Christmas

May soon be changing the way I write my posts into more long winded political thought posts rather than always topical newsy type posts.

Took my political spectrum quiz, not quite so easy to say that almost everything is very important... but here it is:

My Political Views
I am a far-right social libertarian
Right: 7.77, Libertarian: 6.31

Political Spectrum Quiz

Oh and Happy Christmas!

Bankers Bonuses

Seems that my thoughts on bankers bonuses may have been slightly misguided. Sky are reporting that Tullett Prebon:

"One of the biggest trading firms in London is allowing staff to move abroad to avoid the "uncertainty" over the Government's bonus tax..."

This is exactly the sort of thing that I am worried about with the legislation. We do not want a 'brain drain' where top firms and highly talented individuals move elsewhere as a result of increasing taxation etc.

Cut taxes, cut regulation, cut the public sector. Growth will result :)

Tamiflu

Turns out that firm Roche has been withholding information regarding Tamiflu which has "made it impossible for scientists to assess how well the anti-flu drug stockpiled around the globe works by withholding the evidence the company has gained from trials, doctors alleged today ."

How familiar this sounds. Thaddeus has an excellent post regarding the matter over at Anna Raccoon.

Pre Budget Report

So this year's pre-budget report is now out. Not sure how interested we should be, but it appears that MPs really aren't that bothered: (from Obo)

 
So NI is to rise by 0.5% to raise another £3bn a year, which is excellent, more taxes is always good news.

VAT is to go back to 17.5%. Either they shouldn't have made the change in the first place (as the results are negligible, and consumers barely notice) or it should be kept at 15%.

I'm slowly turning towards the opinion that huge government spending may not be thes best way out of recession, I'd prefer a method of lower taxation and reduced regulation to let the free market find it's way out of the recession, this also doesn't have the unfortunate side effect of racking up huge debts and being forced to increase taxes and reduce spending at a later date. Oh yes but the Labour government do not have to worry about that, as they will not be in power when the time comes to fully deal with the consequences of their decisions.

Bankers bonuses are to be taxed with a one-off 50% tax on bonuses of more than £25 000 for a year. I'm still unsure of my opinion on this matter. I understand that bankers in banks that we rescued are effectively living off the state, and paying huge bonuses is therefore ridiculous as it was excessive risk taking and irresponsible banking that have worsened the situation and lead to the necessity of our support in the first place (ish). However I fully understand that by not paying bankers bonuses talented employees will move elsewhere, this is described excellently in this Adam Smith Institute article. For once I seem to be agreeing with a labour policy, on the surface anyway. The fact that it is a single year solution may encourage employees to stay on the premise that they will be earning highly again the following year, and the plan to keep a close eye on other methods of increasing bankers pay through backdated salaries etc is also a good idea.

One thing that I found ridiculous in the PBR was the forecasts of economic performance.

• Economy forecast to shrink 4.75% in 2009, worse than 3.5% forecast in April
• Growth of 1%-1.5% expected in 2010 and 3.5% in 2011 and 2012

So the previous forecast for economic shrink was an underestimation, yet they believe that in a year the economy will recover over 5% from a shrink of 4.75% to a growth of 1-1.5%?! Really? And then a prediction of 3.5% the following year? We spent the majority of the growth years (2000-2007) between 2 and 3% growth, yet they have forecast growth of 3.5%? ARE THEY MAD?

"New 10% tax on income from patents to boost science development."

I have very little knowledge on the area, but surely patents are there to encourage scientific development, in their absence there would be no advantage to scientific innovation as others will simply copy the idea. If this is in fact the case, then surely taxing patents is like putting a tax on cycling, in order to spend the money on encouraging cycling.

Copenhagen Clip

A nice opening to the summit:

Record Companies

Devils Kitchen has an excellent post regarding a development in the music industry. It turns out that record companies have effectively been exploiting artists by using songs in compilations without obtaining the necessary rights.

"And don't, for a second, think that the artists are playing softball with the music companies. In a wonderful double irony, they are using the music companies' own assessment of damages—used against individual filesharers—as a measure of how much said companies owe in damages."

Excellent.

