What I believe in.....

Do You Want To Really Know What I Believe In?

By Dark Politricks

This article is for people who want to know what I personally believe in as some articles which contain videos or references to other sites maybe to Left Wing OR Right Wing Sites depending on the news I am writing bout. This article should give you a good taste of where I personally stand on the political spectrum.

1. I believe we need a government however the size of it and the powers it can exert are very much up for debate. I think the COIVD pandemic has led to the UK Government where I live becoming more like the USA in that they have used a tragedy just like the US did with 9.11, to implement a surveillance state, and put laws on the books that won't be removed such as the COVID law that was only supposed to stay on the statute for 2 years but has already been extended. 

COVID has been a perfect excuse for the billionaire class to get even richer, many having invested in Big Pharma companies that went onto make vaccines just before the outbreak. Now that may sound like a conspiracy theory but it's true, just like the fact they ran a war game called "Dark Winter" just a year before the pandemic of what would happen in a virus outbreak, how it would spread quickly worldwide and how the people would react and how governments would control them with lockdowns.

That and the Police bill gives them too much power to monitor us, hack into our computers and TVs and enter our houses without warrants plus ban protests against the bill, and any protest the bill deems too "loud" they can stop under new laws. 

As the Independent says "MPs have voted for “draconian” protest laws in spite of mounting warnings over human rights and questions over whether police want or need the powers. A bill backed by the House of Commons would allow police to impose restrictions on protests based on noise and ban demonstrations by a single person.

They have also passed laws which let them lock people up who expose the UK Governments misdeeds and own war crimes. This really puts shackles around journalists and bloggers like myself that report on the UK surveillance state and intelligence agencies and their devious tricks such as the BBC and Reuters joint operation with MI6 to pay bloggers and YouTubers to spread NATO propaganda into the Russian sphere of influence, something we keep accessing Russia of doing to us, but that in fact we are doing to them 100 times over. 

They buy a few Facebook adverts and the Americans accuse them of fixing the US election in 2016, because Trump beat the chicken hawk, neo-liberal, war-mongerer and one of the most hated politicians in US history, Hillary Clinton. Someone who had already cheated and abused the DNC rules to beat her opponent Bernie Sanders to claim the Democratic nomination. 

Of course her loss in the election could not be down to anything she had done such as lie about events such as being shot at during the Serbian Kosovo war when she visited, or her links with multiple strange deaths, and how she managed to get away with having her own personal Email Servers setup with sensitive information on them which were hacked by WikiLeaks and spread e.g the Podesta Emails and the Anthony Weiner sex crime emails. 

No she had to blame someone and despite the fact Trump put even more sanctions on Russia, accused them of crimes they had not committed and pulled out of missile defence treaties that been set in stone for decades to decrease nuclear missile sizes in both countries, and stop the development of certain weapons. All that would seem to suggest he wasn't in Putin's pocket at all. Their #Russiagate claims have already been proven totally baseless and there has been no apologies by conspiracy theorists on MSM like Rachel Maddow on MNSBC.

He had to be a "Russian Puppet", despite the #Russiagate claims being proven false, and an impeachment trial where there was insufficient evidence to actually convict him of anything, and although he may have borrowed money from Russian banks, he was not in any way a Russian Hand at the wheel of Statehood as Mrs Clinton claimed. She claimed they used social media to hypnotise the American people into voting against her when in fact only a few thousand pounds were spent on pretty innocuous Facebook adverts.

2. I believe laws need to be made with the good of the people as the primary concern not the benefit of vested interests. You only have to look at the USA and how rich some of the politicians are like Nancy Pelosi who has made over $200,000,000 since becoming speaker of the House due to insider trading, or rather passing on to her husband which companies would be getting expensive Government contracts that would boost their share price before any news was released about it.

AIPAC literally forces potential Congress people to sign a form saying they would always vote in favour of Israel in any situation and for those that do sign they get lots of fund raising money and those that don't are smeared and labelled anti-Semitic. Cynthia McCarthy found this out the hard way

3. I believe lobbyists have too much power and influence over our political system. We need to reform our governing system so that politicians truly do represent the people and not the next vested interest hoping to buy a vote. Strict term limits should be implemented at each level of government so that career politicians cannot get comfy and there should be more referendums to allow knowledgeable citizens to take part in the decision making process. 

4. I believe we require major election campaign reform that would enable new parties to run for office to break the 3 party monopoly here in the UK and 2 party system in the USA. The amount of money available would be staggered so that the more support the party gains the more finance they receive. This would stop large amounts of money being wasted on niche parties with little support as well helping larger parties fighting lots of seats. This would also encourage new political ideas to hopefully flourish into new parties and break the control of the existing centre ground parties that only provide an illusion of choice.

