Taking Advantage

Standby I am angry across several fronts. So UKplc is spending much more than it earns. Right. To bring the economy back towards a better balance the spending has to be cutback, quite hard so it is going to be painful. Right. I get all that. One significant area of spending that has 'got out of control' is welfare support. So the most vulnerable, least able to make any lifestyle changes, the sector totally dependant on the government support to pull themselves out of their problems will become the sector of our society in the frontline to make more savings, to rescue our failing economy.

That is all perfectly alright because as we all well know people who live off benefit are liars, or if not liars, fraudster, or not that then at least workshy or at the best living an extravagant lifestyle beyond their limited means. A lifestyle that any other sane person would immediately recognise as inappropriate. Our government, our high salaried politicians living a comfortable lifestyle look down on these lower income classes, distance themselves and actively promote the demonisation of these awful hopeless people dependant on welfare. They are to blame and therefore have put themselves beyond any compassion. Their own worst enemies. You and I of course realise that, though there are bound to be the odd individual that (is allowed to) get away with abusing the system, the majority are decent people trying very hard in impossible circumstances to give their children a safe and sheltered upbringing, to ensure the best start in life possible for them. Government speak is that they are workshy, afraid to do a decent days work, preferring the easy benefits income. The lack of any work opportunities are a direct result of the double dip recession the governement has been administering these last years. Somehow the victims of their policies are to be blamed for not 'wanting to work'.


It gets worse. Over many past decades the governement has funnelled money into social housing and built predominately three bedroom houses. The 'best' return for effot put in. Suddenly, with the demographic changes and the rise of single parent families, we have all these big houses under-occupied, rooms to spare. Brilliant, we will penalise these the weak and vulnerable for the failings of the governement past choices where they cannot justify the number of rooms occupied. Outside of the cities, there are almost nill alterantive to a three bedroom social house, right payback time, they have no choice, no where else to go so a nice steady cashstream. That will teach them, depending on the fair even handedness of the state benefit system.


Meanwhile of course, our mates, those affluent members of this society that our salaried politicians now aspire to mix amongst, adopting their lifestyle choices, continue to get their winter fuel payment. Unless they have voluntarily opted out. Now is that cynical or what. In a wide variety of ways the income streams of the very rich are explicitly protected by government actions. Afraid that any negative actions will frighten them away to other shores. Forgetting of course that everyone of us in this society has had to give up some, so that they, the wealthy minority, can take ever more of their entitlements.


I urge you to watch this video, Wealth inequalities in USA, because it is relevant to UKplc and a real eye-opener. It compares what people think is a fair distribution, low to high income, then contrast that with what these same people think is the actual gap between the lowest and the highest income and finally to reveals the actual and increasing gap between the highest and lowest. We are talking twenty fold. Eye-watering difference between the majority, including all the comfortable off middle incomes groups and the tiny few percent who are taking, not just a lions share but almost all of the available income. Watch the video, it sets it all out clearly and objectively, no party tub thumping. Relevant because for the last two decades our government has set its objective to increase the income divide. The rationale goes something along the lines of, those with get even more then they will spend more and it will trickle down and we all get to benefit. I have no objection to one favoured person having a gilded lilly, an incentive. When that gilded lilly is re-gilded and then again and again because what else do you do with wealth beyond contemplation. It cross over from being an incentive to being a obscentity. Which is where we are now. There is an ever increasing gap between those that have and those do not. An increasing gap, maybe not yet to USofA proportions but we too are well headed down the same route.


So what? Envy! No, because a society with big income inequality, is a sick society. The Spirit Level has explored exhaustively the relationship beteween all those social maliase we worry about. Binge drinking, under-aged sex, single parents, aggression, crime, you name it and failings within our society are aggravated by the extent of the divide. Does not make sense, yet it does. Low self-esteem, low self value and isolation from the heart of the society does result in self-deprecating behavior. The link is irrefuteable. The breakdown of our society we all sense but cannot quite pin down arises out of this ever increasing gap between the haves and the have nots. Social cohesion is just one aspect. We have to take a new tack and start to reduce the income inequality. We cannot pull all the poor up, the gap is too great, we have to rein in by big steps the wealth of those rich minorities. We must start to medicate our sick society back to health. In doing so we might even resolve some of the governments current problems of spend exceeding income. A spend not from the poorest sector of society I guess.

