Category Archives: basic income

Diary Blog, 17 February 2020

A sad story with lessons for us all

People who think that mass immigration has no real effect on British people should read the Daily Mirror report, below.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mum-sobs-we-nothing-family-21489077

The family concerned has had its home repossessed by the local council. Without going into the reasons and merits of that repossession (and without examining why the acquaintances of the 15-year-old son think that it is OK to make fun of his homelessness), one can see:

  • that the council in question is staffed by idiots;
  • the effect of mass immigration on services available to British people.

Firstly, the council. The council no longer runs the school but still owns the bungalow. It does not need that bungalow for a new school caretaker. Why could the family not be allowed to stay, paying extra rent or even market rent?

The council has laid out what must have been hundreds of thousands of pounds to alternately bring the action and then to defend the result in the higher courts. Is this money well spent? The council could even, for that money, have bought at least one such bungalow elsewhere and rented it to the family in question (or to someone else).

Immigration: we see that there is very little spare accommodation available to councils, even for emergencies. When a country imports literally millions(since 1997, perhaps 11 million) and those immigrants are breeding fast, this is what happens. Hertfordshire and Essex become, in their urban areas, Calcutta and Kingston. Don’t believe me? Visit, say, Ilford, Essex and doubt no more…

The “refugees welcome” dimwits and “multikultis” will say that all (“all”?!) that is required is for local councils, or central government, or Uncle Tom Cobbley, to house anyone requiring housing. Just like that. Manna from Heaven. Pie in the sky. If only life were that simple!

A sad story, and a tale of unnecessary suffering.

Mike Stuchbery’s case against Tommy Robinson

If anyone is following the legal proceedings of self-styled “historian”, “journalist” and antifa rear-echelon cheerleader Mike Stuchbery against Tommy Robinson, my blog post (updated every few days) can be found here:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/11/27/mike-stuchbery-and-tommy-robinson-legal-dispute/

So far, Stuchbery and his UK supporters have raised £11,594 from mug donors, but it is a mystery what has happened to that money. His one-man-band Pakistani solicitor (there may be a second solicitor involved) sent a “Letter before Action” to “Tommy Robinson” (sub nom Stephen Yaxley-Lennon) in November 2019. Since then, nothing. I have blogged (see above) repeatedly that I do not think that any action will be launched, or will be successful if launched.

Anyone wanting to read more about Stuchbery can do so here:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/10/23/a-few-words-about-mike-stuchbery/

Lisa Nandy

Seems that Lisa Nandy has joined Rebecca Long-Bailey and Sadiq Khan in the ranks of those who cannot distinguish reality from fantasy or semblance:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8012193/Labour-trans-rights-row-Lisa-Nandy-says-rapists-transition-sent-womens-prisons.html

What a deadhead! It also shows that Lisa Nandy is yet another post-Blair political box-ticker, politically-correct agenda constantly at hand. She has, like others, obviously not thought this through.

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/11/15/when-reality-becomes-subjective/

Labour is a joke now. Boris-idiot is embedded in No.10 for at least 2 years and quite possibly nearly 4 years. Whatever Labour does in the next 2+ years is supremely irrelevant.

Holden

Holden cars have run out of road:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8012719/Holden-closure-need-know-car-iconic-brand.html

Even when I was at school in Sydney (1967-69), a Holden was a rara avis. I knew not one person who owned one. My family and their friends and wider circle owned Fords, VWs, Mercedes, even one Rolls-Royce, but no Holdens. Occasionally one would be seen on the road, but not often.

Sabisky

“…should be nowhere near government“…says a thick black barrister (practised for about 3 years in criminal law before becoming an MP at age 28, having also been in the USA for a year or so). Basically a black “racist” who believes in corporal punishment, supports the Jewish lobby (which is why he is often on TV and elsewhere in the msm), and thinks that white European people are the source of most of the evil in this world.

Thick? Yes. Don’t assume that a law degree, Bar qualification or whatever signifies high intellect or knowledge these days. Lammy even thought that reference to the colour of the smoke of the Sistine Chapel at a Papal conclave was “a silly racist joke”!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lammy#Comments_attracting_criticism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_conclave#Smoke_colors

Lammy is also a liar, having said (to give but one example) that his mother raised him in conditions of poverty alleviated by Tax Credits, an easily-rebutted claim in view of the fact that tax credits of that sort were only introduced when Lammy was aged 31 (though there were other low-income credits before that, so in fairness it may just be that Lammy was not lying but just talking confused rubbish. He often does).

Lammy also claimed recently (on Twitter) that “[his] ancestors died fighting this shit”, by which he apparently meant white European civilization. What “ancestors”? What “shit”? If his ancestors died fighting anything, it was in African tribal wars, or maybe in riots on British streets (though that seems unlikely). Hard to know where else the ancestors of this African-race Guyanese might have “died fighting”. Perhaps Lammy will enlighten us.

Anyway, the good news is that Lammy, who actually managed to get promotion to junior minister under Blair/Brown (tokenism?), will probably never be “anywhere near government” himself now. By the time that Labour wins another general election, he will be at least 50 and quite possibly 150!

Sabisky resigns

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51538493

The scalded reaction of the msm, many System politicians and the Twittersphere indicates to me that Sabisky was at least on the right track overall, even if not in every detail.

This was almost literally “15 minutes of fame”…

Baddiel and “holocaust” “denial”

I see that the Jew TV face, David Baddiel, has done a show about so-called “holocaust” “denial”, i.e. about the modern-day heroes and heroines who examine this whole narrative sometimes termed “The Hoax of the Twentieth Century”, people who are treated as heretics and, in a few countries, actually prosecuted as modern heretics.

It is telling that Baddiel did not include these people (from a newspaper report, seems that maybe there was only one person) on his previous series, Heretics. That is because those people, including the nasty comedienne, Jo Brand, are not heretics, just nasty squalid people who, like Baddiel, get paid large amounts for being “edgy” in a fake way. Not real “heretics” by any means.

So there had to be a special show to trash a view of modern history that is claiming more adherents every day. I shall not be watching Baddiel’s show. I could almost predict its content, minute by minute, anyway. A waste of time.

Katie Hopkins

Katie Hopkins has tweeted this:

https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/1229458276083019781?s=20

It may well be that people adherent to Islam and/or Labour want to silence Katie Hopkins, but she is deluding herself if she cannot see that Jewish interests are behind the attacks on her. Sadly, she seems intent on trying to curry favour with the Jewish lobby, which will not work (even if she is part-Jew herself). They hate her. Still, that seems to be the path she has chosen…

The Master Race

I saw this tweet by ignorant rent-a-mouth James O’Brien:

The term “Master Race” is or can be misleading. It tends to conjure a picture of a latter-day Nietzschean “blond beast”, complete with equally Nietzschean whip, lashing the “inferior breeds” into submission and obedience.

In reality, what is or should be meant is that History or (to put it another way) the “evolution of consciousness” through Time, requires at any given moment an advanced element, which (though that advanced element may or may not have the keys to world power) “leads” that evolution simply by being the most advanced in terms of evolution.

There are also backward or laggard elements. We are talking about races, nations, groups, not necessarily about individuals within any of those races, nations or groups.

The leading racial/national/group element will tend to have more power than the rest, but that is by no means always so.

 

The hour before midnight

Labour’s Prospects 2020-2024

Latest opinion polling re. Labour Party

The “has support of the unions” aspect shows how very out of touch is even the rank and file Labour membership. In 2019, membership of trade unions was only 3.69M out of a UK population somewhere between 65M and 70M and an official UK workforce population of over 32.5M. Trade unions now are almost powerless, a result of both “Thatcherite” policy since the 1980s and the relentless migration-invasion.

On Trident etc:

Not that I would disagree with that middle position, but what is important is not what I think but what the voters think. Most or at least half want to retain Trident. Yes, perhaps influenced by the popular Press, so be it…

Voting intention (all voters):

As the recent poll by another polling organization showed, Labour has continued to slide since the recent General Election. Why?

Corbyn has said that he will be resigning once the process of electing a new leader and also Deputy (Tom Watson having imploded and gone down in a ball of fire) is finished. So Corbyn can scarcely be blamed for the continuing slide in voter confidence.

My view is that, though Corbyn was scarcely popular with most voters, the present five candidates wanting to replace him are even less popular. There is, in my view, a perception (which I share) that Labour is a mess, seems not to stand for much except a return to the 1970s (which most voters, however wrongly, look upon with disfavour) and has five people, none of whom is in any way “electable” as potential Prime Minister, vying for the leadership.

