HIGHER PRICES = MORE JOBS?

How in heaven's name does raising VAT from 17.5 to 20% boost jobs? And if income tax was raised in the right places, e.g. Super-bonuses over a set limit, say £50,000 and raising the top rate of tax to 75& for those earning £200,000 and over we wouldn't need the VAT rise that hits us all.

VAT was introduces to replace the several rates of purchase tax and was designed to be a 'luxury tax' on goods deemed not essential, such as fur coats and Rolls Royce cars so that those that could afford such goods would contribute more through their purchases. Hard to believe when we see it on everyday clothes we all have to buy.

This rise will hit spending and therefore jobs. High wages and low prices are not diametrical opposites. This is a good, efficient expanding economy. The problem is successive governments have concentrated on holding down wages while prices have been left to the whims of their wealthy friends.

And why isn't VAT charged on newspapers and magazines? I haven't bought either of these items for years and get on quite nicely. Could it be the government don't want to upset their friend's in Fleet Street and attract bad press?

It's time VAT was applied strictly to luxury goods, such as the ones I mention above. Then they can charge 90% as far as I am concerned.

AND SO THE ELECTION IS DONE...

I accept that whichever party was elected we would have seen cuts or increased taxation or both at some time. I can only groan in horror and disbelief that the people of this country (more accurately some of the people) have elected a government that will use the deficit as an excuse to introduce swingeing cuts to the services that the most vulnerable among us rely on for some semblance of a reasonably comfortable existence.

At the same time I hazard a guess that their wealthy pals will see tax breaks and a free reign to continue profiteering on the backs of the needy.

I can only hope that the hung parliament and Mr. Brown's insistence on clinging to power results in a speedy second election and the people of Britain get their thinking heads on vote with their conscience not on a balance of probabilities of who might win.

I urge you to vote for a fringe party to show the three (maybe two now) contenders that they cannot ignore the electorate. Beat them into last place, behind the Greens and the Monster Raving Looney Party. I must say, after 18 years of disastrous Tory rule and 13 years of equally disastrous New Labour Monster Raving Loonies aren't sounding quite so loony now.

GORDON BROWN – BIGOT

Gordon Brown forgot he still had a mic on and called a woman he had just visited a bigot because she said, amongst other things “she used to be labour” (people seem not to have heard this comment- or chosen to ignore it) .

I think you’ll find Gordon, what she meant is she is still Labour but you and your cronies are not.

PEOPLE’S BANK BONUS. (DON’T FORGET TO TELL SID!)

The Tories have come up with a plan to pay back the public for the investment in failing banks. The idea is to sell shares at discount prices to the public, with extra discounts for those on low-incomes and the young.

How will this help? With shares at hundreds or even thousands of pounds what kind of discount will they offer? If it is a large discount, selling shares at a few pounds then the banks will be disadvantaged and we will find a similar situation that the public investment was designed to ease. If it is a small discount, once again it will not be the less well off, but the Tories rich mates that will benefit.

Even if we ignore this and the obvious publicity stunt this is to catch a few votes, and accept it is a good thing and will help, we will see the shares bought up at slightly inflated prices that the small shareholders will see as attractive and a quick profit by the biggest and richest players and we shall be back to square one with the banks owned and run by a few rich individuals who care only about quick profit, whatever the cost.

Mainly, however we should look at the shares fiasco of the 1980's. It is obvious that the Tory Party has not learned anything, that it has not changed and is dogmatically following the tenets of Thatcherite monetarism. If that's what you want, vote for them. I want something different. Something none of the three major parties are offering. A return to the manufacturing base that made Britain great and paid high wages to ordinary people. A return to a system that put people before profits, not the utopian ideal that the benefits of capitalism and profit will inevitably trickle down to the less fortunate.

MONEY TALKS

There are two scandals in the news this week. The BAE Systems £208m out of court settlement and the three MP's and one lord, Elliot Morley, David Chaytor, Jim Devine and Lord Hanningfield who are trying to use Parliamentary Privilege to avoid a criminal case.

In the first situation, the £208m 'fine' paid by BAE seems a massive penalty. But when one considers they count their income at over £1,000m and cash flow in the thousands of millions, it pales into a rather less significant consequence. And it has avoided an open court which may have uncovered further wrongdoing; I think they got off lightly.

As for the MP's and lord, to break the rules sufficiently for prosecutors to believe a crime may have been committed and then try to use Parliamentary Privilege to avoid open court questions, I'll make this point. If your extravagant expense claims are truly mistakes, you have nothing to fear from a criminal prosecution, for you will surely be found not guilty. Or does 'nothing to fear if you've done nothing wrong' only apply to us lesser mortals, who often have only Legal Aid, which MP's seem intent on removing, to call to our defence.

