The tax payers corp

Does anybody else play the game Criminal Case? I have been playing it from the start and it is about solving crimes and finding the culprit. As the game develops – and I am now on level 472 – one of the judges, develops a Justice corps, which starts to kill those which are not complying with ever stricter legal requirements.

That reminds me of how the Tax Payers becoming more and more a law onto themselves. Many posts on Facebook are about how undeserving those are who do not pay a lot of taxes and that only those paying a lot of taxes are acceptable human beings. It’s really frightening.

A huge thank you for all the publishers who push the plight of poor families this Christmas. Metro is one paper who published about a family with 7 kids having had benefits reduced. thanks also to MSN.

At the beginning of our civilisation, all families owned a house and had three plots of land on which they grew crops in rotation and fed themselves. (see a study about this) That was an equal standing but since then society has developed away from direct dependance onto the land and society has industrialised and people have become dependant on centrally run systems. We now have huge wealth gaps and some can earn Billions whilst others work all day for a handfull of pasta.

Don’t vote Tory

Boris Johnson yet again hints at further tax cuts. Tax cuts mean cuts in services. Tax cuts mean subsidising business on the expense of the poor working people.

The different principle of Tory v. Labour is simply that Labour would nationalise key industries and services. The Tories would privatise everything.

Privatisation is people running a business that has to make a profit. The more people run our services the more profit they need to make to create a living from it. The more profit has to be made, the more expensive anything becomes.

To make a profit, the business pays as little wage as possible to its employees. Or to say it in better words, the business employs as few people as possible. This then forces those not in work to create their own business to do something.

We see the creation of the working poor, people who got jobs but can’t afford to buy food. People get enslave to work for those who create profits for themselves, from which they pay less taxes to provide services for those who need them.

Overall a government collects taxes to run services for the nation. The less taxes they collect, the less services they provide.

Of course those who make a lot of money from their companies, they couldn’t care less about services provided from the state. They simply buy their own services. Hence we see private health care, private schools, private homes. etc.

The poor and ever increasing poorer masses have to do with the small amount of services the state provides and share the spills of the rich, that they can get hold of. Because Tories reduce taxes, the services the poor masses get, become worst and worst.

On the other hand if Labour wins, we get nationalisation of services and utilities and that will make everything cheaper for all of us. Because if now 100 companies run a service, 100 companies will need to make a profit; we all have to pay for those profits.

But if a state runs the services, we just need to pay as much as it costs to run that service, the material and the wages of those running it, which is of course less than if private businesses run it.

 

 

Tories spreading rumours

How Andrew Neil ran that Corbyn interview was more than manipulative, but now that rumour that the Conservatives are due to get a 68-seat majority and how the media further now influences voters to report that Domic Cummings is reported worried about the Lib Dems is clearly aimed at getting voters to switch to Lib Dems because the Tories know that the Lib Dems are the only party likely to support them.

How a YouGov poll works already determins that the poor and those working people who have not gotten much time are very unlikely to even take part in them.

YouGov polls are conducted via e-mail request from YouGov to registered voters, they are urged to do a survey. It takes internet access, a device capable of going onto the internet for the purpose of the survey and then it takes around 15 minutes to do the survey.

A lot of people don’t even have internet access or at limited times and then a lot of working people hardly have time to cope with their daily grind rather than do YouGov polls.

Those YouGov polls only attract a certain type of people who have the equipment and time to take part, that is hardly the typical Labour voter who enmass probably is more engaged in community activities. So the poll is not representative. It just shows that the participants are mainly Conservative voters or right-wing.

Unfortunately because Labour announced that they will tax the online providers more, they will find now that every Internet company will be as unfriendly as possible towards Labour and not support them and report favourably for the Conservatives.

