Petition for Rationality

Reading this yesterday got me thinking: how do governments guarantee certainty? For all it's demerits, it's big-talk-small-action and it's downright illiberal poo-gravy this coalition has at least done one (good?) thing; it has stopped the mass capital flight that Eire is currently undergoing by assuring the markets that things, though not ideal, are at least stable.

So I felt obliged to create this petition (annoyingly missing the last word off which is "limit").

My logic can be no better summed up than in these famous words:

I am in favor of cutting taxes under any circumstances and for any excuse, for any reason, whenever it's possible. The reason I am is because I believe the big problem is not taxes, the big problem is spending. The question is, "How do you hold down government spending?" Government spending now amounts to close to 40% of national income not counting indirect spending through regulation and the like. If you include that, you get up to roughly half. The real danger we face is that number will creep up and up and up. The only effective way I think to hold it down, is to hold down the amount of income the government has. The way to do that is to cut taxes.

-Milton Friedman

Ultimately the stranglehold is that of our elected representatives and the fact that they have the keys to some very powerful tools:

- The legal use if violence.

- The legal use of counterfeiting

I simply say that the problem of abuse of these tools can be fixed by arbitrarily limiting what proportion of the economy politicians can control and staple it to a written constitution protected by democratically elected but separate powers in the judicial services (which are long overdue an overhaul).

Will people join me?

So Much For £480 Million...

Thank God for Dave "cast-iron" Cameron eh? If it wasn't for him we would be paying considerably more to the EU on seriously nebulous grounds while public services are wound down to levels we can't afford rather than levels we hilariously could never afford in our lifetimes.

Oh.

British taxpayers could be liable for up to £6 billion of Irish debt under a potential rescue package for the Republic's stricken economy, it emerged today.
Downing Street said the UK was responsible for 12% of a €60 billion (£50.94bn) stability mechanism that might be used in a bid to restore confidence in the Irish economy.

Yes I am aware that this was a bit of scorched earth policy that Labour put in to stick it to an increasingly compromised europhilic-in-europhobics-clothing Bory party, but it goes to illustrate just how un-erring our political masters are to the grand EU project; they are willing to pile on a few extra thousand on each of us for the moral hazard of absolving another nation of it's actions, all in the name if "ever closer union".

I am not even going to attempt to list what you could buy with this kind of money; if the left weren't so buried up the arse of the EU to see what a bad idea it is they would no doubt point out that that covers a fairly massive part of the welfare cuts proposed- the EU are quite literally taking money out of poor peoples hands & putting it in bankers in Ireland.

I Wants One

Backlash after budget supermarket Lidl launches reindeer meat for Christmas

Lidl, which has more than 500 shops in Britain, is the first multiple grocery retailer in the UK to introduce reindeer meat in the run-up to the festive season.

Guess where I'm headed after work?

Well There You Have It

Count Yourself Lucky It Was So Warm, Ye Gods.

Anyone else listen to Radio 4's Material World last night?

Apparently last winter was a consequence of other factors including sea currents and so other cyclical phenomena which apparently don't affect the underlying trend in rising global temperatures.

So in a nutshell, were it not for our polluting, mother-earth bashing ways it would not been freezing cold but freezing bollock, nuts firmly trapped in the freezer cold.

Remarkable; has it not occurred to any of them that global temperatures themselves might vary in temperature?

Reasons To Be Cheerful

After seeing the odious YouTube efforts of convicted murderer John Hirst gloating about winning his "Hooman Royts" battle with the government I couldn't help but wonder "if he is on licence should he really be smoking dope? Won't that land him back in jail?"

It seems I'm not the only one who questioned this and that John Hirst may soon be practicing his new found "rights" in jail.

This folds in the increasingly hilarious fact that Cambo has basically no real sovereignty or power on matters usurped by the EU:

- He failed to tell the EU where to go on a billion pound budgetary increase (and there is no guarantee that will be the end of it)

- He failed to grasp the ECHR's very simple request to clarify the rules on prisoners voting rights, and by doing so left them to rule in favour of the odious little turf Hirst (Labour naturally share most of the blame or allowing this to languish but surely a dyed in the wool conservative wouldn't need to give this a second thought would they?)

- He has failed to keep public sector reform about service reform and has allowed the unions and Labour to make it about money - ultimately the state is will not only grow bigger but be galvanised by an apparent climb-down by weak Bory's.

- He has failed to address dissent in his own coalition and what's more ignore the gall of a BBC that reports every Bory proposal in a negative light, vilifies Maxwell and friends for wanting to grow whilst ignoring the monopoly it enjoys through it's licensing structure.

