Articles
Overseas Aid, Pension Funds. = Sovereign Wealth.
Much of this Investment money starts out in your PayPacket. Is Stolen as Taxation and then given away by those *** *** at Westminster and ends up in a "Swiss" Bank. Before finding its way back into the Country as buy-out Money for British Airports, Sainsburys? Or some other dubious investment, like "sub-prime" this or that.
Branson is not at all interested in Northern Rock. Only in the TaxPayers Money that Guarantees the Banks deposits. Like Railways, the TaxPayer is where the Profit comes from. Ask the Treasury. Or Sir Richard Branson.
Last Tuesday, 9th. October, I went to our Local Parish Council meeting, Tivetshall St Margaret and St. Mary's, and asked for a vote of Protest against the High Level of Council Taxation for the Parish. I was voted down. The Parish Council think you should pay up and not complain. Do you remember the Headlines on Wednesday, the next day?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/actionnetwork/G2287
is my main BBC. Website. There you will find my suggestion about how to Legally avoid paying Taxation to Westminster and Whitehall. And how it is Legally possible to build another system of Taxation to Fund the Public Services on a County by County, Local System only. Leaving Westminster and Whitehall stranded in London. (Who now remembers the words to that old Army Marching song, "We'er a shower of B*st***s B*st***are we. We come from London, the Ar****le of the Empire and the Universe". And so on. In that situation, Westminster and Whitehal would be right at Home, I suppose.
Is South Norfolk, and possibly the rest of Norfolk, ready to unshackel the dead weight of Parliament from your hard earned Money and cast them adrift in that Sea of Filth and Corruption that they have created these last Seventeen Years?
I believe the EEN, has got a bit of a Campaign going, why not write to them and see if we can revive the Local Economy, Jobs and Pride in the British Nation, again. Regards, ATFlynn.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Sir Ronald Cohen: Midas with a mission 12 May 07
Sir Ronald Cohen: Midas with a mission – to make Gordon King
In lining up Sir Ronald Cohen to bankroll his leadership bid, Gordon Brown could hardly have made a more inspired choice. He is not only one of the most powerful men in Britain, combining discretion with a reputation for ruthlessness; as a former acolyte of Tony Blair, nobody else could be better calculated to put the prime ministers nose out of joint. The Egypt-born Jewish multimillionaire has already given £800,000 [$1.4m] to Labour and is said to be planning a shadow fund-raising campaign that perfectly mirrors the one performed by Lord Levy for Blair. With a fortune put at £70m [$126m] by The Sunday Times Rich List, Cohen lives at an elegant £15m property in west London with his third wife, Sharon Harel-Cohen. Here they give lavish parties for the likes of the Rothschilds, the Rausing billionaires and Cohen’s old mentor Sir Clive Sinclair. At their home in New York they have welcomed their friends the Clintons.
He fell under Blair’s spell in 1996. “I decided that here was a man who was capable of implementing a programme that I have believed in for 30 years”, he declared, after sealing his conversion with a large cheque for Labour, reported to be £100,000 [$180,000]. Cohen moved into Brown’s orbit in 2000, when the chancellor appointed him chairman of a Treasury fund set up to encourage investment in deprived areas of the country. The next year he was rewarded with a knighthood. There were also signs that Cohen had begun to usurp Levy’s role as go-between in the Middle East. Last year, along with Blair and Brown, he met Ehud Olmert, deputy to Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon and a possible successor.
But Cohen’s emergence into the spotlight has highlighted business links that might prove embarrassing to him and Brown. His most successful investment was in the software company Autonomy. Cohen’s Apax sold its shares in 2000 just before the internet crash, walking away with a profit of about £150m [$270m] on its £1.8m [$3.2m] investment. However, Cohen’s business partner, John McMonigall, continued to serve as director of Autonomy while the firm rebuilt its fortunes by winning lucrative government contracts. There is nothing sinister in this: raising venture capital depends on networks of like-minded investors, a principle pioneered by Cohen. But the appearance of financial cronyism, allied to the vexed issue of government extravagance on failing computer systems, does not sit well with the chancellor’s austere image. Brown’s banker may be in for a bumpy ride.
(The Sunday Times, 23rd January 2005)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
COMMENTS
Whatever are you playing at. I spend what I think is an hour looking over comments I made in 2005 and what do I find?
As with this, "Midas with a Mission", it is removed. Comments I have made on other peoples Campaigns, Articles and Notices, have been moved to "My Links". Are out of context and posted where they were never intended to be. And some pieces I have produced, have just disappeared.
This complaint is posted on Thread, /A22620313. And I would not expect this "comment" to ever see the light of day.
You are destroying what was once a very good Web site. When Madelane Lewis ran the show, it was friendly. Not any more. ATFlynn. 13th. 8. 07"
By anthony flynn in South Norfolk - on 13 Aug 2007 at 04:50
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: Gordon Brown and the great Tax Robbery? 03 June 06
I was looking at another Article, "Change The Tax System if you Don't Like It. And It's Legal". I started the piece on 11th. December 2005.
What I wanted was a place to copy out a post I put on a thread at the
http://new:edp24.co.uk/forums
This is in answer to "Autismuk", who has some concern over my postings here, and on the EDP24 Forums.