Yet if you look at the Labour policies, they are extremely friendly towards the community and even though Labour is accused of being anti-semitic, nobody can argue against the fact that the many Jewish children who grow up in Britain will benefit immensely from the Free University policy that Labour has announced.

legalising Cannabis

man smoking a cigarette

Photo by Brandon Nickerson on Pexels.com

Unfortunately the Liberals stand for the legalisation of Cannabis for recreational use. The Washinton Post published research showing that the number of car accidents has risen in areas where cannabis was legalised. ““The combined-state analysis shows that the first three states to legalize recreational marijuana have experienced more crashes,” said Matt Moore, senior vice president of  the IIHS’s Highway Loss Data Institute, in a statement.”

So do we really add to the risk of car crashes in the UK?

adult alcohol bar bartender

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

We are just about able to cope with alcohol consumption and mobile phone use. Adding cannabis consumption will significantly add to the pressure the police is under, which will wipe out any benefits that will be created from the planned Cannabis tax.

Whilst a new law will require the installation of alcohol brathalisers in cars to stop it from starting when the driver had a drink, was reported by the Express.

Yet the alcohol breathaliser will not work with Cannabis.

That is one reason why I won’t be voting Liberal.

Don’t make us rely on charity

abundance bank banking banknotes

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

I was amazed that Simon Cowell could just donate £25.000 for the BBC Children in Need appeal. Wonderful, some needy children will benefit from that.

What bothers me is that the amount of requests for charity donation has spiralled to immense proportions.

Now, since Facebook has jumped onto the bandwagon and lets people collect donations on their birthday, I am really in a jiffy because I have in excess of 800 friends.

Multiply the donations x 850 and I would find myself broke by Easter.

With the creation of the Big Society and the reducation in Taxes, essential services having to rely on donation rather than guaranteed support through the Funding Formula from Central government.

Yet people constantly fall into that trap, the lower taxes will get votes but in fact, our lives are much better when all those who need it get support all year round, which will reduce the crime rate, problems with care for people and maintenance of local areas and food banks and crowd funding.

tin can on gravel surface

Photo by Nico Brüggeboes on Pexels.com

When we have a higher employment rate in the UK but most working get less money, then the tax income will fall lower because they won’t even meet the lowest tax thresholds for income tax. But they also do not earn enough to afford food.

Now we get so used to demands for money that it has become normal.

  • The beggar outside of supermarkets
  • The demand for Foodband donations inside the supermarkets
  • Constant demands for donations from online charities
  • Constant demands for donations in voluntary clubs and organisations.

Our incomes are vastly diminished through voluntary contributions, which are far higher than a regulated amount of higher tax.

Setting international standards

What humanity needs is an international set of professional standards, that enables all communities of the world to set rules of human interaction.

Even the smallest indigenous communities have standards that are set to enable the community to thrive.

Depending on location and environment, the more primitive societies made the most of what they had but set moral standards to prevent sexual exploitation or unhealthy live styles.

Most major religions are centred around the unquestionable servititude towards a divine being – a God –  and the rulers in charge identified themselves as being a direct descendant of that God. Of course that developed through from ancient times via the Greeks, Romans, then Christians in the west and Muslims in the East.

Through international communications it becomes clear that a lot of such communities exist world-wide, communities who teach their children, that their God is the only true one.

Conflicts are created when one community teaches their followers that they can exploit anybody who is not part of their religion as for example Daesh or Isis did. They said it was OK to exploit anybody sexually who was not a strict Muslim.

This principle leads to tribal conflicts on smaller area disputes as they can happen in African tribes for example, who roam wild areas and conflict with each other over territorial disputes.

Modern gangs, even in western societies use the rape of another gang’s members as a tool of control and stamping on authority. The rape of the women in other tribes is also an ancient method of destroying other cultures.

Religion started off as a moral code to regulate personal and family life to restrict behaviour to acceptable standards to avoid disease transmitted by sexual activity for  the members of any particular community.  Where later on science came in was when ‘doctors’ found  cures for common illness through scientific research, developing medications that could be administered and also by finding hygiene rules to avoid water contamination for example.

Setting a commonly accepted code of standards is important to avoid local and wider conflicts and to enable humanity to develop.

