PIP – Permanently Irritation Persecution?

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

Whilst our mainstream media continue with the media circus about the USA presidential nominations, the referendum on EU membership and the false allegations of anti-Semitism against those who support the Palestinians rights.  Concerns have been raised by landlords, that those on Universal Credit, are in rent arrears?  Which will come as no surprise, to any one with any commosense!

We still have a Government still hounding the least able in society.  Whilst the rich get away with false expenses applications and avoiding tax.  Money is wasted hounding the poorest in society, instead of assisting them and making their lives more worthwhile.  A society which sits-by and allows the persecution and ridicule of the poor and meek, is not worthy of calling itself civilised!

Recent experience leads me to ask the question what does is PIP – Personal Independence Payment OR Permanently Irritation Persecution? In February  I wrote about how following the DWP rules r…

Source: PIP – Permanently Irritation Persecution?

RTBe legislation a shoe-in and NO recompense for HA’s!

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

More bad news for social housing in the UK!  Social housing was brought in during the 1930’s by a Liberal Government.  This was because of the disgracefully poor quality private rented properties.  In the 1930s people were still living in hovels, in the ‘land fit for heroes’.  Firstly under Labour, who continued with Thatcher’s policies and now under this satanic Conservative party.  We are returning to the days of utter deprivation for most of the public: poverty-in-the-uk..

Source: RTBe legislation a shoe-in and NO recompense for HA’s!

Recovering the early economic programmes of Die Grünen

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

The UK’s Sustainable Development Commission (disbanded by the present Conservative Government) produced a report called Prosperity without Growth in 2009.  I do not know, if they used any of the material from the earlier Die Grünen economic programmes (link below) from the eighties?  But it is a pity that the German Green Party, that recognised that continued growth, could not continue, broke up.  And that we just seem to be recycling old ideas, without them materialising into actions.

Back in 2011, at the UK’s Green Party conference in Cardiff.  At a fringe meeting, Equality without Growth, the author of the Prosperity without Growth, Tim Jackson.  Spoke about the need for the Green Party to show real leadership, by pushing forward an agenda for Degrowth.  Something that was needed as the Global North was suffering from the financial melt-down.  Unfortunately, the UK’s Green Party promotes the continued pursuit of economic growth!

Source: Recovering the early economic programmes of Die Grünen

“Numbers should be a light, not a crutch”

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

Unfortunately, the use of percentages (%) instead of hard figures is used within all Government departments including the NHS (National Health Service).  Even the Health Protection Agency HPA), in their reply to a planning application for a biomass incinerator in Davyhulme, Trafford.  Stated it was acceptable because it would only increase the local death rates by 0.06 per year.

 

application predicts that the particulate emissions from the plant would result in a 0.011% increase in deaths brought forward (paragraph 12.180). This is also expressed as 0.06 deaths brought forward per annum for this population. The applicant considers this impact “would not be noticeable”.

Of course, any increase in the local death rate is totally unacceptable.  And, yet we have a Government department, the HPA, supposedly responsible for the protection of human health finding it acceptable.  Though they put it as, ‘would not be noticable’!

We also have the use of percentages, when they talk about ‘fracking fluid’.  The highly toxic cocktail of water, sand and chemicals they use in high-pressure hydraulic fracturing of shale gas.  Hydraulic fracturing for shale gas is likely to involve the use of large quantities of clean water, typically 10,000 to 30,000 m3 water per well (10,000,000 to 30,000,000 litres).  Which is mixed with sand, around 5% and other fluids at around 2%.  Which makes it sound as miniscule amount, until you do the maths and 2% = 300,000 to 600,000 litres of highly toxic and carcenigenic fluidsbeing added.  Which has the potentail to seep into aquifers and pollute drinking water.

As the blog below ststaes, it is time the Government stopped hiding behind percentages, and gave clear figures that people can clearly understand.

“Numbers should be a light, not a crutch”.

Funny weather we’re having… how the melting Arctic is affecting global weather patterns in a sinister way | Campaign against Climate Change

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

An article on Climate Change, going into some detail on why we are experiencing some very unusual weather.  It is those in the Global South and the poor in the Global North who suffer most, from these extreme weather patterns.  And as he states, we are now on a slippery slope downwards, which we will not be able to get back up.  And what do our leaders do, more of the same, which is the cause of Global Warming.  It is time, those in the Global North, cut back on their excessive consumption and waste.  It is time to throw away the motor car and give up flying on holidays abroad.  Because, in the end, this is going to adversely affect everyone, no matter how much money you have.  You cannot eat money, gold, shares, bonds or even bricks and mortar.

Funny weather we’re having… how the melting Arctic is affecting global weather patterns in a sinister way | Campaign against Climate Change.

