Showing posts with label Floods. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Floods. Show all posts

Wednesday, 8 November 2017

The 'centrist' bubble of delusion is absolutely extraordinary


I've just seen a bunch of smug centrists on Twitter lauding the 2010-2015 Coalition government as some kind of great success story because it wasn't as bad as the current shambles (the turd in the hand is better than a turd in the gob defence) and describing their litany of failures as "niggles".

Well here are just some of the catastrophic failings that these intolerably smug centrist types and the small core of die-hard Lib-Dems are trying to shrug off as just minor niggles.
Niggle 1: After the Lib-Dems decided to abandon the their core student demographic to win a tiny taste of second hand Tory power, students these days are being lumbered with £50,000+ in debts which 77% of them will never pay off despite entire lifetimes of paying a 9% aspiration tax on their disposable income
Niggle 2: Between 2010 and 2015 literally thousands of disabled people died within six weeks of being declared "fit for work" in Tory disability denial factories. Instead of doing something to combat this disgraceful situation, the coalition government tried to just hide the evidence of this death toll from public scrutiny.  Imagine the kind of person who considers a government desperately trying to hide the death toll from their systematic abuse of disabled people to be just a "niggle".
Niggle 3: The Coalition government introduced many unlawful pieces of legislation. Two of the most horrifying were Iain Duncan Smith's workfare schemes designed to unlawfully force jobless people into working for no wages at giant highly-profitable corporations, and a Coalition government scam to dissuade employees who have been mistreated at work from seeking compensation by unlawfully charging them £1,200 in fees to access the employment tribunal system
Niggle 4: As Home Secretary for the Coalition government Theresa May promised to reduce net migration to below 100,000. In reality they oversaw the biggest immigration surge in history peaking at 336,000 in 2015. Somehow, despite actually increasing net migration to its highest level ever, Theresa May remains popular with the bigot demographic because they adored her divisive anti-immigrant rhetoric and her "Go Home" vans so much that they allowed themselves to forget about her actual track record. 
Niggle 5: The Coalition government introduced the Justice and Security Act, which legislated Secret Courts into existence. This one flew under the radar because the mainstream press basically ignored it, but what they did was to undermine centuries of British legal tradition with new rules so that people can have their fates decided in courtrooms they're not allowed to enter, on charges they're not allowed to know, based on evidence that they're not allowed to see. 
Niggle 6: Thanks to their deliberate policy of repressing wages, the Coalition government oversaw the longest sustained collapse in the value of workers' wages since records began. I guess some people are so comfortably well off that they can consider the worst ever devaluation in UK workers' wages to be just a "niggle", but for people living on or near the breadline already after the bankers trashed the economy, it was catastrophic. 
Niggle 7: The Coalition government oversaw the lowest level of new house building since the early 1920s. Two things make this very much worse. House building is one of the proven ways of stimulating struggling economies, so cutting house building during an economic crisis is pure idiocy. The other of course is that a strategy of cutting house building whilst allowing the biggest immigration surge in history is guaranteed to stoke house price inflation, which is exactly what happened, with house prices soaring to their most unaffordable levels ever as a result. 
Niggle 8: The Coalition obsession with hard-right austerity dogma meant that they set about cutting all kinds of beneficial forms of public spending in their blind ideological quest to make short-term savings. Of course you can save some money by cutting wasteful spending, but ideologically driven cuts to stuff like flood defence spending is complete lunacy, because for every £1 invested today, flood defences save £8 in avoided damage and disruption further down the line. To make matters even worse David Cameron rewarded the woman who introduced the government policy of 'save £1 now at a cost of £8 later' with a DBE for political and public service
Niggle 9: The Lib-Dems binned most of their main principles in order to leap into bed with the Tories. Arguably the worst betrayal of all was the way they completely sold out the parliamentary reform movement by agreeing to a referendum on AV, rather than demanding a modern form of Proportional Representation as a condition of joining the government (with a referendum on the precise form the new voting system would take). Another betrayal was their failure to secure reform of the House of Lords. In fact the Lib-Dems watched on gormlessly as David Cameron stuffed the Lords with new unelected peers at a faster rate than any Prime Minister in history, swelling it to become the second largest legislative chamber on earth (after the Chinese parliament). The reason parliament is still such a mess today is that the Lib-Dems threw away their golden opportunity to enforce reforms in order to swan around in chauffeur driven ministerial cars for a few years.
Niggle 10: The Lib-Dems helped the Tories carve open the NHS for mass privatisation of services whan they backed the 2012 Health and Social Care Act.  The current chaos in the NHS is a direct consequence of the Coalition government's health policies.
Niggle 11: The Lib-Dems helped Michael Gove to vandalise the state education system by giving away thousands of publicly owned schools, for free, to unaccountable private sector pseudo-charities. Several of these private academy chains have gone bust leaving schools in crisis, or collapsed in orgies of fraud, others continue on gouging huge six figure executive salaries out of taxpayer funded education budgets to this day. 
Niggle 12: The Coalition government engaged in a massive fire sale of UK national infrastructure. Some of the worst deals included selling off the Royal Mail at way below its real market value (netting huge instant profits for a bunch of city spivs including one of George Osborne's best mates), selling off chunks of the nationalised banks at huge losses to the taxpayer, and flogging Britain's stake in Eurostar for an unbelievably tiny fraction of what it cost the country to build it
