Posted by SteveNYGuy on 05/29/09

Not sure if this was reported throughout the U.K. but Dundee has announced that they are bringing back mortgages via the City Council. In a move I would only describe as dangerous Dundee City Council have announced that they will be offering mortgages up to 100% (utter madness) going back to something they finished with back in the 1980's but started much earlier. It was reported on the STV news that Edinburgh will be joining the band wagon but that will guarantee rather than provide such loans. Following the current model of creating money from nothing via a loan agreement then charging interest to individuals to increases profits against an unstable environment we presently face is, in my humble opinion, dangerous. Although some sources purport that the economic down turn (love how you can repackage something with a little spin) either may be or is turning around - we have seen similar glimmers of hope in history just prior to a major crash. With Americans living in tents (1920's anyone?), governments forcing inflationary practice through the back door and people losing their jobs left-right and centre I could not believe this news story. I would expect similar reports from your neck of the woods but, if not, you could review the news cast online.

Steve

Posted 05/31/09 MrsJJS Taunton England TA1 4NJ, United Kingdom

I haven't heard of that happening anywhere here in Somerset. I'm not orginally from the UK, I'm a Yank who moved here 8 years ago so I don't have any experience from this happening back in the 80's but I agree with you, sounds like any council that gets invovled in this sort of thing is just asking for trouble. If a person doesn't have good enough credit or enough of a deposit to get a mortgage from a bank then I don't want my local council getting involved in offering sub-prime mortgages. I will have to educate myself on the happenings back in the 80's just in case my local council decides to jump on that particular bandwagon.

Posted 06/03/09 Elysiumboy Billericay, United Kingdom

WTF? Not the same here Steve; looks like it has already happened, but I didn't hear a word (that link to Essex by the way, includes my current home town - my son attends the Mayflower school named after the pilgrims that first ventured to the land of the free). http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/35377 09/Essex-council-plans-to-set-up-own-bank.html I know that's currently for business, but once a scheme works amongst the few they always assume the can throw it on the masses with equal success (lol with a huge bolt of sadness following)! Sorry it took so long to reply, been on my hols with the kids! I think I still have to take in what the others are reporting because I missed this with leaving it behind.

Posted 06/04/09 jonathanpew exeter, United Kingdom

I don't think the local council (Devon/Exeter or Exmouth) is offering these kinds of DEBT CREATION SCHEMES / THROW GOOD MONEY AFTER BAD INITIATIVES yet. Take a look at Alice Cook's (Libertarian Blogger) article on her site: http://ukhousebubble.blogspot.com/2009/04/council-mortgages-solution-in-search-o f.html www.democraticlibertarian.com

Posted by SteveNYGuy on 05/18/09

by SJS

To my fellow British residents this news will come as no surprise as it has filled the pages of newspapers as well as made headline T.V.  I draw this to the attention, instead, to my fellow American citizens.  As Al Capone was brought to justice maybe we should consider the notation of the violation of the laws less considered.  We could look towards the cost of each representative in relation to the duties they carry out.  We could consider the role they are elected for versus the role(s) they actually have and could be considered a conflict of interest to the job they were elected as public servants.  We could look at the individual departments costs against the total expenditures allotted for said department.  We could look at many areas of the legal system that have been forgotten and find methods to remove those that would act against either the American people or the Constitution (or both).

One excellent example is Ron Paul's push to audit the Fed.  In doing so we could see the state of affairs and bring this information into the public domain.  One of the greatest powers of the people is to hold their elected officials accountable. Another is the freedom of information.  Ironically the best the place to look to find such indescrations is the Library of Congress.  Documents contained within coupled with additional documentation would provide good groundwork for proceedings.

I'm drawn to the belief that if laws have been created to serve the best interests of the people, even when they are proved to act in direct violation of the aforementioned, then these same laws should be considered for all citizens regardless of position or title.  Wouldn't it be ironic to use one of the many Executive Orders that currently stand as protection but, as we have seen, erode the very rights provided to us within the Constitution.

I call upon the Constitutional lawyers and scholars to centralize resources for such actions and support not only the causes presented within the Campaign For Liberty but for any American.

SJS

Constitutionalist at home... Libertarian whilst abroad.

Posted by SteveNYGuy on 05/13/09

by SJS

Recent events have brought the expenses of M.P.'s into question. With the Telegraph taking the three ring circus that is British mainstream politics into the spotlight the leaders of such groups are calling for change. I've heard that phrase once before and the result, so far, would suggest little difference and more of the same. The issue was highlighted to the public, as said, via the Telegraph but was actually mentioned on a (Channel 4) t.v. program when a female, who's name escapes me, mentioned the call for these expenses, the fact the a group of M.P.s were working for several companies while employed and that some of these extra positions created a conflict of interest due to the nature of their business. This call for the expenses, it should be noted, was delayed several times.

