These idiots don't know the first thing about capitalism, they are socialists who haven't got a clue what capitalism is supposed to do. The "Free Market" is not supposed to work AGAINST people, it is supposed to work FOR people.
The approach of "letting the market sort it out" is WRONG, for the market will only sort ITSELF out and has no social conscience.
We elect politicians for our own considerations, not to stand back, "do nothing", and let the free market pirates have their way, but to LIMIT and CONTROL their influences so what they do brings more benefit to OUR societies.
Making wealth is first and foremost to better ones own standard of life which THEN allows you to look after others who are poor.
If we are poor then the entire world will become poor, so it is imperative that we become wealthy so we can give to others.
Presently, the people are becoming poorer, the poor are going to die, and the rich are becoming richer.
The EU is alone in its quest in a so called "free market", which has barriers around it which prevent British, Italian, French or other workers working in "The Global Economy", which we're led by Gordon Brown to believe includes America, China and Russia et al.........It doesn't !
All the "free market" has produced is a "free ride" on Europe and it must stop.
Obama is set to deliver a "Big Bang" policy next week to save the US economy. ( He will seek to 'protect' the USA )
Putin has already said he wants nothing to do with the uni-polar structures which control economies, money and finance. He has already protected the Russian economy.
Since I don't see many European workers taking up contracts in China, then I can't see how we're in a "Global Economy", yet Brown gave £2 billion to China and another billion to India - WHY ?
Gordon Brown talks a load of bollox and no one is listening to him any more, so if you're reading this David Cameron, I'd like to know when you are going to say that Gordon Brown should be put out of our misery before he puts Britain on the scrap heap with the ludicrous pomposity he expelled in an empty room at Davos, TALKING about saving the world when other leaders were and are, saving their own economies.
As for David Cameron's speech at Davos, I would hope in this context, that he's talking about our economy as the free market. He indicates that capitalism must have the aim to improve peoples lives and not just the capitalists pockets. This "policy" is manifest in his stance on the European Union which would retain our veto over all legislation but it needs to go further with a policy to take us into EFTA.
The strikes occurring now over the Italian workers at the Total site are occurring because the Italian firm has been given a contract and decided to bring their own workforce to Britain. This has led to British workers not even being considered for employment and a flagrant breech of their rights to equal opportunity and resultant unemployment. This has happened as a result of the kind of capitalism we see in Europe, which has no moral or social consideration. It is a prime example of why capitalism on its own without a social aim, is "immoral", and David Cameron has already said he disagrees with it but not yet how he plans to tackle it.The fact is, he will be elected as Prime Minister, and he will "seek" to change it, and the European Union will have to change or Britain will have to veto its decisions or leave. -Social interests, social responsibility and a reckoning that the true aim of capitalism is to promote better standards for all and not the irresponsible few is what he said, so now we have to hear "how".A firm here can't take its entire workforce to the USA, China or Russia which all quite rightly demand local 'jobs' are created. Perversely, what the EU does is tantamount to lunacy and this gives a compelling insight into how it fails to consider the social aspects of the political decisions it makes, which affect the lives of ordinary people all across Europe, but not in the USA, China or Russia.In the "globalised world", or more accurately in the "European economy", only the people suffer through EU policies which allow the jobs to be taken away by a foreign firm and be given to foreign workers whilst our skilled workers remain unemployed and without consideration for their own rights to equal opportunity.Brown is the only leader singing for globalisation !! Obama, and Putin are doing their own thing to save their own economies. Sarkozy will too, likewise others who have their own plans and Gordon Brown is alone on this.David Cameron MUST stand up for British jobs for British workers and advise the world that HE believes in capitalism, it is our party ideal not Labour's, and only he knows its true aims are to bring properity to all.
Thatcher would have made this very plain. Get on with it David - END the European mess they've created.
There is no point having British politicians if they are not acting in the interests of the people who elect them, and David Cameron must say Britain is his number one interest, remove us to EFTA and get on with running the British economy as Obama and Putin are getting on running theirs.
