Ineptocracy - the cause of the deficit?

Ineptocracy - (in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) -
'A system of Government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods or services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers'.

The above definition of Ineptocacy could easily be read in two ways ... a dig at the poor and/or least able ... or a dig at the ultra-rich who misuse power and add no value, but gain wealth from ponzi ('money for nothing') schemes (eg counterfeiting money/gambling) and/or from the backs of hard working people who are actually adding all the value (but paying most of it back in tax - e.g. income tax, national insurance and 20% VAT) ... whilst the ultra-rich accumulate more wealth, more tax cuts and pay accountants to find any possible avoidance scheme so they can avoid paying any tax at all! **

The biggest problem by far is in fact the latter ... tax needs to be applied to non-productive ways of generating wealth (gambling, land, housing) as a matter of urgency ... and income tax for those adding real value reduced ... these actions together would both remove the black hole in the countries finances and reward producers who add real value!

Can this be done? ... of course e.g. by introducing a land value tax! ... However, those currently in power would never allow this to happen as it is not in their interests to do so ... as they want to be able to continue to make money from nothing ... and off of the backs of others ... and will fight tooth and nail to be able to continue to do so!   

Ignorance is not bliss ... and Poweromics is evil.

** We've started flushing out companies avoiding tax (e.g. Starbucks), but we need to expose all the individuals involved in this practice too ... starting with those with their grip on Power!

Partners in Crime ... Debt Slavery and Wage Slavery

It is well known that greed, self-interest and the reckless gambling of bankers caused the current crisis, as Governments were forced to bail out banks in order to stop ordinary hard-working people from losing their savings.

Government debt resulting from this subsequently saddled their nation (i.e. people) with massive interest payments (to service these debts), whilst bankers continued to reward themselves with massive bonuses (at taxpayers expense again)!

Banks are still legally allowed to counterfeit money too, by printing 'electronic money' and lending it to others at interest ... a real 'money for nothing' scam of epic proportions (which is why 'runs on banks' were possible in the first place ... as they never had the money/capital they were lending out)!

This process is very important to those in power, because when people are in huge debt they are more easy to control, manipulate and abuse (by the process often termed 'Debt Slavery'). Fictitious money can also create fictitious booms in an economy (e.g. housing market), which is why successive Governments have pandered to banks and not done anything to stop it (n.b. in the US J F Kennedy was assassinated when he started to challenge debt slavery ... and as a result no President or political leader has attempted to do so since).

In the UK the Government is continuing to help banks drive people into debt slavery, by pushing graduates to immediately take on debt by tripling tuition fees (and trying to stop them paying debts off early), before they even have a job and prior to going into massive debt in order try to put a roof over their head (n.b. inflating house prices is also part of the scam)!

And we can now see the next scam ... Wage slavery. The Government has been working hard to deflect blame away from bankers and onto those who can't find a job ... so they can use this environment to bypass the minimum wage (£6/hr) and allow big business to boost their profits by getting job-seekers to work for them for free (and at tax payers expense).

With the slashing of public sector jobs, and the private sector struggling due to the global crisis, we currently face the worst conditions for generations in terms of jobs and these changes will only make things worse. The few new jobs created by the private sector have mostly been part-time low paid jobs, with massive competition for positions and extra hours difficult to come by. With big business now able to get people to effectively work for free now too, the negative effect on jobs growth (be it part time and low paid) and on overtime available will only be made worse!

Governments have for a long time pandered to big business, and actively allowed a massive influx of people into the country to keep pay/salaries down. The massive amount of immigration that has occurred has also pushed up housing demand and house prices ... to the delight again of the bankers and politicians reliant on more 'debt slavery'.

The Government has 'spun' this new scheme as giving people the chance to 'get work experience', but when it displaces additional part-time jobs (and overtime) that would otherwise have been created ... the smoke-screen, just like all the others, quickly evaporates.

Debt Slavery and Wage slavery are partners in crime ... and underpin a cruel and immoral strategy best described as 'the economics of exploitation'. So how come the Government is getting away with this?

Ignorance, Apathy and/or 'Clever Collusion' of those in Power (including the media)?