We have to put UKplc into reverse. Return once more to support the desperately needy in our society, give them the lifeline to help themselves out of their predicament. If for no other reason than that their despair taints and spoils all our enjoyment of the society we live in. Support that can only come from severely reining in the extravagant indecent wealth of the top earners. Do not think for one moment you can safely sit back and your government will blunder into the right lines of thought. They show no signs of understanding or sharing the evils that our poorest are forced by their policies to endure. Their focus appears to be how quickly they can get to lap the cream they are pouring into the coffers of the well off. 

No the reverse gear will only be found through people power. It is well past time for each of us to speak out and make sure your voice is heard loud and clear. Income inequality is immoral, unchecked wealth is a cancer in our society, it is wrong and it is harming us all. A divided society is a spoilt society.

The other way

Standby for the long haul. For time to time I have lost heart. Those with power and or privilege have such a firm grasp on the Establishment as to rebuff all pressure to change. People power as evidenced by 38Degrees or Tweets that go viral have shone a light. Not by plaintive 38Degree appeals to the better nature to those in power, who have shown by their sanctimonious platitudes, to lack compassion. To be devoid of all empathy. No people power as demonstrated by the overwhelming strength in numbers.

When all the Establishment has left is the preservation of the status quo, the power redistribution is over, job done. If the masses and just as important, the income generated by those masses refuse to accede to demands of those who have subsumed power to themselves, finally power reverts to where it always has been, with the will of all the people. Not just a select, self-protecting clique minority but all of the people. Clearly the Establishment is going to fight, fight dirty and there will be causalities along the way. The Establishment will use wontedly against it own citizens every vestige of power it has accreted over the years, indefinite detention without charge, body orifice search, seizure of assets, denial of service, search and exploitation of a digital material, injunctions, you name it and they have given themselves the uncontested power to do as they choose to any person that courts their displeasure. All in the name of the security of our State, the State that belongs to us, not 'them' that have arranged amongst their cohorts to be in charge.

Logistically if enough people come to together and agree on a course of action there is nothing that can be done to stop them. The mass will always win out against the minority no matter what weapons the minority choose to fight with. In the end, sheer overpowering numbers, overpower. There is no other outcome. Until now mobilising sufficient mass to overcome the forces set against them has been the restraint, (think the miners strike). Now we can have instant mass action or reaction, dynamically fluid, ever moving orchestrated by mass appeal, not along designated channels. IT savvy, entrepenual and able to respond in kind to Establishment attempts to throttle the communication pipes.

Not banner waving protests either that accede and are subservient to the powers assumed. No, but by mass refusals to comply, refusals to accede to domination. Emphatic rebuttal of this or that directive issued by those seeking to exert power and control. Masses that refused to be demonised as fraudster, cheats or liars and stand their ground and claim recognition for what they are, loyal, hardworking, honourable and worthy citizens. The will of these people do not consent to what you have granted to yourself. Not just a negative reaction either but a rejection along with an alternate action that the people will support and put their will behind. 

My hope is that the people will choose to move towards an egalitarian society. Where each looks out for the other and helps them to realise their potential for the great good of all. Where no one is left distressed or disadvantaged, each one helps the other. No elites, no protected tiers of ring fenced wealth, power and influence to buffer against the just claims of all those majorities without. My belief is in the common person. They would not tread down those below them just to get on the next ladder up. In the end, the people, just the people will decide. Now that really would be a welcome breath of fresh air.

