working an effective seven days a week due to the work I brought home, though the hours were variable but I’d guess an average would be around nine hours for five days, and four hours for two days. However, rather than feeling I was an exploited worker I was loyal to my place of employment and genuinely wanted the best for it.
This was quite some years ago and, to sum up, I don’t see a 10hr/six day week as exceptional. (I believe teachers and some others in the public sector are making a similar point today, where the concept of paid overtime is not available.)
G8 and other meetings are interesting for what the politicians do not say. They are invariably placatory, which may be the art of international leader meetings; placating.
It is not as though the fine detail is ever hammered out at such meetings, much of it having been gorn over with a fine tooth pick or interdens by the relevant govt depts before hand.
No toffe mints here!
This woman was out of her depth.
It must have been when I was about 35 that I realized that a great many political correspondents talk out of their posteriors, and know nothing about the subject they are speaking, and expecting you to listen, to.
Maude really ought to spend some time in parliament to get a better feel for it. Some of her “oratory” here is excellent, and I do enjoy the mistakes she makes due to exaggeration….. while making her point.
I often thought that radio and TV analysis had very little bearing on the day to day work of parliament. The recent NHS computer commissioning argument a case in point.
Perhaps she should take up the pulpit along with her other sisters of the cloth.
Perhaps I missed my calling too, half a dozen of them. I am probably best at digging weeds out of a newly seeded lawn.
Now that is a career.
@Twm:
I already spend plenty of time in Parliament. I watch the debates in both Houses regularly, or, listen to them as I go about the day. Which is why I sometimes miss names and can’t find the sequence when I return. Very irritating.
And, what you term as exaggeration, others, including myself, feel are understatements.
As far as the pulpit is concerned. I find female preachers horrendous and would not attend a service with one taking the position of front man under any circumstances. You see, I like the sound of a paternal voice. One that can give me a feeling of solace if I need it. A woman, from my point of view, can not reach those places that I really enjoy in myself and don’t wish to change in favour of a harpy maternal influence.
Gardening is the mainstay of a creator. Politics is the pastime of over bloated ego’s.
American Marxist economists are up there with tanning booths
If you want to go back to the homestead in the Appalachians and stay there, just growing the veg and feeding the pigs, I don’t see what it has to do with “tanning booths”.
Wouldn’t you become a Zoroastrian? (though not necessarily in Iran?).
Perhaps Marxists are not Primitivist at all according to Lady tizzy’s analysis.
Gareth, think simile rather than metaphor, but only if you give a damn.
@Lady T:
I am sure you have read Orwells’ Animal Farm. If not, check it out, and take a close look at the charactoer called, Boxer, the work horse. He ends up in the knackers yard, having sacrificed his life to ideals of the famer he slaves for.
To suggest to others that they too should grind away endlessly to enable greed mongers the ability to buy champagne at £30,000 a bottle is not only ridiculous it is suicidal.
And if you don’t feel I have it right, take a week or two off, and go to a couple of St. Tropez nightclubs and see for yourself.
This attitude to me, is the same idiotic thinking that goes with buying unaffordable tickets for a football match, in order to ensure foreign, or even British, ball kickers can take you for an underachiever. When, like most British concerns, those same footballers despise their customer, the fan.
Maude says she spends a lot of time in parliament, but she can’t answer back, or even ask a question, or vote.
If she could I would agree with her opinion, that she does spend any time there at all, and I persist with the same recommendation.
Maude, St Tropez? Way too chichi, and passé.
@Lady T:
Boy, sre you out of touch!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qo763FP7idg
How many human-livings must an individual be taking or being-given from the Common Purse to afford nightclubs in St Tropez, and some inclusion in the “Westminster Village” ? ?
If we had asked Maude how she herself has afforded to frequent or visit such places, or otherwise to ‘live high’,
we would be missing her main points and her very clear word-snapshots of the Gordian-Knot Conflicts, Issues and Lifesupports-Matters that we should be focusing upon in any honest Democratic Discussion Place or e-site.
Surely ?
And we might ask GH
(who claims that his annual income is £10,000*)
how nonetheless he affords to be frequently in Parliament himself
(but fairly clearly nowhere near nor in two-way communication with the also frequently-present Maude).
Possibly such a parliament-watcher could be there even among the opportunisticly-insider “Westminster Villagers”, or ‘socially’ of the lobbyist-favour-buying contingent thereto hanging-on ?
So in a very real-need sense, a procedural-topic necessary to discussion of “Statesmanship” must be
“statement-ship”.
———-
*
(= £192.30 per week;
or 37% more than the UK Minimum Guaranteed Income, of £140pw).
————
Peers are costing people 2,700 a day. What makes you think they care one iota about the poor?
Now, as to your ‘human livings’ or your own jargon.
Why do people deserve money from other people in exchange for doing nothing?
Why should people on the poverty line be paying taxes for people to get your wished for redistribution for no work?
@LB:
Because it takes an entire village to raise a child, and we are each others insurance policy within that village.
Who said anything about children?
If you want a child, shouldn’t you be responsible for its upbringing, including the cost?
What gives you the right to say, look I’m going to knock someone up, but I’m going to force you to pay for its upbringing?