Whilst primitive cultures enslave their followers by simple dicatatorial rule, e.g. everybody must follow the laws of the leader, modern society exploits the poor by having rules, which create dependency. Universal Credit is a nodern example of that because it drove recipients into prostitution or they could not afford to live.

Other countries developed away from religious Gods and became Communist, again using strict dictatorial rules to regulate society.

A lot of states now have nuclear power and use that as a threat to keep foreign influence away.

I really do not think it matters what type of rule a society has, it just matters that each member of any society can live with a freedom of choice and without having to loose dignity.

Yes, the ability to choose aslo depends on intellect and brain function. This can vary from individual to individual. Yet professional standards should regulate good standards of living and enable everybody to contribute to the best of their ability.

Unfortunately much of modern society is determined by venture capitalism, a form of control over people, by making those with the most money privileged. Whilst it doesn’t matter how people gotten rich, they do not loose their wealth, even after they have been found to supply humanity with dangerous products.

Using advertising and mass-media, any producer of any goods can use streaming to attract people to buy their products and get rich, may that be cigarettes or e-cigarettes, alcohol or petrol cars.

Modern societies life-styles have been driven by a desire to have comfort in the home and use less physical activity.

People are required to use their energy to work for an employer and then have little time for their personal lifes. Laws force any person to work for any employer who will give them a job, not allowing the individual to choose.

This produces a downward social spiral. Dismantles family life and the ability of the individual to choose a healthy profession over an unhealthy one.

Earth warming has now become the biggest threat to humanity but the mechanisms that drive international trade, which is mainly responsible for earth warming, are not being dismantled.

When I say international trade I also mean the goods that are being traded and the production of which causes a big carbon foot print.

Wars and conflicts have an enormous carbon foot print. The use of fossil fuels, which also produce petrol, diesel and plastics is a major source of carbon.

Unfortunately many societies cannot exist unless they engage in trade because all services and labour are distributed due to a GDP calculation that is established. GDP stands for General Domestic Product.

Societies, countries rely on tax collections to provide services for the inhabitants.

Unless governments make a stand and refuse to accept taxes from bad companies, we cannot progress.

We need to exercise control over venture capitalism and control goods and services for their beneficial impact on society before we produce, advertise and sell them.

Tax cuts are not cheaper

Just watched Boris Johnson’s first Prime Ministerial speech to the Conservative Conference. He is an excellent and enthusing speaker but what he said was fairly empty propaganda.

I have not heard anything reliefing the pain of those who suffer through increasing homelessness.

He just promoted higher productivity, but said almost nothing about environmental improvements.

The biggest mantra is always the tax cuts and I would say tax cuts increase the costs for all of us on a constant basis.

The requests for charitable donations have trebled in all our daily lives. We are also providing considerably more voluntary services since the Conservatives introduced the Big Society.

Housing costs have increased significantly for those who bought their dwellings through improvement costs, may that be because of cladding or repairs.

At the supermarket are the requests to donate to the local food bank and constant request to donate to charitable deeds either through sporting or social events makes significantly more dents in all of our pockets rather than having a higher but regular tax contribution.

Crowd funding is another indirect taxation on us all.

I ask all of you to work out how much you have actually spent on donations since tax cuts have been introduced.

The speech was very emotionally satisfying to listeners but contained little proper politics. A lot of empty spin nevertheless.

In contrast Diane Abbott, the first Member of Parliament of colour, at least made reference to a real person of achievement, Dina Asher-Smith who is winning medals at Doha at the moment.

It’s not about installing women prime ministers who make the typically male policies, to be progressive. It is about making life good for all of us.

 

 

 

 

The rainforest fund

top view photo of forest

Photo by Tom Fisk on Pexels.com

Woke up this morning thinking that all the nations who have a foreign aid budget should also have a rainforest fund. Our efforts to reduce deforestation must increase and it has to become a lawfully required activity to save nature.

I searched the Internet and such organisations do exist, predominantly trying to help save the rainforest. Yet whilst countries, around rainforests make illegal logging a criminal offence, it is impossible to police and enforce the laws.