----------------------------------------------------
Autismuk, if you will please forgive me, you are almost right. For some years now this Country has been "Broke". Have we yet paid off the 1945 £4 Billion War Debt? So far this Government has announced, "It is Paid", at least three times. IS it Paid?
"Gordon" has taken on some Billions of £Pounds of new debt for PFI Schemes. I don't claim to know the amount, but my calculation, on the back of an "Envelope" comes to a staggering £16. 000.000.000.000. That is Sixteen Billion Pounds.
"Gordon" has been printing money almost since "Day One", May 1997. Merv' the Gov', of the Bank Of England, keeps moaning about, Personal Debt. Mortgages. Overdrafts. Plastic Card Debt. All those "Luxuries" you Punters keep buying instead of spending it on Petrol, Diesel, VAT Goods, Alcohol with Duty and VAT. You know, those things where "Gordon" gets his cut. The point is, "Gordon" Prints it, Merv' hands it out to the "Lending Banks", and Mortgage Providers. Literally, gives them money to lend to you, the Punter. How do you think the Economy is Expanded? How do you think some Banks, "BOS, HBOS"? Became so big so quickly? And others.
Now, one or two things that might be of interest. Yesterday or Thursday, I put a notice on BBC Action Network. It was about a report by the Government of the Fact that, "More money is remitted to India, than the entire, International Aid Budget, for the whole of the United Kingdom". I just reported this again, and made a few comments that covered the Fact that National Insurance numbers are available on the "Nod", and that Some People, are claiming as much as £3000 a week in Benefits.
On BBC TV News, at about 0900 hrs. this morning, 3rd. May, the BBC announced this Fact again and this time they included a Junior Government Minister on camera. It also had a short report about Africa.
Then again, there was a report that the HMRC, had "Lost", several Million £Pounds worth of Tax Credits. Again on BBC Action Network, I made the point that Tax Credits are Worthless, unless you have a contact who will cash them. Sure enough, David Varney CEO,HMRC, makes a statement to the effect that his Staff, are Stealing your Money as you Pay It in Taxation. At the moment, he admits the theft of £15 Million. But there is more to come.
And so it goes on. This is why it is necessary, that you take the Power over all Taxation away from Central Government. Have a look at where the Money to buy the BAA (Airports), is coming from? Then ask yourself, WHY? Autismuk, the money is not much good. They would rather have your "Bricks and Mortar", than the Paper.
Keep Smiling Everyone, it might never happen. Regards, ATF. PS. I have mentioned the BBC Many times here. I am now going to post this on Action Network to even it up. Thanks..
This is just as it is published at EDP Forums.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
COMMENTS
Today is the thirty second day from the start of this Article.
In the meantime I have posted many comments on BBC Action Network and other Web sites. I would now like to add another Observation on the subject of "Finance and Taxation".
The Financial Mail on Sunday 4th. June 2006. "Big Firms Ready to Flee Over Tax War".
I put this proposition to the Accountants, PriceWaterhouseCoopers, Deloitte & Touche, and KPMG, some years ago. Ernst & Young was also contacted. The Letters I have from the Accountants are dated 2002, but the contact and correspondence would have begun in 2001 or earlier.
What I proposed was a system of Tax Avoidance , that I had developed over, two, three, or more years, by taking my suggestions to "contacts" I had at the Treasury and the Inland Revenue. What it really meant was that any Company, Business or Commercial Organisation, could, quite Legally, move just the Financial Operations, Off-Shore. Changing the Legal Standing of the Boardroom and Directors, into nothing more than a "Holding Company", for all and any "Taxation Obligations". All individuals, employers and employees, must notify their "Local" Income Tax Inspector. And as long as "Any Money Remitted to Great Britain is No More than the annual Tax Free Allowance, No Income Tax or NIC's are Payable".
It is not a very difficult task to arrange for all Household, and other running costs to be settled outside the Jurisdiction of the Revenue. (Class 2 NIC's @ £2.10pence each week.)
What seems to be proposed by the Accountants, reading the "Mail" report, is that the Company Headquarters, be relocated Off-Shore. If any Company goes down that route, not only will it cost them many Millions and Millions of £Pounds, but they will lose the Protection of English Law. They will be at the Mercy of the Jungle.
My way, will cost next to nothing and can be completed without disruption to the daily activity. By the way, the only Accountant to give me time and examine the suggestion, was Ernst & Young. For two or more years, Alistair Kendrick and I corresponded and talked on the telephone a great deal. But at that time, people at the CBI, IOD, FPB, BCC, and the FSB, all said that they were winning the argument, "Reducing Taxation. Cutting Red Tape. Rebuilding and Repairing the Private Pensions Industry". I have their Letters.
Contact me. Details are on my Profile.
In the Meantime, Keep Smiling, it Might Never Happen. Regards, ATF.
By anthony flynn in South Norfolk - on 05 Jun 2006 at 17:05
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you know what you are talking about, albeit you jump from topic to topic
If more people voted for the likes of YOU as apposed to big brotherX (sorry if you’re a fan), then I think this country would be saved, but with the likes of brown in charge, borrowing so much so that things don’t affect the national balance sheet, I worry for my kids future
By stewart C in Brent - on 14 Jun 2006 at 21:09
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Good afternoon, I was having a look over the "Internet" this morning and I clicked on to NO2ID
After a few minutes, I went to "Pledge Bank" and I couldn't resist it. I opened a "Pledge Bank" Web site.