Niggle 13: Between 2010 and 2015 the global tide really began to change away from ideological puritanism and towards rational drugs policy. As Home Secretary Theresa May insisted on swimming in the opposite direction, criminalising the very mild stimulant Khat, pressurising the United Nations into not adopting rational drugs policy, and introducing a total farce of a law intended to ban possession of all non-approved substances, including drugs that haven't even been invented yet. May copied the legislation from Ireland, where handing the 'legal high' market to criminals resulted in the biggest surge in the usage of these drugs anywhere in Europe. Since Theresa May introduced the same legislation here, guess what? A huge upsurge in usage and the horrifying Spice epidemic! 
Niggle 14: Huge cuts to the police and emergency services mean that the per capita level of policing in the UK has fallen back to 1970s levels, huge numbers of crimes are going un-investigated, and the number of deaths in house fires has soared due to the closure of dozens of fire stations. But to self-declared centrist types dying in a house fire, or having the police fail to even investigate after your house was burgled are obviously just "niggles".
Niggle 15: Coalition government ministers continually used the "striver vs skiver" false dichotomy to defend their cuts to the social security system, but the bulk of the cuts actually affected the working poor. They slashed tax credits, and imposed real terms cuts on loads of other in-work benefits like housing benefit, child benefit, parental pay, statutory sick pay, and benefits paid to help disabled people to stay in work. 
Niggle 16: The Coalition oversaw an absolute boom in exploitative employment practices like Zero Hours Contracts, the gig economy, and employers forcing their employees to take on fake self-employed status in order to pay them below the minimum wage. It's no wonder that in-work poverty has soared so dramatically with the boom in exploitative employment practices combined with the Coalition government's systematic attacks in in-work benefits.
Niggle 17: The Coalition government oversaw an exponential growth in food poverty, with hundreds of thousands more people each year turning to food banks like the Trussell Trust in order to feed themselves and their kids. 
 Niggle 18: The Coalition government signed up to one of the worst rip-off deals in history by agreeing to bribe the French and Chinese into building us a new nuclear reactor at Hinkley Point C. Not only will this power station end up being the most expensive object on earth by the time it's completed, Coalition ministers agreed to pay double the market rate for the electricity it produces for 35 years.
Niggle 19: The Coalition government oversaw the worst UK productivity crisis since the early 19th Century, which is hardly surprising at all considering the boom in exploitative McJobs, and millions of workers subjected to increased workloads for decreased pay. 
Niggle 20: The Coalition government had a very illiberal attitude towards criticism and dissent considering one of the component parties was the so-called Liberal Democrats. One of the ugliest pieces of legislation they passed was "the Gagging Law" designed to prevent organisations like charities, community groups, trade unions, and think tanks from criticising government policies. 
Niggle 21: One of the most savage Coalition policies of all was their draconian benefits sanctions regime. 5 minutes late to sign on, suffer a heart attack during a meeting, miss an interview because you're in hospital to comfort your wife after your child was stillborn ... Fuck you! No money for months. Not only have people been sanctioned for the harshest of reasons, but it soon became clear that jobcentre staff were being actively pushed to comply with sanctions targets. Just think about it. If you're instructed to condemn 4 people per week to absolute destitution, is it easier to quickly trick a few people with mental health problems or learning difficulties into making a sanctionable mistake, or to spend hours and hours trying to catch out the minority of hardcore benefits scroungers who know the rules better than you know them yourself? Vulnerable people died because of this horrific punishment system.
Niggle 22: The Coalition government decided to hand a huge tax break to fracking companies by slashing their corporation tax rate in half. They did this because they knew fracking wasn't financially viable without such a vast tax break. Numerous senior Coalition ministers had clear financial interests in the fracking industry when this decision was taken. 
Niggle 23: The Coalition government promised that by 2015 their hard-right austerity programme would have completely eliminated the budget deficit. When it came to 2015 and it was obvious that they'd failed, they simply rebranded their failure as a success by endlessly repeating "we've cut the deficit by a third" as if missing their target by 66% is super-brilliant. Now we're in 2017 and the deficit still hasn't gone, and the Tories are predicting they won't be able to eliminate it until 2025. Over 15 years to do what you said you would do in under 5. Good work guys! 
Niggle 24: The Coalition government's obsession with hard-right austerity dogma dramatically prolonged the recovery from the 2007-08 bankers' crisis because "let's cut our way to growth" is an idiotic policy at the best of times, but it's economically suicidal when the private sector is hoarding assets rather than spending, and when the cost of government borrowing has been reduced to an all time historic low with central bank interest rates set at only marginally above 0%. 
I've stopped at 24 niggles because it's a nice round number, but there are so many more niggles I could have written about (the VAT hike, Bedroom tax, DRIPA, Internet snooping, the Libya disaster, Corporation tax cuts, soaring child poverty, railway chaos, legal aid cuts, flooding our schools with unqualified teachers, the social care crisis, tax-dodging, the prisons meltdown, ruination of the adult education system, armed services cuts and aircraft carriers with no aircraft, the massive trade deficit, selling arms to tyrannical regimes on their own blacklist of repressive states, mental health funding cuts ...)