5. I believe specific taxes should be spent purely on the items they are taxing keeping to the original idea that brought the tax into being. For example road tax should be spent purely on the upkeep of the roads. Petrol duty should be spent on public transport to make it cheaper and more effective and duties on tobacco and alcohol should be spent purely on the health service. People would be much more likely to accept paying a tax when they can see where the money goes and it would also prevent the government from using money from one tax on other projects.

6. I believe in market economies but I am not an Austrian economist who believes the market knows best in all cases. Examples being Monopoly laws, certain employment law and some health & safety regulations. Without government intervention in these matters we would be working for less money, longer hours and in less safe conditions just like they still do in China, Bangladesh, India and other parts of the world. The market does not always deliver the right solution and without laws to protect the rights we have fought for over the centuries they would easily disappear in this global economy where there is always someone willing to work longer hours for less money. Just because there is a market in child pornography does not mean that it should be allowed.

7. I believe in total freedom of speech and expression as well as an Internet devoid of Government spying. We are living in the last days of an idealistic time on the net and everyday comes more news of the powers that be wanting to exert control over what sites we can visit and new ideas on how to log our every move or take away our ability to surf at will. A government should only be able to monitor a persons activity on the Internet with reasonable grounds for suspicion and a signed warrant they should not be allowed to trawl the web in the hope of uncovering someone doing something wrong

8. I believe that the UK government spends too much time kissing America's arse and we should always be acting in our own self interest rather than going along with the USA's merry wars of aggression because we want to be their best buddy. We need to repeal our unfair and unbalanced extradition treaty and ensure cases like that of Gary McKinnon never come to pass again. We need to stop any CIA plane landing at Heathrow or any other airport on its way to Egypt or Uzbekistan to drop off more renditioned prisoners to be tortured and put anyone inboard into jail for a very long time. We need to prevent any more prime ministers going to the US congress and making embarrassing speeches professing our special and unending friendship and instead realise that modern America has taken our place as the next great Empire and speak out against its high crimes and misdemeanours.

9. I believe we are fighting a phony war on terror that can never logically be won which is actually the whole reason behind it. We need to treat terrorists as the criminals they are and realise that this expensive game of hide and seek has cost us dearly in terms of civil liberties lost and increased security measures that won't prevent terrorists from attacking us but will destroy what remains of our way of life.

10. I believe that our intelligence services along with those of most modern countries do not act in the interests of "we the people" but instead collude with those powers that transcend nations to deliver us more quickly into the Orwellian police state that is rapidly rising around us more quickly as each day passes. 

Nearly every major terrorist atrocity of the last 20 years has a murky link with at least one intelligence agency or another who either had pre-knowledge and allowed it to happen or manipulated it from within though plants, informers and contractors. Plausible deniability has become the modus operandi of most agencies in regards to terror attacks and we need to spend more time helping people see through this.

11. I believe in personal liberty and freedom to make ones own decisions in life. However I also believe that in our crowded island we cannot lead a purely individualistic life without thought for our neighbours. With an "I'm all right jack" attitude to life where the rich get richer and the poor stay angry society becomes a violent and unfair place to live. I personally have no problem knowing that a proportion of my tax helps to provide someone else health care or school education and I would much rather my money was spent that way than on wars, bailouts to the financial industry and a huge high surveillance state apparatus.

12. I believe we have already gone too far in the march towards a high tech surveillance state that only serves to give the government too much control over our lives. We should scrap the proposed national ID card, tear down 99% of all CCTV cameras, repeal the RIPA Act as well as numerous Anti-Terrorism laws and the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act of 1994. The scales of justice have swung too far in favour of the state and we should always remember that its much harder to regain liberties from a government once they have been lost.

13. I believe that our war on drugs also falls in the same category as the war on terror as being an unwinnable and illogical concept that has no chance of succeeding in abolishing mankind's desire to temporarily escape his surroundings. Add to that the fact most career criminals are addicted to drugs and have to rob to pay for them it makes sense to rethink this policy of prohibition. The following article of mine talks about this in more details.

14. I believe our public state schools needs a total overhaul so that if you leave the system with good grades and the ability to think critically its not through pure luck. Religious education should be banned from state education as teaching kids to believe in fairy tales is not a good grounding for anything let alone for a world where miracles never happen. Philosophy, sociology, psychology and politics should be taught from a very early age as well as critical thinking, logic and reason and economics. 

