David Cameron wants more from those with the least.

I dont think he title needs an explanation, the Tory government of 2012 is acting like the tories of any year in post war Britain. Despite a recession which has been caused by bad management at the very top of various organisations, the Tories have targetted the poor as a means to make back the money they have lost.

That sounds like some partisan crap I know, but it is true. Despite David Cameron wanting to sound serious about “crony capitalism” he has brought nothing to the vote in the House of commons which relates to tax evasion, neer mind proposing the rich pay more in tax to help fix the apparant mess were in.

David Camerons Tories are supposed to be new wave, the middle ground, and yet all their curents efforts fit perfectly into the typical image of the working-class hating conservative.

It’s humiliating. Despite their poor-bashing efforts they have been overwhemingly defeated by the Lords. The House of Lords is overwhelmingly conservative and in favor of the establishment and the cereal-packet conservatives have been blocked at almost every move. If the Lords are opposed to current Tory efforts then the mild socialist such as myself clearly has merit in questioning David Camerons judgement.

Currently the nation is debating the 26K benefit cap. A proposal which in theory any wanna-be socialist should even agree with. But you’d have to be a moron to think that more than 3% of benefit claimaints got as much as that, nevermind more. its beautiful Tory propaganda. In fact it is London propaganda. That figure of 26K is only relevant to London and a few other places in the south. It oddly comes back to a complaint by Boris Johnson…Such a cap will equal an ethnic cleansing of London. The words of a Tory, NOT MINE!

I must be desperate if im quoting Boris, but he is right and even Ken hasn’t got the balls to say that. Oddly no one except bumbling Boris has had the balls to say it, and he makes few friends by saying it. Frankly London can jkeep its problems for its self. Just because the government has allowed house prices to get out of control  doesnt mean they can offload their problems to other counties by making living in London untennable to thousands of families.

What no one dares talk about is the worst of all benefits….Housing benefit. It is a cost to the taxpayer we can souly blame on a conservatiuve mentality. Why should council houses brought and paid for, for 1 to 4 thousand pounds decades ago cost 90,000+ in 2011?

The sad truth is that the backbone of the UK economy building up since about 1984 has been the cost of homes. Council housing used to be a benchmark, not unlike the philathopic effots agsinst slum-lords in the Victorian era. Without solid council-housing house price HAVE gone out of control.

The Housing sector of our economy is morally void, not corrupt or unfair, simply void. Morals have no place in setting rent or house prices and yet it is the one sector of the economy where most people will agee that on a basic level it all should be done at cost. A home atfter all is an essential. To spend most of your life paying for one basically makes you an emancipate Serf in Imperialist Russia, also known as giving you basic rights at a cost so unfair you’ll be lucky to pay it off.

The property ladder is so vicious and selfish it alone gives capitalism a bad name. It serves as a prime example of why capitalism perhaps in some areas of the economy should be curtailed. I would require massive sexual favors beyond my wildest fantasies to ever argue that homes for profit is in anyway justifiable. Thats not just me, those who have allowed it to happen have been brought and paid for. That is to say our whole polticial system bows down and dares not fight this huge unfairness.

I ma seem like I have gone off topic but I haven’t. We are all looking for that 1 problem that binds us all, the one action action government can take to help the vast majorty, and it is house prices. We need to firstly drastically and pernamently drop the prices of houses and secondly protect everyone from negative equity. We all need more money, and if you one of the 3% getting 26K in benefits or one of thew 3% earning and living on more than 26K or a mug somewhere in between all of our costs are high due largy to the price of our home. A price which is totally arbitrary.

If your a Tory that has just angered you, because for some odd reason you think your house being worth 10,000% more than it was worth in 1984 puts you in profitable situation, while like a total poon you ignore the fact your next step on the property ladder has increased in price at a rate even higher than the home you live in. Someone is winning but it aint you, ya fool.

The same goes for Utility costs and at this point I must point out that I’m just as much a capitalist as I am a socialist. How I ask you can a capitalist society prosper when the majority of people loose the majority of the wages paying their rent, gas water and electricity bills?

These 4/5 sectors of the economy have a monopoly over our money, they have become so greedy that they are strangling our economy.Technology the mother of capitalist invention is far too often sold at a lost in the desperate attempt for market domination. Yet im sure we’d all rather be ripped off on playstations and Ipads than on electricity and rent.

To get through a recession you need people to spend,  people arent earning less if we compare 2005 to 2011. comparing 2011 to 199 we are earning more, yet disposable income is far less and it has everything to do to gas water electricity and housing costs.

It is not fair that the general public or the rest of the world great capitalist systems suffer because a minority of greedy companies dominate our income. These companies act like cartells. It is laughable to think that in Britain there is healthy competition in the housing or energy sectors. The money people save in changing energy providers is a saving on the costs caiused by them selling electrity to each other and the extras charges they add for random reasons which includes you switching providers befiore your contract ends. You never make savings on the product your buying because they follow each other on how much they charge.

This to me is the major example of unfairness and it effects everyone from the ultimate freeloader to the Queen. Making Utility companies and hosuing run at cost is a major win for everyone, from the hard up family to the fabric of our capitalist system. We must come to see these companies as a monopoly on our wages.

As for Cameron wanting more from the least that is evident from his atacks on benefits. While some may argue he is right, he clearly wants more from the least because it seems to be the only area of society he is try to get money from, or at least save. Attacking the poorest makes little sense considering that we need to get more people spending money on worthless crap to get the economy moving again, and the poor make up over 60% of the poulation. But because we need people to spend money on crap to get the ecomony back on track that is every reasont to attack these cartels, furthermore, so long as people are protected fom negative equity, slahign house prices and making utility companies run at cost is a win/win for all.

It would slash the cost of benefits, and would benefit ALL families in all levels of society and would in turn leave people with more money to spend in a vaster range of economy. It would save jobs, make jobs and make more people rich.

Quite simply how can capitalism survive if a few sectors dominate our income? You might not want to talk about whats fair on a personal basis, but it isnt fair to a capitalist system that housing and basic utilities have majortity control over the best part part of everyones wages. David Cameron wouldn’t need a 26K cap on benefits if it wasn’t for these excessive costs. In fact if such things were priced fairly I have no doubt in the ideal world we’d be talking about a 14K cap.

Benefits are only as high as the government allows the cost of basic living to be and if basic living living in London or the south requires 26K+ in benefits then I argue the cost of living has got out of control/ It shouldnt be a case of taking things away, but giving more to those who deserve it based on that 26K. If the poorest ar getting 26K by a system thats clearly got more consideration and morals than employers who pay less, our mentality should be about getting more people living on that wage, not lowering itto make the hard working rape victims seem less abused.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s