Brown's article in The Observer - 22 March 2009 - outlined plans to train 60,000 people - "from security guards to store managers" - to watch for al-Qaida suspects as they go about their plans to repeat the 7/7 atrocities.

Since it was not thought necessary to implement such a vast panoply of security measures when the IRA were bombing mainland Britain in the 1970s, and given the propensity of New Labours' public, er, 'servants' to use such measures on people who are not members of al-Qaida and are clearly not planning to bomb their local communities - RIPA - it's advisable to poke around for the other agendas that are riding pillion with the security plans.

Superficially there are two aims here: to combat 'terror' [9], and to integrate Moslems into the indigenous 'community'.   [1]

In the latter case the agenda is not new. Several previous reports signal the government's desire to persuade 'moderate' Moslems that integration into British society will obviate the need to bomb the indigenous population.   [1]   [4]   [6]

A BBC World Service documentary - 22/23 March (?) - suggested that the Moslem community might be split between an older generation of non-fanatics, and a radicalised younger generation eager to extract revenge for events in the Middle East.

Since the British Government has both nailed its colours to the 'war on terror' in Iraq and Afghanistan-Pakistan, and the BBC has shown itself unwilling to offend Israeli hardliners in respect of the Gaza charity appeal, radicalised Moslems have been handed a double propaganda coup, which no amount of flim-flam from the likes of Hazel Blears will counteract.    [HB]

There is, however, a larger background which casts doubt on the overt aims of New Labour's 'cohesion' agenda.

First, it assumes there is some ready-made social order which Moslems might wish to join.

There is not: the other 'society' which Moslems might wish to join is now absorbed into the wider world of market norms which admits of, to quote a famous phrase, 'no such thing as society' - in the sense of a shared community with obligations beyond market norms, norms designed for the very purpose of sacrificing social norms on the altar of profit.   

The "British jobs for British workers" dispute highlighted the reality. Namely that the Lisbon Treaty's 'precarious and commodified citizenship' [SBH] recognises only market norms, to which Brown's "British workers" are expected to conform.

Hazel Blears offers no voice for them.

For them there is 'Police State Britain', and the use of New Labour's vast security agenda by an expanding host of busy-bodies and corporate lackeys - [TMS] - to pursue a wide range of miscreants, such as the parents thought to be misusing the schools' admission procedure.  [GDN].

The 'war on terror' helpfully provides the smoke-screen necessary to camouflage the reality: that both main parties have bought into 'market norms' to the degredation of social norms, which are now of miniscule importance.

Yasmin Alibhai-Browns sums it up better than I can:

In 'The Spirit Level', two sober academics – Richard Wilkinson and his partner Kate Pickett, both medical epidemiologists – have published strong evidence to prove that in unequal societies everyone suffers – even those who think they have it made for generations to come.

They looked at 20 of the richest nations and compared various social and health problems, measuring those against an index of equality.

The US, Portugal (feudal in the near past) and the UK are the most unequal nations, with the top 20 per cent earning nine times more than the bottom 20 per cent.

Japan, Finland, Norway and Sweden are where the money gap is smallest.

Teenage pregnancies, mental illness, life expectancy, obesity, illiteracy, homicide, crime are all worse in the states of greater inequality and not only for the poorest but for all citizens and residents.

Spain is more equal than its neighbour, Portugal and you can see how vastly different are the social ills in the two countries.

There is even evidence that in unequal societies, the people have higher levels of stress hormones. [YAB]

Moslems now act as a lightning rod to deflect the anger and depression - the powerlessness - which touches anyone who recalls, or imagines, a different Britain in which social norms transcend the greed of markets.   [FaG]

This is the ultimate - hidden - racism behind New Labour's multicultural mask.

Labour's 'war on terror' is yet another adoption of Steven Lukes' 'third face of power' - the use of one agenda to pursue a hidden one with a totally differing aim. [TFP]

That a degree of Protectionism might restore the balance between social norms - social cohesion - and market norms is the no-go area in the economic debates of the day, but a raft of recent papers have called into question the economic theories on which the global markets are constructed:

"It is positive that protectionism continues to be off the agenda ..."   (Writes Nitashas Kaul)

Why?

