Friday, 31 October 2008
Life, again
This weekend will entail engaging with that "life" thing again. Blogging may be erratic.
Thursday, 30 October 2008
Managing Expectations
Obamalamadingdong has announced that he needs to manage expectations after the elections:
Well, Barry, I can promise you that there will be a vast mood swing, it's just a matter of whether it's immediate or whether it takes a couple of years. Best you deaden away.
Cunt.
Barack Obama’s senior advisers have drawn up plans to lower expectations for his presidency if he wins next week’s election, amid concerns that many of his euphoric supporters have unrealistic hopes of what he can achieve.
The sudden financial crisis and the prospect of a deep and painful recession have increased the urgency inside the Obama team to bring people down to earth, after a campaign in which his soaring rhetoric and promises of “hope” and “change” are now confronted with the reality of a stricken economy.
One senior adviser told The Times that the first few weeks of the transition, immediately after the election, were critical, “so there’s not a vast mood swing from exhilaration and euphoria to despair”.
Well, Barry, I can promise you that there will be a vast mood swing, it's just a matter of whether it's immediate or whether it takes a couple of years. Best you deaden away.
Cunt.
Darling's VAT Double Bubble
Trixy again:
And indeed, most people are so woefully uninformed that they would not be able to tell the difference. But what is happening is that Darling is screwing us twice, at a time of great financial crisis in an empty gesture: since he can't withold the VAT from the EUSSR, he is stealing skoolzanhospitalz money from some other pot. That means that the EU gets all their money, we get even fewer / worse skoolzanhospitalz and ZaNu Labour gets a bit of much-needed good PR.
Fuck the taxpayers (twice!), who cares about them?
Well, blow me down with a feather if Alastair Darling hasn't gone and done just that for the X Factor Royal British Legion and Help for Heroes single.Chancellor Alistair Darling announced today that the Government will waive VAT on the sale of the X Factor finalists' charity single Hero.
Except that he hasn't, has he.An exceptional one-off charitable donation will be made, equivalent to the sum of the VAT receipts collected on its sales.
You see what he did there? He said he'd do something, then in the next line he said he'd do something else on the same topic but not the same and hope that people wouldn't notice.
And indeed, most people are so woefully uninformed that they would not be able to tell the difference. But what is happening is that Darling is screwing us twice, at a time of great financial crisis in an empty gesture: since he can't withold the VAT from the EUSSR, he is stealing skoolzanhospitalz money from some other pot. That means that the EU gets all their money, we get even fewer / worse skoolzanhospitalz and ZaNu Labour gets a bit of much-needed good PR.
Fuck the taxpayers (twice!), who cares about them?
More EU fascism
Trixy has the details. Depressing stuff:
Providing the details have been filled in properly then a British citizen can be sent off to another EU state with as much ceremony as posting a parcel.
Spineless little fucks
Colour me outraged:
Actually, I'm beyond outraged. I'm apoplectic. Fuck you, you jumped-up neo-Nazi cunt. Fuck you in the arse, and the eye socket and in every single festering putrid orifice, you fucking fascist whore. And fuck all those fraidy-cat little Himmlers who didn't just stand up and denounce the whole discussion as ludicrous.
You can fucking hide at home you weaselly little cowards, but at some point you're going to have to go to the office, and we know where that is.
Hat tip to the LPUK.
Prospective MPs may no longer have to give their full address when standing for office, under plans being considered by the government.
While voters should know their MP lives locally, there was a question mark over whether they had to give house numbers or streets, Harriet Harman told MPs.
Actually, I'm beyond outraged. I'm apoplectic. Fuck you, you jumped-up neo-Nazi cunt. Fuck you in the arse, and the eye socket and in every single festering putrid orifice, you fucking fascist whore. And fuck all those fraidy-cat little Himmlers who didn't just stand up and denounce the whole discussion as ludicrous.
You can fucking hide at home you weaselly little cowards, but at some point you're going to have to go to the office, and we know where that is.
Hat tip to the LPUK.
So what, exactly have these fuckers been spending our money on, eh?
Blaney got my eyebrows up:
And this got me to thinking: what have these fuckers been spending our money on for the last decade? No new prisons. No substantial improvement in military kit. No new roads. No improvements in the railways. Nothing substantial in the common weal that I can see at all.
So what have they been doing with the readies then? My best guess is that they've been blowing your money and mine on "social justice", two words that sum up every mealy-mouthed thing that is wrong with this cunt of a country. They've been handing our money out to people they feel deserve it, with the usual mixture of efficiency, even-handedness and generosity that only the state can manage. Said people are of course extremely grateful for our money and spend it wisely. Some of it they've given to the EU. And the EU can do no wrong, can they? They've also chucked huge wedges as starving bankers, famished train operators, the poor waifs at EDS and Crapita and any number of other valuable, useful causes.
And the rest they just pissed up the wall in fatuous wastefulness.
Cunts.
Criminals on probation have committed 120 murders in the past TWO years. I do wonder how the do-gooders in the Howard League for Penal Reform and their fellow apologists for violent criminals can sleep at night.How many of these people had been released early by the government, a government too mean to spend the billions in tax revenues purloined from us on new prisons?
And this got me to thinking: what have these fuckers been spending our money on for the last decade? No new prisons. No substantial improvement in military kit. No new roads. No improvements in the railways. Nothing substantial in the common weal that I can see at all.
So what have they been doing with the readies then? My best guess is that they've been blowing your money and mine on "social justice", two words that sum up every mealy-mouthed thing that is wrong with this cunt of a country. They've been handing our money out to people they feel deserve it, with the usual mixture of efficiency, even-handedness and generosity that only the state can manage. Said people are of course extremely grateful for our money and spend it wisely. Some of it they've given to the EU. And the EU can do no wrong, can they? They've also chucked huge wedges as starving bankers, famished train operators, the poor waifs at EDS and Crapita and any number of other valuable, useful causes.
And the rest they just pissed up the wall in fatuous wastefulness.
Cunts.
The British economy is in the best condition to weather ... blah, blah, blah
Sure about that, Gorgon? Some dumbass yank doesn't think so:
So actually, Britain is uniquely positioned for the "storm", because it's the only one in it. Turns out those pesky yanks actually aren't having a recession at all, it's just us.
Fuck off and die, you arrogant, hypocritical, mendacious, snot-eating, fat, monocular, Scottish cunt.
Recent growth looks a lot like ... 1996. Don't believe me?
Of course, third quarter real GDP comes out tomorrow, and everyone knows it will be low - I'd go so far as to say there are a lot of folks who have their heart set on it making the world look like it's 1932 all over again.
More importantly, it will be used by everyone to justify increased centralization of decision-making ... even though the world spent most of the last century learning that centralized decision-making always ends up being reactionary, inefficient, and ossifying.
Tomorrow's number will change things for the worse, so it is worthwhile to point out now that the last time the economy looked like this was July of 1996.
You read that correctly. Don't believe me? Check the data at the source - second link from the top.
You are also correct to recall that the sky wasn't falling then.
So actually, Britain is uniquely positioned for the "storm", because it's the only one in it. Turns out those pesky yanks actually aren't having a recession at all, it's just us.
Fuck off and die, you arrogant, hypocritical, mendacious, snot-eating, fat, monocular, Scottish cunt.
An end to boom and bust
Labour arrogance and hubris:
the number of repossessions in the UK increased by 71 per cent in the three months to June, with 11,050 people losing their homes. There were 6,476 reposessions in the same period last year.
I don't know what to make of this, either
The great purveyor of hope seems to be a bit short on delivering hope to his own kin. First, there was his half-brother living in real poverty, not fucking New Labour "children in poverty" shit, but utter, abject $300 a year poverty. You could pretend that because it was half a world away, it didn't reflect too badly on him, but now there's this:
I can't help but feel that a man who wants to uplift the downtrodden with your money should be setting a better example with his own fucking kith and kin, using his own fucking money.
I'm telling you, folks, this is another Tony Blair we've got here. A thieving bastard hypocrite of the very highest order.
Zeituni Onyango, the aunt so affectionately described in Mr Obama’s best-selling memoir Dreams from My Father, lives in a disabled-access flat on a rundown public housing estate in South Boston.
A second relative believed to be the long-lost “Uncle Omar” described in the book was beaten by armed robbers with a “sawed-off rifle” while working in a corner shop in the Dorchester area of the city. He was later evicted from his one-bedroom flat for failing to pay $2,324.20 (£1,488) arrears, according to the Boston Housing Court.
I can't help but feel that a man who wants to uplift the downtrodden with your money should be setting a better example with his own fucking kith and kin, using his own fucking money.
I'm telling you, folks, this is another Tony Blair we've got here. A thieving bastard hypocrite of the very highest order.
Ross and Brand
I generally don't pay much attention to the lives of luvvies, but you can hardly escape this little clusterfuck. For what my opinion is worth (nothing!) I think that a) both of them showed very poor taste and on a personal level I'd kick both of them in the balls if I were Andrew Sachs; b) the show should never have been aired, and the BBC producer responsible should get the sack; and c) Brand went up the tiniest of notches in my estimation for resigning.
Ross, on the other hand, has shown himself to be a money-grubbing coward and can go help himself to a large helping of "shut the fuck up" pie from here on in. I hope that Ross's career is fucked from here on in, the cowardly little lisping cunt.
Ross, on the other hand, has shown himself to be a money-grubbing coward and can go help himself to a large helping of "shut the fuck up" pie from here on in. I hope that Ross's career is fucked from here on in, the cowardly little lisping cunt.
Will cloud computing destroy the computer industry as we know it?
This guy seems to think so:
I'm not sure I agree with the idea that a market can be over-supplied. Normal market economics would wipe out anyone who wasn't delivering something worth buying. But consolidation of most IT into a bunch of clouds is not a very good thing, in my book. In the same way that I opposed my clients migrating to SAP or BaaN from their bespoke systems (to no avail, it must be said!) I oppose the cloud model. It will inevitably provide some advantages (mostly around costs) but will also stifle the ability to innovate.
It's going to slaughter a lot of IT business. And that's fair enough, but as usual in the IT industry, I see a lot of people rushing to "adopt the latest paradigm shift" without thinking through the consequences.
My prediction is that the cloud will look like hell on earth for the small contractor at first. But once businesses realise how little control they have over their IT, there will be a surge in demand for smaller, nimbler providers to give them the systems that help add business value.
I really wish IT wasn't under the control of the bean counters.
Cloud computing means fewer and larger storage buyers. The server industry has already savagely consolidated. The storage industry has yet to do so. Judged from a server industry point of view the storage industry is ridiculously over-supplied.