- He has abused both the localism movement and the civil rights agenda espoused by the likes of Hannan and Carswell, waxing lyrical about referendums and people power while handing taxpayer money over to fake charities, special interest groups and QUANGOs, albeit slightly fewer than there was when he beganin the latter case. All the while still spying on our emails, still handing over British citizens to foreign governments and ignoring louder calls for a referendum on the EU.

And why is this something to be cheerful about? Because noone's buying it anymore...

Because Sometimes Comments Just Get Too Long

Old Holborn has, as is his way laid down the gauntlet for a very divisive issue, one which sees some very bad people privileged.

The comment I was going to post there got too long I now give it it's own blog here:

It is testament to the state of our country which has thrown natural rights by the wayside that they have adopted so called "human rights"; they are a mockery of natural rights. It is merely a consequence of govt. abandoning the Individualist perspective in place of a communitarian one, born of too much power concentrated in too few hands.

To me the answer is simple; infringing on the natural rights of others (to life, liberty and property) and, regrettably, those laws set forth by our parliament means you give up those natural rights of yours that can be returned or compensated for at a later date if the arbitrating process (I.e. The justice system) fails and your are wrongly convicted.

As all other "civil and social rights" as Mr. Hirst posited are merely extensions, in both positive (eg the right to elect those who minister and formulate the law) and negative (eg the myriad "entitlements" mistakenly called rights, which usurp everyones natural rights) terms, of the natural rights then their denial is intertwined in that of the natural; the right to vote is an extension of the right to liberty and thus is rescinded when the criminal is convicted of infringing on someones own natural rights.

You are correct Old Holborn; what was done to Mr. Hogan is an injustice but only because of the deeper injustice contained in unjust laws and corrupt lawmakers- likewise with speeding.

But, to apply the same logic to a just infringement on someones natural rights is foolish; I would go further in stating that this brings Mr. Hogan down to Mr. Hirst's level.

I'm beginning to understand a very important point about the philosophy of liberty (I believe it was Obo who pointed it out shortly before he gave up, kind of); one of the main "gauntlets" laid down by challengers to the libertarian message could be written thusly: "if your ideas are so great then why not start a political party and see if people will vote you in to pursue that goal" - this is the rationale of the guilty rapist or murderer who will tell himself and his victim that "they were asking for it"; it makes the victim of injustice the offender and turns the concept of justice on it's head.

By removing the right to liberty and property justice is served; to say we must overturn justice when it comes to natural rights because there are miscarriages of justice or the law is abused in dealing with things beyond natural rights (Mr. Hogan for example) is to accept there is something wrong with your argument, not something wrong with their supposition that you should fight for laws that respect natural rights.

Fighting for a prisoners right to vote because their is legislative abuse of the justice system is silly arguement; removal of those natural rights that can be returned or compensated for in the event of a miscarriage of justice is a legitimate action to take on someone who infringes on another's natural rights. We fight a lost battle when we accept that the cause for freedom is something we should bet for, rather than claim by right.

Way too long, hyperbolic, but gets my point across.

Victory At Any Cost

So it appears the Republicans now control the purse strings of government; their control of the house, with it's powers to dictate federal spending is exactly what the TEA party movement needs:

I am in favor of cutting taxes under any circumstances and for any excuse, for any reason, whenever it's possible. The reason I am is because I believe the big problem is not taxes, the big problem is spending. The question is, "How do you hold down government spending?" Government spending now amounts to close to 40% of national income not counting indirect spending through regulation and the like. If you include that, you get up to roughly half. The real danger we face is that number will creep up and up and up. The only effective way I think to hold it down, is to hold down the amount of income the government has. The way to do that is to cut taxes.

- Milton Friedman

This was as much a slap in the face to Bush's big-state conservatism (a contradiction in terms) as it is to Obama's bigger-state socialism; which is why it is especially repugnant to hear so many reporters on the radio this morning talk up the "fact" that "fundamentalist teapartiers" were responsible for losing the senate for the republicans.

It is telling that most paid MSM commentators see it as incumbent on voters of a particular political hue to compromise on most issues in order to get "their man" elected - "the middle ground must be occupied" the sheeples pundits bleat, and in our race to the bottom in our various mediocracies the world over we have bought into this line to our detriment, particularly when "the middle" isn't actually the middle at all but graded to a curve dictated by authoritarian scum.

That is why the TEA party movement is important - ultimately it is teaching politicians that there is no curve, nor is there a "left" or "right" in the way we neatly dress it in out minds; only freedom and slavery, the latter of which we have drifted forward to for too long.