PAPER 3.
DRUGGED & ADDICTED.
This part of our on-going discussion is primarily
focused upon ‘why’ our governments, politicians and their party politics are
unwilling to reform themselves, and this includes tighter regulation on the
banking institutions and the Corporate World.
Collectively, the western-style economies have locked
our global monetary system into a Global type of Financialisation that is based
on CREDIT. This Financialisation on a
National level has created such a severe problem for governments and their
politicians that they have found themselves in an impasse and are ‘unable or
unwilling’ with what they know, to drastically reform the entire
Financialisation of that state or country.
We will use an analogy here to explain why we are all
now part of the crisis. Imagine a person
who is a drug addict and is heavily dependant upon Cocaine but tries to lead a
normal life. Fortunately for this addict
he/she meets and falls head over heals with admiration with their perfect
partner, who is wealthy, attractive and with good social skills. Then, after they have married the addict
discovers that their spouse is a successful drug dealer, who explains that
these activities are ‘just business’ and they personally ‘do not take
drugs’. Perhaps after some soul
searching the addict may feel slightly betrayed, however, now finds themselves
in drug heaven. All they have to do now
is ‘toe the line’ and they are set for life.
Substitute ‘drug addict’ for ‘governments’ and
substitute ‘the wealthy drug dealer’ for the ‘national and international
financialisation’ of our economies. As
previously discussed, our governments are heavily dependant upon loans to
balance the yearly Deficits they find themselves in. These loans are continuously taken out year
upon year and are added to the National Debt that keeps climbing and in reality,
can never be repaid or the debt cleared.
Now imagine, a consumer based society where a government decides to
limit the ‘available credit’ to these consumers. This will result in a corresponding catastrophic
loss of tax revenues! How many less
houses do you think would be sold if the Banks imposed a 20% or 25% Saved
Deposit; how many less new cars would be sold if there was required a 25% to
30% Cash Deposit on these loans, and if the 0% or very low percentage interest
rates were to be scrapped to match Banks personal loan lending rates? Apply the same criteria to the home
furnishing markets and the many complimentary industries that service the
general consumption of goods in our western style economies. In other words, our National Governments are
‘heavily’ dependant upon the ‘taxes’ that they collect. Some of these taxes are visible to the
consumer and employees while other taxes are not so visible through the
consumerism consciousness of our economies.
Nevertheless governments depend on taxes collected. In theory, Award wage’ earners should pay
little or no taxes. Conversely, highly paid executives and professionals, again
in theory, have larger incomes and pay lots of tax into the governments
coffers. The only major way a government funds itself beyond these
taxes is through International Loans as previously discussed. However, in
reality, increasingly within the current 'system', the tax burden falls upon
those who earn less and those described as 'middle class'. This is especially
so with 'indirect' taxes. Highly paid executives and professionals also have
access to creative accounting and creative accountants, able to maximize
expenses and minimize real tax liabilities'. So, yet again, those in the middle
and with the least capacity (the majority), are forced to take up the slack and
the burden. When this is allied with cuts to entitlements and benefits, the overall
load increases.'
It should be clear to the reader that the western
style of Financialisation is now severely problematic. Governments now find themselves in a position
that they can not reign in the National and International Banking sectors, hence
the expression “too big to fail’; neither can they reign in the National and
the International Corporations for the same reasons. One provides the ‘available credit’ and the
other provides ‘the commodities for consumerism’. It is this situation that our governments
will not address and they will certainly not discuss with you - what your governments will not tell you.
'Let us now look at the political situation in New Zealand
especially now that John Key and his National (Conservative) style government
have been given another term in office by the majority of New
Zealand voters who actually voted. Again, he has a clear mandate
from the majority of voting New Zealanders to continue with his National style
politics and party vision, however, some 1 million people did not vote. As
previously mentioned in another discussion, effectively, there is no real
difference between Labour (Socialism) governance and National (Conservative)
governance, in the respect of ‘they are detached from the reality of the majority’
of New Zealanders and pursue their own style of politics and agendas with
little care or consideration for the individual. However,
there is ‘one’ fundamental difference between these two parties.
At the core of Conservatism (National) is the belief
that ‘wealth creation’ and the corresponding affluence of a Nation is driven
through entrepreneurship, the success of which creates employment and
opportunities. It is through this
consumerism and abundance that ‘wealth creation’ filters throughout the economy
and uplifts the majority. Under Conservative
governments Privatisation programmes are usually pursued wherever
possible. Whereas, at the core of Socialism
(Labour) is the belief to ‘look after the interests of the working masses’ and
this is accomplished through the redistribution of wealth by handouts and
higher taxes on the wealthy. In reality,
Socialist governments tend to grow out of ‘all proportions’ in their attempt to
create a fairer society. This
administrative dinosaur becomes a great financial burden on the taxation system
as well as intrusive upon the individual’s way of life. And under Socialism,
governments pursue a programme of Nationalisation wherever possible.
From memory, up until the decade or so of ‘Clarkism’
there was something like, 4,500 laws on the statutory books from the formation
of the first governments 100 years earlier in New Zealand and then during the
reign of Helen Clark and her Socialist Government, a further 4,000 laws were
added to the statutory books in only their ten year reign. As you can see, both styles of party politics
have not really served New Zealanders well, even with MMP: the political games
are still being played out and party agendas prioritised. Again, NNP (No More Politics) is the way
forward.
Let's look at the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement
(TPPA). Under a Conservative government
in New Zealand with the above analogy, this agreement equates to a very
successful International drug dealer inviting a National drug dealer into its
financial hub. So we can expect through
this agreement the continuation of hidden agendas and its politics all
negatively impinging upon every New Zealander's liberty. In addition to this, International
Corporations will be taking financial control of National interests sanctioned
by the government, with their misguided politics that new lines of credit and new market places will be available to New
Zealand and that all New Zealanders will benefit, all in alignment with the
core Conservative beliefs. Any amount of
demonstration and opposition to this treaty will have little or no effect on a
National Government. These treaties or agreements are at the core of Conservatism. It is like expecting a leopard to change its
spots if you want to reverse or eliminate this type of politics. We are not saying, do not demonstrate or
voice your opposition to anything, what we are saying, is understand your
adversary. Similarly, the political
outcome at the last elections with the two alternative parties that some
supported, entered the political arena of playing dirty politics and, the
outcome should have been no surprise.
The major parties have had over 100 years of playing dirty politics and
relative new comers are very easily dispensed with. The large parties have vast experience in dealing
with what they would view as an irritation.
A wonderful experience in the respect of showing what can happen under
MMP and party politics, hopefully, never to be repeated if we learn through the
experience. Yet again, we remind you of
NMP.
Sent on the Loving Waves of Upliftment.
No comments:
Post a Comment