There was a huge Jewish (mainly Jewish, or if you like, Zionist; certainly Jewish-led and influenced) campaign against Corbyn and Labour, which started as soon as Corbyn became leader. That certainly had an effect, particularly as it intensified during the election campaign itself. It was not, however, the only factor. It tended to reinforce a view of Corbyn —and so, Labour— that many had anyway. Cartoons such as that below were damaging, but simply played on existing foundations.

DLoVt8oXUAA5KMb

Diane Abbott as Home Secretary. That. Alone. I blogged about it before the election. Long before. About how Diane Abbott was worth a million votes to the Conservatives. Not purely because she is a West Indian or, generically, a black. The “Conservative” Party has plenty of black, brown and even Chinese MPs now. It was that and her obvious disdain for real British or English people, and her plain unfitness to be a Cabinet minister. I mean, Diane Abbott was let go from the Home Office when she was a graduate trainee, so how would she be any good at running the whole show?

Not that Diane Abbott is the only deadhead near the top in Labour. Here’s another one, Dawn Butler:

When you look at the above, you see (if not blinded by political correctness) how it is that African and West Indian societies are so chaotic and poorly-run. British voters did not want that; nor the corruption and freeloading (and hypocrisy) that go along with that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawn_Butler#Expenses

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diane_Abbott#Political_controversies

A couple of my blog posts about other Labour MPs:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/21/deadhead-mps-an-occasional-series-the-fiona-onasanya-story/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/02/troop-cartload-barrel-or-family/

The bigger picture

As previously blogged about, Labour emerged from the struggles of the (mainly) Northern English, Scottish and Welsh industrial proletariat. That colouration, socially, economically, even geographically carried on even unto the years of Blair and Brown. After those years, certainly after 2010, Labour’s nature changed. From being a mainly Northern/Scottish/Welsh trade-union orientated, community-orientated semi-socialist or Social Democratic party, it became a party strongest in a few urban centres such as London and Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool. It became increasingly a party of public sector employees and/or managers, and/or of Pakistani, black and other non-white persons and “communities”.

We have seen that Labour simply abandoned its original British (real British) voters. The scandal of non-whites (mainly Pakistanis) abusing young wayward or “mal gardees” white girls, with Labour and its closely-connected Common Purpose quasi-freemasonry covering it all up. The way in which, even before the 2010 General Election, “Labour” MPs were trailing the same kind of cruel or callous policies as were Iain Dunce Duncan Smith and Esther McVey.

I saw, among others, John Woodcock, Caroline Flint, Gloria de Piero, Tristram Hunt and others talking on TV as if “welfare” (social security) cuts were both necessary and unavoidable. More than that; talking about cutting off money to those who mostly desperately need it. The element of cruel humour was noticeable, even in, say, Gloria de Piero, whose own family, when she was at school, was entirely dependent on State benefits! All of those MPs were Labour Friends of Israel members, too. What a co-incidence…

Well, guess what? None of those named in the above paragraph is still in Parliament. Guess what? If you abandon the voters, they will abandon you. It might not happen overnight, but it will happen. Mass immigration has been encouraged, colluded at, ignored otherwise by all three System parties, for 70 years, but Labour most obviously. That was not the doing of Corbyn; most of it, that happened under Labour, happened under Blair and Brown. The Jewess Barbara Roche (she lost her own seat because of it and has been unable to find another one) was behind much of it, quite deliberately importing as many and as “diverse” a mob of migrant-invaders as possible, with the express aim of destroying Britain’s racial, national and cultural foundations.

For a long time, inertia held Labour together, both as a party and as a party for which people would vote. Finally, again not overnight, but very clearly, the voters just gave up on Labour. Not all (yet), but enough to gift the unmeritorious Conservatives the biggest (and least deserved) electoral victory in a generation. The Labour voters did not move, the majority of them, to the Conservatives, or anywhere else. Many, very many, voted with their feet and stayed at home. Look:

2019votermigration

I have already blogged about these details: https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2020/01/16/diary-blog-16-january-2020/

Basically, about 600,000 former Labour voters defected to the Conservative Party, a similar number to the LibDems, about 300,000 to Brexit Party, but about 1,200,000 former Labour voters did not vote at all.

The Conservative vote only increased by about 1 point over that of 2017, but the Labour vote sank by 8 points.

Labour’s problem is not really one of policy, not even one of leadership, certainly not one of “institutional “antisemitism” (and after all, I should know!), but one of overall relevance. The people, though unconsciously, want some kind of social nationalism, but Labour is offering —near enough— open borders, more migration-invasion, no clarity in industrial strategy, no clarity on matters such as Basic Income, State benefits, pay, overall socio-economic goals etc.

What about “free speech”? So far, all five new Labour leadership candidates have signed up to the Jews’ demands to curb it even further. We have seen how Labour has failed to speak up for those suffering repression, or who are prisoners of conscience, e.g. persecuted satirical singer-songwriter Alison Chabloz. Her own MP until the recent General Election, Ruth George, ignored Alison’s plight, while also backing down after at first speaking up about Israeli/Jew interference in the Labour party:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruth_George#Parliamentary_career

The wages of political sin is political death! Ruth George lost her seat in 2019, and by only 590 seats:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Peak_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Peak_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

Labour’s near future

Labour is trying to reconcile two or even three blocs of voters at once:

  • traditional English and Welsh “working class” voters (the Scottish ones have mostly gone forever);
  • the “blacks and browns” etc;
  • the public service workers and bureaucrats.

I do not think that Labour can reconcile, let alone unite, those groups. The rhetoric about “our communities” and “uniting the people” rings hollow. The “communities” are often mutually-antagonistic, for example. As for “uniting” “the people”, one has to ask “what people?” Britain is split into many groupings now. There is no one people or nation. Prince Harry and the Royal Mulatta have surely highlighted that. He’s off to North America with the mulatta, her dogs, and as much loot as they can carry and hang on to, at least until she kicks him out or he “offs” himself. Symptomatic…

A great charismatic leader in the Adolf Hitler mould might be able to reconcile all the elements of modern Britain, at least sufficiently to get the power to expel or restrain those inimical to the evolving real British, but Labour certainly has no-one who can even pretend to go beyond mediocrity.

Labour’s one hope is that, as older (almost-all Conservative-voting) voters die off, and as young voters come on-stream, the demographics will favour Labour. Had only 18-24 y o voters voted at the recent General Election, there would be no Conservative MPs at all, and about 500 or more Labour ones.

However, no-one knows what events may change politics between now and 2024 or even (a significant year) 2022. In 1928, the NSDAP and Hitler got only 2.6% in Germany, nationally. By 1932, that had grown to 33% and by the following year to 44%.

At present, the voters only have a System “three main parties” choice. Tony Blair had advisers who told him that he could go semi-Conservative, import millions of immigrants, because “where will they [Labour voters] go?” Well, now we know: away from Labour, even if that means sitting at home and watching trash TV instead of voting. The “leader” (snake oil promoter) of the “Brexit Party” betrayed his own party, its candidates, members and voters. What if another leader, of another party just formed, did not sell out, but crusaded for and perhaps to victory? It might be that discontented former Labour and other voters, non-voters too (a third of those eligible did not vote either in 2017 or 2019), might sweep such a leader to supreme power. Never say never.

Update, 19 December 2023

Four years on, we see that, superficially, the Labour Party has climbed out of the pit. It now stands between 40% and 50% in the opinion polls, with the Conservative Party polling between 19% and 25%. A stunning turnaround. Why?

Why? Four years of incredible ineptitude, corruption, and general uselessness on the party of a Conservative Party and Government led by “Boris”-idiot, absurd “ho” Liz Truss, and Indian money-juggler Rishi Sunak.

Mass immigration has reached about a million a year, unprecedented. There has been the Covid “panicdemic” and the response to all that. The cost of living has rocketed, but pay has not. Among other events and developments.

Also, snake-oil salesman Farage has another vehicle, Reform UK, which is cutting into Con Party polling, and is now 11% and climbing in those polls.

Labour? Underwhelming but, in a basically binary system, for many voters it is the only game in town.

I sense (in the voters) anger, but also desperation, mixed with apathy.

Deadhead MPs, An Occasional Series: The Therese Coffey Story

It will be noted that among the names on the above list is that of Therese Coffey MP [Con, Suffolk Coastal], recently appointed as Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. The role has been held by deadheads before, idiots such as Iain Dunce Duncan Smith and Esther McVey.

So who is Therese Coffey?

