Shoemaker makes Shoes: Something that does not apply to the present government

When you have people who have never ever been in business and don't have a clue about running a business, when you have people making decisions about farming when the closest they have been to managing a farm is standing near the shelves of a supermarket, you know that the country is in trouble.

Ideology does not replace knowledge and expertise, but we have got politicians driven by blind ideology deciding what is best for the country. So, if anything can go wrong, it will go wrong.

First thing you learn about economics is that the closest the factory is to raw materials the lower production costs will be, but then comes Ed Miliband and decides to prevent new oil and gas exploration in the North Sea.

How old was he when Britain was going over the edge because of lack of oil and gas? In the 1970s, Britain was saved by the discovery of oil and gas in the North Sea, but now the all knowledgeable Marxist politician wants to prevent any more exploration for oil and gas.

Britain buys already too much foodstuff abroad so reducing the number of farms on British soil will force Britain to buy even more foodstuff abroad as population keeps growing. What does Labour do? Implements tax measures that will put more and more farms out of business thus reducing production in the United Kingdom.

Every step of the way, Labour policies are based on ignorance, ideological hatred and misconceptions and the alternative is, as it always have been, to borrow more and to produce less. When Labour talks about growth, Labour is not talking about economic growth. Labour is talking about indebtedness growth. And then when they can borrow no more, they will propose massive cuts that will leave people ever poorer.

The consequences of economic mismanagement will be worse than the Covid Pandemic and the energy crisis combined and this could become a very long Winter of Discontent that will end up with tears, and even spilt blood.

Here came the budget: Main target NHS and Second target the economy and particularly interest rates and growth.

The general thinking is that the Labour government will inflict pain earlier with the hope that near the next General Election the numbers will be much better to produce good feelings amongst voters. But this is a gamble by a government that publicly stated that if they had not inherited interest rates that were already going down the present announcements about borrowing could not have been made. 

Everything is based on the presumption that the economy will improve, that interest rates will go down and that repaying the borrowing will become easier. Another factor is promised improvements of the NHS. If the economy does not improve and if improvements promised regarding the NHS are not delivered then this would be a double political wammy that could bring down the present government at the next General Election.

The hope is that no crise like the Covid Pandemic or the energy crise generated by sanctions implemented against the Russian Federation or anything of the sort happens from now until the next General Election. Anything that would require much more borrowing and generate emergency conditions, negatively affecting. the economy, is not welcome. 

Et ceteris paribus? All other things being equal? Expecting that nothing will happen along the way that could change or derail present plans is a very negligent attitude. Things are bound to change. There are crucial ongoing conflicts and the seeds for more conflicts are being planted.

Now, lets have a look at potential trading partners. What is the situation in Europe? What is the situation in the Americas? What is the situation in Africa and Oceania? What is the situation regarding new players that are rising and increasing mutual cooperation?

The belief that new global associations will remain focused on the East and will not spread towards the West is extremely naive. We now live not in a bipolar world. We live in a multipolar world. In which direction the Americas, Africa, and Oceania will go is not a given. But present trends indicate that BRICS is making inroads. Those joining BRICS happen to be the most populous countries in the world. They also happen to be those which tend to have more resources in terms of raw materials. 

Founding countries? Russian Federation, China, India and Brazil. While the main Western countries have been involved in a rising number of conflicts, China has been spreading financially and economically across key regions of the world. The impopularity of the Western approach when dealing with conflicts is spreading and such impopularity does not benefit Western countries. China has not been involved in any major conflict. In fact, it is gathering more and more influence in countries that are far away from China.

Israel vs Iran: is this the real show?

 Is Israel versus Iran the real show?

We hear the news and see mass media flooded with articles about the dangers of widespread war in the Middle East and Asia Minor. We hear the news about North Koreans joining the fight in Ukraine. It is difficult to ascertain the real dimension of what we have been told. 

The real issue of widespred war in the Middle East and Asia Minor are not Israel or Iran, for that matter. The real issue are the vast amounts of oil and gas spread across the entire region. Kuwair, Bahrain, UAE, Saudi Arabia, and so forth. If the Middle East and Asia Minor were to go up in smoke this will be a catastrophe for the world economy as a whole and there would be massive political consequences.

