Just for starters here is a little about me: Ivor Timson
Like real ale- long walks into the oblivion, with a touch of blues and rock music; particularly at festivals. Many fun jobs- hobbies, including being a local DJ, Charity Worker, Potholing, Fairground Worker and Competitive Motocross Racing. I believe in peace, equality and a fair world.
Been involved in many National and Local positions in the Trade Union Movement and other groups. I am against prejudice and believe in radical economics and politics. Been elected as a Councillor, a School Governor, Branch Secretary seven years- Nalgo- Unison, Warwickshire, Chair of Joint Union Conveners Group-West Midlands- Warwickshire, Chair- Nuneaton District Trades Council, Secretary NW Mind, Secretary CPC, Coventry, West Midlands, Chair of Warwickshire Heads of Homes Group, Chair/ Secretary Nuneaton District Anti- Racism/ Anti War Group 1970- 1974 -1978- 1985- 1994-2008, West Midlands Provincial Council, lead negotiator with Ministers, including Kenneth Clarke MP- Minister for Transport at the time etc; plus many other positions both Locally and Nationally. Have a Masters Degree in Economics and professional qualifications. Been a Carer and Voluntary Worker.
Try to be caring, and a listener, and I believe that relationships are more important than material assets. My life experiences are considerable, but I still have lots to learn. Enjoy having a laugh with friends, often with a pint or two of real ale. Now also addicted to the internet.
Other jobs and hobbies over the years, include playing Local Football, Motocross / Racing, and Practical Conservation.
Currently- CPC, NWC, Warwickshire and the West Midlands, UK and on the Regional Council- August 2011.
I promise to respond to everyone who e-mails. Take care out there. Ivor 07-2011. See my blogs on the economy and life.
Went to Ratcliffe Culey Infant School, Queens Road – Nuneaton and Market Bosworth Schools. Then Ruskin College, Oxford and Cardiff University. Lucky to have enjoyed them all.
And now for the main blog:
It really is so difficult to comprehend so much toxic- stupidity in Economists, Politicians and the squieky TV and Radio presenters. Most have been utterly discredited over the past years. Economists cannot even agree whether their subject is a science or a liberal vocation. Based on this systems methods, they would need a crystal ball to predict any economic outcome. So it ought to be understandable why they got it so wrong? Were was all the predictions of the current recession. And why in view of the fact that the unfettered market has utterly failed, do we still finance it and even encourage it’s destructive forces on our services such as the NHS.
Any person visiting from a hypothetical- another world, would think we had all gone completely bonkers. Would they be correct? And whilst we might believe the squiekies- the so called TV and Radio ‘political’ presenters, we forget they are representing their own interests, the status quo and are often in total denial. The ones on BBC radio are often the very worst and have the most to answer for. Continuously telling people that at least some cuts must be accepted, is one example of their indoctrination processes. The bankers of course, also fall into this same category and seem to be very self indulgent. The speculators and the stock market must surely be reformed and controlled on a democratic and international basis. And creating fictitious capital simply will not do. So why exactly have we got into such a severe crisis situation, with a imminent slump in both the overall economy and the housing market around the corner?
Left economists have often called for nationalisation of the banking sector. And now the Bank of England’s deputy governor conceded that taxpayers should not have had to pay for the 2008 collapse. Paul Tucker told the BBC that the taxpayer bailout represented a failure “at the heart of capitalism,” suggesting that investors and shareholders should pick up the bill in any future banking collapse. “If we have a system where banks take the upside but the taxpayer takes the downside, something has gone wrong with capitalism and we need to repair this,” he said. “We want the upside to go to the shareholders and to some extent the managers, but the downside must go with that too. This is going to require big changes internationally.”
Mr Tucker also suggested that banks needed to boost capital reserves in order to stem the flow of a boom and make the finance sector “more resilient” during a bust. His comments were an indication of divisions at the heart of capitalist economic thinking about the state’s role in regulating the finance sector, following the outcry over excessive banking bonuses. Professor of Industrial Relations Roger Seifert said banks “should be nationalised but the state would have to play an increased role in the long term to “regulate banking behaviour.” “The short-term position would be to nationalise failing banks permanently then use them to encourage behavioural change in other banks through more progressive employment and lending policies, linked with community and government projects,” he said. And now Mervyn King-, Governor of the Bank of England has similar reservations. He is of course, caught up in the contradiction of the century regarding interest rates. Whatever decision will lead to slump. The current policy is bringing gains of over one hundred pounds per week to the average mortgage payer, but savers are loosing out. The impact of highering them will be another disaster for the economy as will the status quo. Yet another insolvable contradiction.