NB and the next scam after this? ... these same people are now starting to argue the need for 'trickle down economics' again ... and the need to reduce the top rate of tax for the ultra-rich (e.g. bankers, executives) ... to try to stop them avoiding tax and for money to 'trickle down' to the poor ... you couldn't make this stuff up!

Ignorance is not bliss ... and democracy is a long way off (e.g. look at the NHS reforms)!

Scientists have suggested the theory of democracy has a key flaw - that most of the public are just too stupid to pick the 'right candidate'!

According to the theory, the democratic process relies on the assumption that a majority of citizens recognise the best political candidate, or best policy idea, when they see it.

However research led by Professor David Dunning, a psychologist at Cornell University, recently showed incompetent people are inherently unable to judge the competence of other people, or the quality of those people's ideas.

This research is misleading however, and for numerous reasons. 

First of all it assumes the majority of people are ignorant/incompetent, which they are not. A good dose of common sense, and a greater sense of community/purpose, can go a long way ... but this has been steadily displaced by a mix of self-interest and greed (modelled by current 'leaders').

Secondly, the research ignores the deep and corrosive influence of all those with vested interests who quietly wield power; from politicians, media tycoons, lobby groups, big business, bankers and landowners. Put these into the mix too and it becomes quickly clear that the vast majority of messages people currently receive are hardly unbiased (e.g. remember 'dangerous climate change' and 'weapons of mass destruction')!

Thirdly, the research assumes that what we now have can be called democracy! Most people in the UK are indeed ignorant/apathetic to how little influence their 'democratic system' actually affords them! People get to have 'a say' ... but only once every five years, and even then, around only 2% of votes actually count/make a difference as to who gains power (i.e. 'swing votes' in marginal constituencies).

Aristotle once said ...

"Democracy is when the indigent, and not the men of property, are the rulers"

"In a democracy the poor will have more power than the rich, because there are more of them, and the will of the majority is supreme"

Given the above, and the self-interest and greed (poweromics) being shown by those wielding power to stop this, it's clear that real democracy is still a long way off ... and will only arise if/when more people stand up for democracy ... 

Take a look at the planned changes to the NHS for instance. The Government are still trying to ignore all the opposition to its NHS bill (n.b. a bill that no-one voted for), from patient groups as well as all the healthcare experts!

The Government is attempting a 'divide and rule' strategy ... and deploying as much misleading PR/spin as it can. It also plans to deflect any blame from increased NHS rationing away from themselves ... and onto local GPs/consortium groups (and are trying desperately to bribe GP's to accept this ... with lots of cash)!

Their 'localism strategy' is being used as a smoke-screen for deflecting blame, to 'divide and rule' and to effectively remove the word 'NATIONAL' out of the National Health Service (NHS) ... creating a complete post code lottery for healthcare in the UK.

Scrapping waiting targets for treatments is also a way to force more people to pay in order to 'queue jump' ... as they will be treated by exactly the same NHS doctors and nurses (n.b. the health bill is seeking to ration healthcare provided free on the NHS, and at the same time allow existing NHS hospitals to use up to 49% of this 'freed up'/'spare capacity' to treat 'private patients')! 

People need to wake up and 'smell the coffee', and stand up and be counted ... or they will lose a vital/cherished service, a National Health Service set up to provide healthcare for all based on clinical need ... and not the ability to pay.

Voters reject Clegg ... and throw out electoral reform

In the referendum on electoral reform voter turn-out was less than half (60% didn't vote) and of those who bothered to vote, only 32% said they wanted to change the system. 

Nick Clegg, Liberal Democrat leader, compromised everything (e.g. the tripling of tuition fees, the scrapping of EMA, NHS reform etc) in order to secure a vote on electoral reform, but then failed to win the vote!  

And the irony of it all is ... Nick Clegg, by reneging on all of his promises and putting aside his moral compass (choosing power over principle), is the actual person who set doubt/alarm bells off in people's heads (e.g. about coalitions) and sounded the death nell for electoral reform.

Many will not have bothered to listen to the arguments, and simply wanted to deliver a protest vote against him (nb which is why the Yes campaigners tried desperately to stop him getting involved in their campaign)!

This would also explain why the Liberal Democrats suffered a rout in the Local Elections, whilst their coalition partners actually gained seats (nb even though their partners are the main party responsible for introducing the cuts)!

