Dodgy Dave and his chums.
Posted by celticman on Sun, 10 Apr 2016
This is a difficult script to write. You could go with the no suggestion of impropriety, criminality or wrongdoing, and following good business practice [fill in any name here, for example, David Cameron, Pablo Escobar, Vladimir Putin]
You could go all jokey and imply we're all in it together and we’ve all done it, signing on, or someone else signing on for you, for example, Bahama residents including a part-time bishop, because you’re too busy that day, creating wealth. Perhaps fling in a bit of alliteration, Dodgy Dave the Downing Street landlord coining it in, and mention the Panama Papers.
But then you’d probably have to mention not just Panama, but London itself as a tax bolt-hole where rich people congregate and get fitted for a bespoke tax avoidance suit, tailored to their needs, by an army of experts, such as David Cameron’s dear departed father.
In the European Union there - this week discounted offers- of convenient parking spots in Luxembourg, Lichtenstein and Monaco. And if sir and his capital wants to take a break from all that onerous paperwork there are hotspots in Guernsey, Jersey, Sark, Gibraltar, Anguilla, The Virgin Isles, Montserrat, Bermuda, Turks & Calicos Islands, Cayman Islands and any other British Territories and Crown Dependencies you can think of and that can be expected to keep stuhm about how much loot you’ve looted and don’t really give a flying fuck where you got it from. As long as you’re filthy rich you are master of all you survey. Only mugs and poor people pay tax. Thomas Piketty on Capital showed an interesting anomaly there is more money in circulation than can be accounted for. It doesn’t take a genius to suggest that turn over any of these stones and you’ll find lots of interesting facts about wealth squirming under the light of transparency.
We could go for the moral angle and the exposure of pious untruths. A biblical quote would be good here to set off the script. Perhaps something from Proverbs 22:16: Whoever oppresses the poor to increase his own wealth, and gives to the rich will surely come to poverty.
But the problem with that is we are a nation built on that great lie of trickle-down economics that the poor might eat –eventually- from the scraps of the table of the rich man. The poor are always with us and it’s their fault for being poor is a stick. We have our masters grandstanding, telling us to work harder and dig deeper and stop being such a whinger and whiner, while quietly, money flows in one direction from the poorest to the richest at an increasing rate. Paul Mason shows that before Lehman Brother’s collapse 40 percent of corporate profits in the United States were in the financial sector, four out of ten dollars. London, the most subsidized city in the United Kingdom, offers its own model of excess equalling success with everything for sale including the government. When Napoleon invaded Russia in 1812 he took artillery and about one million men of different nationalities, the finest fighting force on the planet, but he was no mug, somebody would have to pay for the invasion. Napoleon had roubles printed. Whoever paid the full cost to the bearer of such a note would not be Napoleon, nor will it be Cameron and his ilk paying for the NHS or road, or school or take your pick and mix . Who’s paying for failure if it’s not the rich?
As a morality play it doesn’t work and as an economic template it works even less well, but ironically it offers the greatest chance of electoral success. Beat the drum. Come clean and admit your faults. David Cameron is a good man. As is George Osborne and Boris Johnson. They are just doing what they have been brought up to do, which is to help the select few. What’s the problem with that?
- celticman's blog
- Log in to post comments
- 1396 reads
Comments
I'm almost too old to get
I'm almost too old to get angry about it now, but not quite. In fact quite a lot of people seem to be pissed off about this turn of events. Not sure if that will translate into any form of challenge to our political culture, where Corbyn is 'unelectable' and Cameron, Osborne and Johnson aren't. Also where a wishy washy Guardian reading left of centre such as myself is (I've been informed) a rabid left winger out to destroy the country because I think Corbyn should be given a chance. Which only makes me think, OK then, let's get rabid.
I've never had money, never
I've never had money, never had cars or houses, but I've always had a roof over my head. For one of the richest countries in the world not to be able to house it's citizens and feed them is an abonimation. Food banks are an abonimation. Yet, far too many young people have been schmoozed into thinking that this the way it's got to be. Fuck off I say. But the systme is set up to benefit the rich, like Cameron and his cronies, and really Corbyn has no chance. It's not that he's unelectable, which he is, but that Labour are uneclectable. They've lost 50 plus seats in Scotland. They'll never get them back. They'll struggle to get 4 or 5 seats here. And the tories have been quietly moving the goal posts so that funding from unions no longer can be counted on and moving, literally the electoral boundaires. And their biggest asset has been the propaganda war whiich has been lost so badly that Labour in the last election agreed that as a strating point they would continue with Tory cuts to welfare. The young have never had it so bad. Well, that's a lie, go back to pre-1939 and you'll find many of the same conditons and many of the same asinine solutions.
You're right about the
You're right about the numbers, and I doubt I'll see another Labour government again whoever's leading the party. And yes, that's to a great extent Labour's own fault because of the complete dog's breakfast they (we, I'm a card carrying, if weary, member) made of the last election (and the entire job of opposition.) But I'd like to see Corbyn given a chance to form a principled opposition, with the backing of the parliamentary party. Yes, 1939, pre-welfare state, seems a sadly apt analogy for the young.
you won't see another Labour
you won't see another Labour Party governent, but I guess we'll split from Europe *(it will be very tight) and that will mean another referendum. I guess you might see a coalition with Labour and SNP. Their policies are identical. Sadly, they are also equally ineffectual. To be young is a curse. (well, maybe not a curse, it has it's compensations)