Protectionism was not 'off the agenda' in Abraham Lincoln's America, nor was it 'off the agenda' in Wilhelmine Germany.

Nor should it be off the agenda for present day Somalia, plagued by overfishing.   

The neoliberal 'free' markets are attempting to create the conditions under which Adam Smith's 'invisble hand' theory can come to perfection.

There are several severe flaws with this theory:

1. We do not - and by the nature of current corporate-capitalism, cannot - have markets in which there are so many small players - and only small players - that Joseph Stiglitz's 'asymmetries' cannot interfere.    [JS]

2. The tenets of the Washington Consensus subordinate societal needs - and the (social embedding of the) economy - to the creation of the invisible hand.

As Paul Treanor puts it,

"Neoliberalism is a philosophy in which the existence and operation of a market are valued in themselves ... and where the operation of a market or market-like structure is seen as an ethic in itself, capable of acting as a guide for all human action, and substituting for all previously existing ethical beliefs."    [PT]

3. Markets demonstrate an inherent short-termist, myopic, focus on profit.

This should not surprise us. If economic decisions are taken via the Pareto efficiency paradigm, consideration of societal and ecological dimensions are not factored in.

The position in the UK, which has probably embraced globalisation more fully than any other country - including the USA - has created a situation in which global finance has an unhealthy dominance of the economy, leaving a narrowed range of employment in which industrial activity is a shell of its former self.

One of the side-effects of this distortion, is that before the current recession there were more people on incapacity benefit with mental health issues, than there were people unemployed.    [LSE]

In pursuit of the Washington Consensus, successive British governments have reduced spending on mental health, thus, whilst creating the conditions under which mental health deteriorates, the services needed to address the problems have been weakened.  [OJ]

One of the more serious consequences is the criminalisation of sufferers of more severe forms of mental illness. In this case there are two sets of victims of Pareto efficiencies and the Washington Consensus.    [VCD]

It is hard to envision this kind of dystopia being ameliorated by the introduction of the Tobin Tax, since this proposal implies a global dimension to government which is even further removed from real communities, and would probably end up replicating the lack of democracy inherent in the European Union.

I draw attention to the fact that the EU hovers between it's possibility as a supranational institution - which turns its component states into members of a federation - or it's present as a collection of sovereign states bound by a treaty which started life as a constitution.

openDemocracy  20 April 2009

Protectionism: is it so bad?

A Moral Climate

Governmentality

The mechanistic approach to economics has failed

Why money messes with your mind

Why we need a proper study of mankind

The good society rejects neoliberalism, and refuses any compromises with it.

The good society acknowledges that we are all - to borrow John Donne's words - "a part of the main".

That is to say we are interdependent.

This ought to be obvious, but thirty years of rampant - unrestrained - individualism have seen a generation grow up to accept the 'ethical' world-view of Josef Fritzl:

"I'll do what I like, and if someone else gets hurt, that's tough!"    [BoS]

The victims of this individualistic dystopia include: deprived children, the unemployed, the chronic sick, the mentally ill, and the frail elderly dumped in squalid 'care' homes which are run for corporate profit.

For those in work, there is systemic insecurity, low wages, and the knowledge that full-throttle consumerism - which is held up to us as the only goal in life - can only be reached via the plastic, the possibility of a big win on the lottery, or getting into the final of a show like the X Factor.

Neoliberalism is big on dreams, big on the smashing of dreams.

To end the neoliberal dystopia it is first necessary to recognize that protectionism will play a part in rebalancing the economy in the pursuit of jobs for all.   [IAED]   [Prot]

For those without jobs the good society would offer the 'citizen's income', along with - unless disability dictates otherwise - an expectation that its recipients will be active in their local community.  [AtW]

Government will be genuinely democratic, and predominently local.

Education, health, care of the elderly, nursery services, recycling, social services, etc, would be managed by elected boards, and subject to recall.