Nick Clegg is deliberately keeping his head down, but did say "When you have such a overwhelmingly clear answer you just have to accept it and move on. This is a bitter blow for all those people who believe in the need for political reform, but the answer is clear and the wider job of the government, and the Liberal Democrats in government will continue, to repair the economy, to restore prosperity and jobs and a sense of optimism in the country. That is the job we started and we will see it though. We will dust ourselves off and move on."

And the issue with this? ... well for many it was not a case of rejecting electoral reform at all, but the best way of voters showing they reject him (given it was Nick Clegg's key demand in coalition)! ... and to try to maintain power ... he's predictably saying the public rejected electoral reform (i.e. not him) ... and he will continue in power doing what he's been doing!  

IMHO if the Liberal Democrats could get rid of him they almost certainly would (nb calls are there already from the grass-roots), but because of the massive damage that he's done to his party, they are now in such a state they could actually potentially implode.  Looks like they are just going to try and hang on and hope for the best ... for now. 

Meanwhile, Nick Clegg will still no doubt be contemplating his lifeboat (a safe Tory seat in the next election), particularly as the Conservative vote went up! But he will sit between two stools ... wanting to please an increasingly rebellious party (by showing he's prepared to stand up for people), and wanting to please Cameron and the Conservative party (to ensure he has a free passage to one of their safe seats)!

Trust, honour, respect ... Here I do think the electorate have given their verdict on Nick Clegg. However, apathy ruled the day and ignorance helped to deliver a protest vote but not electoral reform (nb by voting for electoral reform, but not voting for the Liberal Democrats in the local elections, voters could still have delivered a protest vote!) ... so Poweromics will continue unabated.

Whilst Ignoromics prevails, Poweromics will flourish ...

Apathy ... a 'sign' of things to come?

Contrary to popular belief "Ignorance" is not bliss ... and levels of "Apathy" will determine the future ...

Levels of voter apathy in the forthcoming elections (local elections and the referendum on electoral reform) will signal to those currently in power, and misusing power (i.e. applying Poweromics), how much more than can get away with before people finally take notice and decide to do something about it!

Ignoromics is what allows Poweromics to flourish, and it's made up of two types - Ignorance (Type 1) and Apathy (Type 2). Why not take a look and see which type of Ignoromics those around you suffer from !

Whilst Ignoromics prevails, Poweromics will flourish ...

The banks are to blame ... and King's surprised people aren't more angry!

In an interview with the Daily Telegraph, Mervyn King has urged high street banks to take a better, longer term view towards their customers and to stop focusing on the need to “simply maximise profits next week”.

He accused them of routinely exploiting their millions of customers, stating “If it’s possible for them to make money out of gullible or unsuspecting customers, particularly institutional customers, they think that is perfectly acceptable.” [More evidence highlighting that ignorance is not bliss, and that those misusing power think it's perfectly acceptable to exploit it!]

The Governor also criticised the “weight put on the importance and value of takeovers” and raises concerns that companies with good reputations have been “destroyed” in the search for short-term profits.

Mr King expressed regret for not sounding a louder warning over his concerns before the last banking crisis [NB Is this an apology? IMHO he should have been sacked for this!]. The Governor’s remarks are a warning to George Osborne, the Chancellor, as a government commission considers whether to force high street banks to sell off their investment banking arms [NB IMHO this is a must and a no-brainer!]

Mr Osborne is thought to be against such a plan [NB as he's trying to look after his friends in the City!], but Mr King is due to ultimately become responsible for banking regulation and his views are, therefore, critical. In the interview, the Bank Governor said: “We allowed a banking system to build up which contained the seeds of its own destruction. We’ve not yet solved the 'too big to fail’ or, as I prefer to call it, the 'too important to fail’ problem. The concept of being too important to fail should have no place in a market economy.”

When asked whether there could be a repeat of the financial crisis, Mr King said: “Yes. The problem is still there. The search for yield goes on. Imbalances are beginning to grow again.”

Mr King suggested that the culture of short-term profits and bonuses within the banks may ultimately be responsible for the problems. He says that traditional manufacturing industries have a more “moral” way of operating [i.e. banks have few(er) morals!] They care deeply about their workforce, about their customers and, above all, are proud of their products. With the banks there isn’t that sense of longer term relationships. There’s a different attitude towards customers. Small and medium firms really notice this: they miss the people they know”.

