Westminster Trough Of Hypocrisy

Hypocrisy

Not only does the trough get deeper, but it gets dirtier. And more rotten. Hypocrisy pervades around Westminster like a filthy curtain. As only one example, the police have been denied a full pay increase already decided upon through arbitration to 'politically' contain costs and so attempt to contain the uncontainable inflation myth. Presumably, it's all in the numbers game. The alleged deal struck between MPs of all parties, certainly Labour and Tories, demonstrates only a few (hundred) individuals that consider themselves so much more important than anybody else.

• Speaker of (for) the British House of Commons

• The Speaker presides over the House's debates, determining which members may speak. The Speaker is also responsible for maintaining order during debate, and may punish members who break the rules of the House.

• Who punishes the Speaker, if required, and who decides if punishment is necessary?

Michael Martin - the pressure
Michael Martin - the profile
Michael Martin - the wife

With the party coming to an end, they all want to dig down as deep as possible now to maximise the take before it all ends by voting themselves an inflation-busting pay and pensions increase. This makes the right noises for public consumption, but that's all. Whether it is successful or not, it is allegedly being 'demanded'. It is rather telling that the prime minister can only "urge" MPs to limit pay rises. This is a prime minister clearly not in control if "look chaps, please show a bit of sense..." is the best he can do. Since (probably) one or the other of the two main parties will be returned to power, the argument cannot apply to around 50% of those making it. Three things about Dr James Gordon Brown:

• trustworthy
• totally honest and transparent
• supportive.

Notably, in some professions (primarily medical) Mr is more senior and important than Dr. So, Dr. Brown has become Mr. Brown. An honest ascendency. Rather tough on the poor MPs. Nobody else counts and anybody who provides an essential service (police, nurses, firemen...) isn't important. But ensure personal pensions are well topped up - to the brim. The tens of thousands of other sorry souls who have no pension (and how exactly did that happen, Gordon? What caused it? A slight oversight? Mistake?). Opps..., but never mind. Even after financing one's own future for years and years? But they don't count even though they could only help finance an MPs ring fenced pension.

Banking Panic - The Plan (8)

Banking Panic - The Plan (Prelude)
Banking Panic - The Plan (1)
Banking Panic - The Plan (2)
Banking Panic - The Plan (3)
Banking Panic - The Plan (4)
Banking Panic - The Plan (5)
Banking Panic - The Plan (6)
Banking Panic - The Plan (7)
Banking Panic - The Plan (9)
Banking Panic - The Plan (10)
Banking Panic - The Plan (Nearly There)
Banking Panic - The Plan (Arrival)
Banking Panic - The Plan (The Next Phase)
Banking Panic - The Plan (11)
Banking Panic - The Plan (12)
Banking Panic - The Plan (13)
Banking Panic - The Plan (Exit)
Banking Panic - The Plan (1st Encore)
Banking Panic - The Plan (2nd Encore)
Banking Panic - The Plan (3rd Encore)
Banking Panic - The Circus

Growth of the Affordable Debt Continues

A BBC article provides a glimpse of the current issue: Northern Rock. With the Olympic Games, and British taxpayers funding it all, almost £67bn is now underwritten and payable and increasing by 100s of £millions every week. These two examples alone demonstrate how the British public is paying a staggeringly enormous overhead to simply help ensure the banking system remains viable. The system is only in existence to make itself money. We borrow money from this globalised cartel so it can charge interest and the system is in the greater part directly responsible for the debt in the first place. The mechanism provides the opportunity to exploit money making schemes like the Olympic Games. Justified as essential, clearly it is not. But the taxpayer finances it anyway. Selling an unjustifiable scheme as essential. It is a type of black magic and a classic case of firstly creating the problem and then providing a solution. If a buyer does not come forward and pay off at least £10bn up front, the government will not entertain a private sale. And if private business sees no profit in the idea and withdraws, then the government has threatened to nationalise the bank. The taxpayer will be forced to 'buy' the dead duck to simply prop up the system. For a while. And will never be asked. It's an absolute obscenity, yet passes effectively unnoticed. The Olivant group is one contender to 'rescue' Northern Rock and the extent of British government involvement is clarified by: the government's aid package for the bank now amounts to about £57bn. Made to appear not a lot different to £57m. But that's 57,000 £millions. And adding all the zeros:

£57,000,000,000

The concept of the illusion of money 'creation' is exemplified here: the original 'loan' of £26bn has only been a box-ticking exercise. No money has actually been transferred, only the theoretical (authorised) loan. The virtual loan has now increased to an underwritten £57bn without any actual money being involved.