This 'globalisation' nonsense is complete rubbish, it's all in Gordon Brown's head, and it's doing a mass disservice to Britain and to British workers as no other country acts the way he'd have us believe. He's delusional.
Edit: 1st February 2009 -
Right, since I wrote this post I entered a rather long and tedious argument under the guise of 'debate' with some daft twat in Europe who calls himself a Conservative, and is an obvious cheerleader for the grand European plan of facking La-La Land, to create a "free market" which bears as much likeness to Thatcher's free market as my arse does to Britney Spears. i.e. ( Excuse my anger but this is important and it has to be said ).....It is fuck all like it !
Where did it all go wrong for Britain?
Let me explain. Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, together with Mikhail Gorbachev, created 'detente'. This was the 'agreement' which led Russia to permit the Berlin Wall to fall peacefully. If you want my opinion on it, it was done with the help of Mikhail Gorbachev because there's no way in the USSR as it was at that time ( 1989 ), that a pin could have moved toward that wall without being drilled with a sub-machine gun so it stands to reason it was started by Gorbachev's supporters because he 'permitted it'. Right. Once you believe that it was an 'inspired operation' then you have to believe 'someone inspired it', and ask yourself whether you've yet found anyone in history who acclaims to be the perpetrator and the cause of breaking up the Berlin Wall. No? You mean you can't find anyone? - I thought so. So then you have to believe me then.
Margaret Thatcher and Reagan played this free market in Britain and in Europe and in America. Trade barriers were dropped, trade tariffs were agreed. The World Trade Organisation and the European Union, sat about and developed the plan to open doors to world trade. Hence Britain was over-run with investment, everything was privatised, financial regulations were relaxed, deregulated and revolutionised, and thus was born the "free market" which begat DEBT through easy credit and a home equity spiral which led to the boom we've all just experienced these last 20 years.
Enter Blair, Clinton and Brown, throw in a bit of George Bush, and you have a ficking catastrophic economic problem, not least because the system requires permanent growth in GDP which cannot be sustained indefinitely without an "enlarged trading area". Hence "enlargement", hence robbing territory from Russia whilst it was in a state of flux with Boris Yeltzin and then his protege Vladimir Putin who both grappled with internal problems, a new constitution and the extraordinary political dimensions which were born by the sudden changes brought by 'detent' under Mikhail Gorbechev and the new Russian Federation along with its constitution which clearly is a work of art and places Russian's with personal rights and freedoms which were never before seen. One of which is the right to labour, another is the right to have state protection anywhere in the world. Thus, Russia would be in breech of its constitution if it failed to protect South Ossetians'. Anyway, I digress. Where does the European Union come into this plan?
Okay, well in order to sell the global plan to the EU, there had to be a social dimension to it. Like everyone can travel, everyone is a European, everyone can work where they like and everyone can have a European Passport. Which of course sets the "Everyone can lose their sovereignty" plan in motion as a consequence, and everyone can go take a flying jump if they want "British Jobs for British Workers".
So this 'Italian Job' highlights the significance of where we are now.
It opens up the political question as to where the fuck are British people supposed to get jobs in Britain when immigration is welcomed by their government, laws are there to protect them rather than us, we don't have the right to be interviewed for these jobs, we have to traipse off around Europe with £60 a week Job Seekers Allowance like beggars, to find work, whilst Italians and other Europeans are sat in our country which suddenly belongs to everyone but us, and working here in Britain on jobs we British didn't know existed, were not told about or even considered or able to apply?........Sensible I guess if you happen to be roaming the streets of Italy looking for work instead of knocking two doors up at a British oil refinery with your cap in hand like a guy waiting to see the governor, where the personnel manager might be arsed to show his face, to ask whether you can be considered for one of the jobs he didn't tell you about and had no intention of inviting you along for an interview!!!