Initially these M.P.s took the stance of defense in noting that they didn't break any rules until the actual extent of such rules, or flexible interpretation, caused further outrage to the public. The speaker of the house, too, did not deprive us of the defense plea by questioning whether the police were to investigate how the materials that provided this information were received by the Telegraph. I found that part the most interesting of all. In an age where Brits can be watched from the moment they get up and turn on a computer or make a call to their drive or trip into work and home again in Britain's police state. We are treated as guilty until proven innocent and subject to various intrusions into our public and private lives. We are charged guilty and can incriminate ourselves by completing tax information should it found to be in error whether by fault, omission or on purpose. We, the individual citizens, have lost our rights but yet those elected to serve as our representation to look out for our rights raise themselves upon high and advise us they have the rights we are precluded from and thus should be treated differently and allowed self-rule.

In the scheme of the news story amounts to precious little even though the tally seems eye-watering to the hard working tax paying individuals that often struggle to make ends meet. These same individuals are then teased by costly items, stung by the inflation imposed both directly and indirectly and even forced (in some cases) to succumb to paying in credit and suffering the interest thereafter. This amounts to little because the same people elected to serve in our best interests borrow from either the Bank of England or other countries with interest for programs and policies the we citizens neither chose nor need given proper options presented to us in such matters. These programs that force only one method but are provided at reduced or free charges (so said) but paid for via back-door taxes and comes with strings attached that amount to loss of freedoms and liberties. The policies such as economic and foreign that place us in a worse off position but are tauted as either status-quo or must be done for the good of the nation to only later be proved to have worked in direct opposition. The costs of these amount to hundreds of billions of pounds, with interest, and are lumbered onto not all of us because either some can't afford as not earning enough or are so well paid that can afford the best tax accountants thus paying near nothing.

We then see recently that these elected officials should face the sack. If we are to show responsibility should not be reflected in our political system? Should not those elected to represent but fail be made to right the wrongs to show not only their citizens but also future politicians of the great responsibility of the role? Changing the faces or individuals that do wrong would only serve to perpetuate the situation rather then correct it.

I hope that in this rise of public awareness the party's that would otherwise be shadowed begin to raise their voices and be listened to. If this shows the public nothing it should be to watch government, become involved, look for options and support while voicing your opinions. This would be the most opportune time for the Libertarian party of the U.K. to publicly raise awareness and be seen in the media spotlight showing not only the public of the ideals they stand for but also support they need to provide the voice that can be heard.

Steve

Constitutionalist at home... libertarian whilst abroad

Posted 05/13/09 Elysiumboy Billericay, United Kingdom

I've chosen Libertarian myself in the coming elections, and I have spoken regularly with others, sent letters to the media and political representatives of my area and pretty much punted everywhere I can. I've always said these politicians are businesspeople as well and they will set up a system that suits them. They always find a way to squirm out of things, but what a time for all this to come up! Elections around the corner, the stock market still rocking and many up in arms at the defiance of the ID cards so it's leading to a spectacular election and who knows. I don't want UKIP either, but even that might shake the system up having a new kind of government! You are right about guilty until proven innocent as well; if you look at it from the outside it almost resembles paranoia.

Posted 05/14/09 Elysiumboy Billericay, United Kingdom

Typical! I can't find a candidate for the Libertarian Party for local elections, but at least I know there is one in the European elections. If you have any information, please let me know; I'll keep looking.

Posted 05/14/09 SteveNYGuy Wormit, United Kingdom

A recent update on Radio Scotland proved equally interesting. I'm waiting for the transcript but an MP noted a former speaker of the house being shot for speaking out or getting a message across in violation to the current system. In response I would note that the Libertarian party is growing and the members list is far smaller than could be beneficial. I would hope citizens would review the ideals and choose either to fund or to run (or better still both) to expand knowledge and provide options that are seriously lacking in the traditional three-ring circus that is present day British political parties. I am aware that the leader of the party is now a member of the Campaign For Liberty and may review not only the main pages but also the blogs presented.

Posted 05/31/09 mjavfc8832 Birmingham, United Kingdom

Steve, I have been a long-time supporter of Heather Brooke’s campaign for the freedom of information of MPs expenses, along with the Taxpayers’ Alliance. Therefore I have not in the least been surprised at the revelations, we have long known what has been going on but it seems the public at large did not know to what extent until the Daily Telegraph revealed what MPs themselves should have done years ago instead of attempting to suppress its release at every opportunity. The postive to come out of this is that the general public are actually angry for once and people are coming together to pressure for change to our political system. For the first time in a long time people in England are actually interested in politics, they're talking about it during their lunch breaks and the politcians are reeling.

Posted by SteveNYGuy on 04/30/09

In the 12:00pm BBC Parliament show at approximately 12:10pm a Liberal Democrat raised the point that the filtering of people for the purpose of voting into small areas raised concerns of spreading said virus.  He further suggested the introduction of electronic voting (by name).  The response by the cabinet minister was that there was considerations for such eventualities within the processes of the "Swine" flu procedures.