There is Another Way

Just read an article that has given me hope, great hope, 'Evolution of Inequality, New Scientist, 28.07.2012'. I am no longer that nutter aspiring to impossible dreams. There are alternatives, so they are achievable if only we want them enough. Our capitalist based society of the winner grabs the lions share and gets to dictate has only been around for some 5,000 years. Whether or not you accept the premise that prior to that our hunt gatherers ancestors lived an egalitarian lifestyle  matters not. What does count is that there is an alternative to grab first and hoard. He with the biggest hoard gets to take his pick of what is available,  grab more and then use his hoard to buy fealty. The rich just get richer and richer off the backs of the poor, too poor and weak to resist.

The alternative is an egalitarian society where we look out for each other and make sure that what we have is no more than what anyone else has. No one is left in need or want, the group looks after it kin, as the weakest bring them all down, but together they have strength beyond the sum of their parts.

Just the required fresh new way of looking at our world as we have passed beyond the tipping point, where our plunder of its resources exceeds its capacity to replace or regenerate. We have to get back to a more frugal way of life. We have to stop putting our own little clique first and start to ensure all people born on this planet have some hope of a life not too disparate from our own expectations. A way to minimise our use and waste of scarce earth resources. A chance to rein in the incomprehensibly wild extravagances of the few and to look carefully at what the earth is able to offer so that we can all have a comparable share in it. Not equality. Not match for match, but comparable, not so disparate as to give rise to resentment, but a rough and ready fairness dependant on global position, climate and ease of access to resources.

Of course the bully boys and their cohort thugs have ruled the roost for millennia. Each generation is born with them as their only their role model of, take what you want and answer to nobody, as the possible viable route to follow. They are not going to give up their inherited accustomed rights and privileges. Yet their excesses can only be fuelled by the acquiescence of the masses that go without. So it is mutable, but whether peacefully or their rush to force can only be countered by a matching force, is the question to be addressed.

There are prospects, not everything we value in life is based on what can be obtained by force. Appreciation, respect, attention, these give an inkling of an Achilles heel that could bring the capitalist tyrants to book, maybe. Assuming, as a daydream, we overthrow our capitalist society and replace it with a society founded on egalitarianism, the battle is not over. There is always, in every society, it is in our human nature, the small percentage of cheaters, who claim full shares but hold back and conceal their gains. Or even worse steal or take by force when no one is looking. Nothing new here I guess. Like our hunter gatherer ancestors before us, the consequences of becoming a social pariah has to outway any advantage gained by stealing a march. When we all share in the same comparable distribution of resources, when we all know what we are entitled to, it does take the heat out of the need to go one better.

The longer you contemplate an egalitarian society the more it reveals in it a new calmness, the need to work together rather than to complete. How the world could begin to start out afresh in a new dimension. Inspirational but not beyond realisable.

Tax Array

Time for another dig deep session. It verges on an Alice in Wonderland incredulity the number of organisations, the variety of assessment / claims forms and the bewildering variety of benefits out there where the government, in some guise or other, pays money back to its beleaguered citizens. These byzantine arrangements, all arrived at with impeccable credentials of fairness, equity, non-judgemental compassion and social egalitarianism ends us up in this current mad house. Duplicates of civic servants or quasi scrutinising the minute of income, assets, disposable wealth and interpersonal relationships to arrive at not so dissimilar views. Yar, this person is in need of financial support to get through.

Some times, just occasionally, the sticking plaster on top of the sticking plaster approach to crisis management fails. This is where we are now. We have to dare to lift up the corner to see right back to the origins and be prepared to discard the past. There are the majority of people that sit within the norm sufficiently well as to not raise concerns. Then there are people that are well below the norm and, compassionately, need special considerations. Then there are those above the norm that require particular attention.