Therese Coffey was born in Lancashire, to parents about whom neither Wikipedia nor her own website say anything at all. She was brought up in Liverpool, according to Wikipedia, which however says that she was at school both at St. Mary’s College, in the small North Wales town of Rhos-on-Sea, and at St. Edward’s College, Liverpool. Both were at the time private Roman Catholic schools. Coffey is a name of Irish origin.

Therese Coffey was awarded a B.A. degree by Oxford University (subject unknown), she having gone up to Somerville College; then (oddly, on the face of it) she acquired a Ph.D. in Chemistry from UCL. Therese Coffey is often referred to as “Dr” Therese Coffey.

[Update, 21 May 2020: since writing the above, I have discovered that, while Oxford’s usual Chemistry degree is a 4-year course leading to a Master’s degree (M.Chem), the University does offer other chemistry-related 3-year science degrees

http://admissions.chem.ox.ac.uk/Data/Sites/21/images/mchem-chemistry.pdf.

http://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/courses/course-listing]

[Update, 7 September 2022: Wait a minute… it now turns out that Therese Coffey was asked to leave her Oxford college because she was not up to the course academically, and/or failed her exams! See update at foot of this blog post for more]

In England (though not in some other countries, notably Germany) it has always been considered infra dig to use the title “Doctor” unless one is either a medical doctor or some sort of working academic, scientist or clergyman. Unfortunately, there has fairly recently developed in the UK a strange affectation, of people insisting on referring to themselves as “Dr” when all they have is a doctorate in something (other than whatever they do professionally or whatever). So we have “Dr” Julian Lewis MP [Con, New Forest East], who holds a doctorate (D.Phil) in Strategic Studies. Another is “Dr” Louise Raw, “antifa” type prolific on Twitter, who holds a Ph.D. and whose special subject is one particular industrial strike in 1888. Now we also have “Dr” Therese Coffey.

Therese Coffey was awarded her doctorate in chemistry in 1998, at the age of 28. Her own website says that she was at one time a “management accountant”. She worked for Mars, the confectionery company, and for a subsidiary of the same, at which latter she was apparently Finance Director. She also did some work for the BBC. I think that we can assume that Therese Coffey’s non-political career was far from stellar.

Therese Coffey failed to become a Conservative MEP at the EU elections of both 2004 and 2009. She was, however, selected for the Conservative candidature at Suffolk Coastal (despite having been born and brought up in the North West of England, later living in Andover, Hampshire and having no obvious connection with Suffolk or East Anglia).

The expenses claimed by Therese Coffey in her first 6 months as MP were more than double those claimed by MPs in some other nearby seats. She seems to have kept her house and flat in Hampshire, which (it has been said of at least one) are being let.

Therese Coffey was one of the 72 MPs (almost all Conservatives) who both have an income of over £10,000 p.a. from rental property and voted out a bill requiring landlords to ensure that their properties were fit for human habitation! In other words, Therese Coffey is a parasite.

Therese Coffey voted to sell off woodland and forests in public ownership to private interests (the bill was dropped after a huge public outcry).

Therese Coffey has written a position paper recommending that pensioners pay National Insurance. She is a member of the extreme Free Enterprise Group within the Conservative Party.

Therese Coffey has been in favour of both Rupert Murdoch and gambling interests in the past.

Therese Coffey has from time to time bunged her own sister some money out of Parliamentary expenses for work (presumably) done.

Therese Coffey likes a “rock band” called Muse, it seems. I had never heard of them until now. Her interest in rock music seems bizarre, looking at her photographs and thinking of what can be gleaned of her personality (not very much). She certainly looks more like Patricia Routledge’s portrayal of the retirement-age Lancastrian private eye, Hetty Wainthropp, in Hetty Wainthropp Investigates. However, Ms. Coffey’s liking for real ale (she is a member of CAMRA) is rather plausible. In fact, Ms. Coffey is only 47 years old, surprisingly, she having been born in November 1971.

I would have assumed that Therese Coffey is a lesbian, looking at this tank-like, Guinness-drinking, cigar-smoking person who likes football, but there is nothing I have found on the Internet to support such a conclusion directly; and she voted against “gay marriage” (and in that alone I support her, inasmuch as I feel that “civil partnership” provided whatever socio-legal comfort was necessary to deal with the inadequacies of the English law as it was in the previous century).

What disturbs me most about Therese Coffey is not so much what she has said, written and done, though that is bad enough, but what I have not seen from her: I have seen no intellectual curiosity that goes outside the box, for example any discussion of the need for Basic Income; neither have I seen anything else of intellectual interest from her. Admittedly, I have only been looking since her elevation to Cabinet (she was only a non-Cabinet minister earlier in 2019, and before that only one of the Conservative whips, traditionally a role for plodders…). If my view changes, I shall update this article, being by nature fair and just.

Therese Coffey may be the Cabinet minister with the lowest public profile. She is unknown to the general public. How long she will remain in Cabinet, I have no idea. If Boris-Idiot falls, “not long” is my guess. It may be thought unfair to dub someone with qualifications in both chemistry and accountancy a “deadhead”, but from the socio-political point of view I think that she well merits it. At any rate, as MP she is not going away, in that Suffolk Coastal is one of the safest Conservative seats.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffolk_Coastal_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s

https://www.theresecoffey.co.uk/about-therese-coffey

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%A9r%C3%A8se_Coffey

https://www.houseofnames.com/coffey-family-crest

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/meet-new-dwp-secretary-who-16912568

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/who-therese-coffey-what-new-20049187

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/09/09/praise-therese-coffey-single-guinness-drinking-charmingly-outspoken/

https://bylinetimes.com/2019/09/10/therese-coffey-the-worrying-votes-and-views-of-boris-johnsons-latest-right-wing-appointment/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muse_(band)

https://womenalsoknowhistory.com/individual-scholar-page/?pdb=982

https://www.parliament.uk/biographies/commons/dr-julian-lewis/54

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Lewis

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/b/amber-rudd-replacement-work-and-pensions-secretary-therese-coffey-just-nasty

https://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/suffolk-mp-defends-claiming-more-than-27-000-expenses-1-792686

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tories-vote-down-law-requiring-landlords-make-their-homes-fit-for-human-habitation-a6809691.html

https://raptorpersecutionscotland.wordpress.com/2019/09/08/bye-then-therese-coffey/

She made extra money this way: https://www.speakers4schools.org/speakers/dr-therese-coffey/ (Why am I not surprised at her cupidity?)

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/new-dwp-chief-lfc-fan-16898413

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hetty_Wainthropp_Investigates

Update, 17 September 2019

God, she is a ghastly bitch!

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/therese-coffey-minister-uses-cruel-electric-dog-collar-wshlqs85d

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/dwp-chief-therese-coffey-blasted-20083806

Update, 24 October 2019

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/ministers-push-ahead-with-single-face-to-face-assessments-for-disability-benefits/

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/pip-assessor-told-claimant-to-ignore-her-irrelevant-suicide-attempt-then-challenged-her-son-to-a-fight/

Update, 20 May 2020

Update, 6 October 2020

Update, 13 September 2021

The deadhead strikes again, attempting to justify removing £20 per week from some of the poorest in the UK:

Just as well that she does not have the power to give DWP benefits claimants an electric shock via a dog collar…

Update, 6 October 2021

I could comment, but my words would probably be regarded either as “grossly offensive” or as “incitement” to…something or other…

One thing is for sure— standing outside the Conservative Party Conference holding up placards asking for this kind of political criminal to be nicer to people just does not work…

(and what about this?)…

Jesus Christ! Could it get any worse? Do you call for its nurse, or just put it out of its misery?

Update, 6 September 2022

Well, whether you call it “the irony of fate”, a concatenation of unexpected events, or just madness, Therese Coffey has not only survived the fall of “Boris”-idiot, and stayed in Cabinet, but has been effectively promoted to two new positions— Secretary of State for Health, and Deputy Prime Minister.

It seems that —unknown to me until today— Therese Coffey and the —it seems strange to use the words— new Prime Minister, Liz Truss, are rather friendly. I suppose that, in that snake pit, Liz Truss would rather have a few friends around her rather than potential backstabbers who might, however, actually be competent at the jobs occupied.

The Twitterati have not been kind:

As I noted, impliedly, in my blog assessment of Therese Coffey of three years ago, the keywords are callousness and incompetence.

So there it is. Those who follow my blog, or read it regularly, will know or perhaps can guess what I think (inter alia, that tweeting, blogging, or complaining and protesting, will not rid our country of incompetent, corrupt, or evil politicians). Let’s leave it there…

Update, 7 September 2002

Wait a minute… it now turns out that Therese Coffey was asked to leave her Oxford college because either she was not up to the course academically, and/or failed her exams.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/sep/07/therese-coffey-had-to-leave-oxford-university-but-made-it-to-deputy-pm

So how did she get even a BA degree from Somerville? Or is that a total fabrication, like Iain Dunce Duncan Smith’s notoriously fake CV? Other MPs also have faked or partly-faked CVs.