Both Israel and Iran have to play according to the rules. The United States of America might care about Iran, but the USA cares more about money and as long as money is being made the lives of hundreds of thousands don't matter at all, but the monies being made by shareholders matter more than human lives.

As long as the business of war keeps going and does not get out of control threatening the value of shares it is business as usual. Don't attack nuclear facilities! Don't attack oil reserves! Don't do anything that could ruin the business of war. Both Israel and Iran have to play for their own public and therefore they have to do something to prove that they are doing something.

We are dealing with Jews that do not give a damn about Jews, people for whom their own people matter very little as long as they get what they want. We are dealing with the Bernie Madoffs of geopolitics. Benjamin Netanyahu is a Bernie Madoff of geopolitics. The massacres carried out by Israel will continue. Israel has a license to kill as long as the business of war goes on as usual and monies are being made, but the Bernie Madoff also know that there are limitations. When Iran threatens to attack all those who help Israel there are direct references to oil and gas countries in the region. So any action against Iran has to be limited not to push Iran to attack the real targets in the Middle East and Asia Minor. We know how things are now under the present US Administration and I reckon that things will not change dramatically under a new US Administration because the interests are the same and the people actually running the circus are the same.

With regards to North Korea, I reckon that Ukraine is for North Korea what the Spain's Civil War was for the Wehrmacht: a training ground. North Korea has been in isolation and has not had any opporunity to test its Army in real battles. Although the number of North Korean troops is minimal, Ukraine can provide valuable opportunities. It also sends the message of unity: boys, we are all in it together. Military cooperation at every level. About 3,000 North Korean troops will not make any major difference in the conduct of the war, from a Russian standpoint as the Russian Federation has mobilized hundreds of thousands of troops.

Much of what Western politicians say is no more than chit chat, a propaganda effort to justify the existence of people who are absolutely irrelevant. NATO is a business to keep money rolling in for shareholders. Any monies that go into the pockets of shareholders are not monies that serve the general public. They are not invested in health, education, transport, infra-structure and so forth. The most important problems remain forever unsolved and this is why we have got the problems that we have got with more and more people facing miserable lives.  

Wednesday, October 30th, 2024 - Budget Day

 

This is personal, stated the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves. She refers to realities of the 1980s and 1990s. The Chancellor's efforts to gather capital will drag hundreds of thousands more people into paying tax and even more into higher rates as their pay rises, indicates none other than The Guardian.

Could a personal crusade turn into a nightmare? Changing fiscal rules to disguise debt making it appear as something else does not change the fact that it will still be borrowing. So more taxes and more borrowing that will be increased for public interest, according to the Chancellor.

Ordinary folk and many business were badly hit by the Covid Pandemic and the measures implemented to deal with the Covid Pandemic. After that, people and many business were hit by the energy crise generated by the conflict in Ukraine and the measures adopted against the Russian Federation. 

Now, they stand to be hit again by taxation and potentially higher prices of utilities, housing and daily shopping.

But the Chancellor of the Exchequer still says that she will implement the budget in a way that she will 'protect the living standards of working people'. 

Well, in an interview made in Washington, USA, Rachel Reeves - perhaps inadvertently - made promises that she will have to deliver. If she does not deliver and if the measures implemented by the Labour government become a de facto nightmare, then this will create a widely open door for another Conservative government.

Starting on Wednesday, October 30th, 2024, the government will have to deliver and with every failure, and every new crise, there will be many by-elections along the way in which people will express their discontent.

She talks about building schools and hospitals. Well, what will she do about nurses salaries that are not enough to rent a one bedroom flat? If living costs keep rising, this will be a de facto devaluation of salaries and a worsening of living standards. Before she goes around building schools and hospitals, she will have to look carefully at salaries actually paid to teachers and NHS staff. 

Even with the triple lock, state pensions are not enough to rent a one bedroom flat. State pensions are totally insufficient. Taxing state pensions and private pensions can only worsen an already bad situation. And this is going to do nothing to 'protect living standards'.  