I telephoned most of the people who have linked to my Sites, and it should not be long before the new Web site has enough pledges to be able to get a listing on other Locations.
At this stage, all that is needed is a pledge to consider the option of paying Direct Taxation to Central Government, or to change to a System of "Low Taxation Paid to the Local Authority".
The URL for the Web site : http://www.pledgebank.com
The Title is : TheTaxaxe. If you feel able to, make a Pledge and watch the way the wind blows. My way will end up being the only "Fair" Tax you will ever encounter.
Unlike today, where the Chancellor has total control of your money. My way, when you put money into your Pension Fund, it stays there. And once you get one or two of these iffy "Pension Funds" sorted out, all should be well.
My way is not a competition over who can spend the most. It is about who can do the best job with the Money the Taxpayers are prepared to let the Government have.
It is Your Money. And it is up to You to tell the Politicians, How Much Money They Can Have.
If you are interested, I will show you how to achieve that objective quite Legally.
e-mail: flynn354@btinternet.com Keep Smiling Folks. Regards, ATF.
By anthony flynn in South Norfolk - on 07 Jul 2006 at 16:29
-------------------------------------------------------------------
My last comment on this Thread, was "Rejected". It might offend "some people".
It was about "some people" defrauding the Housing Benefit System. And others, Stealing the Taxpayers Money. Literally.
So I have Posted a version of my comment on another Web site : htt://wwwtaxcontrol.blogspot.com
I am now going to add more, on the subject of terrorism and the way the People of the Muslim Natioms, or some of them at least, have now adopted "Terrorism" as a Major part of their "Foreign Policy".
Only this morning the BBC News had a Prof' ASKARI, advising on the affairs of the Middle East. And that from Washington. Yet in the Lebanon, twenty or more years ago, the Lebanese were Killing the American Lecturers and Professors and they Closed the American University. Wake up all of You.
I looked at what the BBC, online Analyst had to say. The name of the Analyst ? TARIK KAFALA. And Israel is to blame.
The URL is : http://wwwtaxcontrol.blogspot.com
See you there, Regards, ATF.
By anthony flynn in South Norfolk - on 15 Jul 2006 at 09:23
-------------------------------------------------------------------
HERE WE GO AGAIN. SORRY ABOUT THIS. IT MUST BE MY AGE.
THE POSTING ON THE 07th.JULY, HAS THE URL OF MY PLEDGEBANK WEBSITE. IT SHOULD READ:
http://www.pledgebank.com/thetaxaxe
APART FROM MY AGE, COULD I BLAME THE HOT WEATHER ?
REGARDS, ATF.
By anthony flynn in South Norfolk - on 19 Jul 2006 at 16:02
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I only joined to leave this comment. If I'm not mistaken, sixteen billion is 16,000,000,000 in numbers, can someone please fix the typo above because when I first saw that number it was rather shocking."
By Stephanie da Roza in Oxford - on 03 Aug 2007 at 04:54
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I am sorry to disagree with you
Stephanie da Roza, but when I left school in 1949, One Million was written as: 1.000.000. And the numerals for One Billion were:
1. 000.000.000.000. That is One Million Million.
Still, thank you for your comment it is most appreciated
and always good to know people do read what you have Posted.
My objective is to let people know, that in this day and age, the "People", the Taxpayer, is in a position to dictate to any Elected Government. And as Westminster has so casually abandoned Our Sovereignty, it is time for the Taxpayers to direct this Government onto a course that the Taxpayers wish to navigate and are prepared to pay for. Please don't take offence, this is an explanation not a lecture.
Regards A T Flynn.
By anthony flynn in South Norfolk - on 04 Aug 2007 at 07:52
-------------------------------------------------------------------
It feels like we have a proper politician that knows what there doing running the country
For the first time since the 70’s
Britain feels better and more substantial already.
By michael salkeld in Barnet - on 12 Aug 2007 at 10:50
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A proper Politician who knows what they're doing? You can't be talking of Britain, since the '70?
It goes, 1970-74
Edward Heath. 1974-76 Harold Wilson. 1976-79 James Callaghan. 1979-90 Margaret Thatcher. 1990-97 John Major.
And then the disaster of New Labour. Death, Destruction and Disgrace across much of the world.
Did you see the BBC Interview by Andrew Neil, of Lord Giddens on "Straight Talk"? Lord Giddens, seemed most please when asked about "The Third Way", policy of change. The destruction of the Coal Mining industry, the Agriculture Industry, The Heavy Manufacturing Industry, from Ship Building to Automobiles. And more besides. Where once these jobs occupied 70% of the workforce before 1997, today they employ just 14%. And that progress and improvement?
Even today, on BBC, News 24 with Peter Sissons, a Labour Minister was on about Maggie and Three Million unemployed. Yet not a mention was made of the fact, that today, there are "Five And A Half Million", working aged people living on Benefits in this Country.
And there are 51 different Benefits to choose from.
Is that what makes Britain feel better and more substantial?
I'll leave it at that, time for tea. Regards, ATFlynn.
By anthony flynn in South Norfolk - on 12 Aug 2007 at 12:51
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
What Ever Happened to the Nuclear Clean-Up Fund , Started by Harold Wilson? 30 March 06
Back in the 1960s Harold Wilson insisted on a levy, 11 % I seem to remember. This was added to every electricity bill and was to be used for the decommissioning of Nuclear Power Stations. Lets see, that’s about forty years building this fund. How much is in the Pot?
