We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Whither the Tories as a low-tax party? Well, I came across this piece of defeatism by Danny Finkelstein, who was once an adviser to former Prime Minister John “bonker” Major.
Essentially, Finkelstein writes that the Conservatives should stop talking at all about tax cuts since it would give them nil public credibility in arguing for reform of the public services.
“There have been times when tax cuts have been a sure-fire election winner and such a time will undoubtedly come again. Yet in deciding to put so much emphasis on public services, the Tories have decided that the next election is not such a time. for if public services are to come first, something must come second.”
Firstly, I was not aware that any senior Tory, unless under the influence of booze, has made a principled and coherent argument for cutting taxes in the last five years. In fact, it seems this previously major feature of what passes for Tory thinking has fallen completely off the radar. More’s the pity.
Secondly, the supply side argument. Surely Finkelstein and others should have grasped the point that most major governments, including the present British one, set taxes at rates which actually means they raise less revenue than otherwise would be the case due to the blight on incentives high taxes cause. While I don’t expect every pundit to have heard of the Laffer Curve it would be nice to think that the enormous success of Ronald Reagan’s and Margaret Thatcher’s tax cut measures would have left some kind of mark. Clearly some reminders are needed.
Increases in public spending or holding spending where it is has not proven to work in delivering good health or education, as the shambolic state of Britain’s socialised system of health care proves. Many of the problems have little to do with money, more with ideology. Finkelstein’s argument is predicated on the idea that reform necessarily will cost as much, if not more, than what is being spent at the moment. That is questionable, to say the least.
And finally, by accepting the notion that one cannot cut taxes while sorting out health, education, etc, the Tories would be allowing the Labour government to dictate the very terms of the debate. That is a recipe for instant failure. That is why Labour-leaning commentators anxious to shaft the Tories urge it as the Tories’ only hope for salvation. Such folk are false friends and should be shunned.
And Mr Finkelstein should recall that although his domestic agenda is now either in tatters or in cold storage, one reason why George W. Bush made it to the White House was on account of tax cuts.
Overheard on Radio 4 this morning – a plan by Westminster Council to fine the homeless who sleep in the ‘tourist sensitive’ areas around Westminster. What a marvellous idea, fine the homeless, like they have the £500 ($750 US) proposed fine! Why don’t they just admit they want to lock them up – and cut out the court admin of chasing the fine? The state is not your friend, whether you are rich or poor…
Also, why is David Trimble really so upset with Sinn Fein spying on the Northern Ireland Assembly? Yes, there are security implications given their ‘links’ to the IRA but surely it couldn’t have come as a surprise? Is he just making political capital out of his opponents being caught with their listening devices out? Is he covering his embarrassment that his party wasn’t doing it? Or is he protesting too much to cover up the fact that he was doing the same thing?
Finally, a policeman’s take on the “after the war in Iraq” question (from a trusted source close to the police, i.e., a policeman I know):
“Iraq’s population is a combination of three different and ethnically varied races who hate one another with a vengeance. They hate us [the West] even more than each other and may be unwilling and unable to support the west should a strike occur. However, if intervention is necessary and the aftermath is about putting together a new and effective ‘junta’, then there might be a chance. If not, it will be a hell of a hole to police.”
Graham Turner asks in an article in the Telegraph Can the Conservative Party recover?… and of course the answer I would give is no. It is fascinating to watch the Tory Party Conference. I have not enjoyed myself as much since I last saw Dawn of the Dead.
The new Tory manifesto is starting
to take shape nicely
Iain Duncan Smith continues to amaze me with his triviality and casual insults to potential supporters. The latest thigh slappingly funny remark is that he dislikes the ‘doggerel’ found in Roman Catholic Masses. Not in and of itself a momentous observation, but then please keep in mind that this is the man who would presumably like Catholics in Britain to vote for him so that he can be the one plundering private assets instead of those nasty labour people.
Did anyone hear front bench advocacy for
genuine capitalist solutions and free trade over
all the blather about ‘public services’ being paramount?
And when IDS finally implodes, or more likely people just forget his name, it seems that chubby paleo-statist Kenneth Clark still hankers after party leadership so he can revive the glories of the Ted Heath era…
Now this is almost better that Evil Dead…
Kenneth Clark’s supporters were much in
evidence this year
 Update: I have now sobered up and I would like to apologise to all of our readers who happen to be undead… in no way was I implying all zombies are members of the Conservative Party. 
Imagine you want to set up a business. Let’s say it’s a software consultancy. And let’s also assume that you require some capital funding to get you started. You decide to approach a variety of sources from wealthy private investors to banks to venture capitalists and in order to impress them you draw up a Business Plan.
Only, there is no Business Plan because you are forbidden from charging your customers. Yes, that’s right, you are obliged to give away your valuable time and expertise for free. Which means you are not a business, you are a charity. No business, no Business Plan.
Insane? Bizarre? Economically illiterate? Intellectually retarded? Yes, yes, yes and yes.