Programs like ‘‘I bought a rainforest’‘, Planet Earth, highlighted the problems, which make poor inhabitants of the rainforest regions fell trees to sell, just to be able to survive. Large swathes of rainforest get chopped down for wood to make furniture, planting of Palmoil, farming fruits for sale etc.

Higher earnings and a world-wide decreasing of poverty doesn’t ensure that people earn that money with environmentally friendly activities.

There is no environmental value how GDP is achieved, it is just GDP. As our governments are proud to provide full employment, they also do not care 100 % what products those workers make, whether they help destroy natural and vitally important resources or not. Capitalism is not valued by earth friendliness, it is valued by profits achieved, whatever it is they sell.

photography of factory

Photo by Chris LeBoutillier on Pexels.com

When we reduce our carbon footprint inland, we still deal with other countries who have a huge one. OK, we no longer strive to produce polluting goods in Britain, but we have them imported from China. Pollution is a world-wide problem, not a local one.

We need to start giving each product and service a carbon footprint value just as we give foods a calorific value.

I don’t support Esther McVey’s call to reduce the Foreign Aid, that Britain gives, instead this Foreign Aid could be diverted to Rainforest preservation. Each time foreign aid gets reduced, we increase the chance of troubles brewing up abroad, which then will need to be solved by wars. Wars have a huge carbon footprint.

Neither do I support Boris Johnson’s promise of further tax cuts for the rich as people simply do not want to invest in Britain because of Brexit. Tax cuts do not prevent Brexit. It just proofs how poorly configured Conservative Brains are, all they can think of is ‘less tax will solve all problems’.

I’ll make another post about Brexit.

 

No point in Labour

As usual, the Labour Party is already busy, thinking of ways, of selling the ordinary working folks, the latest Conservative policy changes, if and when they get into power next. Its’ always the same these days, Conservatives bring in new rules, laws, etc and when people are really upset, Labour puts them into better practise.

Labour has never reversed any Conservative policies. The latest remarks by Miliband proof completely that Labour has no plans to reverse caps or decrease taxes for the rich. Mr Blair urged against “tacking left on tax and spending”

If Labour has any guts whatsoever, then they would reverse the Trust policy of the NHS, re-nationalise the NHS and just privatise health care completely, so that each and every working and/or contributing person would pay their contributions via private health care insurance companies, who would share and finance the national resources via private contributions.

Yet Labour has not even hinted on abolishing health care trusts,which do not work and never will work, as no local area, can actually generate enough income to care for the patients in their catchment area from their own local resources.

There is no point in Labour who want to get people care in their homes, like health care by mailorder perhaps? There is nothing innovative about Labour, as home care is a by now very old concept, that was introduced by commercial retail companies and already exists in care for the elderly, disabled and dying.

Labour has not and never will revolutionise our society but always limp behind and besides Conservative inventions. It does need wealth to innovate and only wealthy people will want to protect wealth and society that revolves around it.

There is also nothing that hints on using new technology to revolutionise our lives and make production of goods more environmentally friendly.

There is this big myth of Free NHS services when nothing of the sort ever existed. Just because we do not have to pay at the point of treatment doesn’t mean that it is for free. NHS services can be paid for in either contributions from the employed, less benefits for those on handouts. A privatised NHS would merely mean that private insurance companies collect all contributions and pay for services instead of the state distributing services and taking payments of salaries. A privatised NHS that would collect payments from private insurance companies could deliver a truly equal service because all would pay contributions to private insurance companies who would collect contributions from the state for those on benefits and the rest through company collection. Currently stamp duty is paid to Inland Revenue but that could be paid directly to insurance companies instead.

Currently health services are too splintered to be effective, that is what makes it expensive.

More hypocrisy from current UK government

Owen Tudor from the Robin Hood Tax Campaign has found out that the UK cashes in £3 Billion worth of tax from the trading of UK shares wherever they are sold but at the same time the UK has now launched a legal challenge in the European Court of Human Rights against the Financial Transaction Tax because Osborne fears that this tax infringes on UK sovereignty.

Previous Older Entries

Blog Stats

  • 53,390 hits