The worst thing is that the combination of all of these factors (especially the erosion of wages and working conditions, the massive increase in in-work poverty, house price inflation, spectacularly missed immigration targets, public service deterioration, and the needlessly prolonged recovery period) created the surge in public anger that manifested in the "fuck this" Brexit vote.

So Liberal Democrats and the so-called centrists can try to delude themselves that the Coalition was a great success story with just a few niggles if they like, but it just goes to show what an out-of-touch bunch they are.

The reality is that hard-right Brexiteers like Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson and Michael Gove deliberately rebranded the niggles (or  "shocking failures" as normal people call them) of the 2010-15 Coalition government as failures of the EU, in order to con the British public into voting for Brexit.


Of course the 2010-15 government looks less bad now than it was at the time, because in comparison to this post-referendum chaos and incompetence, every single government in living memory looks a lot less bad than it actually was. But this kind of comparison is delusional, because it was the niggles/catastrophic failings of the 2010-15 coalition government that led directly to the situation we're in now.

It's utterly ridiculous to whitewash the failings of the 2010-15 government because they weren't quite as bad as the government is now, because the state of the current government is a direct consequence of the ruinous failings that these bloody awful centrists and Lib-Dem apologists are now trying to whitewash away as just niggles

Anyone with any sense can see that the pathetic state of the current government is the biggest Coalition failure of all, not a reason to create a revisionist story about how bloody great they were in hindsight.

 Another Angry Voice  is a "Pay As You Feel" website. You can have access to all of my work for free, or you can choose to make a small donation to help me keep writing. The choice is entirely yours.




OR

Sunday, 9 April 2017

Tory economics: Save £6,000 in benefit payments at a cost of only £65,000


Jan Davies suffers from multiple sclerosis but she has a job working for HMRC in East Kilbride which she commutes to four days a week. In March 2017 the DWP informed her that she was being stripped of her disability benefits after a snap reassessment of her benefits claim had found that she does not need her motability car in order to live independently.

After taking advice from her local MP Jan turned to the DWP's Access to Work scheme, which subsequently awarded her £65,133.71 over the course of three years in order to pay for taxis to and from work!