And that probably explains why it has been adopted by the British Conservative Party as their big, bold, brand new idea for the National Health Service:
“During the health debate, Dr Fox will say that hospitals would be able to raise cash however they wanted and from whoever they wanted.
They will, however, be barred from charging patients for treatment”.
I am so resigned to this kind of stupidity that I can no longer bring myself to be outraged about it.
How marvelous that state hospitals will be able to go to anyone for their investment; only wihtout being able to offer a return, no investor will touch them and they will be forced to go back, cap-in-hand, to HM Government (and that means us) and we’re right back where we started. In other words, the Conservatives are opting for ‘no-change’.
Despite endless tampering, tinkering, revamps, updates, initiatives, policy changes, shifts in emphasis, new approaches, fresh ideas, radical thinking, more funding, down-to-earth measures, sensible guidelines, new directions, even more funding and more wishful thinking than you can point a stick at, Britain’s unworkable Soviet-model health care system still won’t work.
But coming to terms with that is a pain barrier that nobody is willing to cross.
They’ve never caught a rabbit, but they’re eagerly sniffing around for some children to harvest.
According to these Tranzi bloodsuckers, HM Government has not been sufficiently zealous in nationalising children in order to better protect them from their venal, barbaric and untrustworthy parents.
“Every one of the very large number of child deaths caused by violence and neglect in the UK starts with a smack, according to Lady Walmsley.”
‘Very large number’!!??? How many is that exactly? 43,598? 2 million? Half a billion? Don’t they realise that every one of the very large number of very bad laws starts with a completely fabricated statistic? Don’t smack me on the bottom, Lady Walmsley, just kiss my arse.
The real reason HM Government won’t enact these stupid laws is because they know that there is widespread public opposition to them; thus proving that it is not the world which is going mad, just the people who think they run it. And the people who think they run it have an agenda which necessitates the eradication of the family as an impediment to the building of New Global Man.
I’m not as angry as I should be about this because I actually think that the UN is lighting its own way to dusty death. I am reminded of that story of a meek little housewife who turned into a rage-beast and lifted up a truck to save her trapped child. It is probably nothing more than an urban legend but even if it is, it serves a useful function for it is an expression of the universal folk-knowledge about the lengths a parent will go to to protect to their children.
The UN will now have made itself that little bit less popular in Britain and, as their agenda creeps forward, the mask of purported benevolence will begin to slip, the sinister purpose will be seen for what it is and little folk the world over will turn on them like Viking beserkers.
As for me, I have a little disposable capital that I might just invest in the double-headed axe business. After all, the UN, they ain’t no friends of mine.
Or so says leading New Labour talking head and failed Northern Ireland Secretary Peter Mandelson.
He says one of Europe’s “huge challenges” in the next couple of years includes “rebuilding the Atlantic alliance”. Well this is indeed a ‘European’ problem, but not a British problem. British relations with the United States and Canada are just fine, thanks… it is the governments of France and Germany which have problems with anti-Americanism at the highest levels.
At least I agree with the dismal Mandelson on one point: the need for ‘British Leadership’ in Europe. Let the nations of Europe follow Britain as it walks briskly for the door marked EXIT.
Alan Greenspan, the chairman of the United States Federal Reserve, has delivered a rather splendid kick in the orbs to the pro-€uro/anti-sterling campaign. Greenspan said whilst speaking in the City of London (London’s powerful financial district):
The City of London is thriving outside the eurozone and has not suffered from Britain’s decision not to join the single currency in the first wave […] and was a sterling place to do business. London has stayed on top in the provision of financial services despite the euro…
Now I am no fan of the whole concept of central banking (and hence no fan of central bankers) but the fact is it would be bonkers to deny that Alan Greenspan is probably, hell, certainly, the most influential voice on the subject of economic affairs alive in the world today. His remarks are therefore going to cause some gnashing of teeth in certain circles, which has to be a good thing, as the pro-€uro campaign is predicated upon turning the abolition of sterling from a constitutional issue into a purely practical economic issue… and thus having Greenspan point out that Britain is managing just fine outside the eurozone is not what Brussels’ fifth column in Britain want to see splashed across UK newspapers.
Ah, but you should have seen the size of the one that got away. It was this big I tell you!
A detective working for the Metropolitan Police specialist crime branch fell victim to crime four times in an hour-and-a-half. His car was broken into and his bicycle stolen before being beaten up and having his moped vandalised.
The crime spree started outside his home in Fulham (which is a nice area!) in London. First, his CD player had been taken from his VW Golf. Then his bike was stolen as he went to report the car break-in and to call his insurance company. He took his moped to look for the thief but, after trying to detain a youth he saw riding his bike, he was attacked from behind by two others and violently kicked in the face and body.
John Cullen, the hapless policeman in question, said it was “frightening” that his attackers had little respect for people, including the police. He added:
“I don’t have any answers to all this but a multi-agency approach is surely urgently needed to tackle this sort of youth offending to protect the public – including me.