Could we have an honest answer for once? No more lies. We were told that Power would be so cheap, it could not be measured. Have a look back at the archives. Regards, ATF
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
COMMENTS
Three times I have tried to correct this post.
It should read, "Back in the 1960s, Harold Wilson insisted on a Levey, 11% was added to all Electricity Bills to be kept as a de-commissioning fund for Nuclear Power Stations. Where is that Money Now?
Regards, ATF.
By anthony flynn in South Norfolk - on 30 Mar 2006 at 19:57.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I always find the edit post
tool works.
By mickysalt salkeld - on 31 Mar 2006 at 10:24
-------------------------------------------------------------------
It is obvious that I need some lessons then. I looked at your profile, not much help. I did see you are interested in Ali Pally though. Many many years ago, my wife used to skate there. Ice skate that is. About 1950.
About the "edit post", I went back three times and put in the % sign but it wouldn't accept it, so I gave up and added a short piece."
By anthony flynn in South Norfolk - on 31 Mar 2006 at 11:29
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Your right.
I just attempted a %sign and it put an( a) instead,
You could always do what I sometimes do and just right percent.
By michael salkeld in Barnet - on 31 Mar 2006 at 21:24
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Or even write percent.
By michael salkeld in Barnet - on 31 Mar 2006 at 21:26
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Michael, I don't feel such a numbskull now. While I am here, have a look at this Web site, http://www.nera.com They have a posting about meetings in the USA, in Europe and in the East. These meeting are to discuss the Power Market, and it would seem, that the objective is to rig the price on a Global Scale. I did send them an e-mail on the subject, and it is because of this that I am very very sceptical about the "experts" and all the scare stories about Climate change and Global Warming. If I am honest, I must confess that I don't believe a word of it. These people are rigging the Market at the expense of you and I. And probably to " Acquire Loans or Donations," for this or that Political Party.
It's a con' trick and the general public are victims. Come back if you have, or want to make a point. Like the fact, that now we are told at times, it is co2 (gas) and then Carbon, an element. If you listen to the argument, you soon see the holes in it. Enough for now, Regards, ATF.
By anthony flynn in South Norfolk - on 01 Apr 2006 at 10:29
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I think global warming and the melting of the ice caps is probably a real possibility, but I don't think any of the evidence they have at the moment is actual proof. They say the green land sea ice is at its smallest for 100 years ,but in terms of the history of the planet 100 years isn't long enough to prove anything.
I sort of feel that even if the risk is just theoretical we should still do something about it."
By michael salkeld in Barnet - on 01 Apr 2006 at 19:57
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The billions of pounds generated by all these levy’s that the general public have been unwittingly paying over the last few decades went to prop up and bail out the hugely expensive nuclear industry.
It also goes on the propaganda machine that the nuclear industry has to keep oiling to try and convince an increasingly suspicious public that nuclear power is cleaner and cheaper than it really is.
The reality is that nuclear power is not clean, its not cheap, costs trillions of pounds in today’s money to construct operate, maintain and decommission and will leave a legacy longer than the Roman Empire.
Let's leave nuclear power in the 20th century."
By Bernard Ingham - on 11 May 2006 at 15:48
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, Margaret Thatcher's government took the nuclear decommissioning fund and spent it on other things! The nuclear industry did not see a penny."
By Robbie Gregg - on 18 Jun 2006 at 19:57
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The way to Andy McEwan's "New Community." 04 March 06
Action Networks news letter, introduced me to Community Regeneration. Otherwise I would probably never have found this Thread.
I spent a longer time than I intended, reading the postings and I must say, I was impressed by the enthusiasm, energy and scope. But one posting in particular caused me to examine my own outlook on the Politics of today. Caused me to look again at Westminster and Whitehall.
I am responsible for one or two campaigns, rather more, in number, notices and quite a few articles. All of them are on the subject of Taxation, Taxpayers and how it is possible to change the concept of Income Tax and all Direct Taxation by Central Government. Quite Legally and quite properly, the standard and traditional method of employment can be changed. The normal, and informal, agreement and the method of payment, hourly, daily, weekly or monthly can continue. The place of payment in what must change. Even the Government is not shy of using this method of payment when it wishes to avoid Taxation.
What struck me, about all of the Articles posted on Community Regeneration, was the fact that people wanted to do something for their fellow neighbours and their living space. These are the people who should be spending some of the £519 Billion of Taxation that Gordon Brown will have raised this year, ending 5th. April. 2006. These are the people who should be in charge of Taxation overall.
Join me, in starting to make the change that really matters. For believe me, without all that Tax money, Politicians are nothing very much. As they used to say many years ago when I lived in Surrey, they are "Full of wind and piss." Just like the barbers cat.
My contact details are posted many times on various parts of Action Network, get in touch if you are interested, as Andy NcEwan says, today’s Politics are bankrupt, corrupted and now that more than 50% of the population are dependant on Government Benefits of some sort, dishonest. When I made suggestions to the Home Office, (Jack Straw was Home Secretary.) or Future Business Security in Leeds, I was told by the Politicians that my remedies for the fraud on the Taxpayer, was extreme. The people who post on Community Regeneration, have restored my faith in human nature. Thank You. Regards, ATF.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Should Britain Become a Democracy? Yes. To Get There Bypass Politics. 11 Feb 06
And as I have said many times, the only way to stop this corrupted system is to remove the power of Taxation from Central Government.