To my mind, Therese Coffey warrants further and deeper investigation. She may be, or may have been, involved in other fakery, fabrication and/or fraud.

Still, it seems now, more than ever, that she fully deserves the title “deadhead“.

Update, 21 September 2022

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-11234871/Health-Secretary-Therese-Coffey-end-8am-Glastonbury-esque-scramble-GP-appointments.html

Update, 4 October 2022

Conservative Party Conference 2022:

Well, there they are— the stupid and ignorant “ho”, Liz Truss, already living on borrowed time as (and merely posing as) Prime Minister, and equally-ridiculous “Secretary of State for Health”, Therese Coffey.

The completely decadent and broken (and Jew-Zionist dominated) British political system, 2022, in a single photograph.

Update, 12 October 2022

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/oct/11/therese-coffey-says-nurses-will-not-get-higher-pay-offer-as-strikes-loom

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/oct/11/therese-coffey-to-drop-smoking-action-plan-insiders-say

Well, I have pointed out, repeatedly, on the blog, that critical words (tweeting, blogging etc) cannot deal with the Therese Coffey type.

One wonders about the psychology of Therese Coffey, looking at her, and looking at the state of her. A fat and ugly woman, prematurely aged, who gets drunk, spills beer over herself, and smokes cigars while doing it. “Multiple frustrations” would be my armchair psychologist diagnosis.

What does it say about our system of “democracy”, and our system of MP and ministerial selection, that a ghastly and quite possibly evil woman of that sort can become, by a series of “chance” events, a Deputy Prime Minister?

The same goes, of course, for the stupid and ignorant “ho” presently posing as Prime Minister.

Interesting, but not surprising. My assessment of the bitch, from 2019, implied as much.

Had one not seen what has been going on in the governance of Britain since at least 2010, one would perhaps be surprised that someone as totally inadequate, dim, and also amoral as Therese Coffey could ever climb higher than the backbenches.

Look at the bitch! Look at her friend and boss, “ho” Truss, too. They are both embarrassments to this country, as are woolly-head Kwarteng and half-caste thicko James Cleverly.

Update, 23 October 2022

Update, 23 February 2023

The bitch’s latest disgusting statements:

https://twitter.com/RealBlackIrish/status/1628766463958872067?s=20

https://twitter.com/RealBlackIrish/status/1628765898663251978?s=20

Update, 21 May 2023

Indian money-juggler Rishi Sunak may now have taken over as bad-joke “Prime Minister”, but Therese Coffey has survived in Cabinet, unbelievably, and still sits there, stupid, incompetent, but immovable…

5 July 2024

At long last, the horrible woman has been binned by the voters, though narrowly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffolk_Coastal_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2020s

The Urgent Necessity for Basic Income (or its equivalent)

Preamble

I have blogged previously about the need for Basic Income (see Notes, below).

One important point is that the nexus connecting work and pay is loosening in the more developed countries. Already, computers, automation and modern business streamlining have led to the situation whereby, apart from actual unemployment, there is huge underemployment. In the UK, we see, in big picture terms, that the poorer half of the workforce is still being paid less in real terms (the latest statistics suggest about 7% less) than was paid in 2007 for equivalent work.

Now, there is a headlong rush into greater automation and, crucially, to Artificial Intelligence [AI].

Working Tax Credits as Government Subsidy to Poor-Paying Employers

Even before the financial upheaval of 2007-2008, it is clear that the “market”, as “hidden hand” mechanism, delivering adequate pay for required work, was not working properly or as old-thinking economic theory suggested that it should. Employers were unwilling or in some cases unable to offer pay high enough for employees to subsist on, let alone live decently on.

The answer of the Blair-Brown governments was to offer employees “working tax credits”, i.e. a form of “welfare”/”social security” for those in employment, the purpose of which was (and at time of writing still is) to top-up inadequate pay to a determined level. A more limited measure, Family Credit, claimable only by families, was in operation from 1986-1999.

The most obvious drawback of Working Tax Credit [WTC], i.e. that it in effect subsidizes poor and poor-paying employers out of general taxation, was either not foreseen by self-styled financial genius Gordon Brown, or was ignored by him and/or Tony Blair. Adding insult to injury was and is the fact that some of the worst-paying employing companies are also those most adept at avoiding tax liability: transnational enterprises such as Amazon in particular.

In other words, an employee is forced (by circumstances) to work for pay which is not enough for that employee to live on, even at a very basic level. That pay is then topped-up to a minimum subsistence level by Working Tax Credit, which is paid for not directly by the exploitative employer but by government, and so by general taxation. Low-paid employees pay little or no income tax now, but still pay so-called National Insurance, which is today just another or extra income tax in all but name. Put simply, the low-paid worker is paying out for his or her own Working Tax Credit, at least to some extent.

The poor-paying employer has no incentive to pay decently, because the government will stump up enough to keep the employee in place.

Real-terms pay now, for very many people, is inferior to what was paid in the 1980s and 1970s. Conditions of employment are also worse in reality (though that aspect is not part of this blog post).

At present, 5 million people in the UK receive WTC, while another 2 million are entitled to receive it but, for whatever reason, do not apply for it.

Other Government Top-Ups to Pay

In addition to basic Working Tax Credit, people in low-paying jobs and who have children can get extra money via WTC , as can disabled workers.

Persons who are disabled or unwell (including employed persons) can receive Disability Living Allowance, which is not means-tested.

Persons who have children are also entitled to Child Benefit, regardless of capital or income (up to £50,000-£60,000, tapering).

Persons of the age(s) specified can receive State Pension regardless of whether they work or not; moreover, whether or not they have ever worked.

Limited Elements of Basic Income Already Embedded in the Existing System

  • State Pension, paid whatever the individual’s capital or income, and whether or not the individual is working (employed or self-employed) or not and (if you include Pension Guarantee Credit), payable regardless of how much the pensioner has paid in via National Insurance;
  • Child Benefit, paid regardless of income (under £50,000 p.a.);
  • Disability Living Allowance (and its successor, “Personal Independence Payment” or PIP), paid regardless of capital or income to qualifying persons (and this is not the place in which to examine why politicians and Department of Work and Pensions [DWP] civil servants often choose vulgar names for State benefits and programmes: cf. “Jobseeker’s Allowance” etc).

Advantages of Basic Income

  • Simplicity. A Basic Income would mean that most of the existing DWP structure could be dispensed with: the vast edifice of “Jobcentres” (office buildings), filled with DWP staff engaged in adminstration, and the snooping upon, monitoring, “assessing” of claimants etc. The absurdity of it is that many claimants are only getting about £75 a week anyway. The present Kafka-esque set-up really should be and can be junked. Probably 90% of the present 85,000 DWP employees can be made redundant. The financial savings from that, decommissioning of buildings, running costs etc would be in the tens of billions annually; the untold billions paid by the State to useless and dishonest private contractors, such as ATOS and Capita, would also be saved;
  • Security of Citizens. It has been shown in overseas pilot studies (eg recently in Finland) that having a Basic Income, even if small, gives people a sense of security only available until now to those with an inherited private income. Yes, some people will decide to loaf all day, maybe even drink all day, but others will do paid work, start small businesses, improve their cultural level, volunteer locally or far away etc. The idle and/or useless are like that under the present system anyway and are costing the State money even now, both directly and indirectly (eg via the costs of policing, NHS, prisons etc);

Doubts Often Expressed about Basic Income

  • “People will not want to work if they get money for nothing”: well, most wealthy inheritors of capital, most of those living off trust incomes etc do seem to want to work in some way, or to set up businesses, or at least to write, paint, or other similar activity. Don’t disparage writing or other artistic activity. After all, Harry Potter, which snowballed into a huge industry employing, altogether, many thousands and even tens of thousands, came out of the mind of one lady, a single mother on State benefits; J.K. Rowling herself has said that, under the punitive present benefits regime, she would have been messed around so much that it would have been impossible for her to sit in cafes with her baby writing Harry Potter. True, some people will simply loaf. They do that under the present system. Don’t think that there are no costs to the State and society now (even if actual benefits are cut off): police costs, court and legal costs, NHS costs, too;
  • “The cost to the taxpayer”: the cost of Basic Income would be little more than the present “welfare” (social security) system, once you take into account the huge savings on DWP and HMRC bureaucracy, savings by not using useless/dishonest outsourcing organizations, the economic benefit of people spending more, stimulating the economy, setting up new small businesses;
  • “People getting Basic Income money that they do not even need”: firstly, what people “need” is, beyond the basic level, something subjective. Apart from that, there is no problem with clawing back monies paid to those above a certain income. All that need happen is that a maximum level of income (all income) for recipients be set. All persons above that income level to be taxed or super-taxed to the same level as Basic Income received. The level might be a total (including Basic Income) of £30,000, assuming Basic Income of perhaps £15,000 per year. In that case, the person would be taxed the £15,000, leaving £15,000. Yes, there would be apparent unfairness at lower income levels, whereby it might be questioned why work, when you could simply receive the (in the example given) £15,000 and not work. However, even then the recipient does gain, via extra security in case of job loss or illness; alternatively, the threshold could be set higher, say at £50,000 p.a.