Copenhagen

So the Copenhagen climit summit started today, in a typical hypocritical manner:



Annoyingly it seems to be what should be expected from these people "saving" the environment. They really don't give a shit. The "poor" developing countries that will allegedly suffer are more than pleased to receive aid from all those polluting prosperous bastards in the West, whilst governments in the West are falling over themselves to give money to these countries. I fully don't understand this.

From http://burningourmoney.blogspot.com/2009/12/flat-earthers-and-assholes.html:

"But even if we accept that the climate is warming, nobody has yet convinced us it's mainly down to our activities. The official line is that the link has been proved, but the people who say that have never presented the evidence in an open and transparent form that we can examine for ourselves. They simply assert it, present a load of hyped up exaggerated garbage like Gore's lamentable film, and rant hysterically at anyone who dares to question their authority."

From where I am standing, there should still be a considerable amount of debate regarding AGW (anthropogenic global warming), yet governments seem to be acting as if there is a global consensus on the topic. Why are they trying to rush into this? As the venerable KB has put forward, what actually are the consequences of global warming?

Here is a nice post regarding the hockeystick graph and the medieval warm period.

If anyone remembers the Maldives Cabinet meeting underwater to highlight their "plight" and the potential damage global warming could do to their country, here is an interesting brief describing a letter from a scientist who has looked properly at the claimed "rising" sea levels.

Even Iain Dale is dubious.

More ClimateGate

A global warming advocate gets a little bit riled by common sense and logic. Shows his true colours:

Welcome to The United States of Europe!

The Lisbon Treaty is ratified today, rejoice! Further integration into the EU, check my last post for a nice speech from Nigel Farage.

I really do not like being part of the EU, I'll explain in a full and coherant manner at some point.

"If it contains the same substance, why is the Lisbon Treaty not a constitution?
The constitution attempted to replace all earlier EU treaties and start afresh, whereas the new treaty amends the Treaty on the European Union (Maastricht) and the Treaty Establishing the European Community (Rome).It also drops all reference to the symbols of the EU - the flag, the anthem and the motto - though these will continue to exist."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8387648.stm

A nice quote from europa.eu :

"In a rapidly changing world, Europeans look to the EU to address issues such as globalisation, climatic and demographic changes, security and energy."

Do we? Do we really? I look to my democratically elected government regarding issues that I believe are important, CLIMATE CHANGE IS NOT ONE OF THEM.

Thought this was good

Van Rompuy

Seems that the EU wants to make itself even more unpopular.

"Herman Van Rompuy: Europe's first president to push for 'Euro tax'"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/6622886/Herman-Van-Rompuy-Europes-first-president-to-push-for-Euro-tax.html

Very nice. I almost want this to go ahead so more people in the UK can realise that the EU is both a HUGE waste of our money, and a completely unnecessary influence on our civil liberties.

EU Foreign Minister

It appears, as you would expect for the EU, that the new EU Foreign Minister has never faced a democratic election.  The only vaguely democratic "election" that Baroness Ashton has faced is that of the appointment to the position.

Pretty standard I guess.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/6613112/Baroness-Ashton-ticks-all-the-right-EU-boxes.html

Creationism

This page goes a long way to disproving it.

Debt

I've been avoiding my Google Reader and news websites over the last couple of days. I have been busy with other things, so much so that I have not had the time/effort to rant about anything.

Today this trend continues, although I have at least gone to the effort to read a few bits of news.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8367991.stm

Public sector debt rising, well there's a surprise.

TaxPayers Alliance

Court of Protection

The Daily Mail, despite its blatant exaggerations, mistruths and sensationalism, is in fact a brilliant journalistic paper. It has a huge readership and as such can draw a large amount of attention to important issues.

One such case is the Mail on Sunday's article regarding the Court of Protection, which I discovered via Old Holborn's post on the matter.

From wikipedia:

"The Court of Protection in English law is a Superior Court of Record created under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. It has jurisdiction over the property, financial affairs and personal welfare of people who lack mental capacity to make decisions for themselves. Among its various roles the Court of Protection is responsible for determining disputes as to the registration of Enduring Powers of Attorney, and Lasting Powers of Attorney, appointing new trustees, authorising certain gifts and making statutory wills. Examples of personal welfare issues determined by the court are decisions about where protected persons live, who they see and how they are cared for."