In order to save the £6,000 it would have cost to let Jan keep her motability car the Tory administered DWP are willing to shell out over ten times the amount on paying taxis to chauffeur her to and from work!

This is astounding stuff from the Tories. They love to dress themselves up as "the party of economic competence", but this case makes it look like their campaign of confiscating an average of 800 motability cars a week is motivated more by malice than any intention to actually save money.

The ridiculous decision to snatch Jan's motability car to save less than £6,000 and then stump up over £65,000 for taxis also makes a mockery of the Tories absurd "making work pay" rhetoric too. The only people this farce seems to be making work pay for are the taxi companies of Ayrshire.

This farcical situation is far from the only example of Tories creating ridiculous false economies. Back in 2010 the Tory environment minister Caroline Spelman decided to save money by slashing flood defence spending, despite the evidence showing that every £1 spent on flood defences saves £8 in future economic damage. Over the next few years various parts of the UK to be hit by huge floods, including places that had their flood defence renewal schemes cancelled by Spelman's bonkers austerity cuts. In August 2016 she was rewarded for this lunacy with a DBE!

It's also worth remembering that various other aspects of the Tories' welfare reforms cost way more than they save. The demeaning, dehumanising and discriminatory Work Capacity Assessment regime costs way more in corporate outsourcing fees than it can ever possibly save in reduced benefits payments, and the Tories' savage sanctions regime also costs way more to administer than it saves in reduced welfare payments.

Jan is just one amongst tens of thousands of disabled people who have had their motability cars confiscated by the Tories. Given their outrageous track record of wasting taxpayers money on malicious and misguided schemes it would take wilful ignorance to excuse this case as an isolated case of incompetence, and a great deal of gullibility to continue believing in the myth of Tory economic competence.


 Another Angry Voice  is a "Pay As You Feel" website. You can have access to all of my work for free, or you can choose to make a small donation to help me keep writing. The choice is entirely yours.




OR

Tuesday, 9 August 2016

A DBE for flood defence slasher Caroline Spelman!


When the Lib-Dems enabled the Tories back into power in 2010 Caroline Spelman was one of the 23 millionaires David Cameron appointed to his cabinet. He ignored the obvious conflict of interest of her ownership of a lobbying company for the food and biotech industries and put her in charge of the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

David Cameron and George Osborne made it clear to all of their cabinet members that they were expected to ruthlessly slash their departmental budgets in line with the economically illiterate "let's cut our way to growth" austerity dogma they were pushing.

Spelman was keen as mustard. Not only did she set about gleefully slashing DEFRA spending, i
n order to score brownie points with Cameron and Osborne she ensured that her department suffered the deepest cuts of any department outside of the treasury

In order to make herself look like the most loyal of all of Cameron and Osborne's slashers she decided to ignore the expert advice and inflict massive cuts to flood defence spending.

The expert advice said that cutting flood defence spending to make short-term savings is an incredibly self-defeating example of creating false economies. This is because for every £1 spent on building or maintaining flood defences, £8 is saved in avoided economic damage. Thus for every £1 in spending cuts Spelman inflicted on flood defence spending in order to impress Cameron and Osborne, the cost to the country would be £8 further down the line.

Unfortunately for Spelman "further down the line" happened to occur very quickly indeed with appalling flooding in Cumbria in the summer of 2012. particularly badly hit was the town of Kendal which, thanks to Spalman's flood defence cuts, had had their flood defence improvement scheme cancelled.

It's unlikely that the people in Kendal who had had their homes and businesses ruined by flooding thought that their misery was a worthwhile sacrifice to help Spelman win brownie points with Cameron and Osborne, but Spelman obviously did.

For a while it all worked out swimmingly for Spelman. She didn't see the floods in Kendal as a reason to resign and stubbornly held onto her job. The problem for Spelman was that Cameron and Osborne needed a scapegoat to deflect public attention away from the fact that the economically inept flood defence spending cuts had been driven by their economically inept ideological austerity agenda. In September 2012 Spelman was sacked as DEFRA minister, apparently for the crime of being too loyal to Cameron and Osborne's ludicrous "Let's cut our way to growth" agenda

Despite the appearance that Spelman had been sacked for following Cameron and Osborne's instructions too enthusiastically, she never spoke out or criticised them for throwing her under the bus to deflect attention away from their own culpability in the flood defence debacle. Even after more massive floods hit in Somerset in 2013-14 and the massive floods that hit Cumbria and southern Scotland in 2015-16 she kept her lipm firmly buttoned.