The Governor added that good businesses “keep a clear vision of who their customers are, and are run by people who don’t think they should simply maximise profits next week.” He said that the payment of bonuses is part of this cultural problem. “Why do banks in general want to pay bonuses? It’s because they live in a 'too big to fail’ world in which the state will bail them out on the downside.”

Over the past 30 years, he says, “we changed Britain away from a sclerotic economy with inefficiencies and problems in labour relations. Everyone got to the point where we no longer expected government to bail us out. Everyone bought in to market discipline. We were all better off. It was working very successfully.” But now, people have every right to be angry, because “out of what seems to them a clear blue sky”, the crisis comes, they find they lose their jobs and there’s the sharpest fall in world trade since the 1930s. “But, surprise, surprise, the institutions bailed out were those at the heart of the crisis. Hedge funds were allowed to fail, 3,000 of them have gone, but banks weren’t”.

The comments will embarrass the Chancellor, who recently concluded a deal with the banks under which they would be able to resume the payment of bonuses in return for boosting lending [IMHO this is yet another act of treachery, from a Tory millionaire looking after his friends in the City, and who also fund his party].

So why aren't people more angry? ... well there's Ignorance of course ... but there's also a great deal of Apathy! Apathy is a disease in Britain ... a disease that will result in millions of lives being blighted!

Monetary rewards - a recipe for success ... or failure ?

Are monetary rewards the passport to 'success' or a recipe for 'failure' ... should a company incentivize its people to innovate? 

This great 10 minute clip does a fantastic job at answering the above questions ... 

The clip successfully highlights the fundamental flaws in traditional enterprises and economies, as well as the fallacy of "incentivizing" people using monetary reward too* ...

It also goes on to explain what really motivates people ... nb the idea that money is not a motivator is well known and has been for some time (well over half a century in fact) ... as Maslow, Herzberg, Deming (and myself) have all pointed out!

So why is it not prevalent in enterprises and communities all around the world today?

Is it down to ignorance? ... well partly, for instance most mainstream business schools are still teaching flawed and outdated practices! 

Is it down to apathy? ... well partly, given many of those who know better chose not to do anything about it. 

Whilst ignorance and apathy are partly to blame, IMHO the main reason for it is that those currently in power (and who apply Poweromics) like to use monetary reward as a way to 'control people' and to get them to do what they want them to do (whether it's best for customers/company/country or not). Politicians/bankers also deliberately use debt to control people and create compliance too (see 'debt slavery')! 

So it's not hard to see why it's not prevalent yet ... it's because those abusing power like to use it to control people for their own personal gain ... despite the fact that it destroys motivation, the performance of enterprise and the long term success of the country.   

* NB the City's drive to profit from speculation and their ability to profit from the buying and selling of shares are also problematic too. For instance, city bonuses drove 'fraudulent' types of 'innovation' and the creation of 'toxic' financial 'products' (e.g. C.D.O's, C.D.S's and Self-certificated mortgages). City bankers profited heavily from gambling using these products (e.g. creating pyramid schemes using other people's money) ... and left taxpayers to pick up all the losses (resulting in massive Government debt, tax rises and cuts to public services). The City also speculates with shares and profits heavily from the process of buying and selling shares too (nb with bankers again not risking any of their own money). This speculation results in the entire share stock of most publicly traded companies being bought and sold in less than a year, and   results in most executives being incentivized by substantial cash bonuses for creating short-term profit/results too (at the expense of long term sustainable success) - just like the bankers themselves!

Real "People Power" ... will rise up as result of leaders "Abusing Power"

Are we currently seeing the arrival of "Government backed People Power" or a disgraceful "Abuse of Power by the few in Power" ?

Ask yourself if you've had any say in i) how swinging budget cuts are introduced, ii) how tax hikes are implemented (e.g. VAT targeted at the poor), iii) if massive tax cuts should be quietly given to the ultra-rich Tory backers (bankers and those in tax-havens*), and iv) if our precious forests should be sold off ...?