Variations on the Basic Income Theme

Instead of money alone, Basic Income could include benefits paid to certain persons, such as free housing for persons receiving less than a certain income. The danger here is in the complexity and cost, as under the existing system, as well as monies wasted going to landlords charging excessive rents. It may be that the way forward is to add to the existing (in the UK) more or less “free” (at point of use) health service, free education at primary and secondary level etc. Examples:

  • free public transport, whether local or regional;
  • free car insurance;
  • free domestic utilities;
  • free NHS or similar;
  • free education.

Basic Income as Necessity

It is clear that, in the UK, relatively few people at present are purely living off what they can earn by work or by investments and/or trust income. 7 million are eligible for Working Tax Credits, millions more are children, retired people, disabled and not working, unemployed etc. For many, working for pay does not cover the basic necessities of life, let alone provide a decent human existence. The State already recognizes these facts.

The explosion in artificial intelligence and robotics will turn the screw. For example, there are at present 356,300 taxi drivers and private hire drivers in the UK. The technology already exists to replace them. It is unlikely that more than a small percentage will still be doing such work in, say, 2030. That’s just one group affected. Groups as diverse as farmers, lawyers, surgeons, pilots, security guards will all be made, as groups, largely redundant.

Basic Income is not just the right thing, but the necessary thing.

Notes

https://www.mirror.co.uk/money/what-happened-finland-scrapped-benefits-13950300

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Tax_Credit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_benefit#United_Kingdom

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_for_Work_and_Pensions

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/07/27/what-do-people-need/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/10/27/the-revolution-of-the-robots-and-ai-means-that-basic-income-is-inevitable/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/12/03/the-general-shape-of-a-future-society/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/11/16/basic-income-and-the-welfare-state-some-ideas-and-reminiscences/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/03/29/aspects-of-the-new-society/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/09/16/priorities-in-state-funding/

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/taxi-and-private-hire-vehicles-statistics-england-2017

https://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/plymouth-news/universal-credit-basic-income-california-2563380

https://basicincome.org/news/2016/09/netherlands-debate-about-unconditional-basic-income-in-parliament/

Update, 11 March 2019

People generally are now waking up to both the desirability and the practical possibility of Basic Income:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/11/scrap-tax-free-personal-allowance-and-pay-everyone-48-a-week

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6886461/Unemployed-people-happier-income-scheme-no-likely-job-experiment-reveals.html

Update, 8 September 2019

The necessity for Basic Income is spreading, but not yet to enough people. Many still think that it is “expensive” (probably the same people who believe that the answer to a recession is to “cut spending”…). There is, however, dissent…

https://twitter.com/DerorCurrency/status/1170523619023147009?s=20

Update, 4 November 2019

Has Parliamentary “Democracy” (as we have known it until now) Had Its Day in the UK?

Preamble

The Brexit argument in the UK has brought to the fore divisions and truths which, until recently, had been covered up by a “politically correct” or bien-pensant “consensus” in the (largely Jew-Zionist-controlled or strongly influenced) mass media and political milieux.

Anyone who imagines that “Brexit” is just about the UK’s membership of the EU is indulging in hobby-politics and joke-politics and/or exhibiting very poor political judgment. I have blogged about this on previous occasions, eg:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/02/brexit-is-to-some-extent-only-a-metaphor-what-could-it-mean/

UKIP is the joke party and hobby-politics party of the UK, effectively a one-trick-pony, obsessed with the EU and EU immigration but not hitting hard on non-EU immigration and only peripherally touching on other issues. However, those voters who grasped at the UKIP straw up to 2015 were voting to a large extent not for Nigel Farage as Prime Minister, not for UKIP’s clown MEPs as UK ministers, not even simply to get Britain out of the increasingly sinister EU matrix, but as a protest and shout of anger against a whole host of issues, not all of which are connected directly to the UK membership of the EU.

What Is Democracy Anyway?

“Democracy” is one of those terms which is rather imprecise and commonly misused (another is “holocaust”, usually and deliberately misused and distorted by Jew-Zionists and others as “the Holocaust”, the definite article and the capital letter supposedly differentiating any misfortunes visited on Jews in the Second World War from similar misfortunes visited on non-Jews throughout history).

In ancient Greece (for example Athens, the home of the idea of “democracy”), we see that only the relative few had full political rights.  In the 4thC BC, Attica had about 300,000 inhabitants (in the state as a whole, not just the “urbanized” polis of Athens itself). Out of that population, only about 100,000 were citizens. Out of that 100,000, only 30,000, being adult male citizens who had completed military service or similarly accepted service, were allowed to vote or to participate in political life. Women, slaves, freed slaves, children and metics (foreigners resident in Attica) were not allowed to vote etc. In other words, out of 300,000 inhabitants, only about 30,000, 10% of the whole, played a significant political role.

UK Democracy: the expansion of the electorate

In more modern times and in England/UK, we see that, though a kind of representative Parliament existed from the 13thC AD, the electorate (using the term broadly) widened over the centuries. At the time of the first great Reform Act (1832), the population of England and Wales (excluding Scotland) was about 12 million, out of which only 200,000 in counties and perhaps 20,000 more in boroughs had voting rights (see Notes, below), about 2% of the whole population (nb. population estimates of that era are not very accurate: some estimates say 400,000 in toto, so perhaps 4% of all inhabitants could vote), a far smaller percentage than in Periclean Athens! In France, the percentage with voting rights was even smaller, but was expanded hugely when universal suffrage was introduced in 1848.

The percentage expansion of the electorate in Scotland in the 1830s was far greater than applied in England and Wales. Some historians use the term “revolutionary”. I wonder whether that has perhaps had a lasting effect on Scottish socio-political attitudes down the line, even to the present day. Just a stray thought…

Further expansion of the electorate in the UK (as a whole, not just England and Wales) in the 19thC meant that, by 1912, there were 7.7 million voters, a figure that increased to 21.4 million following the Representation of the People Act 1918, which extended the franchise to most women of 30+ years, as well as to almost all men of 21+. Of course, the actual population had also increased very greatly, from 27 million in 1850 to 42 million in 1918.

In 1928, women 21-29 also gained the vote, increasing the number eligible to vote to about 27 million.

Changes in the Post-1945 era: where are we now?

UK voting qualifications have not changed substantially since 1928, except that, since 1948, university graduates have no longer had two potential votes, and the minimum voting age is now (and since 1970) 18.

There are now about 65 million inhabitants in the UK (some put the figure higher, by reason of undocumented, unregistered “illegals” etc).

Does “democracy” mean that all inhabitants of the state must be enfranchised?

The South African Example

We have seen that, in ancient Athens, only male citizens who had completed military service could vote. In “apartheid” South Africa, there was a fully-functioning democracy limited however to those of European (white) origin.

There had, prior to 1910, been non-racial forms of limited democracy in Cape Province, limited by reference to property etc. From 1910-1961, the vote was granted to all white men in South Africa, to mixed-race men in Cape Province, and to black men in Cape Province and Natal. Only white men could become Senators or MPs. White women were allowed the vote in 1930 and could serve as MPs or Senators. Blacks and “coloureds” (mixed-race) were barred from holding those offices. In 1960, the black franchise was terminated; the mixed-race franchise followed in 1968. Later, in 1984, an attempt was made to re-enfranchise the mixed-race population and to enfranchise, on a limited basis, the Indian population.

In 1992, a small majority of (white-only) voters endorsed, by referendum, the end of the apartheid system, after which South Africa adopted a different system, under which all person of 18+ years can vote or be elected. In practice, however, this led to what is effectively a one-party, typically-African state, shambolic and corrupt. The African National Congress (ANC) operates what is effectively an elected dictatorship. In the most recent election (2014), its vote declined, but it still holds 249 out of 400 seats (on 62% of the popular vote).