After his reckless Brexit gamble failed in 2016 David Cameron handed Spelman the reward that she had been waiting for: In return for loyally keeping her gob shut about the austerity-flood defence cuts debacle Spelman was handed a DBE in Cameron's resignation honours list.

Of course Spelman's gong was far from the most controversial of Cameron's handouts. Cameron showered peerages, knighthoods and assorted other gongs on his cronies like confetti. Millionaire Tory donors, loads of other Tory MPs, millionaire bankrollers and inept strategists for the failed Remain campaign, loads of Tory advisers, George Osborne, George Osborne's image consultant, even Samantha Cameron's personal stylist ... but Caroline Spelman's DBE really is indicative of the hopelessly out-of-touch bubble of wealth and privilege that Cameron exists in that he could actually have thought that it would be a good idea.

Just think about all of the misery suffered by the thousands of people who have had their homes, businesses and property ruined by flooding in the last five years that could have been prevented or mitigated had Spelman not inflicted such savage ideologically driven cuts on flood defence spending.

Just think about how these people must feel seeing Cameron handing out a gong to Spelman for "political and public service", and another gong 
for "political and public service" to George Osborne, who was the architect of the economically illiterate austerity agenda that drove Spelman to make such idiotically counter-productive cuts in the first place.


 Another Angry Voice  is a "Pay As You Feel" website. You can have access to all of my work for free, or you can choose to make a small donation to help me keep writing. The choice is entirely yours.




OR

Tuesday, 11 February 2014

The Somerset floods and the ideological austerity agenda


I've revisited the subject of austerity driven cuts to flood prevention schemes on several occasions before the Somerset levels flooded in the winter of 2013-14.

The main point I have raised each time is that cutting flood defence spending is about the most blatant false economy possible. For every £1 spent on flood prevention schemes, the economy saves £8 in avoided economic damage. It seems paradoxical, but if the Tory led government was actually interested in saving money, they would have increased the amount of money they spent on flood prevention rather than slashing it, as they did from 2011-12 onwards. Spending on flood prevention is one of the strongest fiscal multipliers going, yet in their ideological zeal to cut spending, the Tories simply assumed that it was "waste" and slashed away at it.

The Environment Agency estimated that the 2012 floods cost the UK economy somewhere in the region of £600 million, now the insurance industry estimates that they will have to pay out some £500 million for the Somerset floods. These costs will be passed onto the public via increased insurance premiums, damage to uninsured property and through lost trade in the flooded areas.

The fact that the Tories have now pledged to spend an additional £130 million on flood defences is just rubbing salt into the wounds of those who have been affected by the numerous floods since the Tory cuts to flood prevention spending took hold. That £130 million represents just part of the money the Tories cut from the flood prevention budget, and it's now being pledged as a purely political gesture.

Another indicator that the Tories are intent on playing politics over the floods is the steady flow of misleading claims that they have supposedly increased spending on flood defences. These claims rely on the tricks of not adjusting the figures for inflation, and including the 2010-11 flood prevention spending they inherited from the Labour government in their own figures. If the figures are adjusted for inflation, or the spending they inherited from Labour is excluded, there is no argument that they severely cut the flood prevention budget. That they insist on tinkering around with the figures in order to create the fiction that they didn't cut flood prevention spending, rather than actually focusing on the disaster at hand illustrates exactly where their priorities lie.

Aside from their statistical chicanery, the other unedifying element to the Tory reaction is their desperation to blame everyone apart from themselves, they've trotted out the ever predictable "Blame Labour" narratives, as well as blaming the Environment Agency (whose funding they cut), the EU and environmentalists.

One of the big ironies is that of the nine MPs that represent constituencies in the County of Somerset, all of them (5 Lib Dems and 4 Tories) are part of the Coalition government that slashed flood defence spending as part of their ideological austerity experiment. Given the tribalistic nature of politics in the UK it seems extraordinarily unlikely that the voters of Somerset will attempt to punish their MPs at the ballot box. It will be extremely surprising if even one of these nine constituencies returns an MP from Labour/Green/UKIP/other alternative/independent at the next election. The voters of Somerset will undoubtedly flock to the ballot boxes in order to vote for the people that ruthlessly cut flood prevention spending and then sat on their hands for weeks as the disaster unfolded.

