Don’t support slavery

That case of the Vietnamese people being smuggled into Britain in a lorry, in which they all died, highlights the danger of people smuggling and exploitation.

I have seen it in so many films how property owners in remote locations can easily hide slaves and nobody seems to care.

Photo by Mat Brown on Pexels.com

Labour intensive business, the beauty industry, sex industry and others seem to find it easy to use slave labour instead of the regular people who get wages and have contracts to work as free people.

What I find interesting is how to avoid buying goods or services from companies who use slave labour.

Most larger companies have a lot of scrutiny to content with but those non regulated supplier, whether they work from markets or selling over the Internet, who asks where they get their staff from?

What we need is labelling on all goods supplied in shops or markets, which state that the supplier has adhered to a code of human respect. That employes who helped produce the item in the packaging are employed under good conditions.

Why stop at calorific value and fat and sugar content, we also need to know who is making it.

Nobody seems to check what people companies employ. How else would it be possible that suddenly people get detected locked away and enslaved and that they worked for a business as cheap labour.

I refuse to buy things from non regulated business whether that’s a market or an unknown Internet company. I do not use the beauty industry like nail bars anyhow. The one time I used a nailbar, was extremely frustrating, the lady did not seem to know the first thing about nails. Though I got charged top money for a rubbish service.

Easing the burden

67.000 claims under the Job Retention scheme were made by employers within the first 30 minutes of the website going live reports the BBC.

Whilst this government furiously refused to pay workers benefits within an acceptable time-frame, they now get what they are due under the job retention scheme.

Only difference is, they are no longer benefit recipients but employed or self-employed instead.

This whole problem hinges on the fact that we cannot control nature and that viruses creep up out of nowhere. Yet doctors made no effort whatsover to analyse or test for viruses in the last decades.

Of course, its easy to see that the government tried to drive people into jobs and what has resulted is that more people than ever sit at home doing nothing.

What the government needs is that those weirdos and missfits who currently advise it, should step down and allow for some more sensible people to take over, people who have the nation’s long-term health in more than one sense at heart.

What they need to do is to introduce tests of viability for every policy someone proposes and thinks they can get it accepted simply because they belong to the right circles.

Being employed, self-employed or part of a productive society is always better than lingering around without proper tasks, which are keeping communities safe, yet, the problem of breakdown prevention is not being addressed proprely.

We always hear excuses like

  • worldwide economic breakdown
  • worldwide pendemic.

I think that either can be prevented through proper policy control. The free market economy prevents that. The whole system of a free market economy is merely set up to keep people in employment as an easy measure to keep people in a context of socially acceptable activity.  There is little scope for systematic disease control. They assume it too expensive for a doctor to get a testing kit out once a patient complains about a viral infection.

Only when the virus becomes too bad to heal and people die, do we get little but complete shut-down.

 

Viral wasn’t on the menu

The world is least prepared to deal with viral outbreaks as many instances proof.

For example architecture. In a virul outbreak people are supposed to stand 2 meters apart, yet we have many high-rise buildings, which rely on transporting people quickly with lifts. Lifts, strictly speaking can only transport one person at a time in a case of viral emergency.

Yet no quick solutions came up. Nobody quickly thought of putting people into plastic tubes to transport them in  lifts, so they do not break the 2-meter rule.

Perishable foods. Shops should immediately put a limit on the amount of perishable foods people can buy, especially in relation to eggs, milk.

Fire-hazardous items like paper and oil should be restricted. I’ve seen photos and film clips of people who have amassed 5-litre bottles of oil around their whole flat. And those storing lots of toilet paper increase their fire risk.

Distribution chains are not working. Those companies supplying catering businesses are sitting on stock whilst food retailers cannot get enough deliveries out.

The whole private finance system is broken because people cannot even buy and sell property and actually move.

The people who benefit are the homeless who at least now get a flat.

But those who followed the guidance and became self-employed or worked in the gig ecnomy – often not because of choice – are left out in the cold.

Capitalism only works if nothing unexpected happens.

 

The desperate time government

vehicle driving on freeway towards wind turbines

Hard shoulders are used as driving lanes on many motorways now. Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

They call it gender discrimination but in the times when women stayed at home to look after the kids, we could manage when a school closed. Now all are drafted in as workers and when the workers fall ill, there is nobody to run services and nobody to look after children.