It seems that this court has been the cause of much pain and suffering to many people, and it is another example of somewhat unnecessary intrusion into our lives.

Daniel Hannan

Daniel Hannan on the EU. Somebody make him PM.

Cyanide and Happiness

http://www.explosm.net/comics/1858/


Best one I've seen in a while. Explosm.net

McDonalds

http://obotheclown.blogspot.com/2009/11/god-bless-b3ta.html

The replacement poem for the advert is epic.

Our firearm laws

You would think that Judges would be able to apply a bit of sense to a situation, unfortunately in some cases this may not be true. Especially in the case of this ex-soldier.

"Paul Clarke, 27, was found guilty of possessing a firearm at Guildford Crown Court on Tuesday – after finding the gun and handing it personally to police officers on March 20 this year."

WHAT. How can this be logical or rational by any sense of the words. This law needs changing. The fact that he had the firearm (in this case a sawn off shotgun with 2 cartridges, found in a black bin bag in the bottom of his garden) in his possession, regardless of intent or any other factor of the situation, will mean that this man will be in prison for a minimum of 5 years. 

I lose faith.

Carbon Rationing

Lord Finsbury the chairman of the Environment Agency has proposed that everyone be given a carbon ration account. This would mean that if you stay within the quota of carbon then you will be unaffected, or even be able to sell on excess "credits". However if you go over your ration then you will have to purchase more credits from underconsumers to be allowed to travel.

"People would be given a “carbon account” and a unique number that they would have to submit when making purchases of carbon-intensive items such as petrol, electricity or airline tickets.". From this article from timesonline.co.uk.

Unfortunately the Climate Change Act became law in the UK in 2008, and since then the Government have been searching for ways to ensure that the UK carbon dioxide emissions are at least 80% lower than 1990 by 2050. The idea of carbon rationing is superior to that of carbon taxes as it allows the free market work to some extent, and will prevent low income people from suffering (as long as they restrict their travel). However the effect of carbon rationing will still fall heavier on the poor, who will only be able to remain within the limit, as they will generally be unable to afford to purchase more credits. Those on higher incomes will be able to afford to travel beyond the limit imposed by the rationing by simply purchasing more credits.

If imposed this would have the effect of causing people to be more aware of their carbon "footprint" and may encourage a higher use of public transport, carpooling, and other methods that reduce emissions. But is this really necessary? This sort of limiting of liberties (and it indeed does so, especially limiting those of people on lower incomes) is increasingly being justified by the war on climate change, a dubious prospect in itself.

Regulations such as this have negative externalities in a variety of places. Developing countries that rely on tourism will suffer from the equivelently increased cost of travel and reduction of tourists as a result, airlines would suffer reduced custom, and the cost of commuting to work will be increased, reducing mobility of labour.

The House of Coomons Environmental Audit Committee has said in a report that "Widespread public acceptance, while desirable, should not be a pre-condition for a personal carbon trading scheme; the need to reduce emissions is simply too urgent". You can understand now how little these climate change Nazis care about the general public, in their push to save the world.

Keynes? Full employment

A very interesting article over at Stumbling and Mumbling regarding capital's effect on employment levels. It discusses the effect that easy money had earlier in this decade on the level of capital from non financial firms, and how this effects the employment level.

That share price bubble

Looks as if some inside sources may believe that the share price bubble may be over sooner than expected. Top directors have recently been selling their shares.

If I owned any shares I would seriously consider selling right now.

Road Trains

As soon as 2011 we could have cars taking part in road trains. A lead car driven by an experienced driver who is used to the route, such as a taxi or lorry driver, is followed closely by 6 - 8 autonomously controlled cars. This system allows the following drivers and passengers to attend to other tasks whilst being driven along the motorway. A driver can then take control of their car and exit to the side to carry on with their journey as normal.

This system does actually sound like a good idea, surprising considering it is an EU initiative. Of course it is climate change driven, allegedly reducing emissions by 20% as a result of the drag benefit from being close behind another car. This would also help reduce congestion on busy roads, the main benefit in my opinion. Not to mention the fact that with the introduction of wireless internet in cars I would be able to browse the internet on long journeys.

