Monday, 23 January 2012

Don't cap it, scrap it.

"Keep them enslaved and they'll vote for us"

And it begins. The long awaited clamp down on exactly how much of our money the idle can lay claim to as "entitlement", the Welfare Cap will be tested tonight in the house of Lords.

The unelected and appointed and the Bishops will pontificate over whether £26,000 is enough of a free handout for a family to raise children and buy necessities whilst up and down the land, the employed are cleaning toilets and stacking shelves at night to make ends meet.

The left is apoplectic, as it's client voters are told by evil men that they might, just might have to make do on less. Except of course, they aren't making do on less. The poor never saw a penny of the huge rents private landlords were able to charge the Council for ex council houses they bought at knock down prices just 25 years ago. As long as the money tree was there, they could charge what they liked, safe in the knowledge that the Council Tax payer and "Central government" would rather cover it than see one homeless person on the street.

So let's spare a minute to think about the poor employed person in London. His wages are kept low because someone else is paying his rent for him. His landlord and his boss are laughing all the way to the bank as the state makes up the difference between what he should earn and pay for rent if the market were free, his Labour MP is delighted knowing he'll never bite the hand that feeds him and his social worker gets to keep her job making sure he never knowingly misses a state benefit to keep him hopelessly dependent on handouts.

It's a step in the right direction. Personally, I see no need to fund the feckless, let them live off the land in Wales if needs must. After all, their grand parents did before a hairy lipped Oxbridge Fabian turned up and told them they could have exactly what the rest of us have, by force if necessary. If you want to free the poor, strip them of the enslavement of State funded landlords and employers happy to exploit the taxpayer, they'll do just fine in the real world.

Falling rents, higher wages, lower taxes - all due to the State just leaving us alone for a change. About time too.

Oh, and don't forget to read my Monday column at Blottr

Thursday, 12 January 2012


His Grace, one of the few Christians to spout some sense, has drawn my attention to a Home Office Consultation that is currently running online AND FINISHES TOMORROW, regarding various topics very, very close to my heart. Namely:

  • the relevance of the word ‘insulting‘ in section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986
  • new powers to request removal of face coverings
  • new powers to impose curfews

Where to begin.

If you are reading this, chances are, you are a moron. There, have I insulted you? I'm asking because I have no idea if what I just stated has insulted you. Only YOU can be the judge of what you find insulting, yet plans are afoot for it to be a criminal offence to "insult" someone. So if you feel insulted, there is nothing to stop you ringing 999 and having the evil perpetrator banged up, DNA'ed and given a criminal record, although they will have had absolutely no idea that their actions or words have insulted you. If we criminalise "insults", we shut up everyone and everything. For ever. Do you want to live in a society where you dare not speak in case the State decides your words may cause offence to people you will never meet? Now's your chance to speak against it, USE IT, whilst you still can.

Now, I choose to be anonymous on my many public outings because, well, my face is my business. Unless I am actually committing a crime, it is not the business of the State to know what I look like anymore than it is the business of the State to randomly sweep bus stop queues for fingerprints. One of the reasons I wear a mask is because of the habit of the state to record the faces of those "who might" cause trouble, "for future reference". The Met employ teams of photographers to take photos of any members of public who may be dissenting, sticks them on a database and cross references them. No thanks. My face belongs to me, it is my property, I will cover it when and if I choose. Naturally, this proposal is stop women wearing Burqas because some sensitive souls "may be offended" (see above), but as always, I say it is not the role of the State to dictate how I may dress. Here's a video of me winding up the Met's "future intelligence Team" trying to take my photo whilst I was minding my own business (for your amusement)

Lastly, the Police want to have powers to impose curfews as and when they decide it would be far easier for them to just clear the streets and not have to deal with pesky members of the public going about their lawful business. Be warned. Once this starts, it will NEVER stop. Long gone are the very principles of Peel whereby the Police are the Public and the Public are the Police: this draws the line very clearly indeed. Them. And Us. It HAS to be stopped. This land belongs to us, not the authorities, we are not sheep, to be herded back into our pens at the whim of the shepherd.

I'd hope things would get better after 13 years of the ridiculous authoritarianism of Labour. It looks like they are going to get worse. Make a stand, do it now. If you don't, the Police will have the right to shut you up, photograph you in the street on demand and then ban you from leaving your house.

Quite, quite remarkable. Possibly the last chance to have our voice heard. Right HERE

Sunday, 8 January 2012

High Speed Fail

A politician inspects "the Peoples Train" yesterday

Once upon a time, some entrepreneurs spotted that there might just be a market for transporting goods up and down the country and producers would pay them to carry their goods to new markets. Low and behold, the industrial revolution began. Gangs of imported Irish labour toiled relentlessly to build the canal system in the UK and suddenly, Britain became a powerhouse of engineering and commerce. Cost to the taxpayer? ZERO

Next, some entrepreneurs decided that there might also be a market for transporting people around the country. Once again, the Irish navvies were sought to lay thousands of miles of tracks across the nation, the postal system was revolutionised, fresh produce could be transported the length and breadth of the country and people could actually choose to live away from their place of work. The age of the commuter was born, giving rise to the middle classes and massive wealth redistribution across the entire social sphere. Cost to the taxpayer? ZERO

So why is the taxpayer being asked to fund a high speed rail network to Birmingham? I have no problem with high speed rail, indeed, I find it infinitely preferable to being stuck behind some old biddy in her Nissan Micra on the M6 and am happy to pay for that service, but I will not be forced, through taxation, to subsidise the building of a network that I will then be charged to use. As if we don't have any experience of letting private finance raise the capital, our Government is keen to plunder the earnings of people who will never use a high speed railway network to the Midlands so that the history books will gleefully show the Transport Minister cutting the ribbon on yet another vanity project designed to show us, the people paying for it all, how benevolent our Politicians are for "facilitating" a new era of transport.

If business wants a high speed rail network, business knows what it has to do. Raise the capital and build one - build it and they will come. But no, our glorious politicians are FAR too interested in the glory of the State for national infrastructure to be left to people who actually have money to risk, so once again, a shelf stacker from Truro will be forced to cough up for a political project that will add no value to his existence and our glorious leaders can pretend they are doing something for the "nation", using money we don't have to spend if only we would allow the market to decide.

Dig deep folks, there's plenty more "national infrastructure" projects to come as Government tries to spend money we don't have on projects we don't want and can't afford. All in the name of State "progress"

Tuesday, 3 January 2012

Justice for Stephen Lawrence?


No matter what you may think of Blunketts decision to introduce double jeopardy in order to re try the original suspects of the Stephen Lawrence murder, we now have convictions. There is no doubt in my mind that these Sarf Lahnden thugs killed him and have used a combination of Police incompetence, police corruption and CPS idiocy to escape the law. They will be sentenced tomorrow as juveniles and can expect moderate sentences although they have yet to spill the beans on who helped them stab an innocent man because of the colour of his skin.

In the 18 years that have passed since his murder, we have seen a great deal of political manoeuvring and many vested interests playing their hands in this case. Our Police are still corrupt, still racist and the CPS is still incompetent. Perhaps the one good thing to come out of it is that an acquittal through the incompetence of the prosecution is no longer final. And in the case of justice, I find that rather comforting.

Ratings and Recommendations by outbrain


Related Posts with Thumbnails