Thursday, 1 March 2012

Attack the poor but never criticise the rich

Apparently 500 greedy parasites (sorry, leading business people) have written to the Torygraph this morning to remind Gideon that the future wealth and prosperity of the United Kingdom rests solely upon reducing the marginal rate of taxation on their earnings over £150,000 per annum by 10%.  Forget providing decent training, public infrastructure or a macroeconomic policy that's not dead set on self-immolation - all it will take to release the wellspring of economic rebirth is a further handout to the rapacious, boorish and feckless.

In this world of fantasy neo-con spluttering, everything that an ethical, ordered structure should be based around is inverted - it's rather akin to a reader with a taste for great literature walking into a poorly-written fantasy novel.  The myth of trickledown was exploded back in the 1980s, but we are forced to watch a wallowing nostalgia-fest completely detached from anything that might be described as reality.  There are too many myths to be debunked, but a few easy pot-shots always liven up the day.

Firstly, the stoater that the rich "create wealth".  Entrepreneurs and workers "create wealth", the rich merely accumulate it and try to hold onto it - it's very difficult to justify how much recent gains are earned when profitability is down and the divergence in pay increases between the boardroom and the poor bloody infantry widens.  From the fat-cat bonanza over the last decade you would have thought that the entire corporate sector has been massively successful, run by people with the wisdom of Solomon and whose philanthropic approach has resulted in unparallelled prosperity and happiness for the whole world.

Secondly, any half-awake "leader" is practised in the arts of tax avoidance and in some cases evasion.  The vast majority of the population have no such opportunity to exploit loopholes - and the parasites wouldn't want them to.  Yet whenever there is a proposal to close gaps in the taxation fence, for example through enforcing stamp duty on mansion sales, then this will, according to the client politicians of which Boris is merely another sordid example, result in a flight of high-quality entrepreneurs.  On the basis of their past record, most of these people would not be a net loss in terms of social or intellectual contribution to society, and as was demonstrated, very ably, by John Lanchester in the "Guardian" on Saturday, there are very few tax regimes as craven and exploitable as the United Kingdom's.

Simultaneously, politicians of all hues have lined up to condemn Len McClusky, the pugilistic General Secretary of Unite, for his observation that his members, and other dispossessed and unwelcome citizens of Cameron's Britain, might consider targeting the Olympic period for industrial action and wider protest.  To hear Hamster Face maundering on about "patriotism", then being backed up by Miliband, is to realise quite what a debased world we now live in.  The Olympics, like the Jubilee, are contemptuous trinkets that distract from the cancerous parasitic worms whose unelected status and economic wealth provide a platform from which to suck further lifeblood from society and the economy, so they are a legitimate target for anger and complaint, whether or not you agree with the individual grievance.

When the rich whine about being asked to contribute proportionately to the common good, there are sycophants who support their selfish ululations.  When they make extravagant and mendacious claims about their importance and the impact of their displeasure the media line up to report it as though just by having wealth (ill-gotten or otherwise) their opinion is worth millions of other people's views.

Naturally, any trade unionist threatening strikes or fighting for their rights and conditions is a socialist wrecker wishing to upend society.  So, by this narrative, the cheer-leaders for the idle and shallow rich come up with more proposals to constrain people's right to combine and protest.  The latest one is a proposal that 51% of all affected staff must vote in favour of action before it can commence.  Sounds attractive - as it could save the public from disruption.  A modest proposal would apply the same principle to elected representatives, as their impact on public life is equally damaging, so nobody can be elected to public office without 51% of all their eligible electorate supporting them.  This would soon undermine the legitimacy of most MPs and councillors, but when you are subservient to oligarchs and media barons would that be a bad thing?

The UK has propitiated the drone class for too long.  Time to demonstrate that Hamster Face's "we're all in this together" means that "fit in or f*** off" applies to them as well, and that if they don't pull their weight and sacrifice some of their theft that they will be toppled and humiliated.  A revolution may be the only thing necessary.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.