Not even in an equalised society, lets say dads or mums can stay at home any longer because parents have to work when a child is 5 now, and can no longer wait until they reached the age of 13.

woman wearing blue jeans

Photo by Luis Quintero on Pexels.com

If you have people idling around, they can be seen as potentially spare workers but if the country already uses the last man standing to work on, then in a crisis, we have no reserves left and start to panic.

The removal of hard shoulders on motorways, showed all drivers that the non-contingency policies lead to serious problems. If a car breaks down on a lane on a motorway where all lanes are in use, emergency vehicles cannot reach them.

If all parents are working and schools need to close, then who is going to look after the children? Or if workers need to stay at home with children then who is going to do the work?

Supermarkets are our best friends, because they charge the same price whatever the demand. In some unregulated remote, local shops, owners just double and treble prices, during the Corona Virus crisis,  because they just want to make as much as they can out of a crisis.

But what is disturbing, is that quantities are not regulated and those unfortunate enough, not being able to get to a supermarket at 7am in the morning will find empty shelves.

At the Sainsbury’s superstore, there were exactly 8 loaves of freshly baked bread in the shelve at 7:15AM. There was no pasta, no toilet paper at all.

Amazingly people do not opt for the fresh foods. Salads, fruits and veg are the only thing you can do to strengthen the immune system. Eat them regularly to stay healthy.

same lies

Whilst President Trump explains in his state of the Union speech that there is now record employment, also amongst the multi-cultural population in the US, the BBC reports that there is record child-homelessness in the US.

How does this all work out?

Obviously the wonderful world of high-yield economy should work for the people and not just for the employers.

The same strategy gets used in the UK. One of the most used arguments in parliamentary debate is, to rebuff Labour, yes, but the unemployment rate is very low.

Whether that creates the highest number of working poor and other problems does not seem to be the problem for the governments on either side of the oceans.

The standard of living is very important and voters really have to stop creating poverty for children.

brainwashed

artists audience band blue

Photo by Jacob Morch on Pexels.com

Greta Thunberg has been told to get an economics degree to be taken serious. Yet, going through years of some education may brainwash you into believing that the only way to do business is the old one.

There are sciences, which are pure and do not relate to current affairs but those decisions that need to be made in relation to climate change are actually not calculated on pure science but on the greed of those wanting to make profits.

Having listened to the Grenfell discussion on ‘politics live’ this morning, we’ve heard that some tower blocks are not so dangerous as they have night patrols. The answer was that many leaseholders cannot afford to pay for it.

Private ownership again hinders progress being made. Of course owning something privately means you rely entirely on your own resources. The smaller the building the less economical can it be to share and spread costs and if a private building owner has to replace a load of cladding on a building it becomes unaffordable.

Nobobdy questions the principle of private ownership, they question why the government hasn’t yet introduced laws to force owners to change the cladding. But this is a Conservative government, a government that supports private ownership.

Question the logic of this.

I don’t think there is a pure state in existance today that has a properly installed community government.

  • North Korea, is a kind of family tyranny, that starves it’s population but which tries to blow our planet apart with constant nuclear testing
  • China, a half-capitialist government, which is unelectable and relies on trade with capitalist countries
  • Russia, a pseudo communist country that charges a flat tax rate to all, regardless of income. Nothing is being shared around there.

This planet is being run into the ground by large money accumulators who run business and produce goods that keep us in employment, the economy moving and make them richer.

The poor have no choice but to work in jobs being offered as they have to work to be part of an acceptable community, which relies on taxes.

Round and round and round it goes.

People ask again and again why didn’t the German’s stop Hitler, ask yourself, why does nobody stop the destruction of the environment.

 

Bad debate – bad result

alternative auto automobile battery

Photo by Mike on Pexels.com

I’ve now spent months watching politcal debate in Britain and it has occurred to me that this democracy is a mock-democracy.

A lot of words are being used to spew out the same thoughts again and again with no results whatsoever. In terms of the environment, Brexit is only important as to the production of extra Carbon Emissions because transporting goods further away will cause more.

The unilateral thinking always centres around plain numbers with little quality attached.

  • The level of poverty
  • the number of food banks
  • the level of crime
  • the level of employment
  • the referendum and numbers voted

In short it’s just a plain and simple numbers game around tax revenue.

Britain is s mock-democracy because there is no quality argument.