Boys leave school with very little understanding of how to budget and live in the real world. Whereas girls often get taught on how to run a household from their mother boys leave school and usually go straight into the arms of banks and credit card companies and into a life of paying off debt. Most importantly the boy or girl that always questions  the teacher and asks "why?" should not be scolded or told off but nurtured and praised. Kids need to be taught to be skeptical and to always question authority.

So that's a list of some of the key things I believe in and hopefully they will let my detractors use the correct terminology when attacking me on Twitter. 

Now even though I believe in personal freedoms that is not to say that if I was granted supreme godlike powers over all mankind for all day and could ban or eradicate certain aspects of culture or human behaviour for all time I wouldn't do so for the good of humanity as a whole. These things would most definitely include: war, all organised religion, the Burka, cruelty to children & animals, public school boys, cheesy pop ballads and all Shopping Channels on TV.

By Dark Politricks

© 2018 Dark Politricks

Riot police officer in hospital as 1,700 migrants storm Channel Tunnel

Riot police officer in hospital as 1,700 migrants storm Channel Tunnel

By Dark Politricks 


• French riot police battle 1,700 migrants desperate to reach Britain
• Policeman in hospital after being hit with stone 'by Sudanese man'
• Chaos on both sides of the tunnel set to continue into another week
• New measures to give powers to landlords to evict illegal immigrants
• Failed asylum seekers with children to be stripped of benefits
• Kent pays migrants' £150 Dover-to-London cab fares

Some news from today from Calais, more can be found at www.telegraph.co.uk

Our Passenger timetable is disrupted, trains are leaving later than planned. Please accept our apologies & thank you for your patience. ^ST — Eurotunnel LeShuttle (@LeShuttle) August 3, 2015

Sudanese migrants prepare food near the Eurotunnel site in Calais (REX/Shutterstock)

Responding to the latest reports from Calais, Labour’s Shadow Immigration Minister David Hanson MP said:

The Government seriously need to get a grip on this situation. A series of panicky announcements on policies that were planned before this crisis emerged just won't cut it. Telling landlords to act as a second tier border force and removing support from asylum seekers already in our country will not stop so many desperate people putting themselves and others in danger to get across the border.

This needs a careful and considered international response. The government should be focused on leading pan-European efforts to stop people crossing the Mediterranean, then making their way to Britain's borders, instead of using a series of re-announcements as a distraction.

However the The European Commission has appealed to Britain to show "solidarity" and take more migrants under Jean Claude-Juncker's controversial quota scheme.

Mina Andreeva, Juncker's spokesman, said the situation in Calais has "deteriorated" and co-operation between the French and the UK is welcome but she said the crisis proves that "all" EU member states need to take part in a scheme that sought to resettle 40,000 migrants across the continent to ease the pressure on Italy and Greece, which are taking the lion's share of those arriving across the Mediterranean.

Britain (of course - seeing we created most of the mess in Africa e.g Libya) has opted out from the scheme, as is it right under the special carve-outs given to the UK and Denmark when it comes to EU justice and home affairs rules.


French gendarmes try to stop migrants on the Eurotunnel site in Coquelles near Calais (AFP)

Henri Guaino, a lawmaker from the opposition French right-wing party Les Republicains, called on the UK to "do their share", saying:

There is no reason for these people to be stored - if I may say this because it's almost that - in France. It cannot go on like this.

The situation is fairly simple. Migrants come to Calais to get to England. England does not want them. Therefore the migrants pile up in Calais and try by whatever means they can to reach England.

A policeman watches men move away from a security fence beside train tracks

Ukip's Nigel Farage had to join into the debate on migrants with the following tweet

The message must go out to illegal migrants that if they get to the UK, they will simply not be allowed to stay. #Calais

— Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) August 3, 2015

What happens when an illegal migrant reaches the UK?

French migrants rush UK border guards to enter the country

• If discovered, they are normally dealt with by police while any criminal investigation is carried out. If judged to be an immigration matter, it is passed to the Home Office.
• Then what?
• They are questioned about their reasons for entering the UK. If deemed to be in the UK illegally (and they do not claim asylum) they are deported.
• Where are they detained?
• The obvious destination for those arriving from Calais is the immigration removal centre in Dover, but there are 12 centres in the UK.
• What if someone claims asylum?
• They are detained or granted temporary release while a decision is made.
• How many are making it across the Channel?
• In the five weeks from the start of June, more than 400 immigrants were found by British police hiding in vehicles or trains. As many as 148 are thought to have reached Britain on a single day in July.