Under this “new” (post-1994) “democracy”, the white population of the country is under siege from both crime (racially-based) and/or (connected) “political” attack, such as the robbery, rape and murder of whites, particularly in the rural areas. Neither are the (mainly black) poor of South Africa helped by the “elected dictatorship”. Indeed, in some respects they are worse off than they were under apartheid. The “infamous” pass laws may have restricted the blacks, but also restricted crime, which has become epidemic.

The USA

The USA is supposedly a “democracy”, but in practice any Presidential candidate has to be a multi-millionaire or billionaire, or have the support of such, simply to be seen as a credible candidate, or to be able to buy TV ads (this is about the same thing, in practice). If elected, he will find that to do anything effective requires that he be not opposed by either the Congress or the Supreme Court. This rarely happens. In most cases, the separation of powers prevents anything effective, let alone radical, being implemented.

The UK

c64bh5xw0aiwygy

In the UK, there is “democracy” (we think). Almost everyone can vote, almost everyone can be a candidate. Yet there are impediments: the powerful Jewish-Zionist lobby (special-interest group), the entrenched First Past The Post (FPTP) voting system, the need for finance, and the way in which boundaries are deliberately sliced up to provide a semblance of “fairness”, but in fact to favour 2-party or sometimes 3-party “stability” over real reflection of popular opinion. There is also the fact that “main party” (System) candidates are usually carefully selected to exclude anyone with even mild social-national views. The “choice” is then put before the electorate (together with the minor candidates who almost invariably have no chance at all).

Another important aspect is that, since the Tony Blair government passed its restrictive laws, political parties have to be registered, can be fined (eg for refusing membership to certain types of person, or certain racial or national groups), and can even be “de-registered”, thus barring them from standing candidates in elections. Democracy?

Here is an example from the General Election of 2015.

C3l1gk9XAAMHAwF

Brexit

The Brexit vote has exposed the sham or part-sham of British democracy. David Cameron-Levita thought that the 2016 Referendum would be easy to “manage”. He had, after all, “managed” two previous referenda: the Scottish Independence referendum and the AV-voting referendum. Third time, he miscalculated. The people, on the FPTP basis, voted about 52% to 48% for Leave. This was a shock to the System. Immediately, the Remain leaders started to demand “No Brexit”, and for a second Referendum, which would (once the voters had been exposed to enough fear propaganda) come to a different result, and/or for Parliament (most MPs being “Remain”) to just ignore the 2016 Referendum result which (they said) had been procured by fraud, lies, or post-KGB Russian trickery…

The fact is that, leaving aside the “sheeple”, the hard core of anti-Brexit Remain consists of

  • the affluent/wealthy metropolitan self-styled “elite”;
  • the big business people;
  • the Jews (most of them);
  • those who have done well financially in the 2010-2019 period;
  • the brainwashed under-30s, mostly from not-poor backgrounds, who imagine that not being in the EU somehow prevents them from getting (for most of them, non-existent) jobs in the EU, or that they will even not be allowed to travel after Brexit!
  • Those shallow little nobodies (again, mostly young or would-be young urban-dwellers) who think that it is old, unfashionable and “gammon” (white Northern European British) to support Leave or indeed to have any pride in England’s history, race and culture;
  • Almost all of those working in the msm.

These groups have become ever more severe and open in their hatred of Leave supporters. There are now open calls for the rights of, in particular, voters over the age of, perhaps, 60, to be restricted, for older people to be disenfranchised, especially if white, (real) British, or “racist” (i.e. people who see their land and culture being swamped and destroyed).

Here, for example, we see an almost archetypal Remain whiner, the broadcaster Jeremy Vine, 53, who is paid over £700,000 a year by the BBC and maybe as much as £100,000 p.a. from elsewhere (despite having been awarded only a mediocre 2:2 in English at university and then been –in my opinion– a markedly mediocre Press/radio/TV journalist).

Here’s another idiotic statement by Vine, though on an unrelated topic:

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/carol-vorderman-defends-devon-girl-2429731

We see from examples around the world, eg South Africa, or Zimbabwe (etc) that one-man one-vote “democracy” can lead to elected dictatorship. In the UK, it has become increasingly clear that the Parliamentary democracy in place does not reflect the views of the bulk of the population, and certainly not the bulk of the white real British population, those with whose future I concern myself.

Leave may “only” have won the EU Referendum by 52%-48%, but there are nuances here: the assassination of pro-Remain MP Jo Cox, only a week before the referendum certainly had an effect, and is thought to have changed the outcome by as much as 10 points (at the time of her death, Leave was 10 points ahead of Remain in some polls); particularly as much was made of supposed secondary culpability of Leave propaganda for the attack. The referendum outcome might easily have been 60% or even 65% for Leave.

There is also the point that most “blacks and browns” and other ethnic minority voters (eg Jews) voted Remain if they voted at all. Most Scots voted Remain too (no doubt because they have a faux-nationalist SNP as a comfort blanket). Take away those Remain blocs and it might be that about 60% of white English and Welsh voters voted Leave, which might have been 70% without the Jo Cox matter.

Alternatives to Parliament Deciding Everything

I favour the Rudolf Steiner concept of the “Threefold Social Order”. As I paraphrase it, and in the contemporary UK context,

  • it means that an elected Parliament decides matters properly within the political sphere or “sphere of rights”;
  • it means that Parliament (and government) does not run the economy or economic enterprises (though it can regulate it and them); likewise, economic forces and personalities cannot rule the political sphere and/or “sphere of rights”;
  • it means that the State (or economic forces) cannot rule over the proper ambit of the sphere of spirit, culture, religion, medicine, education.

This obviously moves on from the conventional “Parliament rules supreme” idea, developed in the UK since the time of Cromwell.

We can see that Parliament in the UK is no longer fit for purpose. Those currently elected have only a limited mandate. Greater freedom and a more efficient as well as a more just society depend on proper integration of the three basic spheres: political, economic, spiritual/cultural.

There is no necessity for everyone to vote. Voting should be for citizens who are resident and who are of suitable age (I favour 21 years, at minimum). Foreigners, offspring of foreigners, persons who are mainly of non-European origin etc should not be allowed a vote.

Brexit and the future

People voted for Brexit for many reasons and fundamentally out of a lack of satisfaction with the existing way of life in the UK. That urge for something better may be the basis for social-national reform or even revolution. The British people will no more allow themselves to be treated as helots.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_democracy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_of_the_United_Kingdom

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Act_1832

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representation_of_the_People_Act_1918

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_United_Kingdom_general_election

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_constituency#United_Kingdom

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_South_Africa

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_of_South_Africa

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/26th_South_African_Parliament

http://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/Search/Registrations?currentPage=1&rows=30&sort=RegulatedEntityName&order=asc&open=filter&et=pp&et=ppm&register=gb&regStatus=registered&optCols=EntityStatusName

https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/party-or-campaigner/guidance-for-political-parties

http://www.brugesgroup.com/blog/the-british-road-to-dirty-war-analysis-by-david-betz-mlr-smith-1

Update, 25 March 2021

Well, it seems that I spoke too soon in saying that the British people will no longer allow themselves to be treated like helots! The “panicdemic”, weaponized for the purpose, has (or the moment at least) put both the British people and “democracy” back in the box. Still, “the night is young”, I suppose. “Tomorrow is another day”…

The Exploding UK

The population of the United Kingdom is considered an example of a population that has undergone demographic transition – that is, the transition from a (typically) pre-industrial population with high birth and mortality rates and slow population growth, through a stage of falling mortality and faster rates of population growth, to a stage of low birth and mortality rates with, again, lower rates of population growth. This population growth through ‘natural change’ has been accompanied in the past two decades by growth through net international migration into the United Kingdom.” [Wikipedia]

I recently saw a pro-immigration poster put out, I think, by some trade union in the NHS. It said that the group of people shown on the poster (mostly but not all black/brown) were all NHS personnel who had come to the UK from other countries. The poster also said that, in the London Borough of Haringey, where the group had been photographed, there were (in round figures) some 82,000 persons who had come from other countries to the UK. The implication was that only thus is the (in Britain, near-sacred) NHS able to function.

Well, I am, in principle, pro-NHS (though I think, with reason, that quite a lot of the NHS system is barely functioning). I have no problem conceding that some of the foreign personnel in the NHS are excellent (though some others are hopeless). I am aware that the NHS has always been a major recruiter of immigrant labour. However, is that the whole story (as pro-Remain, pro-immigration people always pretend)? I say not.