I ask what the social implications are here in respect to family break-up, lower education, poverty, higher crime, more prisons, more benefits for those out of work but still looking, higher demands on our services, environment and infrastructure, transport, roads, schools, hospitals, doctors surgeries, etc etc etc, not least a bigger queue at the dole office or at the recruitment agency when it comes to British people finding work.
How is the family affected by dad roaming around Europe looking for work ?
I can feel myself wondering who exactly amongst the trough eaters in parliament are actually looking after British interests. I can feel myself wondering if this is not all a box of soft soap we're being given in yet another ploy to win over the British public who are damned sick of being spun to by ideologues who haven't an ounce of interest in their interests.
Does anyone actually care?
Blair and Brown are a couple of nuggets. Fruitcakes even. They call themselves 'socialists'. NuLabour. What's New? - Is it that what we have here are a couple of socialist thicko's who can't understand what capitalist markets are supposed to do, or is it they're trying to bend them to their own design? - "We will share the proceeds of growth". Who to? - "An end to boom and bust". Who for? "We're in a global economy". Who's paying for it and who's in it? - Russia isn't, USA isn't, China or India and Africa, Australia or Canada or Japan isn't. Italy isn't because I never seen 400 Brits living on barges in Italy working at an energy plant where Italians live two doors up have not been asked to work?
If Gordon Brown says one more time that "We're in a global economy", I think I'll kick the front of my telly in or at least throw a shoe at the bastard because he doesn't know the first thing about capitalism, or the free market, or Mrs Thatcher's idea to keep your hand on the tiller of free enterprise with the Bank of England through an independent decision making parliament, and to back Britain with every fibre and muscle and sinew, and every thought and action, for she is British through and through, and knows what it means to develop wealth for the nation as opposed to "sharing the proceeds of growth" with everyone else BUT the people of Britain.
Where did it all go wrong for Britain?
Let me explain. Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, together with Mikhail Gorbachev, created 'detente'. This was the 'agreement' which led Russia to permit the Berlin Wall to fall peacefully. If you want my opinion on it, it was done with the help of Mikhail Gorbachev because there's no way in the USSR as it was at that time ( 1989 ), that a pin could have moved toward that wall without being drilled with a sub-machine gun so it stands to reason it was started by Gorbachev's supporters because he 'permitted it'. Right. Once you believe that it was an 'inspired operation' then you have to believe 'someone inspired it', and ask yourself whether you've yet found anyone in history who acclaims to be the perpetrator and the cause of breaking up the Berlin Wall. No? You mean you can't find anyone? - I thought so. So then you have to believe me then.
Margaret Thatcher and Reagan played this free market in Britain and in Europe and in America. Trade barriers were dropped, trade tariffs were agreed. The World Trade Organisation and the European Union, sat about and developed the plan to open doors to world trade. Hence Britain was over-run with investment, everything was privatised, financial regulations were relaxed, deregulated and revolutionised, and thus was born the "free market" which begat DEBT through easy credit and a home equity spiral which led to the boom we've all just experienced these last 20 years.
Enter Blair, Clinton and Brown, throw in a bit of George Bush, and you have a ficking catastrophic economic problem, not least because the system requires permanent growth in GDP which cannot be sustained indefinitely without an "enlarged trading area". Hence "enlargement", hence robbing territory from Russia whilst it was in a state of flux with Boris Yeltzin and then his protege Vladimir Putin who both grappled with internal problems, a new constitution and the extraordinary political dimensions which were born by the sudden changes brought by 'detent' under Mikhail Gorbechev and the new Russian Federation along with its constitution which clearly is a work of art and places Russian's with personal rights and freedoms which were never before seen. One of which is the right to labour, another is the right to have state protection anywhere in the world. Thus, Russia would be in breech of its constitution if it failed to protect South Ossetians'. Anyway, I digress. Where does the European Union come into this plan?
Okay, well in order to sell the global plan to the EU, there had to be a social dimension to it. Like everyone can travel, everyone is a European, everyone can work where they like and everyone can have a European Passport. Which of course sets the "Everyone can lose their sovereignty" plan in motion as a consequence, and everyone can go take a flying jump if they want "British Jobs for British Workers".