200 Migrants breaching Eurotunnel fences to get into Britain

And what gets me the most is that our benefit system is not exactly the best in Europe anyway. A lot of migrants flock to London where the prices are the highest and a jobseekers allowance or income support of £140 a fortnight would literally get you nowhere.

It may be a lot of money back in the migrants homeland of Sudan or Libya but over here with high fuel costs, high rent, high food and other costs it is nothing. It was nothing when I was on it - one day up the pub usually - only because I lived at home when I had just left college.

However if you look at Germany's benefit system, there are two levels depending on whether you have been working or haven't or have come to the end of the first section which states:

If the claimant has no children, they receive 60 percent of their previous net earnings. If caring for children under 18, this rises to 67 percent. This benefit is payable for 90 to 360 days, depending on the length of previously insured employment and age. A full year's unemployment benefit is received if the person has worked for two calendar years or more (18 months for those aged over 55).

That means myself, who has worked for the last 10+ years without a break would get my whole years salary for the first year!

That is way more than £140 * 12 (£1,680) a good few dozen times more. The more you earn, the more you get when your unemployed, this is how it should be.

If you are living a more expensive lifestyle due to the amount of money your job was bringing in then you would need a lot more money to survive on wouldn't you.

Figures taken from: germany.angloinfo.com Here it's a fixed £140 whether you were a McDonalds worker or high-flying city stock broker! Then after this first year OR if you have never worked OR worked at least one day in Germany and for at least 360 days over 3 years in your last EU country of residence you get the following.

Subsistence allowance (Arbeitslosengeld II)

This allowance is lower than ordinary unemployment benefit and is payable when the claimant cannot receive full benefit or their period of benefit has come to an end, but they are still fit to work and registered as unemployed. Whether or not a person can claim for Arbeitslosengeld II will depend on savings, spouse's earnings and life insurance. A set amount is paid for those requiring social assistance (about €350 per month). Claimants must attend training courses, and be ready to step into any job offered them by the Arbeitsamt, even a very low paid one. Exceptions to this rule are sometimes allowed on mental, physical or psychological grounds or in cases where pay rates are deemed immorally low.

Exactly how much social assistance an individual receives depends on several factors, such as number and age of children as well as marital status.

So €350 is about £245.97 and more than two fortnights £140 however at least Germany has the logic to split their system up so that people who need more get more. How it treats migrants and asylum seekers I don't know but for David Cameron to claim people cross deserts and seas just to claim our generous benefit system really pisses me off.

In my area if you are NFA (No Fixed Abode - Homeless) it doesn't even put you on the priority list for housing!

You have to be dying (with less than a year to live) or seriously disabled to get a place om our register. I was on it then I got kicked off after reaching enough points to bid on places saying single men should be able to look after themselves - or words to those affect.

If you are lucky enough to have already had a place to stay and are made unemployed you can claim housing benefit but this is being slashed by our caring loving Tory government.

Anyway I just thought I would break it down for you about what is happening on this side of the pond regarding the masses of people trying to get into the country.  

By Dark Politricks


View the original article at www.darkpolitricks.com.

© 2015 By Dark Politricks

Please call Obama a Dictator not a Socialist!

By Dark Politricks - Is President Obama really a Communist or is he more of a dictator?

A quick lesson to all the people out there who keep calling Obama a Communist or a Socialist and interchanging these words with the word Liberal.

For me it really gets on my tits as its basic use of language and although I only went to a mere English comprehensive I do know the difference between these 3 words.

You only have to read a dictionary to see that the three sociological concepts are totally different from each other and that in no-way whatsoever is Obama leading America down a path to Communism.

If anything, since George W Bush - and if you really want to delve down the rabbit hole and talk about the FED, the 2 national banks before it, the assassinations of the Presidents who abolished those banks. The UK support for Southern states in the war of independence and the very little time it took from the first US President and the founding fathers to break many of the promises and declarations they had created in the constitution - then you can go back much earlier.

However it seems since Bush at least you have been on a road to fascism and dictatorship rather than communism and Obama is only following the one party line you have in the USA rather than making meaningful changes. You need look no further than all the things that have happened since 9.11 ( a coup-d'etat ) to see this:

• The PATRIOT ACT brought in although many US politicians didn't even bother reading it amidst a climate of fear and staged Anthrax attacks to push those against it to support it.
• Also don't forget the Orwellian nature of the name here.  Anyone who didn't support the PATRIOT ACT was called un-patriotic although the act itself brought in emergency laws which Americans are still living under.
• The NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) which allows the US President to detain US citizens without trial on his say so alone.
• Over a decade of war against an "idea" and enemy that will and can never be beaten.
• Lost liberties (too many to count).
• The ending of habeas corpus.
• Torture and black hole prisons everywhere.
• Extraordinary renditions
• Sweeping wiretaps.
• A militarised police force
• Drones flying the US skies
• TSA grope or virtual strip searches at airports ensuring a loss in tourism trade at the very least.
• A "big brother at school like" tool to be used to take out another countries enemies i.e Israel.
• A loss of moral standing in the world.
• Most of all it has shown the one-sidedness of your political system.