The future is cool.

More liberties

Old Holborn has a similar opinion on how our Politicians are slowly removing our liberties.

http://bastardoldholborn.blogspot.com/2009/11/not-good-start-to-day.html

He cites lots of good examples.

More Scientists Resign

The Professor Nutt case has been interesting to follow. Professor David Nutt was fired by Alan Johnson because it was concluded that the Professor was attempting to change policy, he has been "...saying cannabis is less harmful than alcohol or nicotine." according to the BBC. He is of course, absolutely correct. Both alcohol and tobacco have been proven to have very damaging effects on the human body, both in the long and short term; whilst cannabis has been proven to, after very heavy use (over 5 joints a day for 10 years), damage the hippocampus and amygdales in the brain by a small amount (although that is one, very small case study). Other claims regarding cannabis use have been greatly debated, with no definite conclusion reached.

It has been concluded that although the Government like to pretend that they rely on scientists for advice on subjects which Politicians themselves tend to have no expertise, they instead frequently disregard information provided and base policy on populist and often incorrect views.

Alan Johnson has again come under fire today after the resignation of a further three scientific advisers from the government's drug panel. Two other scientists from this panel resigned earlier in the week, making the total now five resignations in the two weeks following Professor Nutt's sacking. I'm glad to see the other advisers supporting Professor Nutt and realising that the Government does not take their advice seriously when making policy.

Our government needs to understand that drugs policy should be based on solid evidence. I believe that it should be within the right of any consenting adult to ingest anything they desire, as long as it does not have a negative impact on others. The campaign demonising smokers is bad enough as it is, QUANGOs funded by the government lobbying effectively against the rights of individuals who choose to smoke tobacco, but that is a different matter, which I shall hopefully address another day.

Less Privacy

I was going to wait until tomorrow to blog about this but a sudden burst of rage has caused me to address it right now.

The Government has recently decided that we do not have our civil liberties invaded enough already. It has decided that:

"Every phone call, text message, email and website visit made by private citizens is to be stored for a year and will be available for monitoring by government bodies."

This article in the Telegraph is full of joyful quotes, for example:

"It is doing so despite its own consultation showing that it has little public support."

Ah yes, it I suppose we should be used to the fact that our Government acts againsts our interests.

So why is this legislation needed? Oh yes, of course, the fight against terror: 

  

"David Davis, the former shadow home secretary, added: “...this is no doubt necessary in pursuing terrorist suspects..." "

Necessary? I do not believe that this in any way necessary. Instead of destroying the liberties of our own citizens, why don't we pull out of Afganistan and any other Country in which WE HAVE NO FUCKING BUSINESS. Maybe without provocation extremist muslims will be unable to recruit more suicide bombers, and our national security might benefit.

Now, I wonder who is behind this fantastic idea? Ah how silly of me to wonder...

"But the Home Office yesterday insisted it would push the legislation through. Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, originally released a consultation paper in April."

The troughing chipmunk who has been systematically removing our liberties since she gained her role as Home Secretary. 

Not to mention being totally unnecessary, this fantastic idea is also going to be costing the taxpayer £2 billion over 10 years. OUR money, spent spying on US. Sounds fair.

Stock Market Bubble

The FTSE 100 has been steadily rising since March this year when it troughed at an index value at 3500, since then it has grown to over 5000. Many see this as a sign that the UK Economy is recovering strongly, and a sign of improvements to come. Unfortunately this may not be the case.

According to an article in MoneyWeek what is being interpreted as a bona fide Economic recovery is infact just a stockmarket bubble, caused by the Bank of England's quantitative easing programme.

I haven't yet fully researched the effects and aims of this quantitative easing, but I have a feeling that I will be against it on principle that simply printing money is not a sensible or sustainable way of encourage economic recovery.

Drunk Woman + Subway

A drunk woman in Boston had a VERY near miss with a Subway train last friday. Pretty amazing. Yes I am aware of the paradox involved in a "near miss".