Town and ward meetings would drive policy.

Taking part in decision making is understood to be a duty; being elected to implement such decisions is also regarded as a duty, and is not seen as an opportunity to enrich one's self.

Central government's job would be to equalize local funding.

Real education will be crucial to the success of the good society:

1. The good society is the literate society, in which the mastery of basic skills - and IT - is offered to all;

2. Members of the good society understand those aspects of geography and history which will allow us to "place" ourselves in the wider context of where we are and where we came from, and to broaden this understanding to include all of humanity;

3. Members of the good society understand the fallibility of beliefs and opinions;

4. Members of the good society have an inquiring mind, a scientific attitude - imparted by experiment and discussion - and understand the importance of withholding judgment until all the facts are available;

5. Members of the good society show empathy with, and a concern for others, imparted by history, geography, drama and role play, and role models from people - from all times and cultures - who have demonstrated in their lives a spectacular care and concern for others;

6. Members of the good society understand that lack of altruism, such as the treatment of the poor during and after Hurricane Katerina, the treatment of asylum seekers in Britain, the (lack of) treatment of the mentally ill, and the degredation of old people, exemplify perverted individualism, and that the marginalisation and scapegoating of individuals or groups of citizens places all of us in danger of being treated in the same way;

7. Members of the good society understand the causes of conflict and war, and the importance of conflict resolution;

8. Members of the good society understand the nature of 'Gaia', display a caring attitude to other creatures, and understand that the economy must function within, and show respect to, the planet's ecological limits.

Greed: An Online Essay

'Rampant' society upsets natural order

The Indian way of thinking

By Dr Adrian Wrigley, Neale Upstone and Robin Smith (10th Sept 2008) – SystemicfiscalReform.Org

Systemic Fiscal Reform is a radical programme for the reform of taxation, subsidies and welfare. It is designed to stabilize economies, improve quality of life, and facilitates the transition to full environmental sustainability.

The reforms mainly comprise the abolition of cumbersome and wasteful tax, welfare and subsidy systems, together with abolishing the bureaucracies which implement them.

In their place, a simple integrated tax and welfare system is introduced. This includes retaining a number of existing taxes which have been found to operate effectively where they have been tried.

The wasteful burden of personal and corporate tax returns is generally eliminated.

Key Reforms

No Income or Corporation Taxes – Replaced by a Land Value Tax

Income Tax and Corporation Tax are to be abolished (along with all payroll taxes, National Insurance payments and Gains taxes).

In their place a Land Value Tax is levied on landowners, equal to the value of their land, but excluding any buildings, crops or other improvements.

The land values are calculated using a standard procedure applied by local assessors. Landowners generally pay the annual fee in regular monthly instalments to their local government.

No Value Added or Sales Taxes – Replaced by a Carbon Tax

VAT and sales taxes are to be abolished. In their place, a uniform Carbon Tax is levied on all extraction and importation of fossil fuels.

This Carbon Tax is in proportion to the pollution and climate change potential of the fuel when used in the normal way.

No Estate (Inheritance), Gift, Transfer or Stamp Taxes

Estate taxes such as Inheritance Tax and Accession Taxes are to be abolished. All Stamp Duties are to be abolished, including those on share and real-estate transfers.

No means-tested welfare benefits – Replaced by a Citizens’ Income

Welfare benefits based on poverty and joblessness tests are to be abolished. Any welfare payments based on disability are retained.

Universal Welfare-a Citizens’ Income

All resident citizens and lawful residents are entitled to claim a universal welfare payment called the Citizens’ Income. Such payment is made monthly by the local government, and may be directly used by home owners and their families to offset or cancel out their Land Value Tax obligations.

Citizens’ Incomes for those in prison and state-funded care are retained by the state to help pay the costs incurred. Those in state-funded education will have an amount deducted from their Citizens’ Incomes to help pay for the education costs.

Subsidies abolished

Many tax-based subsidies cease to exist with the abolition of Sales, Value, Income and Corporation taxes. For example, tax exemptions on aviation, fuel, public transport, education and food simply disappear.