IMHO "People Power" will eventually arrive, but to counter the "Abuse of Power" we are currently witnessing! However what we are also seeing is this Government smokescreen being blown away. What they are trying to do is to devolve responsibility and deflect blame for the cuts onto others (e.g. a great article on this is here) ... and put responsibility on communities for picking up the pieces (via volunteering - or perhaps by compulsion in the future with future welfare reform)!

It is important to note that this Government is also trying to force through NHS reforms, that also 'devolve the axe and deflect blame' onto doctors for the planned £20bn p.a. of efficiency savings ... and 'buying their silence and support' by bribing them for cutting the healthcare they provide to you (e.g. with lucrative contracts and bonuses) ... again without any consultation or support from the electorate (as this radical change was in neither of the Coalition's election manifestos).

Michael Gove, the Secretary of State for Education, has also been accused of an 'abuse of power' by a high court judge for scrapping the Building Schools for the Future programme without proper consultation and consideration ....

There are many more abuses of Power highlighted on this web site too. IMHO Ignorance and Apathy are endemic, but both will reduce as people's lives get far worse ... which they will given current plans!

Roll-on real "People Power"!

* An excellent post in the Guardian exposed this one! Contrast this with the spin from David Cameron ... who tells us he can't afford tax cuts!

'Localism' - a strategy for 'devolving the axe' and 'deflecting blame'

Following on from my last post, I have included extracts from an excellent article written by Polly Toynbee and published in the Guardian on 11th February 2011.

"Holding the Coalition line on cuts is getting harder as 90 Lib Dem councillors and council leaders break silence in a letter of protest to the Times warning of the damage to the economy and the most vulnerable ... and now some Tory councils are joining in. All this is before the great cull of jobs and services begins in earnest in April, when notice periods end and the redundant start to join the unemployment register.

Esoteric ideological debates over "localism" have become pretty meaningless – though the right find it a useful distraction from the brutality of the cuts. The coalition brand of localism means the axe is devolved, along with the blame. Brazen denial, outrageous abuse of figures, and accusations of (Labour) council profligacy are their weapons of choice.

It's easy to bamboozle voters in the impenetrable thickets of local authority funding formulae. Once a minister sinks a Newsnight debate into a row over whether a council is losing 8% or 25%, the hope is viewers give up. How can they know who's right? 

There is just one extraordinary fact everyone needs to know. The cuts have fallen hardest on the most deprived councils, while the richest areas have suffered least. Whichever way the figures are construed, the highest percentage of cuts hit the poorest places hardest: Liverpool worst, followed by Manchester; Knowsley; Blackburn with Darwen; South Tyneside; Hackney; Newham; Hartlepool; Tower Hamlets and so on.

Now look up at the top and some councils actually gain – such as Oliver Letwin's Dorset. Among the least affected in spending power are such places as Vince Cable's Richmond upon Thames, Windsor and Maidenhead, Wokingham, and Michael Gove's Surrey.

The Local Government Chronicle first outed these figures, but this remarkable fact has not percolated into national consciousness. Perhaps it's just too hard to believe that any government could do such a thing so blatantly. Research by the House of Commons library found the political match is near perfect: the more solidly Labour the district, the harsher its cuts; while the more blue Tory the shire, the less it is affected, with the Lib Dems in between.

The official response is always the same: "The government has delivered a tough but fair settlement ensuring the most vulnerable communities are protected. If councils share back-office services, join forces to procure, cut out non-jobs and root out overspends, then they can protect frontline services."

Now consider this: worse is planned, again in the name of "localism". Pickles is planning to return funds from business rates to councils that earn them. Currently they are collected centrally and redistributed according to local need. Any move to keep them in the affluent areas with the most lucrative commerce – mainly in the south-east – may in the long term take even more from the poor areas to give to the rich. But it will sound nicely "localist".

Although local tax is a small fraction of overall revenues, council tax is more hated and more regressive than any other. That's why localists of the small-state right are all for devolving tax-raising powers to councils, knowing how much less could be raised. That's why the localism bill has a trigger for a referendum if a council raises tax more than some 2.5%.