Below the norm people from time to time struggle. Whether from their own duplicity, bad luck or simply an act of god, they fail to cope. So often it comes down to failing to make financial ends meet. It is in all our best interests that they get some immediate relief, a crucial chance to sort themselves out. Extend them that lifeline to get back on their feet. Moving on from there, from whatever the cause, we cannot let any citizen slide into destitution. We just cannot stand by as another human fails to cope, to find the basics of shelter, food and clothing. Two situations then,  the first, hit the crisis button and immediate temporary relief whilst indepth investigations as to cause and remedy are conducted and your self-recovery attempts are monitored. Your crisis, your solution with the state in the background with advisory help. Not a state orchestrated rescue plan or a state ordained way of life, see also From Cradle to Grave. Second situation, you fail to manage your own recovery and slip further into the financial abyss. Until that point when others decide you need to be taken in. Given the minima of security, shelter, food and clothes in a community, with respect for privacy, for the family unit, though not necessarily your own personal private space. A scaling of support dependant on your willingness to help yourself and help all those possibly undesirables you now find as your companions, but always with that encouragement to work out your solution to your own problems. Shades of the workhouse. Inescapable, but a workhouse comparison diffused with compassion and support for the individual to find their own solution.

If we consistently fail to cope, it is right and proper that others begin to make decision on our behalf. It is the price of getting it wrong. One key questions is whether we are paying our way or living beyond our means. Your view is that you are perfectly entitled to a settee, or a wall screen HD TV, or convenience foods or an annual holiday. Others, that is the we of our society, may well judge that your life expectations are out of kilter to any realistic income. If you are unable to earn enough to pay for your desired lifestyle the State will make up the difference. Great. The downside is that the States view of what is required to sustain you or your family will be set eventually very low. A crutch for those in need but, and a very important but, not so comfortable that any one would choose to depend on it. There has to be that bottom line incentive, to get yourself out of your difficulties. It is your job, not the States job. So a sliding scale then, with interventions all along the way, from sustaining you in your present life style for the short term to a gradual reduction to a bare bones basic. Until the final support of some community based last resort shelter. Achieved simply with a tax credit as an income source. Scrap all the other benefits and allowances and special needs. We, this our society, decides a norm, below the norm, tax credit, on the norm, tax neutral, above the norm, tax debit.

Before turning to those in tax debit, an aside. It has to be all about our personal choices. If we choose, let events put us in a place, where we are a single parent, that is a personal choice. That choice has financial consequences which flow directly out of that choice. If we are born disadvantaged in some way, those are the consequences we have to live with and those are the limitations we have to find a sustainable life style to live within. That may well mean having to rely on support of the family, friends or community around you. Life does not come with  any entitlements. It is up to you to make the best of whatever the start you are given. It is not the states function to reinstitute you to some idealised lifestyle. Crisis support all the way for those crisis situations, caught out by the freak events of chance. Does your finding yourself in a relationship with a person with abusive traits amount to a crisis or a lack of judgement or necessary caution?

For people earning above the norm they pay the debit tax. Remember be are talking here about a pro-rata tax on wealth creation, see Tax, salaries and rewards and That Extra Mile. The more you have invested in skills or equipment the less you pay and the less you have invested in plant or people then the more. That pro-rata rate also on a sliding scale. We as a society will decide that no one shall take home a disposable income of more than 10 times, or 100 times or a 1,000 time more than the norm, whatever. We as the society set and control the divergence between the poor and the richest. The minority rich can only accumulate their wealth with the acquiescence of us the majority poor. We take pride in the unique opportunities our society offers. Those rich that recognise these benefits and are willing to make their contribution back into the society that nurtures them, will stay. Those other rich who are only interested in ever richer pickings will go elsewhere. When the 100% tax point is reached, that is you have arrived at the maximum rich to poor discrepancy society can tolerate, the options become simple. You either have to diversify and invest into less profitable enterprises or you spend on humanitarian good causes. This is a tax on wealth generation, not on the value of the pile of golden eggs but how much income is derived within this society from those eggs.

Society wins all round, it entrepreneurs are handsomely rewarded. The more successful they are the more the state recoups. A successful society is ripe for harvesting wealth. An equitable society that looks after all citizens is a just and stable society. Citizens that are motivated to self seek solutions are mobile and willing to try new opportunities. Win, win in principle. Our resourcefulness can mitigate the inevitable downsides. Better to try than continue to fail.