I have read your article most carefully, and I can find no argument against any point. Thank you for putting into words, what politics in this Country has descended to.
I have posted many notices, articles and one or two campaigns, about Taxation on Action Network, and my contact details are listed on my Profile. At my age, my last wish is to change the way this Country is Governed. Give the real Power back to the People.
The People Are Sovereign. Westminster gave away their power long ago.
Regards, ATF.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
COMMENTS
A Republic is the answer, not perfect but about as near you can get. But I'm afraid there isn’t a Political party in the country that would dare to try and achieve it, they are all to comfortable in their current positions, to take any action with risk of loosing that position. So much for Democracy, one family and the establishment rules forever, whether the Citizens agree or not.
GBG
Feb 2006
By George Green - on 11 Feb 2006 at 16:48
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I have waited until now, to see if there was going to be any other comment on this.
A Republic is not the answer. By all means have an elected head of Government, but the Queen and the Monarchy are now the only safeguard you have against the stupidity of "Globalisation," and half whited politicians in Westminster. In my opinion, there is only one answer, the taxpayer must take over the control of taxation, County by County. Setting the Tax Rate, gathering the money, and spending that money, County by County. If the appointed head of the system, is found not to be up to the job, well sack him and get another head. This appointment would be for one year only. That is the only way to eliminate the failures.
It is quite lawful to change the system of taxation. The Inland Revenue sold off the Building Stock, owned by the taxpayers, sold it indeed, to an off-shore Property Company that does not pay tax in the UK. Not only that, QinetiQ has been sold, again, to an off-shore Company that does not pay tax in the UK. All I want to do is make the system that this Government, and many of its friends and backers, use to Avoid Taxation, I want that system available to every Taxpayer in the Country. If it is good enough for some, it is good enough for ALL. My contact details are posted on Action Network, get in touch.
Regards, ATF.
By anthony flynn in South Norfolk - on 20 Feb 2006 at 11:19
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
No real choice on the European Union. Just pay up and take the squit. 16 Dec 05
In answer to Gareth Farman and his article on the European Daylight Robbery saga. I have posted three or four notices about taxation on this network, and it is only by taking control of taxes, that you will bring the politicians to heel. Only this morning, Haig, William Haig, stated on Breakfast TV, that the rebate Blair is giving up, is equivalent to 56,000 nurses. What the Hell does that mean. The misinformation about EU., finances, is breath taking. The united Kingdom, is paying into the Brussels Blackmail Pot, at least £14,500. Billion each year. And it is probably £24 Billion. Why do you think it has never been possible to be told the truth? Every taxpayer in the country would down tools if only they knew the wastage over the last Thirty odd years. Regards, ATF.
PS. Have a look for my postings, Taxation and other politics issues
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
COMMENTS
I posted this notice on the 16th December 05. On the 17th I posted a comment on the same subject on the Democracy & Government, Central government, Democratic reform Site. Also I added postings on, Money Business & Work, and, Taxation. The title of my posting is-: European Union. Just Pay Up & Take the Squit.
Have a look at these postings if you have an interest, we are not obliged to agree with each other, just respect the fact that there is more than one way to skin a cat.
( I know.) Regards, ATF.
By anthony flynn in South Norfolk - on 08 Feb 2006 at 11:08
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m bothered to hear we might be dragged down by America in the credit crunch,
Where as the Euro is doing better.
By Michael Salkeld in Barnet - on 17 Mar 2008 at 22:52
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Change the tax system if you don't like it. And it's Legal. 09 Dec 05
So, at last TaxTaxTax is becoming an issue, and not before time. If you want to protect your pension, or what might remain of it, if you want to say no to the extortionate demands of government on your hard earned money, you can. It is lawful for everyone to protect their assets from the demands of the Inland Revenue and other tax collectors. If you really want to, and are prepared to take on the job yourself, enough of you, collectively can remove the power of taxation from central government altogether. You would then have to provide your own Local Authority tax system where you set the tax rate. In my opinion, taxation should be 10% on all earnings over £300 weekly. No other taxes. All services should be bought and paid for by the user. Insurance and private health care, given the numbers in need of such, would become acceptable.
Let me see if there is any interest. Regards, A T F.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
COMMENTS
In the Issues section, under Democracy & government, Government departments, Democratic reform, Taxation, and other Headings, I have posted quite a few Articles, Notices, and I have started tow or three Campaigns. The one I am thinking of just now is-: How to Achieve a Low Tax Welfare Society, to replace a corrupted welfare state. All the contact details are there, and the web site is under construction and more should be added this weekend, on Sunday. So Monday will see more information.
There are other postings that involve my disgust of Westminster and Whitehall. Have a look at them, and then see if you can explain how it is that this Government has expanded the economy to the point where taxation is now ,almost twice, the amount that it was in 1996. I tell you now, very soon, probably weeks, certainly months, the Chancellor will be in trouble. When was the last time you saw the figures for, "Money in Circulation" ? Most workers in the Private sector, have lost their workplace Pension. This Government has destroyed their retirement savings. What is next to go into Gordon’s "Game Bag ?" Put a stop to Income Tax and NICs. Regards, ATF.