The transfer of £bns (worth) gold bullion or just an electronic 'tick' in a box?

The Bradford and Bingley Group seems to have an approach that sounds very much like asset stripping. It fails to describe itself as a building society. Perhaps it isn't one and is simply involved in the loans business. For house purchase. Houses are the currency of today and tomorrow. The day after tomorrow:

?

Of course, by government this means underwritten by the TAXPAYER. It's as though government just provides the money. It does technically, but is simply disbursing funds entrusted to it. The taxpayer is effectively an uninvited guarantor, but nevertheless a very welcome gate crasher. The global financial structure has been in hidden meltdown for years, but has only recently been identified for what it always has been. A system that takes from the one (already taxed money) and 'lends' to another: itself. But there's a price to pay. And the recipients? The private banks. And there's more money to be made on the way. Much more and provides a convenient method for the continued cover to mask events.

Banking Panic - The Plan (Prelude)
Banking Panic - The Plan (1)
Banking Panic - The Plan (2)
Banking Panic - The Plan (3)
Banking Panic - The Plan (4)
Banking Panic - The Plan (5)
Banking Panic - The Plan (6)
Banking Panic - The Plan (7)
Banking Panic - The Plan (9)
Banking Panic - The Plan (10)
Banking Panic - The Plan (Nearly There)
Banking Panic - The Plan (Arrival)
Banking Panic - The Plan (The Next Phase)
Banking Panic - The Plan (11)
Banking Panic - The Plan (12)
Banking Panic - The Plan (13)
Banking Panic - The Plan (Exit)
Banking Panic - The Plan (1st Encore)
Banking Panic - The Plan (2nd Encore)
Banking Panic - The Plan (3rd Encore)
Banking Panic - The Circus

Affordable

This term 'affordable' has become a part of British culture. It's highly irritating and supremely patronising. What does 'affordable' really mean? And to whom? It must depend on your bank balance and appreciation of value. A £100 to a wealthy person is perceived differently to how a poor person will view the same amount. But poor people are disappearing into the mist. Poor people don't exist, do they? It's all mixed up in the illusion that inflation is low and so 'inflation-busting' salary rises are unnecessary.

The English police are denied a back-dated pay rise (less than 2%), but enjoyed in-full by the Scottish equivalent (no connection to Gordon Brown being Scottish and resident incumbent of the very English address at No.10 Downing Street, of course). Clearly, the denial is a political point and not a financial one. Train fares being hiked by 5-7%, gas and electricity hikes, petrol tax hikes being levied (around 66% cost per litre goes in taxation and is nearly 70p of every £1). The increase may be at an inflation rate of about 2%, but this is a tax hike on an existing tax. Remember that VAT (Value Added Tax at 17.5%) is charged on the imposed duty of around 50%.

Cynical

Financial systems are debt-based. Without debt, there can be no interest or inflation and consequently no growth. But regarding 'affordable' housing, the equation gets even more complicated as the thickening mist becomes a fog. The obvious psychological 'mind-game' suggestion is that you should be able to afford anything that is described as 'affordable' even if realistically you can't. But you don't know that because it's  'affordable'. Because They say so and They must be right mustn't They? Whatever or whoever They seem to be.