So this 'Italian Job' highlights the significance of where we are now.
It opens up the political question as to where the fuck are British people supposed to get jobs in Britain when immigration is welcomed by their government, laws are there to protect them rather than us, we don't have the right to be interviewed for these jobs, we have to traipse off around Europe with £60 a week Job Seekers Allowance like beggars, to find work, whilst Italians and other Europeans are sat in our country which suddenly belongs to everyone but us, and working here in Britain on jobs we British didn't know existed, were not told about or even considered or able to apply?........Sensible I guess if you happen to be roaming the streets of Italy looking for work instead of knocking two doors up at a British oil refinery with your cap in hand like a guy waiting to see the governor, where the personnel manager might be arsed to show his face, to ask whether you can be considered for one of the jobs he didn't tell you about and had no intention of inviting you along for an interview!!!
I ask what the social implications are here in respect to family break-up, lower education, poverty, higher crime, more prisons, more benefits for those out of work but still looking, higher demands on our services, environment and infrastructure, transport, roads, schools, hospitals, doctors surgeries, etc etc etc, not least a bigger queue at the dole office or at the recruitment agency when it comes to British people finding work.
How is the family affected by dad roaming around Europe looking for work ?
I can feel myself wondering who exactly amongst the trough eaters in parliament are actually looking after British interests. I can feel myself wondering if this is not all a box of soft soap we're being given in yet another ploy to win over the British public who are damned sick of being spun to by ideologues who haven't an ounce of interest in their interests.
Does anyone actually care?
Blair and Brown are a couple of nuggets. Fruitcakes even. They call themselves 'socialists'. NuLabour. What's New? - Is it that what we have here are a couple of socialist thicko's who can't understand what capitalist markets are supposed to do, or is it they're trying to bend them to their own design? - "We will share the proceeds of growth". Who to? - "An end to boom and bust". Who for? "We're in a global economy". Who's paying for it and who's in it? - Russia isn't, USA isn't, China or India and Africa, Australia or Canada or Japan isn't. Italy isn't because I never seen 400 Brits living on barges in Italy working at an energy plant where Italians live two doors up have not been asked to work?
If Gordon Brown says one more time that "We're in a global economy", I think I'll kick the front of my telly in or at least throw a shoe at the bastard because he doesn't know the first thing about capitalism, or the free market, or Mrs Thatcher's idea to keep your hand on the tiller of free enterprise with the Bank of England through an independent decision making parliament, and to back Britain with every fibre and muscle and sinew, and every thought and action, for she is British through and through, and knows what it means to develop wealth for the nation as opposed to "sharing the proceeds of growth" with everyone else BUT the people of Britain.
I just hope Dave is up to the challenege. My only fear is that he will not be radical enough - and boy will he need to be radical - particuarly with the bloated, heaving public sector.
ReplyDeleteFortunately the Government is such a complete and utter mess, its message is unravelling, its policies have failed and the electorate is getting wise.
Seeing Gordoomed performance at PMQ this week hammered home how awful Brown is. Every answer ended with that pathetic lie that the Tories are the "do nothing" party. Unfortunately the lie appears more like a scripted line than a hardfelt political belief.
The country is in the shit. Culturally, socially, economically. Our nation has been put through the great socialist meat grinder. We've got the wonderful (hah!) BBC telling us Britain doesn't exist and it means nothing to be British.
There is soooooo much wrong with this country. To think he inherited such a growing economy in 1997 and began shafting it in 1999.
For Dave time is an ally, for the longer Brown remains the worse this will get for Labour. The worse it gets will lead to a return of the infighting of last summer, which in turn will lead to a further slide in their poll standing. Will Brown hold out until the end of the year? I think he'll hold out until May 2010, unless he thinks there is any chance of being unseated by his own party - in this instance I think he'll go straight to the polls in a last ditch attempt to salvage his premiership and he'll fail.