The Somerset floods are one of the most visible demonstrations that the Tory Lib-Dem austerity experiment is a purely ideological thing. They knew that things like this would happen if they slashed flood defence spending, but they went ahead and slashed it anyway because they had to make savings on paper. New that the true costs of these "savings" are beginning to become apparent, they believe they can get away with it by blaming everyone else but themselves. The really sad thing is, that there are plenty of political tribalists that will believe their extraordinarily dodgy statistics and their "not our fault guv" narratives and wade through the floodwater to vote for them.



Another Angry Voice is a not-for-profit page which generates absolutely no revenue from advertising and accepts no money from corporate or political interests. The only source of revenue for Another Angry Voice is the  PayPal  donations box (which can be found in the right hand column, fairly near the top of the page). If you could afford to make a donation to help keep this site going, it would be massively appreciated.



Wednesday, 5 February 2014

Austerity and economic illiteracy


Since the Tories were enabled into power by the Liberal Democrats in 2010, the national debt of the United Kingdom has soared enormously. Despite their campaign of "austerity", the debt grew more in the first three and a half years of this Tory led government than it did in the entire 13 years of New Labour rule (despite the fact that in 2007-08 New Labour had to deal with the largest global financial crisis in generations ). As regular readers know, I'm no fan of New Labour, however the economic evidence speaks for itself - this Tory government is far worse for borrowing money than the New Labour one that preceded it.

Austerity

So, despite using their mantra of austerity to justify their campaign of social security cuts, infrastructure neglect and hasty privatisations, the Tories haven't saved any money at all. In fact they've borrowed and borrowed and borrowed. One of the most obvious indicators that austerity is a failure is the fact that in 2010 George Osborne and the Tories came to power promising that they would cut the deficit by 2015, an objective that they now admit is impossible. Instead they now talk of making austerity permanent.

It is easy to conclude that the reason austerity is failing is that the Tory party are a bunch of economic illiterates that have built their economic policies upon a foundation of defunct economic pseudo-babble called neoclassical economics. However this is a false conclusion based on a faulty premise. The faulty premise being that austerity is meant to reduce the indebtedness of the UK, rather than it being nothing more than a simplistic justification narrative for a programme of harsh cuts and hasty privatisations that the Tories have always wanted to conduct, long before the economic crisis ever came along. 
 
Austerity is a scam designed to do nothing more than transfer wealth from the poor and ordinary to the super rich. It has nothing to do with "saving money" and it never did.

It is the same old neoliberal pseudo-economic ideology that caused the global financial sector meltdown, crudely rebranded as the "only solution" to the economic crisis that was triggered by the global financial sector meltdown.

Essentially the Tories have found a way of selling gullible people the cause of the crisis as the solution to the crisis.

From an economic perspective there are two very big reasons that austerity is a false economy that could never have achieved what the Tories falsely claimed that it could. To the layman, terms like Fiscal Multiplication and the Marginal Propensity to Consume may sound like highly complicated gobbledygook, but they are not actually that difficult to understand. I'll do my best to provide simple and concise explanations of what they mean and why they show that austerity is an ideological agenda which has nothing to do with "saving money".

Fiscal Multiplication
[Main article]


A fiscal multiplier value tells us how much money is returned to the economy as a proportion of the cost. A project with very poor returns on investment (such as a tax cut for the rich or a stupid government vanity project) might have a fiscal multiplier of 0.29 (29 pence returned for every £1 of investment) whilst any project with a fiscal multiplication value of above 1.00 would actually create more economic returns than it cost.

It is absolutely clear that any government with the slightest intention of "saving money" would carefully consider the fiscal multiplication values of the infrastructure and services that they are planning to cut. If this is not done, then they'd undoubtedly end up cutting a load of stuff that actually returns more to the economy than it costs.

The Tories (and the neoclassical economic wonks at the OBR) didn't bother to do this kind of careful analysis, instead they simply assumed a fiscal multiplier of 0.5 for all government spending. They worked on the assumption that all government spending is essentially 50% waste.