Localism, like the "big society", is the shield for a sizeable redistribution from poor to rich. Sir Michael Marmot's government-funded review pinpointed extreme inequality by council district: in some places, 58% of children fail to reach a good standard of behaviour and understanding by primary school age, destined to fail thereafter. But Sure Starts are stripped bare as the most deprived councils are hit so much harder than councils in lush places.

All this, together with £18bn of welfare cuts, form a turbo-charged programme for accelerating inequality, with an entirely predictable outcome. Margaret Thatcher caused the number of poor children to rise from one in seven to one in three: these figures on the distribution of cuts suggest the coalition will leave an even worse legacy.

But attack is their defence. Labour Manchester, rated "good", is this week's target, one of the first out with grim news that its 25% cut over two years means 2,000 jobs lost, swimming pools, libraries, youth centres and all public toilets but one closed.

Its council leader, Sir Richard Leese, says the less visible cuts are even more painful, in care for the old and mentally ill at home. Grant Shapps, caught fibbing about an imaginary Manchester "Twitter czar", accuses them of deliberately waving bloody stumps for political effect. He compared them with next door (Tory) Trafford, which, he claims, is cutting no jobs through greater efficiency. But he forgets to say Manchester has had a cut 60% deeper than more affluent Trafford.

So beware crude council comparisons as the government tries to shift the blame. First you need to know such things as how many jobs a council has outsourced, hiding job cuts in private or voluntary-sector balance sheets – and exactly which government grants have been cut where. 

Downright dishonesty is a good defence – until found out"

A great article ... but what next ...?  IMHO as dishonesty is exposed (and 'ignorance' is reduced) those deliberately misleading people and abusing power will fall back on their 'second line of defence' - 'apathy' ... as when the majority of people in this country become more aware ... ignorance simply turns into apathy ! 

Hence things will end up getting much worse before this second line of defence is breached!

Public confidence collapsing ... a self-feeding downward spiral ?

A ComRes poll for ITV News shows that half the country thinks the Government has lost control of the economy and fear a double dip.

The sixth installment of the Cuts Index, conducted by ComRes, shows that almost half the country (48%) believes that the Government has lost control of the economy. This compares to 29% who believe that the Government is in control of the economy.

Polled after last week's drop in GDP, 52% of the public believe that the UK is on course for another wave of recession, up from 38% when asked the same question in October. In contrast, 17% of country doesn't believe there will be a double dip - compared to 24% in October.

Asked whether they think things are generally heading in the right direction, 48% said no, up from 32% when asked in October. This compares to 28% saying they think things are heading in the right direction, down from 41% in October.

Asked about who they trust to see the UK through the current economic situation, 22% of the public say they trust George Osborne, 33% trust David Cameron and 22% trust Nick Clegg (nb the trust in all three men has fallen by 10-12%).

With so little faith in the Coalition, and even less in the Opposition (they polled only 15%!), it doesn't bode well for the future of Britain ... as a mixture of ignorance and apathy will continue to prevail ... 

for a while longer at least. This won't last forever however ... as a self-feeding negative downward spiral has started, with household incomes dropping (except for the very rich) and unemployment rising (nb we have also learnt this week that a staggering 97% of all new jobs have only been for part-time work) ... and hard-pressed people will start to take more notice, and demand very different things ... 

NB Politicians need to take a look at the recent IMF report, and on the risks of civil war (due to imbalances of Power).

Are we really 'all in this together'?

Government announces tax free saving and inheritance plan for the ultra rich

The Government, with the use of a clever mix of smoke and mirrors and spin, is telling us it wants to sell off 15% of our national forest-land to private owners ... and says it is needs to do so to cut the deficit, but the real reason could not be further from the truth ... !

In reality this move is being done so the super-rich can profit from it, and at the same time have their tax bill reduced ... by expanding a unique tax free investment/savings loop-hole only available to them ... as investments in land are free from capital gains tax ... and are uniquely free from any inheritance tax too (which is why many ultra-rich landowners, bankers and football players have been quietly 'cashing in' and buy more land).

This carefully crafted move exposes the 'double standards' that currently exist and the real hypocrisy lying behind the 'We are all in this together' spin, as this move comes at the same time as ordinary hard-working people are being disproportionately forced to pay higher levels of tax as a result of the recent VAT hike!  