I'm not sure I agree with the idea that a market can be over-supplied. Normal market economics would wipe out anyone who wasn't delivering something worth buying. But consolidation of most IT into a bunch of clouds is not a very good thing, in my book. In the same way that I opposed my clients migrating to SAP or BaaN from their bespoke systems (to no avail, it must be said!) I oppose the cloud model. It will inevitably provide some advantages (mostly around costs) but will also stifle the ability to innovate.
Fewer buyers of storage who buy in larger numbers will encourage storage industry consolidation. Count the number of backup software suppliers - there are far too many. Every customer who moves over to the cloud will stop buying data centre storage hardware and software. They won't purchase arrays to store the data they don't hold any more, or business continuity and disaster recovery software to shift to backup data centres they no longer have, backup software, backup reporting software, security software for files they no longer need to protect, replication software for the data they no longer need to replicate ... you get the picture.
It's going to slaughter a lot of IT business. And that's fair enough, but as usual in the IT industry, I see a lot of people rushing to "adopt the latest paradigm shift" without thinking through the consequences.
My prediction is that the cloud will look like hell on earth for the small contractor at first. But once businesses realise how little control they have over their IT, there will be a surge in demand for smaller, nimbler providers to give them the systems that help add business value.
I really wish IT wasn't under the control of the bean counters.
The police and cameras ... again
These cunts are useless. I'm tired of hearing the myth about "mostly good cops with a few bad apples", because the good cop never seems to be on duty any more. So, scrap the whole fucking lot of them and begin again under libertarian principles where actual crime against the individual is the priority.
Wednesday, 29 October 2008
How to manipulate world opinion for fun and profit
From the Whited Sepulcre:
Here's how the mafia extorts money:
Say you have a restaurant. The mafia has a trash removal service and a laundry. You prefer to use someone else's trash removal service. You prefer to use someone else's laundry for your tablecloths. Someone comes by your restaurant and "encourages" you to use the mafia's incredibly expensive trash and laundry service. Otherwise, your restaurant will have a fire.
Here's how Albert Gore, The Goracle of Music City Tennessee, winner of the freakin' Nobel Prize, winner of Oscars, Grammys, etc., extorts money:
Say you want to build a new coal-fired power plant. And Albert Gore has a $5 billion company called Generation Investment Management. There are currently no excessive requirements for "carbon capture" on coal-fired power plants. Generation Investment Management, has a "strategic alliance" with Gore's other bedfellows at Kleiner Perkins. Both of these outfits specialize in "carbon capture", "emissions capture", "perpetual motion", etc. (Albert Gore's previous scams can be viewed by hitting the Al Gore label at the bottom of this post.)
Next, Albert Gore appears at something called "The Clinton Global Initiative", and encourages young people to engage in ACTS OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE "to prevent the construction of new coal plants that do not have carbon capture and sequestration."
In other words, buy Albert Gore's weather-changing, rain-making, hurricane-stopping equipment, or he's gonna shut you down. Through illegal means. And he's gonna encourage kids to do the dirty work.
Albert Gore would have to evolve for billions of years to rise to the level of pond scum.
The irony of all this is that Albert has just spotted a major opportunity to a) get very rich and b) get a lot of ego-stroking, both of which are the things that politicians live for. In fact, Albert has done it really well, because he's gotten out of the relatively small stage of US politics into a place where he can influence world events. As much as I hate and despise his hypocrisy and demagoguery, I admire his achievement.
Here's how the mafia extorts money:
Say you have a restaurant. The mafia has a trash removal service and a laundry. You prefer to use someone else's trash removal service. You prefer to use someone else's laundry for your tablecloths. Someone comes by your restaurant and "encourages" you to use the mafia's incredibly expensive trash and laundry service. Otherwise, your restaurant will have a fire.
Here's how Albert Gore, The Goracle of Music City Tennessee, winner of the freakin' Nobel Prize, winner of Oscars, Grammys, etc., extorts money:
Say you want to build a new coal-fired power plant. And Albert Gore has a $5 billion company called Generation Investment Management. There are currently no excessive requirements for "carbon capture" on coal-fired power plants. Generation Investment Management, has a "strategic alliance" with Gore's other bedfellows at Kleiner Perkins. Both of these outfits specialize in "carbon capture", "emissions capture", "perpetual motion", etc. (Albert Gore's previous scams can be viewed by hitting the Al Gore label at the bottom of this post.)
Next, Albert Gore appears at something called "The Clinton Global Initiative", and encourages young people to engage in ACTS OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE "to prevent the construction of new coal plants that do not have carbon capture and sequestration."
In other words, buy Albert Gore's weather-changing, rain-making, hurricane-stopping equipment, or he's gonna shut you down. Through illegal means. And he's gonna encourage kids to do the dirty work.
Albert Gore would have to evolve for billions of years to rise to the level of pond scum.
The irony of all this is that Albert has just spotted a major opportunity to a) get very rich and b) get a lot of ego-stroking, both of which are the things that politicians live for. In fact, Albert has done it really well, because he's gotten out of the relatively small stage of US politics into a place where he can influence world events. As much as I hate and despise his hypocrisy and demagoguery, I admire his achievement.
Timmy nails it
Message for Ed Balls:
Update: NKB has a similar opinion.
Update 2: It's also considered a load of Labour Bollocks.
Do bugger off man.
Update: NKB has a similar opinion.
Update 2: It's also considered a load of Labour Bollocks.
A Vulcan Speaks
Tuesday, 28 October 2008
Informix Roundup: 28 Oct 2008
Non-geeks may want to look away now.
Not so much today.
IBM Database Magazine has an article on functional indexes on row types.
Access heterogeneous data using Informix Enterprise Gateway Manager with ODBC or DRDA over at developerworks
Not so much today.
IBM Database Magazine has an article on functional indexes on row types.
Access heterogeneous data using Informix Enterprise Gateway Manager with ODBC or DRDA over at developerworks
You have entered the Twilight Zone
Deedeedeedee, deedeedeedee ...
If there was ever conclusive proof that multiculturalism doesn't work, it's when it's used to defend the "villains".
Hat tip to the Croydonian.
WHITE workers should benefit from "positive discrimination" to help them fend off competition from better-skilled immigrants, equalities chief Trevor Phillips urged today.
If there was ever conclusive proof that multiculturalism doesn't work, it's when it's used to defend the "villains".
Hat tip to the Croydonian.
That was quick!
Dear Mr Clown,
I have reviewed your recent letter. In essence, my reply is: you have got to be fucking joking. And the Prime Mentalist's a cunt, too.
Yours sincerely,
Mr Anthony N. Undermanager
PS You're overdrawn and your credit cards are maxed out. Do something or I'm coming for your house.
Bugger.
I have reviewed your recent letter. In essence, my reply is: you have got to be fucking joking. And the Prime Mentalist's a cunt, too.
Yours sincerely,
Mr Anthony N. Undermanager
PS You're overdrawn and your credit cards are maxed out. Do something or I'm coming for your house.
Bugger.
Polly Toynbee = Fucking Idiot
Monday, 27 October 2008
Tomorrow, I'm going to see what my bank manager says
This sounds absolutely spiffy:
Dear Mr Undermanager,
In accordance with the highest principles of financial prudence in these difficult economic times, I have taken the difficult decisions necessary to ensure that the Clown household is not affected by the economic crisis imported from the USA, which definitely has nothing to do with my own profligacy, that I shall be borrowing to fund my continued spending. As you will be aware, I have reduced my credit-card bill from a full year's salary to just over eighteen months' salary, and so I am well-placed to borrow heavily and contribute to the economic recovery of the country. The fact that people are not spending money on circuses right now should not concern you in any way.
I assure you that my apparently extravagant plans to refit my entire house with designer furniture, repave my driveway and purchase a new fleet of vehicles is certain to improve the economy.
Because of the amount I intend to invest in the wisest possible sense, I will not be able to pay the loan off in my lifetime, but I am quite certain that my daughter and her as yet unborn children will not mind funding this on my behalf. I will not be mentioning it to her, lest it upset her. I'd be grateful if you would keep this confidential until she is 18.
I look forward to your cheque for the half-million pound loan at your earliest convenience.
Yours sincerely,
Obo.
Yes, that's going to work.
Dear Mr Undermanager,
In accordance with the highest principles of financial prudence in these difficult economic times, I have taken the difficult decisions necessary to ensure that the Clown household is not affected by the economic crisis imported from the USA, which definitely has nothing to do with my own profligacy, that I shall be borrowing to fund my continued spending. As you will be aware, I have reduced my credit-card bill from a full year's salary to just over eighteen months' salary, and so I am well-placed to borrow heavily and contribute to the economic recovery of the country. The fact that people are not spending money on circuses right now should not concern you in any way.
I assure you that my apparently extravagant plans to refit my entire house with designer furniture, repave my driveway and purchase a new fleet of vehicles is certain to improve the economy.
Because of the amount I intend to invest in the wisest possible sense, I will not be able to pay the loan off in my lifetime, but I am quite certain that my daughter and her as yet unborn children will not mind funding this on my behalf. I will not be mentioning it to her, lest it upset her. I'd be grateful if you would keep this confidential until she is 18.
I look forward to your cheque for the half-million pound loan at your earliest convenience.
Yours sincerely,
Obo.
Yes, that's going to work.
Informix Roundup: 27 Oct 2008
Non-geeks might want to look away now.
I assume everyone follows the big blogs, so here is some stuff I found elsewhere.
SolidDB announcement including Informix
Exact announces Informix support
sqlmap recognises Informix
IBM provides lifecycle tools for Informix
Testking has a practice kit for the Informix certification exam
I assume everyone follows the big blogs, so here is some stuff I found elsewhere.
SolidDB announcement including Informix
Exact announces Informix support
sqlmap recognises Informix
IBM provides lifecycle tools for Informix
Testking has a practice kit for the Informix certification exam
Child abuse, again
Leg-Iron has found someone who says that kids want to be spied on when surfing the net.
Like fuck they do.
Like fuck they do.
Interesting idea
Over at Samizdata: does limited liability lead to a lack of care?
I think that's a pretty good idea: businessmen would not fuck about half as much as some of them do if they knew that one bad decision could bury them forever.
However, there are still some nooks and crannies of the banking world where unlimited liability still exists and works successfully. The Swiss private bank Pictet, founded in 1805 in that memorable Napoleonic battle year of Austerlitz and Trafalgar, operates a partnership system where the bank partners face unlimited liability. As a result, Pictet operates a very conservative lending and investment policy. During the fat years of the 'Noughties, Pictet may have seen some of its more aggressive competitors steal a march, but now the bank is attracting inflows from investors who appreciate the structure of the firm. At a time when Swiss banks have sometimes attracted bad headlines due to massive losses undertaken by over-confident people, the example of Pictet is an interesting contrast.
I think that's a pretty good idea: businessmen would not fuck about half as much as some of them do if they knew that one bad decision could bury them forever.