Big Brother Watch

A nice campaign organised by the taxpayers alliance where you can acquire one of these stickers:

You get these for free if you send and email to info@bigbrotherwatch.org.uk and then send them pictures with them in a hilarious place.

http://bigbrotherwatch.typepad.com/home/campaigns.html/

Lisbon Treaty

Too lazy to go into the Lisbon Treaty or the EU in depth right now, but here is a nice link regarding the powers that the EU now has within our Nation State.

http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/politics-and-government/the-powers-of-the-eu-superstate-200911104414/

Secret Inquests

"Secret inquests which will bar bereaved families and the public from attending hearings into controversial deaths were forced through Parliament last night.

The Government narrowly defeated opposition to the new powers by a majority of eight MPs in a highly charged vote in the House of Commons. Under the measures ministers will be able to order that an inquest is replaced with a secret inquiry whenever they deem it necessary."

Apparently during the ridiculous media storm over Gordon Brown's ability to write a letter, the Government managed to force through a Bill that gives Jack Straw the ability to order a secret inquiry at his own discretion, with any case regarding a "controversial" death. A secret inquiry would see bereaved families, legal representatives and the public excluded from the proceedings. How very democratic.

"the move would mean inquiries held at the behest of the government, which could set their terms of reference, choose a judge, restrict attendance and publication of evidence or suspend proceedings "merely on the grounds that it's in the public interest"."

Even the BBC seem to be vaguely against this Bill. If the Bill is used correctly when public safety is genuinely at stake then it could be harmless, unfortunately we cannot always expect our leaders to act in our interests.

GuyNews.TV

http://order-order.com/tag/guynews.tv/

November 5th edition. Old Holborn organised a nice walk to Parliament to celebrate Guy Fawkes day.

The police were very polite and let them enter into the building, how very boring.

A little bit of tech: Motorola Droid

The new Motorola Droid is set to be a pretty nice phone, I'm already jealous, my HTC Touch HD isn't quite a good as I would have wanted. I blame Windows Mobile.

I keep seeing posts on various tech sites mentioning this phone, touting it as a potential iphone contender. Maybe, all I know is that it sounds awesome, looks awesome, and has a decent OS.

The Droid runs Android 2.0, which is far superior to Windows Mobile and apparently on par with the iphone OS. Simple and easy to use, no unnecessary UI features. It has a 3.7" screen with 480 x 854 resolution and a decent camera.

Basically this phone has all that it needs to be great, a physical keyboard, a good camera, a very nice screen, and a good touchscreen. I do want it.

Engadget's Review

First

Well I suppose I should start somewhere. Not entirely sure why I've created this blog, though I suppose I do have a few reasons.

In the past 12 months or so I have become increasingly interested in politics and technology, both of which fascinate me. I read a large amount of blogs, articles, and news websites and frequently post links to articles or blogs of interest. I initially did this by Facebook, but realised after raging to anyone who would listen about how Facebook irritates me that it was fairly hypocritical to moan about other people answering quizzes regarding their future, or which unknown celebrity they are, when I was spamming the news feed with links that the majority or my friends were uninterested in.

I decided to move my attention to Twitter which is currently more exclusive to my closer friends, those who tend to be interested in some of the subjects that I "tweet" about. This is working fairly well, however I am frequently frustrated with the limited characters and the fact that I cannot articulate my thoughts, but simply link to whatever piqued my interest.

Another reason that I have begun a blog is so that I can archive my thoughts and and the links that I post, without having to trawl through endless twitter or facebook pages. That way I can see how my opinions change over time, and potentially what events shape my opinions for better or worse.

The last reason, and maybe the most important reason that I will be "blogging" is that, as I have already mentioned, it will help me articulate my thoughts. I love to have informed debates with people about issues regarding a variety of things, yet although I have a basic knowledge of some of these issues, I often have only grazed the surface by reading somebody else's blog post. By making my own post regarding the issue it should help me formalise my thoughts into something coherent, and hopefully improve my ability to write logically and clearly.

"Blogger: Term used to describe anyone with enough time or narcissism to document every tedious bit of minutia filling their uneventful lives. Possibly the most annoying thing about bloggers is the sense of self-importance they get after even the most modest of publicity. Sometimes it takes as little as a referral on a more popular blogger's website to set the lesser blogger's ego into orbit."

A nice description from Maddox.