The problem of course is that not all government spending is 50% waste. The construction of flood defences has a fiscal multiplier of 8.00, health service spending has a multiplier of 4.30, and investment in housing and infrastructure often creates fiscal multipliers of well above 2.00. All of these things have been ruthlessly slashed by the Tories.

It may seem paradoxical, but if the Tories were actually intent on "saving money", they would have increased spending on things like health service provision, flood prevention schemes, infrastructure projects and social housing, because if managed efficiently they are all capable of producing very strong returns on investment.

Marginal Propensity to Consume
[Main article]


The Marginal Propensity to Consume is just a economists way of saying that poor and ordinary people tend to spend a much higher proportion of their wealth than the very wealthy.

If a government were intent on getting more money circulating around the economy, they would ensure that the poor and ordinary have a bit more money and prevent so much going to the super-wealthy minority who tend to try to hoard their wealth by investing it in housing or stock market Ponzi schemes, or extract it from the economy entirely through elaborate tax-dodging scams.

If the government wanted to stimulate economic activity they would redistribute money from the extremely wealthy to the poor and ordinary, however the Tories are quite clearly doing precisely the opposite.

The poor and ordinary have borne the brunt of austerity (wage repression, service cuts, social security cuts, "Bedroom Tax" disability cuts...), whilst the super wealthy minority have continued getting richer than ever thanks to extremely favourable Tory policies (the 50p tax cut, corporation tax cuts, new tax loopholes, ludicrously extravagant outsourcing contracts and the vast ongoing firesale of state infrastructure).

Conclusion

 
The Tory party have absolutely no interest in "saving money". They are just doing precisely what they have always done - which is to serve the interests of the wealthy establishment minority at the expesnse of the rest of society. They have dressed up their same old Thatcherite policies (hasty privatisations, deregulated financial markets, defunding of government services, wage repression for the majority, tax cuts for corporations and the super rich, attacks on labour rights and the right to protest, consolidation of executive power ...) as the medicine to cure an economic crisis that was caused by these exact same policies.

If Tory austerity was designed to "save money" then it has abjectly failed, and only an economically illiterate fool could conclude that an austerity programme that has added more to the national debt in 3.5 years than New Labour added in 13 is some kind of justification for even more austerity.

The problem is that there are an awful lot of economic illiterate fools that can't see Tory "austerity" for the obvious con that it actually is and even cry out for even more of the same, because it hasn't saved enough money yet.

The problem isn't that the Tories are economically illiterate, it is that the majority of their supporters are. If you earn well over £150,000 per year it might serve your selfish self-interest to support the Tories, but if you're an ordinary person with an ordinary income, you're a gullible and economically illiterate fool if you support the Tories and cheerlead for even more socially and economically destructive austerity.


 Another Angry Voice  is a "Pay As You Feel" website. You can have access to all of my work for free, or you can choose to make a small donation to help me keep writing. The choice is entirely yours.


Sunday, 2 February 2014

Floods, humanitarian aid & the far-right fringe


One of the essential aspects of publicising my work on this blog is the production of Infographics (or "memes" if you like). If it weren't for my infographics, the AAV Facebook page and Twitter accounts would never have become so popular, and you almost certainly wouldn't even be reading this.

Occasionally I come across a political infographic that really makes my skin crawl. You know exactly the kind of thing I mean, containing revolting extreme-right lies (like utterly ludicrous claims that illegal immigrants get benefits from the state for example), which have been shared by thousands of gullible and cognitively illiterate fools who don't seem to care that they are mindlessly spreading transparently fascist propaganda that would have their forefathers (that fought, suffered and died in order to defeat Naziism) turning in their graves.

One particularly offensive source of extremely-right wing memes is the English Democrats Facebook page. For those of you who are not familiar with this tiny extreme-right faction, they are yet another attempt to rebrand an overtly fascist agenda as some kind of acceptable "democratic" party for middle England. Now that "Tommy Robinson" of the EDL has been locked up for mortgage fraud and BNP front man Nick Griffin has been declared financially bankrupt (he was already morally bankrupt), the English Democrats are the "last man standing" on the extreme right-fringe.