Whether Republican or Democrat the same policies remain in place whoever wins the election. Continual war, loss of liberty, ambivalence to the constitution and Bill of Rights, bail outs to Wall St and friends of the politicians i.e crony capitalism, subservience to overseas masters and the targeted assassination of people on the say so of the leader of the country.

If that is not dictatorship I don't know what is.

So lets check what these words that are banded about on late night talk shows actually mean.

From the Oxford English Dictionary

Dictatorship

• government by a dictator:
• the effects of forty years of dictatorship
• [count noun] a country governed by a dictator.
• absolute authority in any sphere.

Communsim A theory or system of social organization in which all property is owned by the community and each person contributes and receives according to their ability and needs. Socialism

• A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
• A policy or practice based on the political and economic theory of socialism.
• (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism.
• The term ‘socialism’ has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state Communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammelled workings of the economic market. The socialist parties that have arisen in most European countries from the late 19th century have generally tended towards social democracy.

Liberal

• Willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one’s own; open to new ideas.
• Liberal views towards divorce.
• Favourable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms.
• Liberal citizenship laws.
• (in a political context) favouring individual liberty, free trade, and moderate political and social reform:
• A liberal democratic state
• relating to Liberals or a Liberal Party, especially (in the UK) relating to the Liberal Democrat party:
• the Liberal leader
• Theology regarding many traditional beliefs as dispensable, invalidated by modern thought, or liable to change.

Now although many Fox News presenters and their guests and many others like to call Obama a communist and compare what he is doing to the European socialists you need to understand that even in countries within Europe that have "socialist" parties like the UK used to with Old Labour they are not really true socialist countries.

Here in the UK since Tony Blair managed to turn the Labour party into a "3rd way" party we have little if no choice at the election box between proper alternatives in the same way as Americans don't.

As they say the Democratic party in the USA is the 2nd most conservative party in the world.

When we vote we don't get to vote on things that really matter like:

• If the surveillance police state would be rolled back or dismantled completely.
• If the money wasted on nuclear bombs and million pound planes and boats would be better spent educating people so we can live in a true meritocracy.
• Whether drugs should be legalised.
• Whether bankers should end up in jail when they ruin the worlds economy, fix Libor interest rates, launder money for Mexican drug cartels and terrorists as they have been proven to be doing continually.
• Whether lobbyists should be banned and political parties funded by tax payers.
• Whether we should pull our troops out of all the many war zones they are in and have a say in any future war that wastes millions, maims and kills thousands, and creates enemies for us to continually fight in the future.
• Whether we can pull out of the failed European project altogether or even join the Euro (for those numb-nuts that want to)

No we get to vote on things like.

• Who will cut the deficit a little bit faster or slower.
• Who "might" give us a vote on our staying in Europe (it doesn't actually matter as whoever wins always breaks this promise!)
• Will VAT / Sales tax go up a couple percent or not or income tax margins down or up a percent or two.
• Whether we slash 20% or 15% out of every ministry and public sector organisation - putting thousands on the dole and creating more deficit to pay back due to dole money.
• How much of the country should go from working in public sector jobs, paying taxes, paying for their families and homes and put them on the dole, increasing the national debt because the "private sector will rush in and fill the hole" - proved wrong so far Georgey boy!
• How much tongue should be put up the arse of the current US President just so we can say we are "special buddies" and all that crap.

So there is no real choice in elections and we are truly voting for our favourite colour or who we would go down the pub with for a beer.

All pure pony.

What I don't get in America is the talk of "entitlements" as if you would rather your taxes are spent shooting $500,000 missiles into mud huts in Somalia rather than being set aside to pay for you in old age.

Or for when you lose your job due to a bankster company or Republican candidate off-shoring it to India or China. Then the banks come and re-posses your home and you have no-one to help you but the state and you then realise that you should of voted for your taxes to be spent on community welfare not on overseas imperialism.

All you want is some help to stay housed, clothed and fed.

Why would you call that money you have given to the government an "entitlement" when it is paid back to you in negative terms?