By anthony flynn in South Norfolk - on 08 Feb 2006 at 12:16
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The Golden Paradigm! 26 April 07
"One man's loss; is another man's gain."
MONEY SUPPLY AND THE PRIVATE BANKING SYSTEM
Extracted from Hansard – November 27, 1985
The following speech by the late Lord Beswick, is reprinted in full from HANSARD, 27 November 1985, Vol. 468, Columns 935-939 where it appears under the title "Money Supply and the Private Banking System".
HANSARD begins:
Lord Beswick rose to call attention to the statement made by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster on 23rd July 1985 that the 96.9 per cent increase in money supply over a five-year period has been created by the private banking system and without Government authority; and to move for Papers.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, on 10th June this year I asked Her Majesty's Government by what amount the money supply had increased in the five-year period to mid-April 1985.
Interestingly, they gave me the answer in percentages and not in pounds. Having given him prior notice, perhaps the Minister would be good enough later to give me the answer in money terms.
The Government reply on 10th June was that the increase had been by 101.9 per cent, and that of that very large amount only 5 per cent was accounted for by the state minting of more coins and the printing of more notes.
That 96.9 per cent increase represented not only an enormous sum of money but also a crucially important factor in our economy.
wanted to know by whom it had been created, and on 23rd July I again asked Her Majesty's Government to what extent this increase had Government approval. I was told by the Chancellor of the Duchy, speaking for the Government:
"The 96.9 per cent represented new bank deposits created in the normal course of banking business and no Government authority is necessary for this."
Had he said that some counterfeiter of coins or forger of notes had been at work there would of course have been an immediate and indignant outcry; yet here we have a government statement that private institutions have created this enormous amount of extra purchasing power and we are expected to accept that it is normal practice and that the government authority does not come into it.
When I asked whether we ought not to consider more deeply who was benefiting from this money-creating power, the Minister said that the implications, though interesting, were maybe too far reaching for Question Time; and so I raise the matter again in debate and hope to get more enlightenment. The issues are important; they are certainly under-discussed; perhaps not adequately understood; and I hope that I am not being unduly unfair if I say that those who understand the mechanisms often do very well out of them.
I make no party point; it is all much bigger and wider than that.
From what point should we start? There is the elementary fact that in a sensible, civilised society, with a steadily expanding economy, there must be a proper and agreed relationship between money available to buy goods and services and the volume of goods and services that may be bought.
At any one time it can be a matter for argument that the money volume should be increased or decreased, but that does not diminish the importance of the relationship; and of course it leaves open the question as to who should have the responsibility for managing the volume.
Over the years very interesting people have recognised that there was a problem and that new ideas and new machinery were needed. The late Thomas A. Edison (full Thomas Edison quote), whose inquiring mind cannot be belittled, once said:
"It is absurd to say that our country can issue 30 million dollars in bonds and not 30 million dollars in currency. Both are promises to pay. But one promise fattens the usurer and the other helps the people".
President Abraham Lincoln apparently thought the same. According to a United State's Congressional sub-committee report that I was reading recently, he insisted upon the government issuing 346 million dollars in money -- the so-called greenbacks -- instead of issuing interest-bearing bonds and paying interest upon them.
Before the 1939-1945 war, in a time of unemployment, poverty, unused resources and deflated prices, I recall that there was widespread demand for increasing the volume of money.
People like Major Douglas, Oscar Sachse and the late Sir Stafford Cripps, I recall, once advocated the ingenious mechanism of Silvio Gesell to increase purchasing power by quickening the speed of circulation. In more recent years, but again in times of unused resources but this time with rising prices, there has been another movement, with Professor Friedman to the fore, for example, which appears to be saying that all could be well if we reduced the volume of money supply.
I do not claim that any of those people has the whole truth, but it seems to me that each of them knew the direction in which the truth lies. For myself I say strongly that, given the importance of the money supply, that supply should be under the effective and professionally responsible management of the state.
Moreover, I hope to get agreement from the Minister that we do not now have such effective and responsible management. I do not think that I need to spend much time in proving that the indirect and almost apologetic devices used by the Treasury in recent times do not bear the stamp of effective professional management.
The almost comic story of the discarded monetary indices justifies that statement. My noble friend the other day asked what was happening to M1, M2, M3, PSL1, PSL2 and PSL3. The Minister's reply was that there had been some eccentric movements of M3 but that the newly created category of Mo had behaved impeccably. No doubt when Mo goes the way of all such indices we shall be told that MX or something else is an absolutely reliable measurement.
The fact is that there is this increasing volume of money, no matter what measurement is used; and as for the volume being under an effective and responsible national control, the Chancellor of the Duchy gave the game away when he said that no government authority was needed for this present system of credit creating.
Of course it can be said, and it has been said to me with varying degrees of kindness and patience by some of the most exalted persons in the financial hierarchy, that without such money supply increases the industrial structure would be stifled. Of course there is truth in that, but that does not invalidate my case that any increase should be under effective control and in line with the carefully considered policy of some national authority.