Business subsidies such as investment relief, tax rebates, pension relief also disappear.

Explicit subsidies including those on energy and carbon emissions trading schemes should be abolished.

Banking subsidies are withdrawn by removing banks’ rights to create new money in the economy (seignorage) in exchange for increases in debt.

Effects of Systemic Fiscal Reform

General economic effects

Widespread effects are certain, because Systemic Fiscal Reform addresses core economic issues, such as the costs and benefits of business activity, land ownership and employment.

* Enterprise is promoted by removing the tax and administrative barriers to employment and business activity. We get free trade within nations.

* Bureaucratic activity such as tax accounting, planning and advice are eliminated. Workers in these sectors move to other work, entrepreneurship, early retirement or reduced hours.

* The ‘black’ and criminal economies no longer gain an unfair tax advantage.

* High value-add products such as software, music recordings or consultancy fall in cost as their tax burden falls.

* Fuel efficiency is promoted by raising the costs of fuel and goods particularly in energy-intensive industries.

* Labour intensive goods such as restaurant and other services, recycling, and education become less expensive.

* Economic output grows rapidly where real value is delivered. Waste is reduced.

Effects on housing, homes and land

The Land Value Tax has far reaching and revolutionary effects: property speculation ends; new and second hand houses become a comparable market to second hand cars reflecting their size, efficiency, condition and quality; urban land values fall, encouraging regeneration of poor and derelict land and housing; property price inflation becomes similar to that of other goods; housing becomes and remains affordable, contributing to a drastic shift in social mobility.

Effect on poverty

The universal welfare payment will virtually eliminate poverty. All in society benefit from the “social dividend” created by a thriving society and effective government.

The poverty trap will be a thing of the past, with financial barriers to employment removed. Elderly home owners with insufficient income to pay their Land Value Tax will be able to “roll up” payments secured on their house value, while others will choose to move house.

Universal Welfare is as significant a step forward for society as universal healthcare or universal education has been in most developed nations.

Effect on oil prices

By imposing a rising Carbon Tax on imports and production of oil, coal and natural gas, demand will be progressively reduced, improving the balance of payments (trade deficit) considerably.

Suppliers will be forced to accept lower prices or reduce output (or both).

If this policy is implemented by the major energy consuming nations, a substantial fall in international fuel prices will occur.

A Carbon Tax is particularly attractive to nations such as the US or the UK with rising dependence on fuel imports.

Effect on politics

At present, government spending on local amenities brings direct windfall benefits to owners of nearby homes and land.

The spending is mainly taken from workers’ taxes. This misalignment of taxpayer and beneficiary is at the heart of many political conflicts and failures.

Systemic Fiscal Reform ensures the beneficiary of local spending (i.e. landowner) is the taxpayer, eliminating this fundamental conflict.

Any excess benefit over spending is returned through the Citizen’s Income.

Conclusion

Systemic Fiscal Reform answers the challenges of today and of the future. It resets the creeping state control and interest in every aspect of household and business life while ensuring an efficient, equitable, stable and free society.

Claverton-Energy.com  11 November 2008

1. Re-introduce tariffs in order to rebalance the economy and pursue the goal of full employment;



2. Significantly increase the basic tax allowance - eg £12k - to make it worth while going to work;



3. Amalgamate tax and national insurance, so that the wealthy retired make a greater contribution;



4. De-centralise the management of public services to the locality, substituting democratic controls for the current centralist targets;



5. Replace the current culture of 'specification and inspection' with democratic accountability.



6. Replace current taxes with the Systemic Fiscal Reform programme;



7. Nationalise 'High Street' - commercial - banking;



8. Replace the current welfare system with a citizen's income.

The policy and process of government should be measured against the ideas of Amartya Sen, Ivan Illich, and Charles Leadbeater, in order to remove what John Seddon calls the "compliance with specifications" regime, and replacing them with purpose: exchanging the external drive of the 'Soviet tractor factory' with the inner drives of self-worth and service, and the external sanction of democratic accountability.