I do hope, LB, that you’re not suggesting in your post above, that I knock someone up? For that would be an impossibility as well as a repugnant concept to me.
I’m soundly hetero and not harbouring notions otherwise.
But the issue of paying for children which are not issue of your body and therefore outside of your remit, yes, all men should be willing to forfeit to the public purse to enable the, Oliver Twist, we collectively keep poverty stricken in a Capitalist society. They are forfeiting their life to this system in order that people like you can benefit, so why the resentment toward them?
It’s called responsibility toward your fellow man.
What you count as being responsible, is in fact other people being irresponsible, and taking advantage of other people.
If you can’t afford to bring up children, don’t bring them into this world. ie. Don’t donate your DNA willy nilly.
As you are about to discover, the support is going going to be pulled from those that rely on others to bring up their sprogs.
Here’s an example.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2152115/UK-benefits-family-12-live-50k-handouts-appear-Daybreak-defend-controversial-lifestyle.html
Their ‘income’ or stealing from others, is going to be capped at 26K. Quite right too. A few hard stories will put others off the scam.
Meanwhile, since its a blog about the Lords. They are taking far in excess of this family. 2,700 a day off taxpayers for their benefits.
@LB:
When you read through the article you cite, this family are explaining that government policies forced them into a no work situation as their joint wages did not keep up with the cost of living. And that was directly due to government interference as they intended to keep wages at a minimum by having an open door policy on mass immigration. It is designed to lessen the average man’s income by making work harder to get. the US has used this policy for a couple of decades or more.
I don’t think you listen to the economists telling it like it is. And the fact that these exploited people have to defend themselves and their choices to a wolverine style attack by some dumb presenter, is a disgrace. They are the pawns in this facade of political machination and spin.
Do you see the Lords defending their policy of taking tax payers money? Or the massive extended Royal family, on the pretext of serving Britain? This family you have put up here could also say they are serving Britain. Britain needs children. We are told we are not producing enough of them and that they have to import more people to produce them to make up the shortfall. What they are not telling the public is, it is government policy across Europe to import another 150 million more from outside European borders over the next thirty years.
And don’t fall for the ‘Europe’ is to blame line, it is their policy we are having to endure so we must have a referendum and get us out of there. Which will not make a bit of difference. Just check out the US policy on immigration and you will see it is identical to ours. It is Western policy.
This family in the article here has taken care of their children by not going to work and abandoning them to the jungle of uncaring adults who are unfit to care for them. And low and behold their children are doing well and receiving the right influences as they are looking for work and education, as they should, for their future.
What this government should be doing, rather than humiliating this nice family, is liberating them from indenture. New Labour wanted multiculturalism along with globalization (US policy) and to achieve this they had to push those at the bottom out of employment onto welfare. It was used as an excuse to change the social and ethnic make up of the UK. Social engineering. It worked like a dream and this family were the ones they sacrificed for their political duplicity.
Now along comes the Conservatives who are deeply invested in low pay or no pay for work. Their backers are looking for the pay off for their loyalty. And their aim is to return the poor to the standards they set up in the past. More and more begging in the streets, soup kitchen and devastation third world style. It’s all a scam designed to sell this spin to the public.
LB you should not fall for this kind of political chicanery. You are too smart for that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkQFzRPs8jc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cv4piaBEudY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8SgfJy2xVI
Political correctness bars genuine job seekers from the positions they want to use only for immigrants. Read the Guardian and see just how many indicate they are ‘equal opportunity employers.’ Code for, don’t apply if you are born here and white. This method keeps the wages down.
And the conservatives have no intention of changing this policy no matter what they tell you.
Do you see the Lords defending their policy of taking tax payers money?
========
Yes. What they fail to realise is that they think they cost 300 a day, which is what they get out. Instead they cost us 2,700 a day, each.
==========
When you read through the article you cite, this family are explaining that government policies forced them into a no work situation as their joint wages did not keep up with the cost of living.
=========
Primarily this is down to taxation. They are being taxed if they work. ie. Min wage earners, about 2,700 a year. ie. 140 British standard peasants are needed to work, get nothing from the state, just to keep a peer in the style to which they have become accustomed.
========
And the fact that these exploited people have to defend themselves
========
Exploited? They are exploiting others. They are getting a free ride from other people. Total up their benefits bill, free health care, free pension, council tax, schooling, and ask how many British standard peasants on min wage are exploited to keep them going?
Are you smart enough to see who is taking money from whom?
========
Now along comes the Conservatives who are deeply invested in low pay or no pay for work.
========
Really? The real problem they face is the mess of debt, including all the debts that you can’t see because they are hidden. Your share, 230,000 pounds. What’s your plan for paying the interest on that?
And I thought Maude was just irritating me with her incoherent mutterings. @Maude, as Lord Blagger explains in his last point, you are not only wrong but ignorant. I congratulate you on representing the voice of the work averse. This section that blights our country with its pathetic self loathing and lack of accountability. You are truly hilarious.
@Paul:
And I find your ignorance equally as hilarious. You have no argument to debate.
Your irritation is yours to address, hang on to it, it will serve you well.