The London Borough of Haringey has about 282,000 inhabitants, only 60% of whom are “white British” or Irish. If you were to take away the 82,000 immigrants already mentioned (even disregarding their offspring, and those non-English/Irish etc who are also resident in that borough), you would automatically have something like —and at the very least— something like 20,000 dwelling units available! Now multiply that appropriately across the whole of London, the whole of the UK…An end to the absurd property price valuations, an end to overcrowded hospitals, schools, transport —including roads—, an increase in pay across the board.

There is no doubt that the UK would be better off, the people of the UK would be better off, without the immigrant hordes and their offspring. Yes, on paper, the economy would perhaps be less vibrant, but most of the benefit of that at present goes to a tiny percentage of the population, just as a relatively small number of buy-to-let parasites and speculators profit from the overheated UK property market.

As for foreign NHS personnel, one has to bear in mind that the migration-invasion has placed enormous burdens on the NHS. The balance of convenience is by no means in favour of immigration. Without mass immigration, the UK NHS could easily handle the demand, particularly by training British people as doctors, nurses and ancillary personnel. Fewer British medical staff would leave (to emigrate to Australia, New Zealand etc), thus saving the State the cost of their education and training.

The same is true of all areas of society. Mass immigration penalizes the vast bulk of the British people. Big business loves mass immigration because it increases the number of consumers, results in higher prices for goods and real property, and reduces pay per labour unit.

When I was born in 1956, the UK population was estimated to be around (possibly below) 50 million. In 1990, 34 years later, the estimate was 57 million, a still very considerable increase. In 2018, the estimates have become less accurate because of the huge influxes of “migrants” (migrant-invaders) and their birth-rate, but anywhere from 66 million to 70 million. By, say, 2022? No-one knows. 75 million? This is totally unsustainable. Only those who knew England (especially) in the 1960s can appreciate what a difference and (mostly) a negative difference those extra 20 millions have made to the quality of life, environment etc in the UK and, again, particularly in England.

It is all very well saying that, because of Brexit and the stalling economy, ever-lower pay and State benefits, that the net immigration figure now is “only” about 400,000 a year instead of the half million or more per year in the past 15-20 years, but 400,000 is still the size of a very large town. Also, “net” means not 400,000 in but maybe 800,000 non-Brits in, and 400,000 desperate Brits out, fleeing the multiracial/multicultural society, desperately trying to find a basically white “Aryan” society in which to live (though most scarcely admit that even to themselves).

The UK is exploding and something has to be done.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Borough_of_Haringey#Demographics

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/articles/overviewoftheukpopulation/mar2017

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/annualmidyearpopulationestimates/mid2017

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/

When Almost Everyone Says to a Government in Office, “Just GO!”

Background

Today I happened to see the Daily Mirror report (link below, at foot of post) about a 9-year-old girl who telephoned a charity begging for help, even offering to work, in order to save her family. This was not in some ragged part of the former Soviet Union, not in Latin America, not (to be rhetorical) in the Britain of the workhouse and Ebenezer Scrooge, but that of Britain in 2018.

The Conservative Party seems to be relying on effluxion of time to disguise what it (and to a lesser extent, Blair-Brown Labour) has done in the past 20 years and especially since 2010 when the Con Coalition took power. However, the fact is that millions of people have been degraded, insulted, even killed or forced to suicide by the hugely expensive and ill-conceived “welfare” “reforms” of Iain Dunce Duncan Smith. He and those guilty with him, have not as yet faced popular justice. Perhaps some form of justice will in the end catch up with him, and Esther McVey and Danny Alexander, and David Gauke, and the Jew “lord” Freud etc.

Then we have Brexit, which I (for social national revolutionary reasons) favour. The present government has proven itself incompetent in respect of that, too.

Armed forces: scarcely functioning, thousands of experienced officers and other ranks made redundant, so that, now that few want to join what was the TA (now, The Reserves), the government is forced to open Army recruitment widely to those from Commonwealth countries who may never even have visited the UK.

NHS: plainly in managed decline.

Immigration: scarcely slowing.

Housing: far too expensive and, in the private rented sector, the hunting ground of buy-to-let parasites.

A future for the young: where is it?

Wherever one looks, the present government has failed miserably, along with its predecessors of the past 8 years. Labour looks scarcely better, true, and has even decided to keep the pathetic Universal Credit scheme if elected, but in a general election, an incompetent government is still at a disadvantage vis a vis an incompetent Opposition.

Labour is no longer unelectable

It was said for years that “Labour is unelectable” under Corbyn, a strange statement in view of the fact that Brown and Miliband also both failed to make it electable. The idea seems to be that Labour has to appeal to the middle of the road floating voters to be electable, and that Corbyn does not appeal to that voter. I do not think that the misnamed “Conservatives” can rely on that. Many of the Corbyn-Labour policies do have Middle England appeal: strict rail regulation or even renationalization, strict controls on utility company bills, making large transnational enterprises pay decent tax. These and other policies speak to those forgotten Middle England voters. Labour has not quite thrown the poor under a bus, but its focus is certainly now on winning over the vital marginal seats. It has recently supported Phillip Hammond’s tax plans on the basis that Labour plans to hit the wealthiest 5% (in income terms) and not, say, the most affluent 10%, 20% or 50%.

The Conservatives have demonized the poor, especially but not only the non-working poor. The Con Party is now more than ever the party only of the wealthy few, the buy to let parasites, the Jews too (95% of whom have deserted Labour since Corbyn took over), the wealthy London foreign cosmopolitans of various types etc.

As to the traditional Conservative Party Middle England vote, that is ebbing away. The reasons are clear: the “middle classes”, at least at the lower end, are sinking, and the Government is letting them drown. A cartoon from a few years ago made the point.

b-cisxdiqaa7qj_-jpg-large

On the above facts, it is more than likely that the Conservatives will not be the largest party after the next General Election. The Conservative vote shrinks with every passing month. There is a sense that, as with the 1990s Conservatives, the present Theresa May government has outstayed its welcome so that almost everyone is saying “GO!”.

The poorest 10% will mostly vote Labour anyway. The wealthiest 5% (and probably 15%) will mostly vote Conservative whatever. The bulk of workers in the middle are the battlefield, and one which Labour looks increasingly likely to win.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/universal-credit-girl-forced-beg-13546259

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/universal-credit-people-are-being-pitchforked-into-poverty_uk_5bdc7c7ae4b01ffb1d01f672?utm_hp_ref=uk-homepage&ncid=fcbklnkukhpmg00000001&guccounter=1&guce_referrer_us=aHR0cHM6Ly90LmNvLzM0dkk5OE05aTM&guce_referrer_cs=ffONymDD0om9x8VezJud7A

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/iain-duncan-smith-claimed-breakfast-1810086

The Revolution of the Robots and AI Means that Basic Income is Inevitable

I have been interested for several, indeed many, years in the socio-political effects of the AI/robot/computer revolution, which effects started to be felt as long ago as the 1960s, accelerated in the 1980s, but which still mushroom, and may be considered to be still in the youthful stage of development.

I happened to see an online article which was about 25 types of human work likely to be largely replaced by robots. Some were unsurprising, such as Data Entry Clerks and Bookkeepers, others less so (as a former barrister, I noticed “Lawyers” with interest!). I did not expect to see “Farmers” on the list, though in fact much agricultural work has already moved from human and animal labour to robotic or at least automated: sophisticated machines now already sow, harvest and process agricultural produce. Some of the most delicate tasks can still not be effectively automated without loss of quality, but that will probably change. The picking of grapes is done today as it has been since the dawn of recorded history– by hand. The best tea is also still picked by hand, though experiments have been made with automation: the Soviet tea industry tried it back in the 1970s (“on Georgia’s sun-dappled hills”, as Lermontov had it).

Looking ahead, one can see that many more jobs will be automated. Even now, that is leaving many either with no jobs, or with “McJobs”, minimum-wage bottom-of-barrel jobs. Increasingly, there will be discontent as those who have either no job or a job which does not cover even basic necessities become more numerous. At present, in the UK, those who have existed on poor pay have had that pay topped up via “tax credits” etc (and/or, now, the cretinous “Universal Credit” pipedream of Iain Dunce Duncan Smith), administered by a shambolic and punitive bureaucratic regime. That can and will be taken over by a Basic Income, paid without reference to whether the individual is trying to find work or better work.

The essence of the plan in respect of AI etc is that automation creates economic surplus. That surplus, at present, is today then distributed mostly to shareholders and higher executives, by means of dividends, pay and capital gains (eg via share options). That surplus or benefit should be shared out with the employees of the enterprise and with the people in general, via the mediation of the State. Not forgetting the need for an economic enterprise to have reserve funding for R&D etc.