But there is an answer! 
With the British government’s approach and policy towards crime, gun control and self-defence, how not very odd that even the police are now victims!
Unless, Mr Cullen considers a 9mm Uzi SMG a suitable ‘agency’ to tackle crime…
Update: Just saw Alice Bacchini’s post about the story from yesterday. How very fast – I only read about it this morning!
How can I count the ways! Well first, let me say what is right with him… namely that as a future constitutional figurehead monarch, he is in fact powerless to do jack shit to impose his world view on the rest of us and his ideas are in reality no more significant than John Bull the Greengrocer. That is a very good thing indeed because unlike members of the government, we are free to ignore his bleating if we wish.
The thing that annoys me however is that when Charles opines in some issues, such as hunting, people misunderstand his underpinning philosophy. People think of him as advocating liberties against the encroachment of the state because he supports the right of hunters to hunt in Britain, but this is utterly incorrect. Prince Charles is in fact an advocate of big interventionist redistributive government: for example see his calls for taxpayers to be forced to subsidise organic farms (which overwhelmingly sell to higher income members of the public). Most significantly he has no problem whatsoever with the philosophical position that rights exist collectively, which is the underpinning of every tyranny imaginable. In a letter to Downing Street, the Prince wrote:
The Human Rights Act is only about the rights of individuals. This betrays a fundamental distortion in social and legal thinking
So when Charles says:
Our lives are becoming ruled by a truly absurd degree of politically correct interference
He is not arguing against the morality of the state interfering in people’s lives, just the fact that it is not being done in a way he approves of. Like so many paleo-conservatives, he thinks the state telling you how to live your life is just fine, provided ‘sensible chaps from Eton’ are the ones in control of that state.
It is with great pride and honour that I can report that I, along with blogger Patrick Crozier and Chris Tame of the Libertarian Alliance took part in the Liberty and Livelihood march in London today. Samizdata contributor Antoine Clarke was also on the march and, although we communicated by text-mail, there were so many marchers that we never actually managed to meet up.
Did I say there were so many marchers? That does not even begin to tell the story. It was HUGE. I cannot recall ever seeing any public demonstration in Britain of this magnitude (and I’ve seen a few). The official figures state over 400,000 marchers but, from where we stood, that would appear to be an underestimate.
It began in from two points in Central London early this morning; two start points being necessary because of the enormous numbers involved. Even so, from our start point at Hyde Park, the throng was so large that it was next to impossible to actually determine where it began or where it ended. Eventually we just melded in where we could.
The atmosphere was one of pure defiance though there was no violence or law-breaking at all. The marchers were loud, proud and spirited, blowing whistles and horns, chanting and waving back to the cheering onlookers. Not once did the palpable grim resolve compromise the joyousness. It felt like a victory parade.
The most telling juxtaposition was provided by a handful (and I do mean a handful) of animal rights protestors, who all looked, well, how can I put this? Have you ever been on your way to an important business meeting and trodden in a dog-turd? That’s what they looked like.
Not being a photography-minded chap, I have no photos to post [Editor: sorted!] but I can recall some of the slogans that stood out from the sea of banners and flags carried along with the march (the Stars and Stripes being very prominent, incidentally).
This one stiffened my back:
“Born to Hunt, ready to Fight”
This one made me smile:
“We’ll keep our cowshit in the country,
you keep your bullshit in the town”
And this one raised the hairs on my neck:
“The Last Peaceful Demonstration”
Having moved among these people today, I am left with the distinct impression that they mean it.
The Labour government is dropping heavy hints about further tax increases in order to fund what it euphamistically refers to as ‘redistribution of wealth, power and opportunity’. Pure, coal-filtered, organic bullshit with no artificial additives or flavourings. What they really want to do is loot more money from productive wealth-creating people and hand it over to their parasitical, wealth-destroying supporters in the public sector.
Of all the high-falutin’ media responses to this, none hits the nail so squarely on the head as Richard Littlejohn in The Sun:
“Like the Lottery, Labour takes money from Sun readers and gives it to Guardian readers, who then decide how best it should be spent.
This Government has presided over a massive explosion of unproductive, worthless public sector appointments.
How many times have I written about the hundreds of millions of pounds showered every year on the Guardian-reading classes?
Each week thousands of irrelevant, unnecessary jobs in Town Halls and Government departments are advertised in that newspaper.
Some days, the Guardian’s jobs supplement is three times the size of The Sun.
The Guardian is the last great nationalised industry. Without its massive subsidy from taxpayers it would fold.”
You call it exactly the way you see it, Richard. And you see it the way it is.
Because I expect it to get negligible coverage in the mainstream media, I feel obliged to remind everyone that grassroots Britain goes on the march this Sunday.
The Samizdata Team will be duly represented and, if you wish to join us we will be meeting with several others of a like mind at Hyde Park Corner at 09.45am Sunday morning.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