Taxing private pensions, assets and shares? More madness on the way.

 Due to low productivity, Britain has increasingly relied on financial services. There are two sides of banking. One is the conventional side of banking based on mortgages and loans and the other is financial banking, lending money to investors that take a huge deal of risk and therefore expect higher rewards. 

Private pension funds very much depend on shares and investments and values fluctuate on a daily basis, so there is an inherent level of risk. How can you tax shares? Will you tax what a share was worth on Monday or what a share was worth on Tuesday?

Imagine yourself as a Northern Rock shareholder. One day you count your wins. You have an investment and you have a return. The next day, your investment evaporates because the value of your shares is literally zero and you have no return. Are we going to see debt taxed?

The only growth that the present Labour government will produce is the growth of debt, unemployment, illegal employment, and fraud. Launching a virulent attack against the one sector that keeps Britain alive is cutting down the tree on which you are standing. The 2008 financial crise will feel like a pleasant vacation.

The infamous event affecting people who had used their assets to support insurance payments comes to mind. One day they were riding the waves of opulence and the next day they were selling everything they had to pay for insurance claims.

Kemi Badenoch and Robert Jenrick: Conservative Party has demolished stereotypes

 

Kemi Badenoch and Robert Jenrick

The British Conservative Party has demolished all stereotypes 

In a few years, the British Conservative Party has demolished all stereotypes and offered the country a wide range of choices, both in terms of ethnicity and of political beliefs, going much farther afield than any other political party, destroying every tool in the Labour Party's workshop. The traditional left used to dress itself as the representative of ethnic minorities and talked a lot about gender. The traditional left has been totally and utterly defeated and can no longer use the race card nor the gender card.

Kemi Badenoch, married, mother of three is an engineer that has held several high positions in government. Robert Jenrrick, also married, father of three, also University graduate and has held several high positions in government.

Both of them have been described as Far Right of Extremist. Really? I suppose that having family values, solid education and professional careers, caring more about the country in which they were born, it is easy to understand that those bent on destroying family values and British identity would certainly see them as something to be afraid of, especially when none other than Keir Starmer, the British Prime Minister, does not know what a woman is.

Political commentators who oppose them say that they might become leaders of the Conservative Party, but would have no political future in terms of leading the party and winning the next General Election.

One can never foresee what the future will bring. Suffice to say, that in recent by-elections, 14 Labour seats were already lost, after a disastrous beginning for a political party that had recently won a General Election with an outstanding majority. We haven't even reached the first national budget and there is already infighting within Labour ranks. 

We await the first national budget with trepidation.Already several MPs decided to become Independent and major figures of the Labour Party were literally pushed out of the Labour Party. It can be literally said that the present Labour Party won the General Election under false pretenses. Major policies that helped them win the election have already been thrown out. No more taxes? It seems that there was one Labour Party before the General Election and another, different, Labour Party after the General Election. A combination of lies, deceit, and miscalculation. 

More than 600,OOO UK companies in financial distress. Labour's answer? More financial burden.

 

In recent years, the level of taxation imposed by Labour authorities increased exponentially. 

Congestion charge? ULEZ? Parking permits? Announced increased of capital gains and national insurance payments? 

Not enough with having to contend with rising costs of utilities - to name one range of expenses for any business to deal with - more regulation on the horizon.

After COVID,  the energy crisis, and after the energy crisis a Labour government that is bent on creating new obstacles along the way.

When we talk about more than 600,000 businesses in trouble, we are surely talking not mainly about big operators, but about medium size and small businesses, many of which might certainly be family businesses.

The amount of money people spend shopping has dropped and this means less revenues for companies, whatever their size. If you add regulation and taxation, there is going to be less monies to invest in the normal economic cycle. If by cutting down the flow of money in the normal economic cycle, unemployment and subemployment rise then the Welfare State will be affected. The annnounced intention to cut down welfare payments by 3 billion Pound is pie in the sky. It is for the birds. Lack of economic activity due to people having less money in their pockets will lead to unemployment. The natural consequence is that several things will grow: domestic violence, street crime, deprivation, and illness.

Taxing people and companies to the hilt will not produce economic growth.