Ripped-off Britons: Key political fibs, and some tips on how to refute them

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

I have posted before, that the UK, especially the City of London Corporation is the biggest Tax Haven in the World.  Our political elite, Labour and Conservative constantly tell us they cannot tax the rich because the financial sector would leave this country.  They also tell us, it is unfair to tax the rich, because success should be rewarded.  But we know, they have only been successful by acting in a criminal way and evading tax.  That, money will trickle down, but for generations we have seen the reverse.  The article below gives some answer, you can use in reply to the nonsense being peddled by the political elite.

Ripped-off Britons: Key political fibs, and some tips on how to refute them.
You can send a message by signing the following petition, asking for a reform of the banking sector:

Big Change in Banking  

The papers are full of stories of how the Conservatives are going to cut benefits, claiming tax-payers are sick of paying for the work-shy.  Most of those who are on benefits have no choice, there is no paid work for them.  The way the Economy is modelled, does not take account of those who do unpaid work, such as housewives and those who care for relatives.  We are going back to the times of Dickens, were the poor were thought to have brought on themselves and deserved punishment.  Whilst the rich fleece each other in a very corrupt business world.

Jobless and big-families lose benefits  

I wonder, are those who are in employment and earn more than the average wage, will continue to receive child benefits, even though they do not need it?  The cuts are supposed to be in the region of £10 billion but the Government is taking about spending £70 billion of a Trident missile program replacement, not mentioned in the papers.

Welfare-cuts of £10 Billion 

And of course this ‘Green’ Governments commitment towards renewable energy, which has seen the Chancellor talk about tax-breaks for ‘fracking’.  Has disillusioned major energy companies, who are now talking not investing in the UK.

Green Energy under threat

The views of SKWalker 1964, on the lack of ‘Duty of Care’ by the DWP

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

IF SKWalker is right, and the DWP (Department for Works and Pensions), a Social Impact Assessment was never carried out on the affects of changes to disability benefits.  It would appear then, that they have failed in their ‘Duty of Care’ and in my opinion, may have contravene Government legislation; The Equality Act 2010.  

Both the last Labour Government and this Government have done nothing to bring the criminals involved in numerous Banking illegalities to justice.  Stating, all sorts of nonsense, why it was not possible to bring criminal charges.  And instead both the last Labour Government and this Conservative Governments have poured money into a corrupt banking system.   Max Kaiser and Stacy Herbert cover some of these illegal activities carried out by Financial Institutions causing abject poverty on millions of people.

And yet, those who are unfortunate and who which to have a basic standard of living, those of us who are fortunate enough enjoy, Equality.  But both Labour and Conservatives Governments and Local Governments, have done their best to demonize the unfortunate.

 

Six Reasons Why Politicians Believe They Can Lie | Psychology Today

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

An interesting article on why politicians lie.  And it is very pertinent to Manchester and the Labour run council.  For years now councillor Richard Leese and Howard Bernstein have been trumpeting the success of their regeneration plans for the City.  This is despite their are hundreds of office and retails units empty, some for years since being built.  Then, there is the high unemployment, deprivation, poverty, fuel poverty and homelessness.  Even despite all this evidence, their plans have not succeeded but have been proven to be a waste of tax-payers money.  And in some cases, this money cannot be accounted for, but no criminal investigation or charges have been made.  Still, their loyal following, including members of Labour’s shadow cabinet, think everything is fine.  In the meantime, the real Mancunians (no matter what their colour), suffer.  And the reason why, is explained in the article below.

Six Reasons Why Politicians Believe They Can Lie | Psychology Today.

100 Million people will die by 2030 if the World does not act on Climate Change

Posted on by Patrick Sudlow

A new report released on the 26th September 2012, called ‘A Guide to the Cold Calculus of a Hot Planet’, claims 100 Million people will die before 2030, due to the results of Climate Change.  This is because of the inactions of Governments and businesses to act on climate change.  This has led to a more polluted planet, causing the Global temperature to rise.  Unfortunately Governments and business are locked into a fossil-fuel and consumer economy.  They have not heeded the calls to invest in real renewable technologies and a move away from ‘business-as-usual’ model.

The report is optimistic, that there is still an opportunity to scale-back pollution and halt Global warming.  I feel, it will not happen, till there is a complete collapse in water and food supplies, when it is too late.  They put forward the argument that economically (not the first time, it has been argued), it would be the sensible thing to do.  It would reduce poverty, hunger and ill-health and opposed to the outcome of pursuing a carbon economy.  This is a report all politicians and business people should read and act on it.

At a meeting of Southern Voices a talk given by Washington Alcott ( a Jamaican), entitled ‘Climate Change – A conservation from the South’.  Made the point that climate change and the environment agenda;

“It was predominately the white-middle class who dominated the debate and decided the outcomes”.

I agree with him, in fact I would go further, it is the so-called ( predominately white) educated middle-class who are part of the problem.  The do not want to change their life-styles, so do not want real change.  Even, those espousing to be environmentally aware, still drive the most, shunning public transport and continue to fly abroad multiple times a year for  holidays.  They consume more than those on reduced incomes, but pay less because of the unequal charging mechanisms.  Because of their spending power, they could make a huge difference but they will not.  There are ‘OK Jack, sod you’.