They:

STAND UP AND IDENTIFY YOURSELVES

The psychological peer group pressure card is being played and keeping up with the Joneses is still very active. Credit is readily available to those who find it 'affordable' and like every other 'affordable' product you need it whether it's necessary or not. The implication is that if it's 'affordable' then you need it. What is 'affordable' debt and how is it defined? 'Affordable' has become fashionable and 'affordable' debt even more so. The nation is allegedly enjoying a 'never had it so good' boom. The standard of living continues to escalate roughly in proportion to the mounting debt. Misery is correspondingly enhanced. So, debt is 'affordable' and to be in debt means success. Debt is a good thing. If you aren't in debt to some bank then you must be a loser. To 'afford' debt and to be able to get yourself into debt by borrowing is winning. If you cannot get a loan to place yourself in debt then you are a loser.

Perverse

Wealth and ownership of 'money' is an illusion. The belief that 'money' actually exists is delusion. If a large proportion of 'savers' demanded their cash assets from their bank, then the financial systems around the globe would collapse in a heartbeat. Even before electronic money, the financial system was easily and quickly  brought down to its knees. It's so weak and vulnerable.

It seems so, but isn't really. It's part of the plan. Money borrowed translates to money owed with interest. And it's with interest that is the important point. Money owed on top of virtual money. It's how the illusion of money creation works. The sum 2+2 implies the answer 4. But in the reality of truth does it?

Olympic Scheme

Olympics 2012
Olympic Fund: Raided
Olympic Lottery
Olympic Torch


A subsidy from the taxpayer to support a football team appears to be the interpretation of legacy. Years before a stadium is (inevitably) built at enormous cost:

£496,000,000

Leyton Orient for some reason is the right flavour presumably and Barry Hearn as Orient's owner asserts:

"I take it over for nothing and I give them a legacy is how it works". According to Hearn: "For the East End the Olympics is the dawn of a new era and for Orient this deal offers the first crack of a new dawn". And: "We've all got egos. What club wouldn't like to give their address as The Olympic Stadium. I could puff out my chest an extra inch or two".

This is a similar 'gift' that Manchester enjoys after the 2002 Commonwealth Games. Something has to be seen to be done, the effective white elephant having served its financial purpose after just over two weeks(27th July - 12th August 2012). With an average gate of just over 5,000 and reduced seating to 25,000 (from 80,000) to accommodate legacy athletics' meetings there should be plenty of space. The appearance will be 'playing' to an empty house, but that's a small price to pay for such a huge, prestigious, and essentially free, venue.

If the seating is reduced by nearly 70% what then happens to the unused area? Cycling is a long-standing competition sport in the Olympic Games (allegedly a competition) and has already had its Eastway Cycling Circuit bulldozed. The 'promised' replacement velopark has been downsized by around 70%. This does mean that the space creation of this 70% area will become available for sale and development of the 'much-needed affordable homes'. The term affordable is (presumably) jargon used by housing developers in the quest to sell their products. This 70% is becoming a very in vogue figure. It would appear that the East End is only one place in England to rise to a new dawn while many others enjoy an expensive twilight where the future outlook is a tad bleaker.

There is a herd of white elephants already gathering on the horizon. Lord Seb Coe's promise to leave a legacy for athletics has invisibly materialised in a future as a minimum of 20 days in each year for Grand Prix meetings, national trials and schools' championships. This is perverse logic since the perceived legacy is left to the nation five years before the event that will create that legacy. In any one future year after 2012, that only leaves 345 days vacancy on the proposed schedule. The stadium tenant will provide only the maintenance costs of the purpose of the as-yet-unbuilt stadium and that would include the occasional lighting requirement and mundane things like toilets that will have been constructed to match a population of 80,000 for about

2 weeks

27th July-12 August 2012 then reduced to an average 5,000. And that's only the projection for a few weeks in any one year after 2012. Maintenance costs fade and disappear into the £496m construction cost - for the very expensive two weeks:

£9.3 billion Funded by the taxpayer

Just don't tell the taxpayer the little details:

• When will the debt be finally settled?
• That Montreal fiasco of 1976
• The Olymic Lottery
• What is the total interest charge?
• How much will the overall debt be?

By 2050 these concerns

SHOULD 

be well forgotten