Yes you are entitled to it as you have paid for it. Saving for a rainy day and all that.

Yes there are those people who haven't worked for generations. Lived off the dole and food stamps and couldn't get a job even if they wanted one because of the poor school they went to.

That is a different question and one which the richest country in the world should be able to solve without having such a disparity between the poor and middle class and the very rich.

Study after study shows that in countries (call them socialist if you want) where the gap between poorest and richest is narrowest there is more productivity and more general happiness in the population.


What is more important - that you pack as many boxes for your boss in the day and work yourself into an early grave or achieving some modicum of happiness in this short life we have?

Do you really want to live fighting against some belief system or theory you heard Glenn Beck talk about. Following his chalk board drawings which always lead up to the same leftist groups as evil puppet masters controlling the world.


Believe it or not there are two sides to the story and George Soros doesn't lie behind all of the left as their ultimate controller just as the Koch Brothers don't lie behind the right.

However as I wrote in a recent last essay once you have met Maslows hierarchy of needs and have all the money you could possibly wish for.

The only thing left to do with it is either spend it altruistically helping people or attempt to gain power by supporting politicans who will have to pay you back once they are elected.

So next time you call the President a Communist or a Socialist remember that they are different meanings from the word Liberal and not interchangeable. 


Plus to us overseas viewers will look at you as if you are an idiot for saying it.

Call him a fascist, call him illiberal and a warmonger but the American nation is as far away from Communist North Korea as the moon is from Earth.

Whether you chose to believe in the definition of the word or not a Liberal believes in free markets, freedom of choice, small government and of course social reform.

If we didn't have social reform we would still be chucking our human waste out into the middle of the street and dying of bubonic plague, whilst the rich held slaves as property and the poor had to send their children off to work as chimney sweeps just to earn a living.

Certain countries in this world still behave like this - it is not pleasant. You can believe it or not but there are good reasons for not wanting to stay in the 17th century.

The UK is in trouble, how do we fix it before it breaks?

By Dark Politricks

I have just watched the Andrew Marr show with his interview with David Cameron which covered an number of interesting matters such as the influence of lobbying and lobbyist especially his closeness betweeen the government and Rupert Murdoch, the economic crisis which has seen the UK enter a double dip recession.

Thinking of this interview and the state our country is in at the moment and with a bit of previous thought that has always remained in my consisouncess I believe we need to come up with a basic plan of steps that can help to restore our country.

These steps should not be ideologically bound and should be considered in a "what works, works" conceptiuial basis. Whether you are a Tory, Liberal or Socialist we all are suffering under the same problems and a solution that works should be considered whether or not it neatly fits inside your ideological view box or not.

The Economy

The private sector has not rushed into fill all the public sector jobs that are being lost. People are being put on the dole which increases government payments for jobseeker allowance and housing benefit and in turn increases the amount we need to borrow and therefore increases national debt. Therefore the question needs to be asked whether or not in makes more logical sense (and in turn basic mathematical sense) to keep on this track.

Many people might blame our tax rates and they might be right. If it can be proven that lower company taxes or a flat tax rate system will bring in more actual revenue to the governments coffers then I have no problem with it.

However corporation tax has already been dropped, our tax free allowance raised twice already, the higher rate of tax dropped from 50% to 45% and no influx of private sector jobs has occurred yet.

Here is something that ought not to be just a thought experiment. I would love to know if some university professor with too much time on his well paid hands has tried workig this out or not and please if anyone knows the answer let me in on it.

In the 1980's our PM of the time Maggie Thatcher went to war with the miners. Many mines were unprofitable but they supported whole villages and towns and were often the only place for people in the local area to work.

Therefore when the mines were closed whole swathes of the country were made unemployed and in time due to the 3 million unemployed people on the dole the government told the employment agency to shift people onto disability allowance if there were eve the slightest thing wrong with them so that the figures were reduced and they could claim success in the war against unemployment.

This is the same government (although a different generation) that is now trying to get people off the disability allowance they had put them on to help win elections. Hypocrisy?

There were no private companies in these places for the people to go to work in and most of the miners were unskilled manual labourers with little other skills. The only "fix" given by the government of the time was from Norman Tebit who said "Get on your bike" and look for work.

Many of these miners are still jobless and many of the towns and villages that were based around the mines are now desolate wastelands full of empty or broken houses, drugs, drink and other social problems.

Now if someone at the time of this massive descission could have done the maths and worked out whether over the next 20-30 years the amount of money spent in dole money, sickness and housing benefit, extra police, court and prison costs and all the other long term costs that come with massive social deprivation and compared it with the subsidies or lost money from the mines which would come out on top?

