Saturday, 27 September 2008

Debt is Slavery

Debt is evil, nowdays it may be a necessary evil, but it is an evil none the less.

Once you are in debt, you have an obligation to you creditor that can be enforced with the full power of the national legal system.

This is the motivation of Loan Sharks - if someone can be teased over the edge of their ability to pay, then you have them hooked for life.

Like a drug dealer getting new innocents addicted, the approach will be as nice as pie - nothing will be too much trouble, they will be your best of best friends - you may not realise it at the time, but there is a price for this. A price that is so high that it may never be paid off in your lifetime.

The American credit-crunch that has little to do with us (but the government (with the help of the BBC) find convenient to blame for their own failings, and divert attention) is founded on Loan Sharkery.

Very poor people whose only assets might be the roof over their head and their future earning potential were persuaded to take on legally enforcable agreements to receive money now to be paid off in the future - however being poor, and so having little practical knowledge of finaance they never realised the massive burden they were accepting.

Enevitably they could not keep up with their massivley escalating repayment using their meagre incomes, so the Sharks forced them to surrender their only current assets - their houses.

The Sharks were pleased with the deal, they had lent pennies at massive interest rates and now owned empty houses ready to sell.

What went wrong was that the Sharks ended up owning so many such properties, and people in those areas were so poor that the houses could not be sold.

Each loan may have been pennies, but there were so many of them that totalled trillions of dollars. The Sharks had trillions of dollars tied up in unsaleable property - the original owners evicted and still in massive debt.

Liquidity vanished - the sharks supposedly had 'assets', but they could not convert them into cash, so could not pay their own debts.

The Sharks victims were bankrupted - now was the sharks turn...

Credit is evil.

How is this relevant to the Free People of England? It is relevant because the government are activley softening up the younger generation to take on debt with out a second thought. In fact it is worse... If a young person wants to go to University they will almost certainly be obliged to take out a Student Loan from the state - to become a graduate in this country you must take the first steps into a debt ridden future.

The governments behavour on this is too disgusting for words - they might as well oblige all students to smoke 20 cigarettes a day for the duration of their courses - and then wonder why the country has become full of smokers...

Friday, 26 September 2008

Why is there no English War of Independance?

What happened?

One day you turn around and see that a gradual process has made massive changes.

The American war of Independance started with the Boston Tea Party - effectively a popular riot triggered by nothing more a feeling that taxation was unfair.

Today in england we have passively (maybe indoctrinated through state schooling) come to a place where many people seem to honestly beleive that the government is the boss, and they submit to its will.

An individual is allowed to cast a vote for a local MP every 5 years or so, and in return they appear to surrender any claim to self-determination.

Even the poll-tax riots of the '80s were not an attack on the system, they were an attack on the government of the time. And despite those uprisings, it resulted in absolutely no long term impact on the representation of the people. The same could happen all over again, in exactly the same way. Riots and uprisings end in one of two ways - either complete victory for one sie, or in an agreed declaration or charter setting out the settlement that the sides have agreed.

The poll-tax riots led to no such document and the system has not changed, so it must be that it was a victory for the state.

Each such victory for the state over the popular feeling of the people is another ratchet click towards totalitarionism.

People must be encouraged to remember that property rights are a funamental part of freedom. The state has no particular right to separate you from your property - whether the property is money, real-estate or other items, and whether the mechanism to deprive you is taxes, fines or any thing else.

The people may grant the state the power to raise taxes to the level essential to fund those things that are essential and best delivered en-mass. And there is discussion to be had on how such a burden is to be spread. However when the taxman collects, he should acknowledge the generosity of the citizen.

However, things are out of whack - the state beleives that all property belongs to it, and that it can do as it wishes without reference or regard to the individual. And what is most worrying is that many individuals passively accept this state of affiars - while it is expected that the political classes (who run the state) would be attacted to suc a level of control and influence, noone who beleives in freedom can approve of such a situation.

Noone (even the taxman) can be allowed to take an individuals property with such disragard for the indiviudal; and individuals must be educated to realise that their freedom (and the freedom of generations to come) from slavery is fundamentally predicated on them asserting this right to property.