Sorry this is so long. It was a good post so I had to comment.
Regrettably J, since reading the shite William Hague said on the Andrew Marr show this morning, I'm inclined to agree with you. This Italian Job thing has sent shivers down my back to be honest and I feel like going on flaming strike!!
ReplyDeleteThat's it for me, they've had my support for as long as I've had a vote, but I'm fed up of waiting around for someone to support my countrymen in their plight. UKIP it is for me then and no turning back because at least I know they stand for the same things I do on having people with enough balls to say enough is enough.
Excellent writing there Rugfish.
ReplyDeleteThe accession of those eight eastern european countries was one of the worst things to happen to this country. The Government cocked it up from the start with their woefully underestimated projections of how many people would come in.
But of course they didn't care. For the Government this was win win win all the way.
First the labour would be cheap. Lets face it, we're not talking about people with German or Swedish costs of living. The Nat Min Wage would be sufficient. Whatsmore they can all share houses and pool resources (that way they can send more money to their families back home). This helped to keep overal average earnings increases down to a minimum. This in turn helped to control inflation. These are only tiny inputs, but they're are still beneficial.
Second it increased that bloody "people in employment" statistic that they have been banging on about all decade. So if unemployment stayed the same it was a winner because more people were in work. Even if unemployed rose it was still a winner because so many hundreds of thousands of people entered the UK to do backbreaking work for peanuts that employment kept on rising.
Thirdly, in the short-term the exchequer benefited. I say short-term because when a 25 year old man (for example) comes over here to do a bit of plumbing for a year he'll pay his taxes and will likely if he stays healthy and out of trouble not be a burden on the state. This of course changes if he has children (and can claim child benefit), or if he decides to stay here and live and eventually retire here. Then the cost of his health, the education of children and his retirement come in being. And this is where the whole growth-by-immigration argument falls flat. I earn slightly less than £17k a year. I pay about £2.5-3k a year in tax and NI. I know full well that during my lifetime I will never pay enough in tax, NI, VAT, car tax, fuel duty, tv licenses, etc to pay for my state pension, my hip replacement, by heart surgery, the education of my children, etc, etc. I know full well that the income and indirect taxes of ordinary people do not pay for their lifetime of needs. We need the wealthy, the super-rich, big business and so on to generate big profits to subsidise our lifestyles.
Now perhaps for every thousand foreign workers we could entice say 10-20 millionaire Poles and Czechs this might balance out. Unfortunately those millionaire foreigners who have come over came to be tax exiles.
I hate to dampen your mood further but you mentioned traipsing across Europe with £60 Jobseeker's Allowance. Well unfortunately you wouldn't even be allowed to do that. The JS Act states you cannot go abroad for any reason and remain entitled to benefit unless the stop if for less than 24 hours (i.e. a booze cruise to Calais) or if you are attending a pre-arranged job interview and your stay away does not exceed 5 days, or something like that. You could however export your benefit, but this is an absolute nightmare. Get your letters from the dole office in the respective language of the country you are going to (one country), then pop over to that country and make a claim in that office (hope you speak the lingo). Then wait 3-4 weeks for the claim to be processed. By the time you have got your first exported payment you may well have realised that our little continental friends want French jobs for French people, German job for German people.
Oh and another thing (blimey I'm on one now), I hate all those pompous pricks on the BBC telling me how there are thousands of Britons working abroad, the guy yesterday gave examples of Dubai and Kuwait and so on. Now I could go on and on about this one, but alot of the people working over in that capacity are highly skilled business-types. I want to know how many labourers, brickies, chippies, plasterers, etc are working in Germany right now. Or perhaps more appropriately Italy. I know there has always been British construction workers in Europe (you only need to watch Auf Wiedersehen to know that), but its the scale and manner of this Total crap that has got me. Perhaps someone can enlighten when a British firm went into a European country in the last say 10, 15 or so years and brought over 400 British workers to do all the work.