Is it better to have a town full of people all working, all feeding their familes, all with a sense of pride in their community living in a town with lower social deprivation at the cost of a government subsidy?

Put aside your libertarian or socialist views and consider it from a basic mathematical point of view. Which do you think costs more?

This is the question we should be asking now with the current public sector cuts. Without knowing the actual true cost of the massive mine closure over 30 years I would surmise that it is cheaper to keep people working and off multiple government subsidies (dole, housing etc) and keeping a loss making mine open - another government subsidy.

So it comes down to a simple question of which subsidy is more benefiial for society? The ones handed out in dole and police wages or the one keeping open the mine and along with it the town that works there.

Remember that the higher cost of current government subsidies for unemployed people has brought our borrowing levels up NOT down and it is only our low interest rates that have kept our heads above water and not turned the UK  into a permanent London riot all year long like Greece and Spain.

Stimulating the Economy

Just a few off the top of my head.

• Tax breaks for UK companies that make their products within the UK and don't offshore them to slave labour camps like China.
• Tax breaks for companies who hire long unemployed people e.g if you have been unemployed for over 1 year or even 6 months.
• More emphasis on ensuring companies are not hiring illegal migrants and keeping UK citizens out of jobs through the use of slave labour. A National Insurance card must be provided, photocopied and saved for every employee and provided on demand by people who's actual job is to prevent slave labour from occurring.
• Closing all tax loopholes and ensuring any international company who wants to sell their goods in one of the biggest markets in the world has a UK company setup on these shores and all relevant corporation tax paid to our treasury from that company.
• Setting up a UK PLC company that is owned by all the taxpayers of the country who will recieve dividends from the company each year - used to stimulate the company. They would battle in the economy like any other company for private work but for government contracts they should get first dibs - and why not I ask? The Labour government has shown us through PPI how much money was (and still will be for the next 20 odd years at least) on these private public investment schemes. The UK PLC company would be filled with UK workers with valid national insurance cards, the long term unemployed, ex prisoners, other people struggling to get work AND any other workers who apply to vacacnies when required. The only benefits this company would have compared to others is in the non private workspace e.g government contracts.

1. It gets first refusal on any government contract whether it be an IT system or new Hospital building or even just a maintenance role at a school. Why pay a private company hundreds of pounds to change a light bulb when we should be able to do it cheaply? Believe me through Gordon Browns PPI system we do pay hundreds of pounds to change light bulbs in hospitals and schools all around the country.
2. If it makes a profit the profit is divided between expanding the company and paying dividends to us taxpayers who will then use that money stimulating the economy in the private marketplace.
3. It is a first port of call for the long term unemployed and others seeking work to find a job working for their country.

Banking.

1. We need to create a national bank that has proper interest rates for savers and encourage people to save money again at a rate that makes it worthwhile.
2. We need a bank that is owned by the people of the country and is willing to loan out money to small businesses who are the companies who give people jobs.
3. We need a bank that is owned by the people that's job isn't to make money purely from money e.g gambling, as we know all the big players do with their high frequency trading and front running.
4. We need s bank that is owned by the people where the profit is given out to the shareholders of the company each year (the taxpayers of the country) and not in million pound bonuses to a few of their best AND most of their worst gamblers.
5. We already have huge stake-holds in more than one bank. We should take the whole thing over and turn it into a bank run for the people of the nation for the benefit of the nation.

Can you imagine as a working tax payer being given a yearly cheque for a few thousand pounds to spend as you wish because you as a taxpayer are also a shareholder in a national bank?

This is one way to stimulate the economy as well as incentivise people without jobs to get jobs and to start paying tax.

The European Union

We should leave the European Union as soon as possible. We should give them an ulimatium either make the whole shaky house of cards what is should have been a free trading zone, with free movement of people and goods and not a semi quasil supra government in which unelected people can weild enormous power and the elected EU government can weild little.

The Euro should never have gone ahead as it was clear to many people at the time that the North and South European countries were two totally different systems that would never mesh together and it was only with the help of the criminals at Goldman Sachs that allowed countries like Greece to hide their huge debts and get on board the Titanic with no-one noticing.

We will save money and keep our own embassies and seats at the UN instead of what is surely on the EU's roadmap a huge polical union like the USA in which the EU is the only embassy in each country and the EU Foreign Minister makes descisions for all European nations.

Whilst there are some good things in the EU there are plenty of bad and I cannot see the balance being tilted the other way anytime soon.