Instead of lamenting poverty, the opposition could ask questions around the quality of employment opportunities in Britain. Of course Johnson would come back with employment numbers but people would start thinking about whether it is feasable to employ people in making

  • single use plastics
  • exploit fossil fuels
  • producing alcohol
  • making cigarettes
  • making fuel guzzling cars
  • produce carbon rich products

The government is as good as the opposition allows them to be and in this ‘mock-democracy’ there is little quality opposition.

Not even the strong-sounding Scottish opposition has much to offer because much of the Scottish produce, they are so proud of is plain and simply Whiskey.

I tried some again yesterday and I am about to empty the bottle into the sink. My son once got at as Christmas gift at work and it just tastes awful. So why be proud of making something that has little health effect on people or the environment?

The one Green MP asks a few questions around the Green agenda but the Labour Party makes no difference because they do not question the investment in fossil fuels and the production of bad products and the people used employed therein.

Economics is sadly just about numbers. But the only numbers important to us should be how affordable healthy and low carbon living can be made for us. The majority of people are poor and purchase what is cheapest for them to buy.

Yet politicians only support the highest tax payers and those are the established industries who are based on fossil fuel exploitation.

Considering the

  • steel industry contributes 8 % of all global emissions,
  • energy makes up 72% of global emission.
  • Agriculture 11% of global emissions.

We should rationalise all arguments.

Because it does not help to switch car production from fossil to electric as electric cars will push up the 72% rate of global emissions even further.

 

Bad primal answers

The answer is always the same

  • less unemployment
  • better economy

Yet, the employment never gets compared to what type of jobs those in employment actually do in relation to the carbon footprint that their jobs actually achieve.

planet earth

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

To reduce our carbon foot print we need to change the things we produce and that will take more effort and cost than this government has failed to address.

Prime Minister’s questions has had only one question about reducing carbon foot print and that is about heating systems.

Yet all those answers relating to employment statistics are merely that. Number of people who do some job. That may be

  • producing single use plastic
  • working in coal mines
  • making goods that have a large carbon foot print.

There is absolutely no conscience about changes needed. Those changes may not allow a seamless transition with profit margins not dipping. It may not be possible to continue running the country on private finance only.

Even though Trump yesterday mentioned that he does not want to believe in the doom and gloom and that 3 billion trees worldwide will solve all our problems. But that is more than naive.

These profit oriented leaders only think about the clink and clank of profit in the tills. They make so much money they probably think, if it comes to the worst, they can buy their way out with a rocket to Mars.

That’s the only reason they keep the economy going as it is, so that they can make enough money to invest in space travel because once they ruined this planet, they think they can just move on to another one.

So what the Prime Minister should do at Prime Minister’s Question time, when he answers questions by saying how good employment rates are, he should state how much of those jobs are environmentally friendly.

Not so free after all

Having watched Charles I: the killing of a King, I got a sharp reminder how unfree Britain really is. Remember Extinction Rebellion have been listed as terrorist organisation and ‘order, order’ is the most important value Britain has.

I grew up in the 70s in Germany, the time of the student revolt. Despite never having even taking part in anyone of the many student demos, I was arrested and locked up for 3 months just because the security services felt like it. Of course they eventually came round to admitting that it was all a mistake.

My arrest came about because I was sofa-surfing and one address I stayed at for a few days was under the watchful eyes of the security services.

So, any individual can become over-scrutinised if a national security situation becomes frightful through activities such as XR these days do. Thankfully, XR has not committed any terrorist offences yet.

I saw it coming and I mentioned previously, do not get involved in those street demos of XR or XR as they will suffer the same fate.

Of course I am not certain whether they will eventually grow into a radical movement just as German students did with the Baader-Meinhof gang but the radical ideology is not dissimilar. Yet XR is funded by Western Billionaires and Baader-Meinhof were German rich kids too who gotten trained by Gaddafi and the like.

It shows ‘the being in 2 minds uncertainty’ Western power figures are. On one hand they are really powerful and on the other they want to throw it all over.

So what is the point in having even a monarchy. Either you have a monarch, who is a real ruler with all the power that comes with it or you don’t. Monarchs tend to be despots with no regard for the rights of their subjects. They just rule and abuse.

Today’s monarch seems more like a display of puppets who do a function, which looks good but has little power.

In fact looking at the reality of it, they can’t do much at all without being constantly watched, criticised and controlled.

Some would call it stalking. Yet, it is their job to be stalked and written about and having their photos taken and being discussed. If that was a private individual, they would have better rights.

Who is really pulling the strings in Britain. It can’t be the monarch, who despite having use of an impressive real estate portfolio has very little actual power but a mere ceremonial function.