And I find the vision of you lining up at a soup kitchen, with your Daily Mail under your arm, quite comic.
As a PS I always know I have hit the nail on the head when those who find exploitation exciting see my words as prickly.
LOL
The only time I will ever have a Daily Mail under my arm is if the lavatory has run out of three ply toilet paper.
Maude, I think you maybe Borg?
Define exploitation.
How can someone receiving lots of other people’s cash be ‘exploited’?
@LB:
Do you hve any comprehension at all of politics and how they work the people in every respect? Because I cannot see much of that from you when it is pointed toward those who are indeed exploited by the system.
This story you have put up is horrendous propaganda put out from government via press releases in order to persued the public that our citizens who are poor and unemployed are the reason for this collpase. They are not.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9rrn7ZEoOo&feature=related
How can you be ‘exploited’ if other people are forced with threats of violence to hand over their hard earned cash?
I’ll reiterate the point.
Why should a min wage earner be exploited into paying 3,000 pounds a year to people to sit on their arses and do nothing?
That applies both to the Lords, as well as large numbers of benefit claimants.
If you think the tax payer isn’t being exploited, perhaps we should meet up and you can hand me 3K of your hard earned. After all, I feel that I’m exploited and no doubt that will mean you will want to hand over the money to help out. 3K isn’t much. After all Peers cost us 2,700 a day, and they keep telling us they are worth every penny.
On how politics works.
I think I’m far clearer than you.
1. Extract as much cash as possible from others for yourself.
Lords and your ‘exploited’ benefits claimant getting all that money for nothing are good examples.
2. Lie about the mess. Peers, MPs do this regularly. Hence the real debt is 7 trillion not 1, because they have omitted all the really big debts such as pensions.
To put 7 trillion in context, I assume you’re a taxpayer, not the benefit claimant. You’re share of the debt is 230,000 plus interest. I’d be interested in your views on how you’re going to pay your share, or are you relying on exploiting someone else to pay for you? Or if you think default is the way, which pensioners are you going to hit? State pension, state second pension, or civil servants [1]
That’s how politics works. Theft for personal profit, and fraud over the mess.
For example, Lord Taylor. He went down for a year. Even after than I put in a complaint to the Bar council and he’s been struck off as a barrister. The Lords on the other hand have done nothing.
[1] MPs have a separate fulling funded scheme. They aren’t that stupid
@LB:
Then why are you not rallying others of your ilk, and I am assuming you are a tax payer and not a benefit claimant, and a tax payer who is not fiddling with the off shore get out game that costs the country ten times the amount any benefit claimant does, or, the pay, buy and spend everything through a company lark, in order to bring a law suit against those who committed this fraud?
There has to be a way to make the thieves accountable. Because the thieves are in our government as well as in the banks, not the claimants of benefit. This fraud of the public welfare pot was criminally persued and deliberate in its strategy. Surely you can find a good set of solicitors who can make them pay.
To blame the poor, disabled, elderly and sick, as you are doing, will get you nowhere, they have no assets to lien on. But bankers and politicians do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbBsSrygdkE
This tells you what is happening and by whom. Unless you and people like you are willing to put your money where you mouth is, they will get off scot free.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D71aiYq7jeM&feature=related
Now this tells us how they do it, time and again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xhkbb32adR8
And they are doing it as I write all over, as I am sure you read this morning in the papers.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/9332570/Osborne-unveils-140bn-scheme-to-kick-start-stagnant-economy.html#
And the amazing bulls in all this is, they are blaming Europe, not their cronies in The White House, who impoverished Europe by their sabotage in order to save the home grown dollar. Europe is the proverbial fall guy.
Notice your revisionism.
People paying taxes, are costing the country money.
So how much pocket money does the government give you because your basic premise is that anything you earn isn’t yours, its the state, and they give you money back. How generous of the state – not.
You can’t steal your own money. That’s a basic delusion to think otherwise.
I’m not ‘blaming the poor’ I’m pointing that people who receive other people’s money where that money is extracted using force are not exploited.
I agree that Lehmans should have been bankrupted. The same should happen to RBS, HBOS, B&B, NR and all other other retail banks who lost money should have been bankrupted too.
As for the state, they have 7,000 bn of debts. Most of which is fraudulently hidden off the books.
So I’ll ask again, how are you going to pay your share of the debt? 230,000 pounds with interest.
The result is that government has impoverished Europe. Banks haven’t run up the debts. Government has.
Even the bank bailout was a decision of government. If they had said no, the 1% of government debt that as resulted, wouldn’t be on the books.
Forget blaming the US too. It’s in just as much of a mess because its government has been spending like mad.
This spend spend spend policy is cast. It’s history, and you are going to see the effects. Greece is a foretaste.
What’s going to happen is dire. Truly awful. It’s so bad because its deliberate. Spending 150K a year on people on benefits is a major chunk of it. I don’t blame them for taking the cash. I blame the people handing it out.
From your posts, you think its a great idea to hand out the cash, because they are ‘exploited’. Still waiting for the answer on min wage people being exploited for their taxes.
Lord Blagger
Well said.
Nazma FOURRE