One such infographic was posted on my Facebook wall and seems to have been motivated by the English Democrats, who are determined to use the fact that the UK has sent £600 million in humanitarian aid to the victims of the conflict in Syria, in order to publicise their own disgusting agenda.

They have been trying to contrast the absolutely hopeless government response to the January 2014 floods with the money spent on humanitarian aid to the victims of the Syrian conflict. This contrast is hopelessly wrong-headed. I'll outline a few of the main flaws in their argument.

The first and most obvious point is that £600 million (or £0.0006 trillion) is actually a tiny amount in the grand scheme of things. The bailouts to save the banks from the consequences of their own reckless gambling cost a Conservatively estimated £1.5 trillion (which is 2,500x the amount going to help the innocent victims of the conflict in Syria). Then the reckless speculator class has had the benefit of £375 billion in Quantitative Easing too (another 625x). Perhaps you're happy that the bankers and speculators that are guilty of wrecking the UK economy got over £3,000 for every quid that's gone to helping Syrian war victims, but I'm not.

Perhaps the extreme-right are happy to overlook the unprecedented cost of the bankster bailouts because the beneficiaries were mainly British? Who knows? Whatever the reason they overlook these vast payments to the guilty in order to shout about 0.03% of the amount going to help the victims of a terrible conflict elsewhere, they're clearly shouting their mouths off about the wrong issue.

The next obvious thing to point out is that the scale of flooding in the UK has been severely exacerbated by the austerity measures imposed by the Tory government, using the bankers' financial crisis as an excuse for it. Not only have the Tories ceaselessly spread the lie that welfre spending caused the crisis when they know damn well that it was the bankers that crashed the economy, they are also responsible for an economically illiterate drive to slash spending on flood defence schemes too.

The Tories lied about the causes of the crisis to obscure the culpability of the banksters (that fund the Tory party) in order to justify slashing spending on flood defence schemes. If this isn't enough to piss you off, then perhaps you might be angered by the story of SSE Engineers being diverted away from the effort to help victims of the floods and storms in order to turn David Cameron's electricity back on because he didn't know how to reset the trip switch in his fuse box!


It is absolutely clear that anger about the floods should be aimed at the reckless speculator class that wrecked the UK economy (and then received vast bailouts in compensation for the crisis they caused) and at the Tories, for having slashed spending on flood defence schemes despite the fact that every £1 spent on flood defences is worth £8 in avoided economic damage in the future.

The fact that the right-wing extremists would contrast the suffering of British people due to the recent floods with the much greater amount of suffering in Syria in order to assert that the British are somehow more deserving of support, just shows how little they actually care about human suffering.

If they can't tolerate the giving of a bit of charity to the victims of an unimaginably bad humanitarian disaster, that is a clear illustration of their own appalling lack of humanity, nothing else. Pretending that they give a damn about the victims of the floods just makes it worse. They don't really give a damn, if it was happening anywhere else in the world they would be squealing for the government not to help in the slightest, but because it's happening here they pretend to care. It is also easy to imagine how they would behave if they were in charge, they'd be demanding ethnicity and political loyalty tests be carried out before anyone is helped, and they'd simply leave non-whites and left-wing people to drown.

As appalling as their lack of human decency is, there are some rays of hope. For every follower the English Democrats have got on Facebook, I've got 3, and for every one interaction with their content (like, share, comment) I get 28 on mine.

They are a well funded political party that have a team of people to post a constant stream of cognitive dissonance inducing bile on their Facebook page (and their network of fake grassroots pages too). I'm just one bloke, working at it part-time (who perhaps averages four posts per day), yet my stuff is vastly more popular than theirs.

This somewhat restores my faith in the Great British public. We may have been lied to and misled by politicians and the corporate media in order to stop us rising up against the crony capitalist ideology of neoliberalism that has been the orthodoxy ever since Thatcher introduced it in 1979, but we can still easily see through the hateful lies of the far-right fringe, and there is clearly still a massive appetite for social justice amongst the British public.



Another Angry Voice is a not-for-profit page which generates absolutely no revenue from advertising and accepts no money from corporate or political interests. The only source of revenue for Another Angry Voice is the  PayPal  donations box (which can be found in the right hand column, fairly near the top of the page). If you could afford to make a donation to help keep this site going, it would be massively appreciated.