The case of Abu Qatada has shown our weakness in the face of unelected European judges and whilst I am happy to know that an appeal lodged at the European Court of Human Rights will take up to 7 years to be heard and maybe prevent Gary McKinnon from being deported to the USA the flipside is also true and it prevents us from deporting dangerous criminals like Abu Qatadar.

Law, Equality and Liberty

The case of Abu Qatadar brings me onto the legal system in the UK.

We should create our own Bill of Rights on the same lines as the US Bill of Rights and that every single person wether they be a policeman or royal is covered by the Bill and everyone in the UK is equal under the law.

I want to know 100% that I will be given the same treatment by the judiciary as the Queen if she let her pack of Corgi's maul a child to death or drink drive into a bus stop full of people killing many of them. Only when we are all equal under the same law - a British made law and one that is the highest law in the land can we call ourselves free and equal.

Alongside this the true "Freedom Bill" should be implemented post haste not the weak and feeble cut down version making its way through parliament at the moment. It is a disgusting stain on the Lib Dem's character that they allowed the Tories to rip out everything good about the bill and turn it into a wheel clampers justice bill.

These reforms will rebalance our extradition treaty with the USA, restore our right to silence under police interview, give back our right to protest near parliament and many more important laws the pro-surveillence governent of Labour (and now seemingly the coallition) had brought in.

The English should have their own parliament to solve the West Lothian question and to prevent Scottish MP's voting to raise UK students tuition fees whilst they can keep University free in their own country.

We should do away with this mismash of devolution which Tony Blair started and go the full hog. 

We should have full devolution for all 4 parts of the UK in which citizens of those countries vote for their local MP to sit in their countries parliament on matters that affect their country alone and then sit within the Westminister parliament when the matter is UK wide e.g whether to go to war, to sign treaties with other nations and other important UK matters.

The English parliament can sit in the Houses of Parliament in Westminster and matters covering the whole UK will involve members of parliament from the Scottish parliament, the Welsh parliament and the Northern Irish one.

Immigration

I live in a town that due to Joanna Lumley is no longer recoognisable due to the ex Gurka veterans (who I have no problem with at all) bringing their whole families over to live in this country. This would be fine if:

• They could speak English.
• They were not all given houses straight away, houses some of us have waited decades on the housing list for.
• They were not overloading our already strained and mercilessly cut public services.
• They would at least try and learn our culture and fit in. A thank you wave when you let someone through at a junction is not too much to ask - I know a little thing that many other people don't do but it's little things like this that really grind my gears (quote Peter Griffin)

People come to the UK from Africa with HIV and turn up at the nearest hospital and then given the best treatment around for free whilst someone who has live in this country their whole life and can trace their history back hundreds of years is treated contentably by the NHS when they have a serious illness.

I am not against immigration as it was badly needed after World War II and when English people won't take the jobs someone needs to do them.

• What I am against is the fact that whole swathes of the UK are now ghettos where a white person would feel threatened to walk at night.
• Where on a bus ride in certain towns you can hear a myriad of conversations, that is apart from English.
• Where if you open a door to a woman in a head scarf or let her pass in the street she won't even look at you in the eye let alone say thank you. I know their culture forbids it but this is Britain not Saudi Arabia and we treat women as equals not slaves therefore we should expect some modicum of "fitting in" if we are going to allow tens of millions of people all from various cultures into our country.

I feel that we should have tigther border controls and that anyone wishing to migrate to this country should be able to pass an entrace exam on our history as well as basic English before being allowed on our soil.

Once they have completed there exams they should be given a citenship ceremony in which they are presented their national insurance card. A card by the way which should be mandatory display at any doctors, hostpital or benefits agency. 

We all got them when we were 16 and any new immigrant should be proud to achieve the right to hold one. They are not national ID cards but they are a sign you are entitled to work, pay tax, claim benefits and this should include health care.

Not only will this help social cohesion it will install a sense of pride at achieving British Citizenship. We should abolish the stupid tests Labour brought in which were more about how to claim benefits than history and our existing culture. Labour ruined this country in more ways than can be counted.

We want people who want to live here and accept our way our life. I don't want our government sending troops to foreign lands so that they can say that "we fight them over there so we don't fight them over here"  whilst at the same time we have thousands of men and women within our shores looking at our culture in disgust and planning payback for all that "collateral damage" we do across the world. It goes both ways and I definitely don't agree with the wars we are in.

There are so many other things I could go on about including stopping the wars, ending the surveillence state, removing our tongue from the USA's ass and much more but I think I have said enough for one morning. Lets cross our fingers and pray to the great big Spaghetti monster in the sky that some of it becomes true.