Friday, 22 March 2013

A UK from first principles. (1)

Every UK citizen is entitled to a living by their own labour

A UK citizen maybe called up to fight to defend the country - this gives them a right to a share in the land we stand on.

The UK is about 60 million acres, there are about 60 million UK citizens - so each UK citizen is nominally entitled to one acre of land.

Farming 6 acres can provide self-sufficiency for 6 people (without huge physical effort) - so each citizen has the (theoretical) ability to be self-sufficient by their own (relatively light) labour.  In practice not all land can be farmed, but I haven't included the sea and fishing resources so I am still comfortable with the principle.

This gives a nominal default condition for UK citizens and the ownership of the land they stand on.

It is this that, I believe, should be the logical underpinning of a citizens income and citizenship itself - the right for each UK citizen to the use of, or receive rental income from, a nominal acre of UK land. This is in return for being prepared to defend the country, this should be as of right and untaxable.

Saturday, 16 March 2013

Minimum Pricing - First they came for the untouchables.

Minimum unit pricing for alcohol is being promoted by many groups - particularly those of a nannying, lefty bent. However, even some of a more conservative nature seem to be supporting this bandwagon.

To me as a believer in equality and freedom, this is an attack on the humanity of a group of our own citizens.

I know of no one who is asking/demanding that they pay more for alcoholic drinks themselves.

The entire minimum pricing programme is being promoted by one group, to be inflicted on another group - the smug, comfortable, faux-compassionate, do-gooders inflicting and imposing their will, against the will if their less comfortable, poorer, vulnerable victims.

The promoters of minimum pricing have done well to bring about this divisive alignment - to put themselves in a group, with no accountability to anyone else, with apparent power over another group unable to defend themselves. Creating a society where men are no longer equal - instead we have the coercers and the coerced, with no election or battle, a simple coup d'etat.

Poor peoples access to alcohol is to be restricted - no such restriction will be placed on any other part of society. Would a wealthier part of society accept a restriction placed only on themselves? Ban the middle class from driving? Ban the mega rich from skiing? Or even banning either of these groups from consuming alcohol? If not then why is it that the current target group are seen as acceptable victims of this coercion? Simply because they are poor and without political influence or power?

To treat the poor in our society with such high handed prejudice disgusts me to the core. Supporters of this shameful proposal disgust me equally. If this goes through, then I can only hope that one day they too will find themselves in a similar position of those they seek to oppress today, and get to feel their own boot stamping on their faces...

Friday, 15 March 2013

Why has housing become 'unaffordable' in the UK?

People are constantly complaining that the cost of housing in the UK has become unaffordable...

The relative cost of labour and materials has not had much of an influence they have been quite stable - although arbitrary building regulations are always being piled on, causing some distortions. But the main cause of price increases is demand increasing more than supply.

Demand rose because:-

  • Good Investment: Property has been one of the few investments open to the general public that the government have not completely debased and stolen from. This is most likely because politicians and their friends also have such big investments in property.
  • Population Growth: More people both born here and from immigration.
  • Property Preference: The properties available have become less of a match to what people are looking for. More, small/individual, accommodation is apparently being demanded.

Supply has been limited because:-

  • Planning requirements on land has blocked development.
  • Planning requirements for redevelopment has blocked redevelopment.
  • Investors in land have been content to watch the asset appreciate rather than actually build on it.
  • Developers build the most profitable type of property, not the most wanted/needed.
  • The costs of moving discourages owner/occupiers from doing so, so many people stay in properties that have become 'inappropriate' for their needs.

So prices rose.

Prices cannot fall safely because people cannot afford to sell for below their purchase price (or re-mortgage value!) - unless they are desperate/bankrupt they have to stick it out.

Inflation will eventually make current prices look more reasonable - so unless the bubble is to 'burst', it is a matter of waiting for inflation to 'bring prices down'.

The bubble bursting may help prices come down, but at the expense of the current home 'owners' being impoverished and made homeless. This would add to the problem, rather than helping to fix it.

So as you can see if you look at each cause... its the government wot done it.

Thursday, 14 March 2013

Government Borrowing and Spending to Create Growth

This is how it works.

Imagine you have a spouse, kids and house - so mortgage, food, heating etc to pay for - and you lose your job and can't get another one.

What you do is...

  1. Take out all the loans you can - empty your bank account, hit your limit on all credit cards.
  2. Spend all this money on luxuries you wouldn't normally buy.
  3. Wait for the shops you spent all your money at to offer you a job to cope with the 'boom' they just experienced
Good eh?


The state spending to promote growth is like a starving man eating his own leg to fatten himself up.