As barnsdale.wordpress.com have said in a previous post government exists largely to ensure the privatisation of profits and the socialisation of losses. In effect their first – and, if the track records of governments are anything to go by, their only… – priority is to help control currency for the benefit of the rich. Or as it was put in this bloody brilliant interview with Alan Moore…
There was a very interesting piece, a 10 minute television broadcast, made over here by a gentleman from the London school of economics, a lecturer who looked like the least threatening man that you can imagine. He didn’t look like an apocalyptic political firebrand by any means; he looked like and was an accountant and an economist. And yet the actual picture he was painting was quite compelling. He was saying that the only reason that governments are governments is that they control the currency; they don’t actually do anything for us that we don’t pay for, other than expose us to the threat of foreign wars by their reckless actions. They don’t actually really even govern us; all they do is control the currency and rake off the proceeds.
This simple fact – that government exists to ensure that wealth continues to flow to those that government serves – explains why the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) found the ‘Firm but Fair’ Budget to be so damaging to the poor. As Sean O’Grady reports in today’s Independent…
Analysis of the Budget by the IFS reveals that the poorest tenth of society will lose about 2.5 per cent of their income, despite the removal of 880,000 low-paid workers from income tax when the threshold was raised by £1,000 to £7,475. Most of that loss was engineered by George Osborne, as they would have lost hardly anything under Alistair Darling’s plans.
Mr Osborne has added to the burden on the rich, but only by about 1 per cent of their average income … [t]hus the Chancellor has placed about two-and-a-half times the burden on the poorest as he has on the richest – a loss of 2.5 per cent against one of 1 per cent.
The rise in VAT to 20 per cent will be a regressive move … Cuts in benefits through altering the way they are uprated will also hit those dependent on them hard, and the freeze in child benefit and cap on housing benefit will also add to the difficulties facing families on tight budgets. A rise in unemployment will also damage the Government’s “progressive” credentials.
In monetary terms alone it may look as if the rich are paying more, but in real terms a 2.5% drop for those of us on the bottom of the economic ladder is devastating. With the proposed cut in housing benefit for those unemployed for more than a year some people face the very real threat of a food budget of £2 – £3 a day. Whereas a 1% drop for the richest – who earn 100s of times more than the lowest paid – is the difference between choosing which canapés to have at dinner!
Now we add this note, will we see what is happening over in Spain?
The Spanish are set for a general strike on September 29th. This will be the fifth general strike against the Socialist government and planned austerity measures. The fact that the four before have had little impact has led the CNT to call for a shift from mainstream trade unionist tactics. The anarcho-syndicalist union, best known from the revolution and civil war of the 1930s, has released the following statement;