Boris Johnson seems to have been selected into post only because of his personality. He comes across as somber and believable. You can hardly resist his voice. When he is together and has his suit on, on TV, Boris is a great actor.

The people of Britain are tightly controlled. Made to work all hours. Kids are taken from their parents at the earliest opportunity and stuck into schools for about 8 hours a day, making the influence parents actually have over their children negligible.

There is really no other way of making it in the public domain other than through kinky affiliations or by being a useful tool and doing what you are told by the ruling elite. And who are they?

I think Britain has a superb publicity machinery, which gives the impression that there is an actual democratic process but if you really look at it, its all talk and no input.

I won’t even go into how proper elections are but think people have not much real choice who to vote for. The public broadcasters and the press are all set to promote private ownership at present.

Whilst that is the mood of the moment, remember please once they stop making a profit from their businesses, we are on our own.

Whilst Labour with a nationalisation strategy gets ridiculed by the press, it seems the only viable solution to guarantee continuation of services when the going gets tough.

There is a general consensus, I would always support that we do like our basic strategy of personal freedom, and liberty of individuals, we should always defend it, that we do not enslave women and that we allow people the right to choose whether to have a religion or not but what seems the complicated part is how our life-styles affect our planet and those questions will rule our minds for some time to come.

We do need an army to defend ourselves from freakish countries like Iran and Northern Korea or Daesh because they are real dictatorships.

Yet so much relies on how our societies are run. Personal freedom often is only possible because we have the luxury of relying on services being available.

One always has to look at the greater scheme of things.

Something’s missing

The Labour Manifesto in itself is quite cool in my view but then I can imagine and know about political theory. But, I have plenty of experience in such matters. The young generation would not know what nationalisation means any longer.

Labour did completely fail to give any pointers of what life under this manifesto would look like. Labour fails to understand that these ideas must be sold to the electorate in practical terms. Labour needs to set examples so people can imagine what this brave new world would look like.

Whilst Labour continually makes the mistake of helping the Conservatives by prompts, Labour also fails to develop a confident strategy to smile people into the new lifestyles proposed.

The current government sets a lot of positive challenges. They use things that people like

  • low taxes, of course everybody loves low taxes, the sheer experience of having money deducted from ones earnings is a major nono for everybody
  • Charity fund raisers. What they do not make in taxes they raise in fund raisers and people just love to take part in those events, when they can sing, dance and be creative to raise money.
  • Entrepreneur economy. That is sooooooo satisfying if someone can have an idea and put it into practise, it’s like setting out on an adventure, being your own boss.

So that is a treble fun strategy. There is that flair of luxury, going on exotic holidays.

What does Labour propose, nationalisation and national broadband.

People cannot imagine what this would look like. The people up north only know that their jobs depend on the companies running businesses up there and providing employment and that employment pays for their mortgage.

Labour has not put to these people what other practical steps they’ll take to make their lives durable with the new proposed Manifesto.

The alternative would be being homeless. Labour has completely failed to address this in their election strategy. In fact most Labour Councillors and public figures ride along on the private ownership strategy pretty well.

Here in Tower Hamlets I am having problems finding a Labour councillor who hasn’t purchased their home or who doesn’t own a council flat.

So how about practising what you preach? In fact I do think that even Labour discriminates against people who do not have a mortgage. The thinking that you are only a good person if you own your home has been widely established.

Labour cannot ever win an election unless they completely change the thinking set that has been established. Unless Labour themselves promote the values they preach, they can only stay assistants to the Conservatives. In fact almost every argument in parliamentary debates has been won by the Conservatives with autmated answers like a rise in employment.

All Labour comes up with is increased homelessness but very little day-to-day solutions of how to actually end this. Labour are great lamenters, always playing victims and not being positive and enthusiastic.

Of course the press has a big role to play, they lament the bad public transport and there is a chance for Labour to argue that public ownership of the railway system would bring better and cheaper service and improve the lives of those who work there and depend on it.

Labour’s whole Manifesto and election strategy is mere lip service that’s why it doesn’t work.

That’s why Conservatism is so successful, they depend on their politics because their livestile is built in, they live what they preach but with Labour, they all adapt to the Capitalist lifestyle but preach that Socialism is much better. That is just a bodged politics.

Labour don’t have any type of coherent strategy.

Previous Older Entries

Blog Stats

  • 53,976 hits