I cannot claim to be an authority on the techniques involved, but from what some recognised authorities have said it seems that my case has merit. In the days when I used to speak from the Government Front Bench for the Treasury, I recall having some dispute with the noble Lord, Lord Cromer, but I learnt to respect his knowledge. It was he who at a CBI dinner in May 1966 said:
"Unfortunately we have a system under which Treasury financing does lead to the creation of money quasi-automatically to the extent that the requirements of the Exchequer are not met by the genuine savings or by taxation".
I am also indebted to the Economic Research Council for this extract from Bank of England evidence to the Radcliffe Committee. It said: "If the Exchequer borrows by issuing Treasury Bills which are taken up by the banks and spends the proceeds (so that the cash borrowed finds its way back to the banks) the liquid assets and deposits of the banks will be increased and they will be put in a position to increase the supply of bank credit. Indeed, as only a portion of the bank deposits requires to be covered by cash and other liquid assets, a given loss or gain of liquid assets by the banks has an effect several times as great on the potential volume of bank credit".
That would seem to be a most respectable description of the multiplier effect of Treasury bill borrowing. That is what happens now.
In an earlier debate I called attention to what happened in the time of war. We then had all the classic ingredients of runaway inflation, and yet we had extraordinary success in curbing interest rates and prices. The Congressional sub committee report to which I earlier referred and which was published on 21st September 1961 told of a similar significant experience in the United States:
"the period from late 1939 to 1951 was as violent and catastrophic as any in the entire history of the United States. At the beginning of this period millions were still unemployed from the great depression. A short time later we were shooting away 250 million dollars every day on the battlefield ... Then came the Korean conflict. Yet during this entire period of economic stress and turmoil the interest rate on long term Government bonds never exceeded 2 and a half per cent. And those bonds never sold below par".
The report adds: "The Fed can restrain higher interest rates when it wants to".
That is a point which I hope to make. If the will is there, we could do something about the step forward that is needed in the management of our money supply. In wartime Britain a significant factor in keeping down the cost of money and other essentials would seem to be the substitution of Treasury Deposit Receipts for Treasury Bills when the Treasury borrowed from the private banking system. I hope that this evening the Minister will explain, carefully and helpfully, the basis for this use of the bill against the TDR. What exactly are the benefits?
It follows from the present practice that not only does Treasury Bill borrowing facilitate this quasi-automatic extra lending by the banks; but, in the course of things, the Treasury will be borrowing, and paying current excessive interest upon, the money that it has enabled the banks to create. It is worth reminding ourselves of some of the figures involved. Estimates for this year and next year are distorted by the receipts from the sale of national assets.
But looking at 1983 as an example, there was an excess of receipts over expenditure in this country before debt interest of £4,234 million. The interest on debt was £14,658 million, leaving a deficit of more than £10,000 million.
To a significant extent, the £14,000 million paid out by the Government on that debt was interest on money created by the private banking institutions – in effect, as I am claiming, in breach of the state's prerogative in the issue of money. If we could change this situation, we could change the whole character of the public sector borrowing requirement.
The line of action needed to reform this unacceptable state of affairs was indicated, I believe, by the late Sir Arthur Bryant, Companion of Honour upon whose clarity of language I cannot improve. In the London Illustrated News [February 1983], he wrote:
"What seems required is a public body removed and divorced from political pressure, staffed by Treasury officials, invested by Parliament with the duty of creating, free of interest, as much money for necessary government purposes as the country at any given time should, in their considered judgment, need to ensure the maximum possible employment of its productive resources".
Sir Arthur also said: "The exercise of the right inherent in every sovereign state of creating and issuing a sufficiency of money to make financially possible what is physically possible and morally desirable, would enable as much real wealth to be brought into existence as, with its immense inventive and scientific potential, it is capable of making".
I know that there are highly qualified experts, whose vision maybe is as narrow as their eminence is high, who would dismiss this concept of Sir Arthur Bryant. Nevertheless, I should like to quote from a research report of the Economic Research Council published in December 1981 which gave some figures that might be borne in mind when we are considering the practicalities. The report said:
"If the Government had followed a policy of extensive fiduciary control and had itself issued credit rather than allowing the banks to do so, it could, for example have made a net reduction over the period 1970-1980 in the need for Government borrowing from the £48,578 million securities issued to about £22,000 million, a saving of £27,000 million on the national debt over the period."
The council went on to say: "The effect of implementing the proposed move now would be that a net amount of £20,000 million of national debt would be cancelled. The consequent reduction of interest payments on the national debt, and therefore of taxation or further borrowing, would help to bring about reflation without inflation".
That is, of course, what we all want.
I have said previously that it is not only a question of what we want but also of having the will to bring about the radical policies that are necessary. I accept immediately that we need a wider and deeper examination of the issues involved. Can the Government spokesman this evening give some hope that we might get the inquiry that is needed -- a Royal Commission, maybe.
The Macmillan Commission in the 1930s made quite an impact upon thinking. I am not sure that the same can be said of the Radcliffe Commission. But is it not now time to give fresh consideration to a serious independent attempt to sift out the facts?
What about a Select Committee of this House? It is not unknown for such an inquiry by a Select Committee of this House to stir up some national thinking. I look forward to the noble Lord's account of the Treasury attitude to these issues. In particular, I await answers to the questions that I have posed.
I have summarised them here, and maybe I can repeat them – helpfully, I hope. What was the amount of money represented by the reported 101.9 per cent increase in the money stock? Is it still agreed, after the period of reflection from 23rd July, that this quasi-automatic creation of such large sums of extra credit should be outside government decision? Would the Government spokesman not agree that if economic growth requires an increase in the money stock this should be created interest-free to the credit of the state?