542
I was really stoked when I got my iPod and all my music was ripped and on the iPod. Then I discovered podcasts.
I now have 542 podcasts awaiting my ear, along with my 1100-odd albums which I haven't listened to in about three months.
There's not just an information overload out there.
I now have 542 podcasts awaiting my ear, along with my 1100-odd albums which I haven't listened to in about three months.
There's not just an information overload out there.
Ooh, bitchy!
Dust off your handbags, ladies:
Diddums!
Julian, dah-ling, I realise that you meeja whores all indulge in mutual reach-arounds with the concomitant bitchiness that goes with a surfeit of incest, but really, the rest of the world doesn't give a flying fuck. He's doing a good job of conning the voters, and if David's serious about getting into Number 10, that's the way you do it.
David Cameron must know that he will have to dump Andy Coulson as his PR adviser if he is serious about gaining access to 10 Downing Street. This may appear to be a deeply unfashionable thing to suggest. Coulson, the former editor of the News of the World, is a respected professional. And he has, after all, done a terrific job in the last year, making Cameron attractive to the readers of the Mail, the Sun and others, as well as taking the Tory message out to single women, to young mums, and to new voters who, five years ago, would have never considered themselves capable of voting Conservative.Right. So why the fuck should he leave, then?
Of course there are many people in the PR industry with a past, and many of them do rather well. Matthew Freud, let's not forget, was once arrested for possessing cocaine. Lord (Tim) Bell was once arrested for indecent exposure. But politics, and in-house politics at that, is a different game. When Alastair Campbell became the story, he simply had to go.
Unlike these celebrated and powerful London publicists, Coulson has a clean bill of health. He has never been caught with his hand in the till and has not been found guilty of anything other than writing a few dodgy headlines.
There was the small matter of his resignation from his job as editor in 2007 after one of his star journalists was jailed for plotting to hack into the phone messages of employees of the royal family. Coulson escaped serious censure and left News Corp with a smile on his face, clutching a handful of newspaper awards.
Yet he is guilty by association. "He who touches pitch will be defiled", goes the saying.
Diddums!
But if you also consider the disastrous legal cases lost by the News of the World during his tenure (against Ashley Cole, Wayne Rooney, the MP Tommy Sheridan and others), it becomes clear that the Tories' director of communications is prone to go too far in pursuit of what he wants. This makes him a liability to any political party with serious ambition. Inside the lobby Coulson gets a mixed press.
Julian, dah-ling, I realise that you meeja whores all indulge in mutual reach-arounds with the concomitant bitchiness that goes with a surfeit of incest, but really, the rest of the world doesn't give a flying fuck. He's doing a good job of conning the voters, and if David's serious about getting into Number 10, that's the way you do it.
Sunday, 26 October 2008
Who says economics is dull?
Issue 5 in Ohio is attracting some interest (ho! ho!):
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Hat tip to the ASI.
As a pimp and sometime loan-shark, I'm voting YES on issue 5! Since I make my living off of prostitution -- something that's banned by law but has shockingly not gone away -- it's clear that the more we can push things out of transparent, regulated markets where participants in a contract have access to legal remedies if things go wrong, the more money I can make.
My brother the pot dealer agrees with me 100%.
Once small loan places are closed down, I look forward to servicing their customers, who will have no less of a need for short term loans. Of course, I'll charge even higher interest rates than the legal shops, and if they don't pay up, we have ways of getting our money back. They involve crowbars and car batteries. I anticipate a high level of success in my collections.
I'm also thinking about opening up a used car lot. Because as we've seen in other states that pass similar bans, when people need a short-term loan and can't get it through legal means and don't want to go to what some might call the "underworld of organized crime and street thugs," they're likely to sell their cars at fire sale prices.
So in short, as a criminal who preys on the weak, I look forward to the additional business that the well-intended but economically-illiterate backers of this ban will give me.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Hat tip to the ASI.
A very bad idea
Dear me, here we go again. It's true, poverty in Africa is shocking. All this wibble about "children in poverty" in the UK is absolutely fatuous when you look at genuine, breathtaking absolute poverty.
But there is no quick fix to poverty. Chucking huge amounts of money, even directly at the poor, does nothing permanent. Chucking huge amounts of money at charities just makes the charities even more jumped up and pompous than they were before. Before you give any money to Breadline, check what they spend their money on. You may find that they are spending money on things that, while worthy, will do sweet fuck-all to help the poor. Breadline could also easily be skimming money off the top and might be distributing the money in a way which might not actually help people very effectively.
It's better if you go and have a look at the projects they support, and give the money directly to them. But don't take them at face value, either. They could be shysters hiding under sweet and honeyed words, too.
And really, the best thing you can do is to employ somebody. And if the minimum wage makes them too expensive to employ, what does that tell you? It tells you their labour isn't worth the minimum wage. So the government should abolish the minimum wage. Getting a shit job for a low wage is the first step to getting a better job on a higher wage.
Getting out of poverty is bloody hard work. Handouts don't do it. High ideals don't do it. Governments can't legislate people out of real poverty. Minimum wages keep people out of work.
Charity sucks donkey cock, no matter if it makes you feel better about yourself for five minutes.
Really poor people, earlier
But there is no quick fix to poverty. Chucking huge amounts of money, even directly at the poor, does nothing permanent. Chucking huge amounts of money at charities just makes the charities even more jumped up and pompous than they were before. Before you give any money to Breadline, check what they spend their money on. You may find that they are spending money on things that, while worthy, will do sweet fuck-all to help the poor. Breadline could also easily be skimming money off the top and might be distributing the money in a way which might not actually help people very effectively.
It's better if you go and have a look at the projects they support, and give the money directly to them. But don't take them at face value, either. They could be shysters hiding under sweet and honeyed words, too.
And really, the best thing you can do is to employ somebody. And if the minimum wage makes them too expensive to employ, what does that tell you? It tells you their labour isn't worth the minimum wage. So the government should abolish the minimum wage. Getting a shit job for a low wage is the first step to getting a better job on a higher wage.
Getting out of poverty is bloody hard work. Handouts don't do it. High ideals don't do it. Governments can't legislate people out of real poverty. Minimum wages keep people out of work.
Charity sucks donkey cock, no matter if it makes you feel better about yourself for five minutes.
Oh my Ghosh, what a load of utter tosh...
... this is:
What the fuck are you smoking, woman? What the fuck job is it of the financial system to prevent crises, and more especially, where the fuckety fuck did you get this insane idea about the banks having to do wealth redistribution? Jesus Hiernonymus Christ on a three-wheeled cycling device, I haven't such utter inanity since the last time I managed to fight my way through something from Polly's oeuvre.
Oh, come on. I'm sure you can find individual cases where this happens, mostly because some rent-seeking fucktard gets into bed with the government of the day and uses the tax income of the government for itself. But the reality of it is that sweatshops and the like are mutually beneficial to the actual residents of poor countries and the businesses that run them, even though they are abhorrent to the cliterati in the UK.
But given that what is worst for the residents of these poorer countries is that some rich corporate gets into bed with the government of said poorer country, what then is Oh My Ghosh's solution to this?
Why? Because:
That's right folks, in order to save the poor from rent-seeking corporate / government sodomy of the taxpayer, she wants to make it easier for the government to support the rent-seeking corporate!
But the most egregious stupidity in the article is this:
Banks and the finance sector in general are among the most heavily regulated industries their are. They are subject to all local (council) business regulations, national general business regulations, mountains of financial sector specific regulation, as well as masses of international regulation. The idea that banks "self-regulate" shows an astonishing lack of basic business awareness. And there is even more stupidity:
Have the average wages in those poorer countries declined, then? Or are they just getting richer more slowly than the Americans? Every graph I've looked at, every bit of research I've read about globalization shows that poor countries benefit overall from the current system. There is a short period of sweatshops (shorter than Britain had to endure, for instance) and then there is a burgeoning middle class and people get to live lifestyles that even a jumped-up Guardianista could survive (albeit with a lot more whingeing.)
Sorry, Jayati, I rate your article as Epic Fail.
Now be a love and go an put the kettle on. If you can manage it.
Update: before everyone starts banging on about it, I know she's a professor of economics. But so is this cunt, and he's fucking useless, too.
Hat tip to the ASI for this one.
the international financial system has failed to meet two obvious requirements: of preventing instability and crises, and of transferring resources from richer to poorer economies
What the fuck are you smoking, woman? What the fuck job is it of the financial system to prevent crises, and more especially, where the fuckety fuck did you get this insane idea about the banks having to do wealth redistribution? Jesus Hiernonymus Christ on a three-wheeled cycling device, I haven't such utter inanity since the last time I managed to fight my way through something from Polly's oeuvre.
even the periods of economic expansion have been based on the global poor subsidising the rich
Oh, come on. I'm sure you can find individual cases where this happens, mostly because some rent-seeking fucktard gets into bed with the government of the day and uses the tax income of the government for itself. But the reality of it is that sweatshops and the like are mutually beneficial to the actual residents of poor countries and the businesses that run them, even though they are abhorrent to the cliterati in the UK.
But given that what is worst for the residents of these poorer countries is that some rich corporate gets into bed with the government of said poorer country, what then is Oh My Ghosh's solution to this?
since private players will inevitably attempt to circumvent regulation, the core of the financial system – banking – must be protected, and this is only possible through social ownership.
Why? Because:
it enables public control over the direction of credit, without which no country has industrialised
That's right folks, in order to save the poor from rent-seeking corporate / government sodomy of the taxpayer, she wants to make it easier for the government to support the rent-seeking corporate!
But the most egregious stupidity in the article is this:
the belief that self-regulation supported with external risk assessment by rating agencies is an adequate way to run a financial system has been blown sky-high. There is no alternative, therefore, to systematic state regulation of finance
Banks and the finance sector in general are among the most heavily regulated industries their are. They are subject to all local (council) business regulations, national general business regulations, mountains of financial sector specific regulation, as well as masses of international regulation. The idea that banks "self-regulate" shows an astonishing lack of basic business awareness. And there is even more stupidity:
In the past six years, there has been a net flow of financial resources from every developing region to the north, primarily the US, even as global income disparities have increased.
Have the average wages in those poorer countries declined, then? Or are they just getting richer more slowly than the Americans? Every graph I've looked at, every bit of research I've read about globalization shows that poor countries benefit overall from the current system. There is a short period of sweatshops (shorter than Britain had to endure, for instance) and then there is a burgeoning middle class and people get to live lifestyles that even a jumped-up Guardianista could survive (albeit with a lot more whingeing.)
Sorry, Jayati, I rate your article as Epic Fail.
Now be a love and go an put the kettle on. If you can manage it.
Update: before everyone starts banging on about it, I know she's a professor of economics. But so is this cunt, and he's fucking useless, too.
Hat tip to the ASI for this one.
The EU will not replace nation states ...