As I have said on this blog before, one of the most fair/just taxes we should be introducing as a country is a Land Value Tax, in order to replace unfair property taxes, to reduce VAT, to reduce tuition fees and to reduce the tax on jobs. The loophole on inheritance tax should also be closed too (so why have the Government, and indeed the last Government, failed to do such things ... well it's obvious really isn't it - i.e. just follow the money ... and look out for all the self-interest and greed).

Vince Cable (Business Secretary) understands the importance of introducing a Land Value Tax, as he held a summit on the subject in the House of Commons recently, so it's a disgrace that this Government, which he and the Liberal Democrats are a part of, are now actively pushing such immoral/unjust changes through ... especially after the immoral tripling of tuition fees and the scrapping of the EMA. Vince Cable must not care or he has become quickly corrupted - see my Homer Simpson post earlier. (NB Today his department also come under fire from the CBI, saying it needed to be 'less of a talking shop' and 'more of an action-oriented growth champion').

It's clear the Liberal Democrats are providing a convenient smoke-screen for the Conservatives, who are taking every opportunity to quietly reward their ultra-rich families/backers (e.g. landowners, bankers) ... and the quicker this smoke screen is removed the better!

It is worth noting that any potential benefit gained from selling off land is going to be short-lived, as any one-off revenue claimed will be quickly offset by large reductions in capital gains tax and inheritance tax bills for the ultra-rich (for generations to come). 

This proposal highlights how 'ignorance is not bliss', because it's young people, pensioners and hard-working taxpayers that are having to pay for these tax cuts to the super-rich, whilst also bailing out bankers (who are still paying themselves obscene bonuses)! 

Ignorance or Apathy - Homer Simpson's view ...

Who do you know that thinks like Homer Simpson?

If most people don't understand what Homer is saying in this caption then we need to educate ... On the other hand if most people think in the same way as Homer then the future (e.g. for families and future generations) is bleak ...  as those exploiting (and stealing the future of) hard working people will continue to do so (e.g. banksters, politicians, judiciary, lawyers) ... up to the point* where all the honest, honorable and hard-working people can no longer survive (e.g. afford to eat - which will be the point when they finally decide they care) ... and riots begin! ... 

* NB Those in Power, and abusing their Power, will try to stop just before this point, but their insatiable greed will make them carry on!

What's worse - Ignorance or Apathy?

As bankers pay themselves billions in bonuses for gambling, and everyone else suffers and pays the cost of bailing the banks out ... most people are living a life of ignorance or apathy ... with hardworking people/families losing their jobs and paying higher taxes, and with future generations being burdened with debt.

Meanwhile these legalised ponzi scheme fraudsters (banksters) are carrying on regardless and getting away with it ... they are lending very little to businesses but speculating a great deal on commodities (such as oil, precious metals, cotton and grain - pushing up raw material prices and thus inflation) and the collapse of economies (e.g. that have bailed them out, such as Ireland).

At the same time the medical profession (consultants and doctors) are busy ripping off the NHS, with consultants earning £100k's (e.g. taking £100k plus extra a year by charging £1000 for just 4 hours extra work) and with doctors quietly taking home 40% more pay (and for many much more than this) for doing less work (e.g. no out of hours cover) as a result of flawed GP contracts.  I raised these issues on BBC's Question Time at the time and they reluctantly admitted it ... nb people used to go into the medical profession with a passion for helping people, not to milk the system dry and use the proceeds to fund property portfolios ... the money they have taken out could have paid for MORE doctors/nurses and much better patient care ... but they clearly decided this was not in their own best interests and decided to take the money for themselves instead (nb as a result taxpayers now pay some of the most expensive doctor/consultant fees in Europe).

Can we expect the current wave of politicians to sort these things out properly ... Well I'm afraid the answer at the moment is 'no' as the truth is they do not have the interests of ordinary hard-working people at heart ... and their own self-interest/greed stops them from challenging others playing the same 'game' too ... so it's going to take far more than this I'm afraid.

Some argue that people get what they deserve ... and if they remain ignorant/apathetic they should not be surprised (or even complain) about being exploited (i.e. 'taken for a ride') by others ... but do you agree with this?  ... and what's worse in your view ... ignorance or apathy? (why not think about it, and avoid the obvious "I don't know and I don't care" answer!)