Is this a back door approach to institute electronic voting?  Did the U.K. not see the issues (at best) as well as concerns and discrepancies from the U.S. Presidential elections over the last two terms?

It was also noted that the BNP (British National Party) acclaimed for their racist/fascist/skinhead ideology should not be allowed to succeed in claiming a seat in the European Parliament.  The cabinet member further went on to state that ensuring voters get out and vote is very important to denounce such ideologies.  I would take two points from this.  The first being that the BNP party, as racist as they are claimed, are being told to be excluded.  The second, and slightly more frightening, is to acknowledge the European Parliament.   For those that are unaware The European Parliament creates laws that can and often do overrule local laws and sovereignty.  Further, they influence heavily the trade, commerce and structure of both existing members as well as any new comers.  As an individualist I oppose this structure of government and the imposition or strong-arming they induce.

Posted by SteveNYGuy on 04/27/09

by S.J.S.

One definition of terrorism is shown as follows:

Terrorism is, most simply, policy intended to intimidate or cause terror. It is more commonly understood as an act which is intended to create fear (terror), is perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a materialistic goal or a lone attack), and deliberately targets (or disregards the safety of) non-combatants. Some definitions also include acts of unlawful violence or unconventional warfare, but at present, there is no internationally agreed upon definition of terrorism.

Presently, as I write this The U.S. & the U.K. are ramping up against terrorism in Afghanistan and Gordon Brown in Kabul notes that their must be a bigger role for the U.N.

The news of late coming from both The U.S. & the U.K. is that terrorism and terrorists are an ever growing threat to be found in Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, the U.S, the U.K., in Arabic countries and in non-Arabic countries.  The main stream news reports the actions of the terrorists and the military casualties and the non-main stream news reports about the deaths of those innocent civilians and the destruction of houses, utilities and the monetary costs.

If terrorism is as noted above then wouldn't the actions of the U.S. government, the U.K. government, the U.N., "allied forces" and the media be classed as a form of terrorism?  Would not being reminded, informed or lied to repeatedly (depending on your view point) about something to fear and therefore something to be armed against, move to foreign soil and battle be terrorism?

I remember the other situations from the past and the phrase one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.  We fought in Iraq with depleted Uranium shells to remove a CIA introduced dictator and shelled every building, utility and road.  We successfully killed over 1 million people.  We (help to) convict Saddam, bring him to a trial and hang him for the crimes of using the training we provided and with the basic weapons we supplied.  We found no weapons of mass destruction but brought our own.  There is an area of land that can not sustain life.  There is an area where the children of the people suffer radiation and their children are born seriously deformed.  Our troops come home with secondary radiation and chemical poisoning that is marked as Gulf War Syndrome.  We brought "democracy" and the resources that were the Iraqi people's are now in the control of western companies.  We now have been told to aim our sights to Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran.  We seek another man who also was trained and funded by the CIA.  Benazir Bhutto reported in a western news show that this man was killed sometime back but we seek either the man or the ghost and will travel to whatever land it takes us to so we eradicate terrorism.

Health wise, we are now informed that there is a Swine Flu that, as news reports started to state, could infect 130,000,000 people world-wide. We are warned to stay inside.  We are told to look out for the "signs".  We are told that there is medical treatment, yet there is no clear understanding of the strain(s) or the best course of action(s).

Are we being terrorized by our own governments?  Are those sworn as servants to serve as our representation now acting to instill fear or terror?  If the above is correct and these same people have created "laws" to act upon terrorism be held under the same "laws" they place upon all else?  We heard Ron Paul note the phrase Blow Back, the act of reciprocation.  If our governments instill terrorism by creating fear and we act upon such notations then do we not invite a possibly wronged people to seek revenge?

To most that read this the answers to many questions is neither surprising nor different from that of my own.  If we create a fear of terror and enough people believe it then the terror will come to be.

I should point out that I do not dismiss the notations of what is said but rather the means by which they are said to insight heightened emotions to the point so that they would cause terror of our own people and that of other nations either looking for peace or looking for an excuse to be against us.

Brought to you from a person against the creation of Sheeple, the cattling of people and being treated like a mushroom.

Posted 04/27/09 Elysiumboy Billericay, United Kingdom

Oh yeah, there's no other word for it! I've always believed that wars are staged and it's for more than just profit - I believe it's also done so that we see exactly what they've got. Look at the fire-power sent over to beat a tin army made of ancient weapons in comparison to the allied war machine (a perfectly worded representation that). Everything is done to pitch one side against the other and fear is their key weapon. I've always stated that in another man's eyes, a suicide bomber is a poor country's missile and their most affective weapon - because they haven't got any others except a few rockets that I have in my back garden on fireworks night! I don't support their actions, but I'm not so sure who commands them.