... so why do they need an army, then?
"Where it can help?"
So ... nowhere, then?
John Hutton has become the first defence secretary to back a French plan for a European army, branding those who dismiss it as “pathetic”.
In a wide-ranging interview with The Sunday Times, he said: “I think we’ve got to be pragmatic about those things. Where it can help, we should be part of it.”
"Where it can help?"
So ... nowhere, then?
Saturday, 25 October 2008
PETA: barking mad ...
... or mewing mad? You decide.
A "sea kitten", earlier:
Update: Peta Kills Animals. Tip of the hat to JuliaM in the comments.
A "sea kitten", earlier:
Update: Peta Kills Animals. Tip of the hat to JuliaM in the comments.
An open letter to Jeff Cumberland
From the letters page of the New Statesman, via Mrs Dale (who does a pretty comprehensive fisk):
What a load of flatulent arse!
Utter shite. I don't know any moneyed bloggers at all, people with money are all out doing things that make them more money. Blogging doesn't make you any money. The free market in blogging is accurate, though, and the difference between left- and right-wing bloggers is that people on the right are writing what people want to read.
WHAT???????!?!????!
What the cunting fuck are you wittering on about, you cock-biting fucktard? You want the state to fund left-wing bloggers? Do you think that's going to make anyone want to read their turgid cuntsnaffling?
You have the most tenuous grasp on the purpose of blogging I think I've ever seen.
I (very) occasionally read Dave's Part, because he is erudite and occasionally funny. I can't think of a single other left-wing blogger that I could be arsed to read. It's not because they lack funding. It's because they're tiresome, whiny shits who haven't learned the lessons of history and because they have nothing useful or even funny to say.
I would say that I can't think of a single more stupid use of taxpayers' money than to fund some cretinous left-wing blogger, but sadly that's not the case.
Go on Jeff, admit it. You've tried a blog and no-one read it, didn't you? It's not a lack of funding, Jeff. It's a lack of wit, intelligence and above all, a lack of anything useful to say.
Ben's bloggers
Ben Davies's "Top ten bloggers" ("Politics and the Internet Age" supplement, 20 October) was too kind to the right-wing blogosphere. At present there is a free market in blogging, so it is not surprising that moneyed, right-wing viewpoints are rising to the top. In the longer term, if the internet is to fulfil its possibilities of delivering a free and democratic media, it will be necessary for the state to intervene to support less moneyed viewpoints.
We have a so-called free press where you are free to open and run a mass-circulation newspaper - provided you are a multimillionaire. Hence the right-wing domination of the press. It's the same with the internet. The start-up cost of a blog may be low, but to run a highly influential, mass-circulation blog you need a lot of money.
Jeff Cumberland
London E11
What a load of flatulent arse!
At present there is a free market in blogging, so it is not surprising that moneyed, right-wing viewpoints are rising to the top.
Utter shite. I don't know any moneyed bloggers at all, people with money are all out doing things that make them more money. Blogging doesn't make you any money. The free market in blogging is accurate, though, and the difference between left- and right-wing bloggers is that people on the right are writing what people want to read.
In the longer term, if the internet is to fulfil its possibilities of delivering a free and democratic media, it will be necessary for the state to intervene to support less moneyed viewpoints.
WHAT???????!?!????!
What the cunting fuck are you wittering on about, you cock-biting fucktard? You want the state to fund left-wing bloggers? Do you think that's going to make anyone want to read their turgid cuntsnaffling?
You have the most tenuous grasp on the purpose of blogging I think I've ever seen.
I (very) occasionally read Dave's Part, because he is erudite and occasionally funny. I can't think of a single other left-wing blogger that I could be arsed to read. It's not because they lack funding. It's because they're tiresome, whiny shits who haven't learned the lessons of history and because they have nothing useful or even funny to say.
I would say that I can't think of a single more stupid use of taxpayers' money than to fund some cretinous left-wing blogger, but sadly that's not the case.
Go on Jeff, admit it. You've tried a blog and no-one read it, didn't you? It's not a lack of funding, Jeff. It's a lack of wit, intelligence and above all, a lack of anything useful to say.
More Labour child abuse
Yet another glorious Balls-up:
Too cluttered? Too cluttered? What the fuckety fucking fuck are these cunts on about? I thought the whole idea was to expose young minds to lots of different things so that as they grew older they would have a broader background upon which to draw when deciding what to do with the rest of their lives.
This is too horrible for words. But it's no match for the unbridled horror of what will come in its place:
I can't think of a single thing that I've read that has horrified me more in a decade of watching how Labour's education policies have fucked up kids.
Listen you appalling motherfuckers, I don't want my kids to "explore themes", especially not on such egregious Labourite cockwaffle as "multiculturalism" or "personal development". I don't want my kids brainwashed with what the government of the day thinks is a "healthy lifestyle".
I want my kids to be taught about history so that they can learn from other people's mistakes and understand where their culture and lifestyle comes from. I want them to learn about the mechanics of the planet and other places so that they can spot Green cuntmongering and be aware that there are other interesting places to go and things to see. I'd even rather have them watch Simon Schama or David Attenborough than have some deathless ZNL apparatchik tell them how to live their fucking lives.
I accuse the Labour Party of being unspeakable fascists, dressing up their statist brainwashing in honeyed but meaningless words like "multiculturalism", "social justice" and "child poverty".
Traditional lessons in history, geography, drama and music could be cut from primary schools amid fears timetables are too "cluttered".
Too cluttered? Too cluttered? What the fuckety fucking fuck are these cunts on about? I thought the whole idea was to expose young minds to lots of different things so that as they grew older they would have a broader background upon which to draw when deciding what to do with the rest of their lives.
This is too horrible for words. But it's no match for the unbridled horror of what will come in its place:
Under the move, schools would be encouraged to merge subjects together. It will give schools more time to explore themes such as healthy lifestyles, multiculturalism and personal development.
I can't think of a single thing that I've read that has horrified me more in a decade of watching how Labour's education policies have fucked up kids.
Listen you appalling motherfuckers, I don't want my kids to "explore themes", especially not on such egregious Labourite cockwaffle as "multiculturalism" or "personal development". I don't want my kids brainwashed with what the government of the day thinks is a "healthy lifestyle".
I want my kids to be taught about history so that they can learn from other people's mistakes and understand where their culture and lifestyle comes from. I want them to learn about the mechanics of the planet and other places so that they can spot Green cuntmongering and be aware that there are other interesting places to go and things to see. I'd even rather have them watch Simon Schama or David Attenborough than have some deathless ZNL apparatchik tell them how to live their fucking lives.
I accuse the Labour Party of being unspeakable fascists, dressing up their statist brainwashing in honeyed but meaningless words like "multiculturalism", "social justice" and "child poverty".
You have been sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, GO!
And so it begins (Part 97)
Once again, the children are roped in:
Uhuh. And by next week...?
European Union members agreed today to create a common alert platform for reporting illegal activities on the Internet.
The system will be used to share information about those suspected of cybercrime with authorities in each of the 27 EU nations. Its goal is to prevent illegal website operators from fleeing to another EU country undetected.
"The Internet can be used for crime all over the globe so the response has to be global," French Interior Minister Michele Alliot-Marie said in a press conference.
EU's criminal intelligence agency Europol will establish and host the system. It will also run a web site where the public can report illegal content.
The European Commission pledged €300,000 (~£239,300, $379,700) to the project, which authorities say will primarily be used to coordinate information on child pornography offenses.
Uhuh. And by next week...?
Friday, 24 October 2008
Moron: "You may be shot and then it won't be my problem"
Remember this?
Via Old Holborn and Gweeds, we know who it was that made this tasteful comment. Take a bow, fuckfeatures:
Old Holborn suggests dropping him an email at rokasha@eis.org.uk ...
"I want you guys on the green," said the man from the Labour Party. "There will be six or seven guys with guns who will keep you away from her. You may be shot and then it won't be my problem."
Via Old Holborn and Gweeds, we know who it was that made this tasteful comment. Take a bow, fuckfeatures:
Old Holborn suggests dropping him an email at rokasha@eis.org.uk ...
What is it about children today, anyway?
I wonder about kids in this country. They have become untouchable, not it the sense of India's Untouchables, but almost as immune from any form of disciple, morality and ethics as our political classes. Almost every day I read an article which includes deathless comments like:
Why?
Where is the proof that kids are at any more risk of "bad things" than they ever were before? Why are so many things foisted upon us in the name of our children? What proof do you have that people who indulge in adult vices have any effect on children at all? Despite a handful of highly-publicised "triumphs" by Operation Ore, where are the serried ranks of paedophiles?
Why are men and women out protesting for their freedom to do the things that they want to do being blithely ignored even though "their thing" has nothing to do with kids?
Smoking, drinking, fucking, drugging; these are all things that people will do no matter what the government says. Why is the concern for the safety children being used as a hammer in every aspect of our adult lives?
And why are we, as adults, putting up with this shit?
"Safeguarding children is top priority for this Government and the child has been put at the heart of our reforms and we are determined to maintain a relentless focus on children’s safety."
Why?
Where is the proof that kids are at any more risk of "bad things" than they ever were before? Why are so many things foisted upon us in the name of our children? What proof do you have that people who indulge in adult vices have any effect on children at all? Despite a handful of highly-publicised "triumphs" by Operation Ore, where are the serried ranks of paedophiles?
Why are men and women out protesting for their freedom to do the things that they want to do being blithely ignored even though "their thing" has nothing to do with kids?
Smoking, drinking, fucking, drugging; these are all things that people will do no matter what the government says. Why is the concern for the safety children being used as a hammer in every aspect of our adult lives?
And why are we, as adults, putting up with this shit?
Erm ... ?
Am I reading this right?
So, let me get this straight:
1. You're going to drain a billion dollars from the real economy to fund
2. a project that will upend millions of lives
3. and cause massive amounts of carbon generation as new plants are built
4. to create "renewable" energy sources that are horrendously inefficient to
5. transport energy over long distances with the inevitable energy losses
6. to second-rate cars that people are buying for the wrong reasons
7. to solve a problem that doesn't exist in the first place.
It's becoming clear to me that greenwashing has achieved a major miracle: both tree-hugging lentilists and rent-seeking corporate statists are united, using the same PR scam to fuck over everyone else who isn't in "the game."
Fucking cunts.
A US firm Thursday unveiled plans to build a massive one-billion-dollar (667 million US) charging network to power electric cars in Australia as it seeks cleaner and cheaper options to petrol.
Better Place, which has built plug-in stations for electric vehicles in Israel and Denmark, has joined forces with Australian power company AGL and finance group Macquarie Capital to create an Australian network.
Under the agreement, Macquarie will raise one billion dollars to build electric-vehicle networks in the country's largest cities -- Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane -- while AGL will power the system with renewable energy.
So, let me get this straight:
1. You're going to drain a billion dollars from the real economy to fund
2. a project that will upend millions of lives
3. and cause massive amounts of carbon generation as new plants are built
4. to create "renewable" energy sources that are horrendously inefficient to
5. transport energy over long distances with the inevitable energy losses
6. to second-rate cars that people are buying for the wrong reasons
7. to solve a problem that doesn't exist in the first place.
It's becoming clear to me that greenwashing has achieved a major miracle: both tree-hugging lentilists and rent-seeking corporate statists are united, using the same PR scam to fuck over everyone else who isn't in "the game."
Fucking cunts.
It all sounds compelling, doesn't it?
A sly French take on protectionism:
And:
Perfidious Albion, indeed!
You are on the right track. You reject abstract theories and have little regard for abundance and low prices. You concern yourselves mainly with the fate of the producer. You wish to free him from foreign competition, that is, to reserve the domestic market for domestic industry.
We come to offer you a wonderful opportunity for applying your—what shall we call it? Your theory? No, nothing is more deceptive than theory. Your doctrine? Your system? Your principle? But you dislike doctrines, you have a horror of systems, and, as for principles, you deny that there are any in political economy; therefore we shall call it your practice — your practice without theory and without principle.
We are suffering from the ruinous competition of a foreign rival who apparently works under conditions so far superior to our own for the production of light that he is flooding the domestic market with it at an incredibly low price; for the moment he appears, our sales cease, all the consumers turn to him, and a branch of French industry whose ramifications are innumerable is all at once reduced to complete stagnation.
And:
There is no needy resin-collector on the heights of his sand dunes, no poor miner in the depths of his black pit, who will not receive higher wages and enjoy increased prosperity.
It needs but a little reflection, gentlemen, to be convinced that there is perhaps not one Frenchman, from the wealthy stockholder of the Anzin Company to the humblest vendor of matches, whose condition would not be improved by the success of our petition.
Perfidious Albion, indeed!
I'm not sure quite what to make of this ...
More Obamunist spin, perhaps?
Vote for Obama or we'll riot? Surely not?
Well, between his MSM pwnage, his massive private backing and his Blairite schmoozing, I can't see why he'd need to have a background threat as well.
Surely?
Law enforcement officials say the intense public interest and historic nature of the vote could lead to violent outbreaks if people are unhappy with the results, encounter problems casting their ballots or suspect voting irregularities.
Police departments say they cannot rule out disorder and are mobilising extra forces and putting SWAT teams on standby.
In Oakland, near San Francisco, police will have tactical squads, SWAT teams and officers trained in riot control on standby.
"We always try to prepare for the worst," said Oakland police department spokesman Jeff Thomason.
"This election is going to mark in history a change in the presidency: you're going to have a woman in the presidency or an African American as president. I think everybody around here is voting for Obama, so if he gets in the White House everybody's going to be happy.
"But we'll have our SWAT teams on standby and traffic teams here, so if something goes off we'll organise and take care of the problem."
Vote for Obama or we'll riot? Surely not?
There have also been internet rumours about plans for protests or civil disobedience by supporters of Democratic candidate Barack Obama if he is beaten by Republican rival John McCain on November 4.
Well, between his MSM pwnage, his massive private backing and his Blairite schmoozing, I can't see why he'd need to have a background threat as well.
Surely?
Credit Crunch Basics ...
... from a man who knows his crap:
Do go read the whole thing.
Borrowing and lending does not require the preservation of bankrupt banks. The banking industry is the greatest example of corporatism, in which government and banks form unholy alliances for their mutual gain, with government holding the ring. It is difficult to imagine anything more remote from “laissez faire”.
Do go read the whole thing.
The Anger is there - 1984 campaign
Through a combination of pledges, donations and a lot of bile after one week 531 copies of 1984 are going to be sent to 531 MP's in time for November 5th.
This weekend is the final push for the last 115 MP's on the list.
Please pledge on 1984@lpuk.org
Thursday, 23 October 2008
We all go on about tractor production statistics ...
... while life imitates art:
In the best Stalinist manner, DEFRA informs us that there has been 'A Record British wheat harvest' and further that "Results show a record wheat harvest of 17.5 million tonnes, an increase of 32 per cent on 2007, mainly caused by a record yield of 8.4 tonnes per hectare, combined with a 13 per cent increase in wheat area to 2.1 million hectares. Excellent planting conditions in autumn 2007, as well as strong cereal prices and the reduction to 0 per cent set-aside, contributed to the high wheat area planted".
"You may be shot and then it won't be my problem."
What the fuck?
So far, so very New Labour. But this raised my eyebrows:
These people really are insane and they need to removed from power immediately.
Tip of the hat to Gweeds.
SHE was supposed to be Labour's secret weapon, but Sarah Brown ended up being so "secret" yesterday that no-one from the press was allowed to ask her any questions.
It was clear from the moment she arrived in Cardenden to campaign on behalf of the Labour Party that she was not there to speak to the ordinary members of the public. The Prime Minister's wife was instead there to be seen to speak to ordinary members of the public.
So far, so very New Labour. But this raised my eyebrows:
Then came the most extraordinary piece of control freakery of the day. "I want you guys on the green," said the man from the Labour Party. "There will be six or seven guys with guns who will keep you away from her. You may be shot and then it won't be my problem."
These people really are insane and they need to removed from power immediately.
Tip of the hat to Gweeds.
It's not a failure of capitalism
Actually, this is important:
And boy, does that grate!
And if we look around the world, we can see for sure that in neither the EU or the UK is this remotely true. But what about the USA?
So I guess there's no laissez-faire in the US either!
But wait, there's more:
And of course, our central banks here and in the EU have been doing exactly the same thing. Regulation, interference and bad policy -- fuck all to do with capitalism.
The news media are in the process of creating a great new historical myth. This is the myth that our present financial crisis is the result of economic freedom and laissez-faire capitalism.
And boy, does that grate!
The mentality displayed in these statements is so completely and utterly at odds with the actual meaning of laissez faire that it would be capable of describing the economic policy of the old Soviet Union as one of laissez faire in its last decades. By its logic, that is how it would have to describe the policy of Brezhnev and his successors of allowing workers on collective farms to cultivate plots of land of up to one acre in size on their own account and sell the produce in farmers' markets in Soviet cities. According to the logic of the media, that too would be "laissez faire" — at least compared to the time of Stalin.
Laissez-faire capitalism has a definite meaning, which is totally ignored, contradicted, and downright defiled by such statements as those quoted above. Laissez-faire capitalism is a politico-economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and in which the powers of the state are limited to the protection of the individual's rights against the initiation of physical force. This protection applies to the initiation of physical force by other private individuals, by foreign governments, and, most importantly, by the individual's own government. This last is accomplished by such means as a written constitution, a system of division of powers and checks and balances, an explicit bill of rights, and eternal vigilance on the part of a citizenry with the right to keep and bear arms. Under laissez-faire capitalism, the state consists essentially just of a police force, law courts, and a national defense establishment, which deter and combat those who initiate the use of physical force. And nothing more.
And if we look around the world, we can see for sure that in neither the EU or the UK is this remotely true. But what about the USA?
The utter absurdity of statements claiming that the present political-economic environment of the United States in some sense represents laissez-faire capitalism becomes as glaringly obvious as anything can be when one keeps in mind the extremely limited role of government under laissez-faire and then considers the following facts about the present-day United States:
1. Government spending in the United States currently equals more than forty percent of national income, i.e., the sum of all wages and salaries and profits and interest earned in the country. This is without counting any of the massive off-budget spending such as that on account of the government enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Nor does it count any of the recent spending on assorted "bailouts." What this means is that substantially more than forty dollars of every one hundred dollars of output are appropriated by the government against the will of the individual citizens who produce that output. The money and the goods involved are turned over to the government only because the individual citizens wish to stay out of jail. Their freedom to dispose of their own incomes and output is thus violated on a colossal scale. In contrast, under laissez-faire capitalism, government spending would be on such a modest scale that a mere revenue tariff might be sufficient to support it. The corporate and individual income taxes, inheritance and capital gains taxes, and social security and Medicare taxes would not exist.
2. There are presently fifteen federal cabinet departments, nine of which exist for the very purpose of respectively interfering with housing, transportation, healthcare, education, energy, mining, agriculture, labor, and commerce, and virtually all of which nowadays routinely ride roughshod over one or more important aspects of the economic freedom of the individual. Under laissez-faire capitalism, eleven of the fifteen cabinet departments would cease to exist and only the departments of justice, defense, state, and treasury would remain. Within those departments, moreover, further reductions would be made, such as the abolition of the IRS in the Treasury Department and the Antitrust Division in the Department of Justice.
3. The economic interference of today's cabinet departments is reinforced and amplified by more than one hundred federal agencies and commissions, the most well known of which include, besides the IRS, the FRB and FDIC, the FBI and CIA, the EPA, FDA, SEC, CFTC, NLRB, FTC, FCC, FERC, FEMA, FAA, CAA, INS, OHSA, CPSC, NHTSA, EEOC, BATF, DEA, NIH, and NASA. Under laissez-faire capitalism, all such agencies and commissions would be done away with, with the exception of the FBI, which would be reduced to the legitimate functions of counterespionage and combating crimes against person or property that take place across state lines.
4. To complete this catalog of government interference and its trampling of any vestige of laissez faire, as of the end of 2007, the last full year for which data are available, the Federal Register contained fully seventy-three thousand pages of detailed government regulations. This is an increase of more than ten thousand pages since 1978, the very years during which our system, according to one of The New York Times articles quoted above, has been "tilted in favor of business deregulation and against new rules." Under laissez-faire capitalism, there would be no Federal Register. The activities of the remaining government departments and their subdivisions would be controlled exclusively by duly enacted legislation, not the rule-making of unelected government officials.
5. And, of course, to all of this must be added the further massive apparatus of laws, departments, agencies, and regulations at the state and local level. Under laissez-faire capitalism, these too for the most part would be completely abolished and what remained would reflect the same kind of radical reductions in the size and scope of government activity as those carried out on the federal level.
So I guess there's no laissez-faire in the US either!
But wait, there's more:
Beyond all this is the further fact that the actual responsibility for our financial crisis lies precisely with massive government intervention, above all the intervention of the Federal Reserve System in attempting to create capital out of thin air, in the belief that the mere creation of money and its being made available in the loan market is a substitute for capital created by producing and saving. This is a policy it has pursued since its founding, but with exceptional vigor since 2001, in its efforts to overcome the collapse of the stock market bubble whose creation it had previously inspired.
And of course, our central banks here and in the EU have been doing exactly the same thing. Regulation, interference and bad policy -- fuck all to do with capitalism.
The Shaved Chimp versus the Iron Chancellor
Dow Jones, 1 May 1997: 6,976.48
Dow Jones, 23 October 2008: 8,519.21
Despite the beating the US economy is taking, the US stock market reflecting the economy nominally under the control of a man perceived as a illiterate baboon and the worst president since Goderich is up over 22%.
FTSE 100, 1 May 1997: 4,445.00
FTSE 100, 23 October 2008: 4,040.89
Despite Prudence and the greatest Chancellor in human history, the UK stock market is down over 9%. This means that any increase in your pension fund, any increase in your shares, has been more than wiped out completely and you are now significantly worse off than if you had just stuck your money in a bank. Unless it was that terrorist bank, of course.
And still the Prime Mentalist insists on standing up at PMQs and pretends that it's all tickety boo. Fucking disgusting. The markets have spoken, Gorgon, and you've been found wanting. Again.
Do us all a favour, will you?
Fuck off and die.
Dow Jones, 23 October 2008: 8,519.21
Despite the beating the US economy is taking, the US stock market reflecting the economy nominally under the control of a man perceived as a illiterate baboon and the worst president since Goderich is up over 22%.
FTSE 100, 1 May 1997: 4,445.00
FTSE 100, 23 October 2008: 4,040.89
Despite Prudence and the greatest Chancellor in human history, the UK stock market is down over 9%. This means that any increase in your pension fund, any increase in your shares, has been more than wiped out completely and you are now significantly worse off than if you had just stuck your money in a bank. Unless it was that terrorist bank, of course.
And still the Prime Mentalist insists on standing up at PMQs and pretends that it's all tickety boo. Fucking disgusting. The markets have spoken, Gorgon, and you've been found wanting. Again.
Do us all a favour, will you?
Fuck off and die.
In defence of Boy George
Much as it galls me to do this, I have to ask his many critics: what did he actually do? Especially when Labour ministers are falling over themselves to claim all sorts of ludicrous things:
Really? Well, I suggest that Denis MacShane could have commited child molestation, by simply exposing children to the utter bullshit he speaks on a daily basis. I'm not sure my suggestion would stand up in a court of law, though.
And the sheer, unmitigated brass neck of these cunts who actively fiddled dozens of bent donations and who have had cabinet ministers resign for being caught fiddling their own rules (albeit only for a week or two) comparing that to someone having a chat over dinner is a bit fucking rich.
Make no mistake, George was a weapons-grade cock end for even having the discussion (especially with Mandelsnake within a thousand miles of the table) and that "dripping poison" fatuity is coming back to haunt him with a vengeance, but unless he actually took any money, there is absolutely nothing more than a trumped up play to try and get Gordon out of the shit pit this week.
George Osborne could have breached the law covering donations to political parties simply by discussing a possible donation from a Russian billionaire, a senior Labour MP has suggested.
Really? Well, I suggest that Denis MacShane could have commited child molestation, by simply exposing children to the utter bullshit he speaks on a daily basis. I'm not sure my suggestion would stand up in a court of law, though.
And the sheer, unmitigated brass neck of these cunts who actively fiddled dozens of bent donations and who have had cabinet ministers resign for being caught fiddling their own rules (albeit only for a week or two) comparing that to someone having a chat over dinner is a bit fucking rich.
Make no mistake, George was a weapons-grade cock end for even having the discussion (especially with Mandelsnake within a thousand miles of the table) and that "dripping poison" fatuity is coming back to haunt him with a vengeance, but unless he actually took any money, there is absolutely nothing more than a trumped up play to try and get Gordon out of the shit pit this week.
Wednesday, 22 October 2008
Real Music
Wow. Just watched Queen in Montreal on the goggle box.
I'd forgotten just how totally awesome they were live, and how Freddy could claim total crowd pwnage.
I'd forgotten just how totally awesome they were live, and how Freddy could claim total crowd pwnage.
Thanks, Merv
What a maroon:
Seriously, Merv, what the cunting fuck were you expecting would happen when you opened your fat gob?
Let me guess? You went short, right?
Thanks for that, Merv. No quick Euro city breaks for a while for me then. I can instead enjoy some delightful British culture among the intelligentsia.
Oh, look: a flying pig. Not as uncommon as they once were, obviously.
The value of the pound has plunged, suffering its sharpest drop in 16 years, after the Governor of the Bank of England warned that Britain is entering a recession.
Seriously, Merv, what the cunting fuck were you expecting would happen when you opened your fat gob?
Traders in the US and Japan rushed to dump their holdings of sterling, electing to cut their losses as forecasts suggest the British economy is poised to deteriorate further. The FTSE 100 opened down 1.5 per cent.
Let me guess? You went short, right?
Thanks for that, Merv. No quick Euro city breaks for a while for me then. I can instead enjoy some delightful British culture among the intelligentsia.
However, Mr King said that history was likely to judge the Government's £37bn banking recapitalisation as the turning point in the sector's crisis.
Oh, look: a flying pig. Not as uncommon as they once were, obviously.
Tuesday, 21 October 2008
George goes all moonbatty
It's a rare columnist who can reduce me to tears of despair in his first line of an article, but George succeeds admirably today:
It's hard to imagine how I'm going to survive even reading this article, let alone fisking it.
Banking isn't a problem. Government regulation of banking and the consequent rent-seeking is what caused the pain. There is nothing wrong with the climate that won't be fixed by George foregoing his 4x4 and electricity and leaving us to get along with our lives untrammeled. And the thought of a committee of government "wise men" turning their thoughts to dictating our lives for the next century is so horrible that I think Dignitas would be overwhelmed by the rush.
Really, how does someone this stupid get to be this influential?
A couple of truly egregious bits of fuckwittery leapt out at me:
This man truly has no grasp on history at all. None. FDR's "New Deal" dragged out the depression and if WW2 hadn't happened, the Depression would probably have carried on till the 60's. Keynes has been almost entirely discredited as an economist. Tax and spend for the last decade didn't help, how the fuck is borrow and spend going to achieve anything?
He's banging on about how much Britain can do to avert climate change by not farting in the thunderstorm of real economies.
He somehow thinks that his mythical 100-year committee will not be "ambushed by other nasty surprises", unlike current "short-termists".
God help me, he even wants us to worry about peak oil.
And finally, he has the temerity to quote Thomas Paine in an article where he is promoting the idea of governing us for the next century by his rules, whether they apply or not:
Is this some kind of post-modern, disappear-up-your-own-arsehole kind of irony, George?
I ask again: how did someone this fucking stupid become so influential?
From banking to the climate, the wreckage of short-termism is stark, and the need for a 100-year committee is plain
It's hard to imagine how I'm going to survive even reading this article, let alone fisking it.
Banking isn't a problem. Government regulation of banking and the consequent rent-seeking is what caused the pain. There is nothing wrong with the climate that won't be fixed by George foregoing his 4x4 and electricity and leaving us to get along with our lives untrammeled. And the thought of a committee of government "wise men" turning their thoughts to dictating our lives for the next century is so horrible that I think Dignitas would be overwhelmed by the rush.
Really, how does someone this stupid get to be this influential?
A couple of truly egregious bits of fuckwittery leapt out at me:
While prime ministers in Italy and eastern Europe are demanding a bonfire of environmental measures in order to save the economy, in the UK politicians from all the major parties have made the connection between environmental destruction and economic meltdown. One of the fastest spreading memes is the proposal for a Green New Deal: a Keynesian package of environmental works designed to boost employment and channel public investment. If this idea is adopted, it won't be the first time that it has helped to rescue a major economy. The biggest and most successful component of Roosevelt's New Deal was the Civilian Conservation Corps, which employed three million people to plant trees and stop soil erosion.
This man truly has no grasp on history at all. None. FDR's "New Deal" dragged out the depression and if WW2 hadn't happened, the Depression would probably have carried on till the 60's. Keynes has been almost entirely discredited as an economist. Tax and spend for the last decade didn't help, how the fuck is borrow and spend going to achieve anything?
He's banging on about how much Britain can do to avert climate change by not farting in the thunderstorm of real economies.
He somehow thinks that his mythical 100-year committee will not be "ambushed by other nasty surprises", unlike current "short-termists".
God help me, he even wants us to worry about peak oil.
And finally, he has the temerity to quote Thomas Paine in an article where he is promoting the idea of governing us for the next century by his rules, whether they apply or not:
In 1791 Thomas Paine complained that "the vanity and presumption of governing beyond the grave is the most ridiculous and insolent of all tyrannies".
Is this some kind of post-modern, disappear-up-your-own-arsehole kind of irony, George?
I ask again: how did someone this fucking stupid become so influential?
Monday, 20 October 2008
More BBC Bias
I see Al-jaBeeba is trumpeting that sales of Marx's Das Kapital are up sharply in Germany, from the normal 200 a year to 1500 a year:
I hardly know where to start: I've read the book, and I was struck by how astute (and still relevant) his observations of the economy were and how equally bizarre his solutions to problems were. You'd have to be pretty loopy to fall for his arguments.
The thing I find most irritating about this article is how it pushes the leftist agenda.
Firstly, there's the implication that the financial crisis cannot be solved by "red in tooth and claw" capitalism. In fact, there's an implication that this has even been tried, which it fucking hasn't. So far, we've had a grossly mis-regulated market failed and the only solutions proffered have been more fucking misregulation.
There's a hidden subtext that Marx offered dense and complex solutions, which may explain why it's never been successful -- people who have tried it weren't smart enough, and if we just keep trying, eventually someone smart enough will come along. Sorry, Al-jaBeeba, it's not. I read the book from cover to cover and when I got to the end I threw it across the room, not because I didn't understand it, but because it was fucking stupid.
And finally, we have the approving quotes of some has-been, should-never-have-been old fucker:
Why aren't you telling us that sales of Mein Kampf are also up, you biased fucking left-wing dildoes? Why aren't you telling us what Heinz-Christian Strache has to say?
Can we sell these fucking cunts off so that they can stand or fall in the real world, please?
Written in 1867, sales of the tome rarely hit double digits but have been on the rise since 2005.
Marxist economic philosophy - and in particular its Russian Leninist version - fell out of favour with the collapse of the Soviet Union in the late 1980s.
"It's definitely in vogue right now," said the publisher's director Joern Schuetrumpf.
"The financial crisis brought us a huge bump."
I hardly know where to start: I've read the book, and I was struck by how astute (and still relevant) his observations of the economy were and how equally bizarre his solutions to problems were. You'd have to be pretty loopy to fall for his arguments.
The thing I find most irritating about this article is how it pushes the leftist agenda.
Firstly, there's the implication that the financial crisis cannot be solved by "red in tooth and claw" capitalism. In fact, there's an implication that this has even been tried, which it fucking hasn't. So far, we've had a grossly mis-regulated market failed and the only solutions proffered have been more fucking misregulation.
"There's a younger generation of academics tackling hard questions and looking to Marx for answers," Mr Schuetrumpf said.
But he doubted their perseverance: "I doubt they will read it all the way to the end, because it's really arduous."
There's a hidden subtext that Marx offered dense and complex solutions, which may explain why it's never been successful -- people who have tried it weren't smart enough, and if we just keep trying, eventually someone smart enough will come along. Sorry, Al-jaBeeba, it's not. I read the book from cover to cover and when I got to the end I threw it across the room, not because I didn't understand it, but because it was fucking stupid.
And finally, we have the approving quotes of some has-been, should-never-have-been old fucker:
And suddenly too, some of the all-but-forgotten Marxist philosophers are having their say again, such as the historian Eric Hobsbawm.
"Globalisation, which is implicit in capitalism, not only destroys the heritage and tradition but it is incredibly unstable, it operates through a series of crises, and I think this has been recognised to be the end of this particular era," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.
Why aren't you telling us that sales of Mein Kampf are also up, you biased fucking left-wing dildoes? Why aren't you telling us what Heinz-Christian Strache has to say?
Can we sell these fucking cunts off so that they can stand or fall in the real world, please?
So much for the "dried turd bounce"
Gorgon's smart and decisive dither over the banks isn't improving his poll standings.
Sorry, Old Holborn, I reckon the odds of a November snap election just got a "bottle" longer.
Sorry, Old Holborn, I reckon the odds of a November snap election just got a "bottle" longer.
More of the same
I was doing so well. I'd stayed away for the papers for nearly a week. My blood pressure was down, I was relaxed and calm. I'd have been comatose if I'd kept it up.
But, no, I just had to fucking sneak a peek, didn't I? That fucking moron, Gorgon Brownshirt, is actually going to try and spend his way out of the recession.
I understand the "dominant media narrative" is that Gorgon is somehow a fucking genius who comes into his own when it's a crisis and he's a towering colossus bestriding the chaos. And his fix for the almighty clusterfuck that he's created is to do the same thing as he's been doing all along to such great effect, he's just going to turn the dial up to 11.
I'm sorry, you fucking monocular moron of the manse, but I fail to see how you continuing to fuck things up in the same way as you have been all along is going to make our lives better.
But, no, I just had to fucking sneak a peek, didn't I? That fucking moron, Gorgon Brownshirt, is actually going to try and spend his way out of the recession.
I understand the "dominant media narrative" is that Gorgon is somehow a fucking genius who comes into his own when it's a crisis and he's a towering colossus bestriding the chaos. And his fix for the almighty clusterfuck that he's created is to do the same thing as he's been doing all along to such great effect, he's just going to turn the dial up to 11.
I'm sorry, you fucking monocular moron of the manse, but I fail to see how you continuing to fuck things up in the same way as you have been all along is going to make our lives better.
“You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately … Depart, I say, and let us have done with you.
In the name of God, go!”
New Austen Adaptation
I'm not really a fan of the classics, but this one looks quite witty.
Click here if the embed doesn't work.
It's the little things
My employer (piss be unto them) decided to migrate us off Microsoft Exchange onto Lotus Notes.
I don't think there is any way that I can express how much I hate Lotus Notes, but today I found out that it was possible to hate it a little bit more.
Notes has a mystical wee file called an ID file, and without that file, you can't use Notes. Even via the web interface. Just exactly how much fucking use is that then??? Especially when your disk drive dies and they can't recover anything from it.
CUNTS!!!!!!!!!
I don't think there is any way that I can express how much I hate Lotus Notes, but today I found out that it was possible to hate it a little bit more.
Notes has a mystical wee file called an ID file, and without that file, you can't use Notes. Even via the web interface. Just exactly how much fucking use is that then??? Especially when your disk drive dies and they can't recover anything from it.
CUNTS!!!!!!!!!
Sunday, 19 October 2008
Call Me Dave and the Porkie Pies
IanPJ has this:
Mr Cameron's Conservatives are calling on the government to allow small and medium-sized enterprises to defer their VAT bills for up to six months. Thus does Mr Cameron tell us, via The Observer:
That, though, might be the least of Mr Cameron's tiny little problems. Member states are required under EU law to collect VAT, a proportion of which goes to the EU coffers – known as the "own resource". Collection procedures are also defined by EU law, requiring the imposition of penalties on late payment – typically one percent per month. Changing these procedures unilaterally, guess what, is not permissible without the unanimous approval of all 27 EU member states, following a proposal to that effect from the Commission – which it not required to deliver.
Under certain circumstances, member states are entitled to adopt a simplified procedure for charging VAT, under Directive 2006/69/EC, but that does not include any provision for delaying tax payments. To the contrary, the Directive allows special provisions to enable member states to "prevent distortion of competition," which rather shows where EU priorities lie.
If these hurdles were somehow to be overcome, however, unilateral action by the UK in offering a tax holiday would certainly be considered a "distortion of competition" under Single Market rules. At the very least, Commission permission would have to be given, which will not necessarily be forthcoming.
And, since Mr Cameron's proposals affect only small and medium-sized businesses, larger firms might be moved to complain. A company like McDonalds, for instance, would have a just complaint. It regards itself as a "group of small businesses" under one banner. Fighting as it does for market share in competition with other high street outlets, it could argue that different rules on payment would most certainly distort competition.
There is also the matter of state aid. Broad-brush aid – which includes tax-breaks of any form, directed at one sector rather than applied uniformly – would most likely be considered illegal. At the very least, Commission approval would be required, which might not be forthcoming.
Then there is one other tiny little detail. Numerous studies – not least this one - have drawn attention to the danger of deferred VAT payments, making the system even more vulnerable to fraud. This is already a massive problem. Would Mr Cameron want to add to that problem?
Nevertheless, armed with his brilliant idea, that brave Mr Cameron has told Gordon Brown that he, "cannot hide from the truth." Thus adds the leader of the opposition, "In the short term, we've got to help families up and down the country with proposals to get them through the downturn."
This is stirring stuff, but with the "elephant" rampaging through the undergrowth, one wonders just who is hiding from the truth.
Hattip EU Referendum
Now Cameron has been in parliament long enough to know ALL of this, so his speech last week and his writing in The Observer are untruths. If he doesn't know all of this, then he is not bright enough to be in Parliament.
When politicians start to tell the whole truth and stop this charade and theatre about our relationship with Europe, tell the truth about the European Union competence in virtually every area of government, tell the truth about the lack of ability to act remaining in Westminster, instead telling untruths to get the quick soundbytes to win votes, then perhaps people might just believe them when they speak.
So if you run a small or medium business, no matter what Cameron is promising, you can forget about a VAT holiday, the EU wont let you.
Mr Cameron's Conservatives are calling on the government to allow small and medium-sized enterprises to defer their VAT bills for up to six months. Thus does Mr Cameron tell us, via The Observer:
That means a typical small business with 50 employees, revenues of £5m and an annual net VAT bill of £350,000, doesn't have to find £90,000 to pay the taxman when the bank has just taken away its overdraft.There are, however, just one or two tiny little problems with this idea. VAT is, of course, an EU tax, implemented via the VAT 6th Directive. A payment holiday on VAT would amount to a de facto reduction in the rate of tax, which is not permissible without the unanimous approval of all 27 EU member states, following a proposal to that effect from the Commission – which it not required to deliver.
That, though, might be the least of Mr Cameron's tiny little problems. Member states are required under EU law to collect VAT, a proportion of which goes to the EU coffers – known as the "own resource". Collection procedures are also defined by EU law, requiring the imposition of penalties on late payment – typically one percent per month. Changing these procedures unilaterally, guess what, is not permissible without the unanimous approval of all 27 EU member states, following a proposal to that effect from the Commission – which it not required to deliver.
Under certain circumstances, member states are entitled to adopt a simplified procedure for charging VAT, under Directive 2006/69/EC, but that does not include any provision for delaying tax payments. To the contrary, the Directive allows special provisions to enable member states to "prevent distortion of competition," which rather shows where EU priorities lie.
If these hurdles were somehow to be overcome, however, unilateral action by the UK in offering a tax holiday would certainly be considered a "distortion of competition" under Single Market rules. At the very least, Commission permission would have to be given, which will not necessarily be forthcoming.
And, since Mr Cameron's proposals affect only small and medium-sized businesses, larger firms might be moved to complain. A company like McDonalds, for instance, would have a just complaint. It regards itself as a "group of small businesses" under one banner. Fighting as it does for market share in competition with other high street outlets, it could argue that different rules on payment would most certainly distort competition.
There is also the matter of state aid. Broad-brush aid – which includes tax-breaks of any form, directed at one sector rather than applied uniformly – would most likely be considered illegal. At the very least, Commission approval would be required, which might not be forthcoming.
Then there is one other tiny little detail. Numerous studies – not least this one - have drawn attention to the danger of deferred VAT payments, making the system even more vulnerable to fraud. This is already a massive problem. Would Mr Cameron want to add to that problem?
Nevertheless, armed with his brilliant idea, that brave Mr Cameron has told Gordon Brown that he, "cannot hide from the truth." Thus adds the leader of the opposition, "In the short term, we've got to help families up and down the country with proposals to get them through the downturn."
This is stirring stuff, but with the "elephant" rampaging through the undergrowth, one wonders just who is hiding from the truth.
Hattip EU Referendum
Now Cameron has been in parliament long enough to know ALL of this, so his speech last week and his writing in The Observer are untruths. If he doesn't know all of this, then he is not bright enough to be in Parliament.
When politicians start to tell the whole truth and stop this charade and theatre about our relationship with Europe, tell the truth about the European Union competence in virtually every area of government, tell the truth about the lack of ability to act remaining in Westminster, instead telling untruths to get the quick soundbytes to win votes, then perhaps people might just believe them when they speak.
So if you run a small or medium business, no matter what Cameron is promising, you can forget about a VAT holiday, the EU wont let you.
1984 is not an instruction manual
Via Old Holborn, this:
to send a copy to arrive on November 5th. You can even nominate who you would like to receive it. Jacui Smith will be receiving my "gift" as I wander around outside Parliament, dressed as Guy Fawkes himself.
Are you prepared to spend the price of a couple of pints for your freedom ?
On November 5th 1605 Guido Fawkes, 'the only man to enter Parliament with honest intent' sought to end the repressive rule of a King from Scotland who brought repression to the Country. The rule of the Stuarts ended on the battlefield of Naseby, with Absolutism subordinate to the rule of Law and Parliament.
The United Kingdom has now become riven with Cameras, unaccountable Local Authorities losing millions in Iceland. Who is speaking up for the people of this Country, as we are plundered as taxpayers to prop up the Banks, not the MP's thats for sure.
We want to send a message to Parliament, we want 646 copies of '1984', one to be sent to each member of Parliament- make your pledge at
to send a copy to arrive on November 5th. You can even nominate who you would like to receive it. Jacui Smith will be receiving my "gift" as I wander around outside Parliament, dressed as Guy Fawkes himself.
The Libertarian Party with the support of other organisations will ensure that each member of the Cabinet will get a copy, with an appropriate message.
Think - If you cannot be bothered to Act, then stop whining and continue to be 'taxed unto your meat and drink'
Do something. This is designed to gently remind the 646 bastards who are currently ruining the lives of millions that they rule by our consent and it is not perpetual. Remind them with a book
Governments should be afraid of their people. People should never be afraid of their governments.
See you all on the 5th. If you can't make it in person, send a gift of one little book to whichever of the evil 646 you choose.
Sold into Bondage
Is it just me, or is the Bond product placement starting to take the fucking piss? So far tonight, I've seen ads for Coke Zero Zero 7, Bond on Sony and Avon Bond girls, as well as the ads for the movie itself.
I'm just waiting for the first advert to tie haemorrhoids cream to Bond movies now.
Fucking pathetic.
I'm just waiting for the first advert to tie haemorrhoids cream to Bond movies now.
Fucking pathetic.
Friday, 17 October 2008
Tory incompetence
Just in case anybody still believes that Call Me Dave and his parallel pal George Osborne are here to save us, think again. Jeff Randall has just torn Mr O a shiny new arsehole:
Seriously, what the cunting fuck is Osborne up to? He and Dave should be kicking that fat Scottish cunt-faced moron from pillar to post on his disastrous time in power, they should be bashing the fucking loon into the ground and calling for his head on a spike.
That, I believe, is the problem. Call Me Dave and his lightweight cronies haven't got a fucking clue about what to do either. They're a gormless bunch of dorks standing around watching a bunch of twats fucking things up but with no alternative plan, just more of the same, in a blue dress.
Gorgon's acumen stands tattered in the wind for all to see, but what do the Tories have to offer:
Probably because they don't entirely disagree with it. Call Me Dave has clearly placed himself on the Social end of conservativeness. He's all for the state doing stuff for the social good.
So, you've got the Labour cunts, tired and past their prime (if they ever had one), corrupt and incompetent; Call Me Dave and his bunch of flaccid more-of-the-same-ists; the flippity floppity Lib Dems, who couldn't work out how to run a bath ...
Do you really think giving your vote to a small party is as much of a waste as giving your vote to any of these buffoons?
Why not try it? Do you really think that having the government cock things up less, fewer civil servants on gold-plated pensions and less tax will harm you?
In short, it would be hard to construct a set of economic circumstances that could offer the shadow chancellor a better opportunity to display his credentials for leadership. This, surely, is George Osborne's moment. The ball is bobbing on the goal-line. There's not a defender in sight. All Wee Georgie needs to do is smash it in the net. Go on, my son, you can't possibly miss from there. Hang on a minute, where the bloody hell is he?
Er, Osborne's not in the box. In fact, he's not even on the pitch. The Blues' golden boy cannot have left the stadium because he never arrived. Just like another famous George, he failed to turn up on matchday. The difference is, whereas Besty was enjoying a steamy session with Miss World, Osborne seems to have frozen in the headlights. As the situation becomes ever more serious, George looks increasingly flaccid.
Seriously, what the cunting fuck is Osborne up to? He and Dave should be kicking that fat Scottish cunt-faced moron from pillar to post on his disastrous time in power, they should be bashing the fucking loon into the ground and calling for his head on a spike.
Mr Brown steered the car into a brick wall and is now claiming credit for pulling a rear-view mirror from the wreckage. This must not go unchallenged.
There is so much for the Conservative party to expose, yet it seems to have lost the will to think. The speed and scale of the financial implosion has shell-shocked a party that believed it was on cruise-control to a general election victory.
That, I believe, is the problem. Call Me Dave and his lightweight cronies haven't got a fucking clue about what to do either. They're a gormless bunch of dorks standing around watching a bunch of twats fucking things up but with no alternative plan, just more of the same, in a blue dress.
Gorgon's acumen stands tattered in the wind for all to see, but what do the Tories have to offer:
Where are the big ideas? What is the counterproposal to the Treasury's plan to nationalise the banks? Lloyds TSB was never a basket case. It was one of our more prudently run institutions. Its reward for dull solidity was to be bullied by Mr Brown into a daft deal with a dysfunctional HBOS.
As a result, Lloyds' share price has been caned. Worse still, 40 per cent of the combined entity has now been snapped up by government. Much shareholder value in Lloyds has been destroyed, completely unnecessarily. Investors are, rightly, outraged. Why is the Opposition not opposing this?
Probably because they don't entirely disagree with it. Call Me Dave has clearly placed himself on the Social end of conservativeness. He's all for the state doing stuff for the social good.
What does the shadow chancellor have to say about these matters? Nuffink. Where are his detailed proposals for an overhaul of Britain's financial services, plans that might secure London's position as the best capital for capital? Dunno. He seems content to polish the hubcaps on Brownian intervention.
So, you've got the Labour cunts, tired and past their prime (if they ever had one), corrupt and incompetent; Call Me Dave and his bunch of flaccid more-of-the-same-ists; the flippity floppity Lib Dems, who couldn't work out how to run a bath ...
Do you really think giving your vote to a small party is as much of a waste as giving your vote to any of these buffoons?
Why not try it? Do you really think that having the government cock things up less, fewer civil servants on gold-plated pensions and less tax will harm you?
Thursday, 16 October 2008
So, half a trillion well spent, then?
The markets have spoken. Gorgon's masterstroke plan (which wasn't his at all) has achieved the square root of fuck all.
Can we have our fucking money back, you deranged fucking monocular lunatic?
What? WHAT?!?!?!
What the fuck is going on with the Icelandic banking thingummy? Having only gotten my "facts" from the three-monkeys BBC until now, I was utterly horrified to read this piece by Daniel Hannan:
OK. So the Gorgon fucked up, even though there was ostensibly no reason to do so. Hm. But here's the bit that doesn't make sense and certainly didn't come out of the BBC's reportage:
Huh? Erm, what? No matter how I fucking look at that statement, it just doesn't make any sense. Everybody had their money in Icesave, run by Landsbanki. I had assumed that Kaupthing were a) in the shit and b) somehow related to this. But according to Hannan, they weren't.
And as big a cunt as I think the Gorgon is, I can't seem him destroying the last standing bank in a friendly country just to make himself look tough. And this is where it gets really weird. Ian Parker-Joseph, head of the Libertarian Party of the UK, has the threads of an astonishing theory:
I was quite astonished at how we went from having a private banking system to one which is largely state-controlled in the space of less than a year.
The mind boggles. If this is true, it explains why the UK taxpayer has been getting reamed harder and harder with less and less to show for it. If the government was in on this, it would explain why MPs have been given such a sweet deal with salaries, expenses and the John Lewis list, not to rock the boat. How the fuckety fuck could Bliar & co afford all these fucking posh houses they were buying up?
It's hard to imagine that even Tony Bliar and Gorgon Brownshirt could go along with such blatantly criminal behaviour, but I must admit that when I read these two posts in full, some stuff felt like it was clicking into place.
I don't mind admitting that my mind is boggling. Please go read the linked posts in full and make your own mind up.
I've taken the unprecedented step of cross-posting this on DK and my own blog because I'm hoping that someone, somewhere will show me where this theory is wrong.
Gordon Brown claims that the expropriation was necessary because Iceland planned to default on British Icesave accounts. How he got this impression is a mystery. Iceland's finance minister made clear in meetings with the British authorities that depositors would be paid. The Prime Minister, Geir Haarde, said in public: “We will immediately review the matter together to find a mutually satisfactory solution. We are determined to make sure that the current financial crisis does not overshadow the important and longstanding friendship that we have with the UK.”
OK. So the Gorgon fucked up, even though there was ostensibly no reason to do so. Hm. But here's the bit that doesn't make sense and certainly didn't come out of the BBC's reportage:
Brown's response? To seize the UK assets, not of the bank that ran Icesave, but of a wholly unrelated bank, Kaupthing, thereby collapsing it.
Huh? Erm, what? No matter how I fucking look at that statement, it just doesn't make any sense. Everybody had their money in Icesave, run by Landsbanki. I had assumed that Kaupthing were a) in the shit and b) somehow related to this. But according to Hannan, they weren't.
And as big a cunt as I think the Gorgon is, I can't seem him destroying the last standing bank in a friendly country just to make himself look tough. And this is where it gets really weird. Ian Parker-Joseph, head of the Libertarian Party of the UK, has the threads of an astonishing theory:
Follow the money my mind keeps telling me, follow the money. Where does government money flow. It flows not only to Local Authorities, but to NGO's, to Quangos, and to the thousands of shady 'Charities' and 'Registered Companies' that NuLab have pumped taxpayers funds into.
And why has Brown gone for Nationalisation of Banks rather than just pumping in liquidity as the experts have advised?
Then on Wednesday of last week a single act added luminescence to that dust ball. The use of Terror legislation to seize the assets of foreign banks.
The questions have been asked, why? The press has been speculative, the government dismissive, the opposition parties silent.
I was quite astonished at how we went from having a private banking system to one which is largely state-controlled in the space of less than a year.
It was that single event that triggered a thought, that misuse of terror legislation that made me ask why? When terror legislation is used, the government can claim that it was invoked in the national interest, it can suggest that for 'security' reasons, we must never know the real truth.
What was the urgency within the Cabinet Office and the Treasury that an 8 man delegation needed to visit Iceland to put the strong arm on the Icelandic government.
What is the truth here? Well we dont know, but we will ask the question:
Is it possible that government or corrupt officials have been running for the past 10 years a massive money laundering scam with taxpayers funds through NGO's, Quango's, Local Authorities, Charities and 'Registered Companies', a scam so big that the financial crisis was going to scupper and expose it, that the beneficiaries were going to lose the money or even worse get found out, or was it that receivers and auditors would be able to unravel it, and that only Nationalisation and the use of terror legislation could keep it under wraps.
The mind boggles. If this is true, it explains why the UK taxpayer has been getting reamed harder and harder with less and less to show for it. If the government was in on this, it would explain why MPs have been given such a sweet deal with salaries, expenses and the John Lewis list, not to rock the boat. How the fuckety fuck could Bliar & co afford all these fucking posh houses they were buying up?
It's hard to imagine that even Tony Bliar and Gorgon Brownshirt could go along with such blatantly criminal behaviour, but I must admit that when I read these two posts in full, some stuff felt like it was clicking into place.
I don't mind admitting that my mind is boggling. Please go read the linked posts in full and make your own mind up.
I've taken the unprecedented step of cross-posting this on DK and my own blog because I'm hoping that someone, somewhere will show me where this theory is wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)