Basic Income will give to all citizens at least a measure of the financial and life security currently enjoyed by only the wealthy, the “trustafarians” etc. It will enable those who want more than the basic minimum to work for that extra money, those who want to volunteer or do charitable work to do so and yet still subsist, those who want to think or write to create. As for those who only want to loaf, they do that under any system (including the present one) and at least Basic Income makes society quiescent.

The cost of Basic Income is high, but the cost of administering and paying out the present “welfare” system is hugely high too! Admin, snooping, interrogating, complex payment structures etc.

Taken to absurdity, one could envisage a society entirely dystopian, where no human workers are needed at all. The machines (etc) then produce goods and services which cannot be bought and paid for, because the humans have no work and therefore no pay and therefore no disposable income.

In such a scenario, either goods and services have to be given away free of charge to the humans unable to pay for them, or the humans need to be given money-value for which they have not directly worked. Basic Income.

The present society is already exhibiting a trend to work which pays little or nothing and a connected trend to an amelioration of the effects of that first trend (via State welfare, pensions, tax credits etc).

In the end, Basic Income is essential, because the robotics/AI revolution is loosening the nexus between work and pay.

Notes

https://vdare.com/posts/automation-farm-robot-picks-peppers

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2018/12/08/waitrose-first-supermarket-use-robots-farm-food/

https://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/plymouth-news/universal-credit-basic-income-california-2563380

Their Last Throw of the Dice

The Jewish lobby (aka Israel lobby, Zionist lobby etc) have been pulling out all the stops to trash Corbyn, to make him resign or to surround him by Labour MPs, officials, NEC members, “advisers” etc who can restrain him, control him and maybe depose him.

The lobby has been gunning for Corbyn since he was first elected as Labour leader. I have previously blogged about that in some detail. “They” failed to prevent Corbyn’s election, then failed again (to prevent his re-election). In between, the lobby has applied maximum pressure on Corbyn himself, in order to try to force a resignation. They have also tried to remove key Corbyn supporters. The latest attempt to topple him even had the head of Labour group Momentum [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum_(organisation)], Jon Lansman [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Lansman], a Jew, reduce support for Corbyn in the key area of supposed “anti-Semitism”. Momentum itself is actually controlled by a private company ultimately controlled by Lansman:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5002774/How-ex-public-schoolboy-Jon-Lansman-hijacking-Labour.html.

In addition, John McDonnell MP, ambiguous if not favourable to Jews, and an ambitious man who (for the first time) is within sight of a ministerial and possibly prime ministerial role, has been prevailed upon to pressure Corbyn in person. He is, arguably, Corbyn’s closest ally in the House of Commons.

The most recent manufactured storm around Corbyn and Labour has been set in motion after Labour refused to adopt the so-called “international definition of anti-Semitism” promoted by a Zionist body called the “IHRA” (which tries to ban all critical examination of the “holocaust” narrative and fakery thereof). In fact, though 30-40 (ZOG-occupied) states have adopted the definition, 155-165 have not (there is dispute about the numbers).

The storm now raging as I write has been a revelation even to me, as I realized anew how deeply the Zionists have burrowed into the structure of the UK, especially in the fields of politics, law and the mass media. Not every journalist-scribbler, editor, msm CEO, lawyer, TV/radio talking head etc is a Jew; it just seems very like it…

At time of writing, it seems that Corbyn is going to tough it out, seem to give in in part, while actually withdrawing from the fray so that the Jew-Zionists have nothing against which to press. Corbyn must have studied Sun-Tzu!

This is surely the last throw of the dice for the Jewish Zionist lobby trying to unseat Corbyn. The assault this time has been frenzied. The reason is clear: Labour recently was ahead of the Conservatives in the polls, though it is at time of writing in second place again by reason of the contrived msm storm. Labour has every chance of at least forming a minority government after the next general election. If that happens, Corbyn will be Prime Minister and the Zionists (for the first time since at least 1989) will not control or very strongly influence the British Government politically. This is their last throw.

Notes etc

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/881317/momentum-leader-jon-lansman-jeremy-corbyn-money-investment-firm-property-market-mcdonalds

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Tzu

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_War

Update, 13 October 2021

Looking back at this post after three years, I see that my basic analysis was correct, even though I was wrong in predicting that a 2018 or 2019 general election would result in a minority Labour government. That would have happened had a few connected events not intervened.

Brexit Party was formed, gained huge support initially, could have stormed to power had a destined leader been its leader, but failed because it did not become social-national and simply stayed as quasi-Conservative. Its leader, snake-oil salesman Farage, then stabbed Brexit Party in the back in 2019 by standing down most candidates, thus almost guaranteeing a Conservative Party win. The rest is history.

As for Labour, of course Corbyn was deposed by what amounts to a Jewish lobby operation, probably assisted by Israeli organs of intelligence and security. The new-ish Keir Starmer Labour Party is suffused with pro-Israel MPs; Starmer himself is married to a Jewish woman, and their children are being brought up as if fully-Jewish.

What Do People Need?

On rereading Andrei Amalrik’s Involuntary Journey To Siberia of 1970, all sorts of impressions were received, most not at all new: the lack of freedom in the Soviet Union, the Kafka-esque Soviet legal system, the primitive life lived by Russian kolkozhniki (collective farm inhabitants) in Siberia etc.

However, at the end of the book, the author’s sentence for being a “social parasite” (5 years internal exile –2.5 years of which to be hard labour on a collective farm or elsewhere–) is quashed on appeal, Amalrik returns to Moscow with the wife whom he in fact married in Moscow and during his exile (because he was allowed compassionate leave from the collective farm or kolkhoz to visit his unwell father). He applies to the housing people in his district and, after some difficulty when he has to share with others, is given a flat with a decent bathroom and telephone.

Now, we are often told and quite rightly that Soviet people generally lived poorly, had to share, in many cases, their accommodation by living in communal flats or kommunalki (usually large flats expropriated from affluent persons during and after the Revolution of 1917 and the subsequent Civil War, though in fact some such shared apartments pre-dated Bolshevism), sharing kitchens and bathrooms etc and given, at best,one room per person (it was usually worked out, in theory, at so many square metres per person or family).

All of the above is true, but when one looks at the situation in 2018 Britain, many are not much better off, and some are worse off. Would a prisoner released from incarceration in the UK be given a flat, even a small one? The most he could expect would be B&B accommodation of a markedly poor sort, and to be put on a local authority waiting list, probably behind a horde of “refugees”, “asylum-seekers” and other riff-raff.

In fact, look at how many British people with full-time jobs live! Many in shared houses and flats, or in bedsit rooms. No better off than Soviet citizens! How many “hardworking” (the label of the past few years) people are living in not very nice shared accommodation in the UK, living off pot noodles and the like?

To go off at a tangent, this “hardworking” thing has become a joke: for example, school students all deserve (increasingly meaningless) “A” “grades” in exams because “they have all worked so hard”. Doesn’t matter if they are thick as two short planks and know only force-fed “facts” (often incorrect, as in the case of “holocaust” “history” etc). They are “hardworking” and so are the “deserving” academic poor. They therefore “deserve” to attend a “uni” where they will also “work hard” to “achieve” an almost meaningless “degree” (an equally-meaningless “First”, in half the cases) before –for many–getting a minimum wage (or not much better) job…

The above thoughts should impel us to think about what people need in a basic way, about what should, arguably, be the State-provided or guaranteed minimum.

Ideally, everyone should live in a decent house or flat, free of worries, with pleasant neighbours if any, while doing work which benefits society. That of course is a counsel of perfection, but that fact should not stop us from aiming at a higher and better form of living for all citizens.

For me, everyone should at least have a home, preferably one where there is reasonable space, reasonable peace, reasonable access to green gardens or wider Nature. Living space should be regarded as a human right, not as a way for buy to let parasites to make profits from the need of others. Everyone should have access to telephone and Internet. Everyone should have access to cheap or free public transport, at least in the local area and arguably within a 20-mile radius of home. Everyone should have (up to a determined cap) free water, electricity, heating. Beyond that, everyone should also have a “basic income”, even if only (in today’s money) £20 a week.

We can move to a society where the basics are provided. When people have the basics, they can work to get more, or to improve aspects of society in other ways.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrei_Amalrik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communal_apartment

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Involuntary-Journey-Siberia-Andrei-Amalrik/dp/0156453932#customerReviews

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=dp_byline_sr_book_1?ie=UTF8&text=Andrei+Amalrik&search-alias=books-uk&field-author=Andrei+Amalrik&sort=relevancerank