These politicians should remember that Parliamentary Privilege was enshrined in law to prevent the monarch from interfering in the proceedings of Parliament, and prevented an MP from being impeached for proceedings or speeches made in Parliament. While I don't claim a full knowledge or understanding of the Privilege, it seems to me it was not designed to protect politicians from prosecution for criminal activity, inside or outside of Parliament.

David Miliband calms to have no EU Job Ambitions

"I am not a candidate for that. I am not available," he said, adding that he was "committed" to his current job.

That just convinces me he wants the job. He is, after all a politician and when such a plain statement is made, with no ambiguity one has to assume the opposite.

He goes on to say that Tony Blair is the best man to be the first EU president. Here, I agree with him. If he does the same job as EU president as he did as British Prime Minister, he'll split the EU, seeing it a multi-tier state ruined and bankrupt. Then the British can get back to governing Britain.

 

Nick Griffin on Question Time?

Nick griffin, leader of the BNP has been asked to appear on Question Time. A lot of people are upset and some intend to protest.

There are two schools of thought here. One, that the protesters, both verbal and those who will travel to the studio are giving the BNP the oxygen of publicity.

The other, that a man with very similar views achieved power democratically in 1930's Germany because people did nothing.

I'm not sure, myself. The British people can be somewhat naive when it comes to politics. But surely, that is the essence of democracy. An assumption that the electorate have the intelligence to decide their own future and government.

We could have an Uncle Joe (Stalin) telling us we don't know what's best, but he does.

We could have an anarchistic system of devolved government so that each town or collection of towns decides for itself.

Neither sounds too bad- as long as we pick the right Uncle Joe or the right neighbours to collude with.

But then we are back to democracy, because we want the right to kick out the leaders if we don't like the way they lead.

So I think I have to say, let's see Nick Griffin on Question Time. Let's see how he answers questions about economics, education, benefits, unemployment and Britain's place in the world. I am quite sure when he reduces each answer to immigration and the inferiority of some races, we will see him for what he is.

I think, though we might see him squirming, unable to answer and uncomfortable with the truth.

But if we prevent him from appearing there will be many people who will see it as martyrdom.

Finland makes broadband a legal right

Finland makes broadband a legal right for its citizens. Uruguay gives a laptop to every primary school pupil with plans to extend the provision to older schoolchildren next year. What are we doing in Britain? Arguing over whether formal education should start at five or at six years old.

I have theory about education in Britain. That there is a state conspiracy to see its people less well educated to better suit them to the totalitarian state the major parties seem to be inching toward.

While more and more of us go on to college or university, the quality of education seems to be falling. At the same time, the cost of higher education is being put beyond the reach of ordinary people. And this is done by the people who got where they are through free higher education paid for by the taxes of our parents and grandparents.

There have only been two major and successful revolutions in the UK. In 1215 when the Barons forced King John to sign Magna Carta and the English civil war. This is because the rulers, be they king or commoner, elected or appointed have known not to push too hard. Because the British people are essentially loyal, forgiving and accommodating. But the two instances stated show we will not be pushed too hard or too far.

MP's Expenses

I just watched Margaret Beckett on Newsnight. When asked about the £600 she had claimed for garden plants and a new pergola on her expenses, she refused to discuss the matter, only saying that the rules were followed. (It sounded a little like a child caught doing wrong and denying any wrong doing regardless of the circumstances or evidence.) While Foreign Secretary, she had access to a taxpayer-funded apartment in London, but like other ministers with similar privileges, she registered that as her primary residence. Sorry, Ms Beckett, but you were a member of the labour party and the government in the 1970’s. You and the party at that time purported to be socialist. There were many honourable socialists in that government. But for you to be at the trough with the rest of the rest of the pigs just because it didn’t break the rules betrays the foundation, the principles and the aims if the labour and socialist movement. If I were you, I’d hang my head in shame. I wait for the day that the labour party returns to its roots and once again becomes the party of the people, the disenfranchised and the ordinary working man and woman. I will be interested to see whether you resign from the labour party or if you change colours again and profess your socialist beliefs to keep your snout in the seemingly bottomless pit of benefits that the current administration denies ordinary people.

I have never voted for an individual. I vote according to the party they belong to and that party’s political, economic and social allegiance. These last 11 years have not given me that option, so I have voted according to my conscience, often meaning I have voted according to the beliefs of an individual. Often an independent. Often the lesser of several evils. If the labour party returned to its roots and I believed it to be genuine in its return, I would once again vote for them. However, if by some twist of fate Margaret Becket was our candidate, no matter what she professed to be her allegiance or belief, I certainly would use my vote elsewhere.

More Revelations HERE and HERE.