Left Economics Advisory Panel co-ordinator Andrew Fisher welcomed Mr Tucker’s acknowledgement that “something had gone wrong with capitalism. “But he added: “To let one of the big banks go bust would see millions lose their savings and tens of thousands lose their jobs. The Labour government was right to step in and nationalise. However, with that nationalisation should have come democratic public control with fair rates for savers and borrower alike and investment targeted at creating sustainable jobs. While Mr Tucker recognises the inherent flaws in the finance capital system, his free-market solution is the exact opposite of what any Left economists have called for. After the Bank of England’s deputy governor conceded that taxpayers should not have had to pay for the 2008 collapse. Paul Tucker told the BBC that the taxpayer bailout represented a failure “at the heart of capitalism,” suggesting that investors and shareholders should pick up the bill in any future banking collapse. Mr Tucker also suggested that banks needed to boost capital reserves in order to stem the flow of a boom and make the finance sector “more resilient” during a bust. His comments were an indication of divisions at the heart of capitalist economic thinking about the state’s role in regulating the finance sector, following the outcry over excessive banking bonuses.
Professor of Industrial Relations Roger Seifert also said banks should be nationalised but the state would have to play an increased role in the long term to “regulate banking behaviour.”
“The short-term position would be to nationalise failing banks permanently then use them to encourage behavioural change in other banks through more progressive employment and lending policies, linked with community and government projects,” he said.
Some believe that capitalism is at the root of all societies problems. Capitalism is driven by competition for profits, not by what people need, which in turn leads to wars and environmental damage. It is a system that denies people work when there’s work to be done and lets people starve when they could be fed. Under capitalism there has always been and always will be a significant section of society that is unemployed. Capitalism simply does not provide employment for everyone and never intends too.
Friedman wrote a book called Capitalism and Freedom, which Naomi Klein states became the rulebook for economic policy in the United States and in Great Britain under Margaret Thatcher, and we believe is continuing under our current government.
These are the rules as stated in a recent newspaper article:
1. Government must remove all rules and regulations standing in the way of the accumulation of profits
2. Government should sell off any assets they own that corporations could be running at a profit
3. Government should dramatically cut back funding of social programs
4. Taxes, when they must exist, should be low and rich and poor should be taxed at the same flat rate
5. Corporations should be free to sell their products anywhere in the world
6. Government should make no effort to protect local industries
7. All prices, including the price of labour should be determined by the market.
These are of course are the policies we have been pursuing now for many years and they have simply failed. We really must be bonkers to continue to pursue them such as privatising the National Heath Service. The banking system has forced us, the tax-payer, to bail out the bankers. Yet they have failed to ensure that the same banks give desperately needed credit to families and independent small businesses.
We need to argue for a fair financial deal, with community banks, credit unions and mutuals. This will ensure those who need financial help are given realistic loans, so they can survive the current economic hardship that they are facing today. We also believe it’s unfair that these irresponsible bankers continue to earn extortionate salaries and bonuses, while at least 420,000 hard working people still earn less than the low minimum wage. Surely it is time for a National Bank under democratic control. This bank could exist with local community banks and credit unions. The rest should be taken over by the state and amalgamated under such a scheme.
Clearly this is not the agenda of the Con-Dem government. They are trying to sell everything and they even tried to sell our forests. Providing a free service such as a library goes completely against what they believe in. Royal Mail is to be sold off, the NHS is being privatised by stealth and our schools over time will become privately owned academies, with an end to free college and university education. This is where Britain is heading, if this government is allowed to get away with its agenda. Similar also to that as advocated by Tony Blair who ‘blindly’ followed the Thatcherite agenda.
And all the parties and the squiekies at present are not only colluding in the process of our so called democracy and manipulating it to their own ends, they are all offering no solution other than we all have to accept huge cuts. This entails yet again propping up a corrupt system, accepting a economic slump, a banking collapse, as the speculative bankers are still free agents gambling with our lifestyle and culture.
House prices will slump as so will the economy. We seem blind even to the recent past. Our fictitious invaders have now returned and after their review have concluded that we are all bonkers. I will drink to that, providing we start to recognise the failure of the system and the necessity to now develop a real progressive alternative. We should be optimistic about planning such a future.
And as a Middle East Revolution now really is in the air, let’s plan for our own. Perhaps we can start by taking on the squiekies in the media and in particular the BBC, who represent the status quo, their own interests and this literally bankrupt society and it’s economy. Our present politicians have lost our trust and their support for the status quo with all it’s corruption, does not aid their cause. The inherent contradictions within this absurd system have now come to a head and we must commence the struggle to form a new society, in order to avoid as previously stated the slump and housing crisis just around the corner.
We need to target banks and in particular the high value speculative transactions. We could engage with the tax dodgers and these two policies alone would save billions, some of which we could spend on environmental projects. We clearly need to move away from our dependency on oil. Our present system also leads to conflict and wars which are hugely expensive. The outline in my main blog if adopted, would mean we would not have to resort to huge cuts now or later. It is difficult to comprehend why we still seem to listen to the same political and economic experts who have simply got it wrong time after time. And let us campaign for a fairer and more objective team of presenters in the Media.
Some of these objectives can start through community groups determining their own outcomes. We surely need a new political programme and a new progressive party. Let’s end this stupidity and look forward to the real big society.
Ivor Timson MSc( Econ.)
Bibliography.
Acknowledgement to all those quoted.
Ivor Timson 