Is it not quite illogical, indeed indefensible, that the state should be so concerned to maintain its sovereignty in the issue of coins or notes that it allows this new form of money, used overwhelmingly today, to be created outside its control? Can the Government not at least agree that the facts known and the implications involved merit early and authoritative inquiry? Would not a committee or commission, authorised to consider and report, be of great national value. My Lords, I beg to move for Papers.
www.fdrs.org:80/private_banking.html
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
COMMENTS
My sincere thanks for this contribution. I was fifty years old in 1985 and at that time I was corresponding with, first, Michael Joplin (who failed to answer any letters.) and then John MacGregor, both Secretary of State for Agriculture. It wasn't until the 1990s that I able to navigate my way around the Treasury.
Expanding the economy, has or had, always been a mystery to me and even now it seems so crude and corrupt. That is one of the reasons I suggest that the power of imposing Direct Taxation should be removed from Westminster.
Soon now, it appears that the whole world economy "could" collapse with tragic results to the mortgage industry, meaning householders.
I have e-mailed a link to your comment, to most of the Institutions, Adam Smith, Civitas, Politeia, NERA, TFA, TPA and others. I hope you are not offended. Regards, ATFlynn.
By anthony flynn in South Norfolk - on 27 Apr 2007 at 16:36
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your response and I'm glad you found the article of interest.
From what I have read so far on your campaign site, I would say we were on the same side. Although, we do differ on some finer points that I shall come back to address those at some time in the near future.
Politics, Taxation and The Banking System are so closely related that one cannot be considered without the other.
National Sovereignty does not even register on the list of priorities for the International Banking System. For who's ultimate benefit do politicians really work for and collect taxes - the general public or the World Bank?
Tony Blair we hear has been promised a lucrative position within the Carlysle Group when he resigns.
The International Banking system has become such a Leviathon, that it can dictate its own terms to any state or government under the present conditions.
"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes the laws."
[Mayer Amschel Bauer 1744 -1812] The Rothschild Banking Cartel
Best regards,
Mordechai
By Mordechai Cohen - on 28 Apr 2007 at 03:07
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
[Control Your Own Income Tax] The Politics of the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries
The Politics of the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries, has now run its course. At times, there was Honesty and Integrity to be admired in those years now long past. Westminster and Whitehall, and what is known as Mother of Parliaments around the World, was a place to be proud of. Not any more. And those responsible should hang their heads in shame.
But Great Britain is only one of a number of once upright, honest, and trustworthy Nations who for the last One Thousand, Five Hundred Years, have dominated the "Known" World. They have been the innovators, the Engineers, the Builders. Of roads and bridges. From the "Span" to the suspension to the BoxGirder design. From the "Clipper Ship" to the Nuclear Submarine. From the Bi-Plane to the Space-Shuttle.
And the last one hundred years has now given you, the "Little People". Or as Tony Blair and the Labour Government think of the Taxpayers and others. "The Ordinary People". you the Mugs, who, now that he has been caught "Selling" favours, He, and all those other Members of Parliament, of all the Parties, You are going to have to stump up TaxMoney, to pay for their Election campaigning. And remember, there are 659, Six Hundred and Fifty Nine Members. But don't worry, Tone will put a "Cap" on the total.
And you happy campers, think about this. Six Billion plus. The Population of the World. And surprise, surprise, more than one third, more than Two Billion people do not have enough to eat. And it is getting worse. So what do our Illustrious Leaders of the European "Eden", do? Why, in their wisdom those Panjandrums at Brussels, all but Close down Europe’s Agriculture. Only France had the intelligence to fight to save what they could. Now you the Taxpayers, are once again paying Farmers to sit and watch the "Daisies" grow. (Sorry Farmers, I know it isn't like that). It won't be that long now before a "shortage", and then a Price Hike. It will be with you by 2010. and you will be paying ever more money "Rubbish Food".
Then the second problem awaiting proper recognition. At any time from about the year 2020, the "Known" oil and gas reserves could End. When I went to work in exploration in the early sixties, the industry was then, a little more than sixty years old. Oil was $4. or less a barrel. Now those oil deposits known, but to expensive to produce are on stream and going fast. Every week, the world uses more and more Oil. And from what I can see, and what I have known of the past methods and geological structure needed, any more Oil to be found in the world, will be just about non-commercial. I think it is the end. 2010, 2020, 2030, it Might go to 2050. But no more.
Go back and look again at "Enron". It started a little before that, Rigging the Oil and Power market I mean. At the time I wrote to Sir John Bond, and mentioned that things were not quite what they should be and the "Market" was being rigged, (I'm sure I didn't say rigged.) at least it wasn't honest. But rigging the Market was exactly what was going on. And politics and Politicians are still rigging the Market. Why? You may ask, and the answer is as plain as your nose. Without the cost of your electric bill "Trebling" from £360 to well over £1000 a year, how can they justify the cost of building N-Power stations? Have a look on BBC Action Network, I posted a notice there about "Rigging the Oil, the Power and the Carbon Market. That was January !st. 2006. but it has moved on faster than I imagined.
I am going to stop for an hour or so, I have some thinking to do. About solving these problems.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *