Tim Price: "The UK Today Feels Like A Very Strange & Disturbing Place"

Authored by Tim Price via SovereignMan.com,

If you have been voting for politicians who promise to give you goodies at someone else’s expense, then you have no right to complain when they take your money and give it to someone else, including themselves.


-Economist Thomas Sowell

It is difficult to know where to begin.

In our election last week, 262 British parliamentary seats fell to a party led by Jeremy Corbyn, a self-confessed Socialist.

Corbyn has also publicly supported the IRA, Hizbollah and Hamas.

Yet his message attracted 12.9 million votes while the United Kingdom is under attack by terrorists. It simply beggars belief.

Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of MI6, the British Secret Intelligence Service, points out that Corbyn, who seeks the office of Prime Minister, would not be cleared to join either his former agency, or GCHQ, or MI5 (the British equivalents of NSA/FBI).

It is said that you get the politicians you deserve. So what on earth did we do to deserve this?

Sadly we are not criticizing a single political party.

While Jeremy Corbyn offered the UK electorate the sort of swivel-eyed Trotskyism that ought to have died out in the 1970s along with flares and safari jackets, Theresa May has been making her own lurch towards the left.

So a plague on both your houses.

Our politics have gone mad, and our markets have gone mad with them. The plain numbers are stark.

Simon Mikhailovich of Tocqueville Bullion Reserve reminds us of those numbers with a sobering tweet:

A bit of math. With the global debt / GDP ratio at 320% and the cost of average debt service at 2%, it takes 6.4% growth per annum just to service the debt. Not happening.

The rise of Socialism will only create more of these financial challenges.

The only sensible and credible responses to the investment challenge of our times can be to diversify broadly, and then invest selectively, and defensively.

(Longstanding readers, along with our clients, will know that we put particular emphasis on Benjamin Graham-style value stocks, systematic trend-following funds, and gold.)

This is also a crisis of education.

How, aside from craven bribery, could so many young Britons flock to the sirens of socialism?

How did so many millions manage to avoid any grasp of history (or choose to ignore it)?

The millennials and Generation Z are right to be angry. They’ve been chewed up by the system.

But last week this anger manifested itself in the form of some socialist Corbyn supporters burning newspapers.

To anyone with a sense of history, the UK today feels like a very strange, and disturbing, place.

Do you have a Plan B?


Harlequin001 AlexCharting Tue, 06/13/2017 - 05:16 Permalink

We need to re educate ourselves on the meaning of, and punishments for, Treason.It seems as if as long as someone spouts it in the press it's ok. It's not.What the UK needs is an individuals absolute right to his assets and gold backing in its money. That way governments can't run up debts for my children.It is unforgivable that I cannot move to Greater Manchester without incurring the debts and obligations of those who have lived there for the last 50 years.And yes I know that some would say that it's unforgivable that I might even want to...But that's not the point.

In reply to by AlexCharting

HowdyDoody Harlequin001 Tue, 06/13/2017 - 05:56 Permalink

"Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of MI6, the British Secret Intelligence Service, points out that Corbyn, who seeks the office of Prime Minister, would not be cleared to join either his former agency, or GCHQ, or MI5 (the British equivalents of NSA/FBI)."

Whereas someone who has sex with dead animals or enables the creation of ISIS would be?

In reply to by Harlequin001

Oliver Jones AlexCharting Tue, 06/13/2017 - 06:07 Permalink

We had something like that in Rhodesia.

If you weren't a contributor to society, you didn't get a vote. It was a pretty effective filter against socialism.

Perhaps that is why the then-Labour government in Britain sought to destroy us: It was such an affront to their Marxist ideology that it could never be allowed to prevail. We can't have people taking responsibility for their own lives and running them as they see fit - that's the Government's job!

For my part, I left Britain nearly 12 years ago. I long considered it a third world country (since the mid-90s, in fact), and things haven't improved since then.

In reply to by AlexCharting

quadraspleen Tue, 06/13/2017 - 05:11 Permalink

"While Jeremy Corbyn offered the UK electorate the sort of swivel-eyed Trotskyism that ought to have died out in the 1970s along with flares and safari jackets, Theresa May has been making her own lurch towards the left." Utter bollocks

quadraspleen Harlequin001 Tue, 06/13/2017 - 05:36 Permalink

Really? You missed the neutering of the unions? the 3-day weeks? The strikes? The loony left-wing focus groups?Asking for a bit more equality does not equal rampant socialism, or would you prefer the 0.001% to carry on shoving their tax-based cattle prods up your arse and reaming it for their mates?You like the way big biz has totally infiltrated politics?You like slow, dirty, massively overpriced trains?You like a health service that was set up for the people of a successful country, who paid their fucking taxes into the bag to have and use free at the point of sale, to be privatised and sold off to the largest insurance companies?? (yes, someone has to pay for it..ME, the fucking tax payer. I don't mind paying for a good health service at all..)You like foreign governments being able to sell us electricity and gas at massive profit, none of which goes back into the energy grid or supply in my country? How have your wages gone since 1970? Are you British? Are you over 45?Go and shill for the banking cartel over at Bloomberg

In reply to by Harlequin001

quadraspleen Harlequin001 Tue, 06/13/2017 - 05:55 Permalink

Read my first sentence again. I explained my comments quite well, I thought. You are dissembling. Corbyn is not a return to the rampant "socialism" of the 1970s as the "socialism" in the 70s was controlled by self-serving Trotsky neophytes, who only cared about theior own advancement thinly disguised as them wanting the proletariat to have everything everybody else had and hang business. This was evidenced by the endless strikes, the out of control unions and the creation and indulgence of many barking focus groups and associations not only given time by the Labour govts of the 70s but actively encouraged and integrated into local government. Corbyn seems to have got this message and is a much softer sell. Perhaps he'll suddenly be outed as another Arthur Scargill, but having watched him for the last 30 years, I doubt it. He is basically a good man. I'm ok with that.I am not a socialist. I voted for Corbyn this last week as I have had enough of the neoliberalism that the Tory Party and New Labour brought to the table. I haven't actually voted in years (except for Brexit) as strictly speaking, I'm an anarchist. I don't believe in rulers, only leaders..I also don't believe in the type of greedy, self-centred politics that people trying to criticise Corbyn seem to be fond of..If you think that by having Corbyn as PM will mean a return to the kind of nuts we saw from 1970-1978 then as I say, you either aren't from here or you haven't been paying attention

In reply to by Harlequin001

mtl4 BoingBoing Tue, 06/13/2017 - 08:23 Permalink

I understand you are voting for change just like for folks in the USA Trump was a change from the norm as well, but the issue here just highlights that the systems are seriously broken when you are voting against the status quo no matter what.  We all know what the road to socialism leads to and non of it is good any more than facism leads to similar limits on freedom and personal wealth.  Frredoms are not maintained without the system being burned to the ground and restarted from time to time throughout history.  The good news with Corbyn is that he will likely bring Britain`s economy to it`s knees alot faster which should eventually lead to an actual recovery thereafter.

In reply to by BoingBoing

Harlequin001 quadraspleen Tue, 06/13/2017 - 06:16 Permalink

I read your first sentence again and didn't get it. I think you summed it up here’ seems to have got this message and is a much softer sell" pretty well. Softer sell he may be but he still wants to take my money and give it to someone else. I understand you wanting a change, the current system sucks. Democracy sucks; it is a softer sell of mob rule. We need a change, total change, and Corbyn isn't it. All socialists require more and more of your money, eventually, regardless of where or how benignly they start off. How can we get richer if government takes our money and gives it to someone else? Corbyn is no different in my view, and socialism is socialism is theft however 'softly' it is sold...So, I don't see how he is any different than the 70's socialists, and yes, I think he will ultimately be outed as an Arthur Scargill or a Ken Livingstone.

In reply to by quadraspleen

RockySpears quadraspleen Tue, 06/13/2017 - 05:46 Permalink

"Are you British? Are you over 45?" Yes, and Yes.My wages are now a third of what they were before Tony arrived.  Not only has my life been chopped to pieces by Tony and Co, but Our soliders have died , and are still dieing on foreign hellholes.Our education system has been destroyed by "Education, Education, Education".  ... and if you want to bring in ther Privatising of Health services, let's look at, say Virgin Health.  Oh, that would be the company of Mr Lefty himself Richard, "Thank you for the Knighthood", Branson. RS

In reply to by quadraspleen

BigJim quadraspleen Tue, 06/13/2017 - 06:07 Permalink

 You like the way big biz has totally infiltrated politics?As opposed to Big .Gov? You like slow, dirty, massively overpriced trains?I remember the trains prior to privatisation. They were even slower and dirtier. Can't remember if they were as "overpriced", but then energy costs have risen since then.You like foreign governments being able to sell us electricity and gas at massive profit, none of which goes back into the energy grid or supply in my country?What "massive profit"? Give me figures. I doubt they're making 5% per annum, and if they are, it'll be because their taxpayers are subsidising them - ie, Brits are getting cheaper energy thanks to EU taxpayers. Besides, when foreigners earn sterling, they need to spend it on British goods. There's no difference between Frenchmen selling me energy and Cornishmen.How have your wages gone since 1970? Wages have lost to financial assets in developed countries since the end of Bretton Woods, and the process has accelerated during the rates bull market that's occured since Volker. The one good thing about Corbyn is that he promised to murder fewer foreigners, and had the honesty to suggest Trident was redundant. That's why he got my vote. Otherwise, he's a numpty.

In reply to by quadraspleen

OverTheHedge BigJim Tue, 06/13/2017 - 07:55 Permalink

"There's no difference between Frenchmen selling me energy and Cornishmen."Well, Peirre Le Frog will sell you his nuclear electricity tout le jour, tout la monde, but Denzil will sell you his lectrickery drekly."Going up Camborne Hill, coming down!"(Apologies for non-Brits who may find the above confusing - you had to have been there - preferably for generations....)

In reply to by BigJim

Offthebeach quadraspleen Tue, 06/13/2017 - 06:28 Permalink

When was the UK successful?  You, along with the US, have been downhill since before World War One.  Wages have been great.  Logically a government that prints has destroyed the value of wages faster.Blaiming banks is like blaming loan sharks.  Don't go to them. (  I appogize to the Mafia for the comparison. ) No matter how much taxes are collected, even 100%,  health or any government service will,  A,  Get Worse.  B. More expensive.  ( like cancer, all governments prosper via taxation.  It is incentvized to do less for more.  )A little on trains.  AMTRACK, runs supposedly its mist efficient route, Boston to New York.  One way $120.  About 4 hours.  You may get a fair coach, or a Soviet one.  AMTRACK loses money so its real cost might be $200, $300, who knows.OrYou can take a bus, with big seats, clean, wifi, 4 hours, for $30.  The bus companies PAY taxes, and makes profit.  ( You can take a bootleg Chinese bus, Boston Chinatown to NY Chinatown, $10.  But bring a fire extinguisher)If you understood incentives,  it would be clearer to you. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_choice  

In reply to by quadraspleen

OverTheHedge max-kisser Tue, 06/13/2017 - 08:04 Permalink

My view on tax is that most of it goes to "worthy causes", such as healthcare, pensions for nice little old ladies, and that sort of thing. In other words, charity. Now, you could give money to a charity, which would then take care of individuals in need, but you are obviously to stupid to know which causes are worthy, and too tight-fisted to give enough, so the government has taken over the charitable work for you, and acts on your behalf. You give, charitably, at gun-point, and everyone is happy.Not sure that the MIC could be considered charitable, but it most certainly is a charity.When you bear in mind that charities such as Oxfam (created to help the Biafran refugees, but somehow still in existence), spend half their donations on administration, then you see that there is little difference between government and private charity. Both are parasites, sucking the life-blood from the host. 

In reply to by max-kisser

max-kisser OverTheHedge Tue, 06/13/2017 - 08:41 Permalink

In the UK - dont quote me - but I think only 10% of money collected by charities need to go to what they are collecting for. Great way for a halo effect for oneself, while milking the caring.

I think the government took over collecting money and redistributing, to take this function away from religious charities, as these religious charities had too much influence in society. Either that or its part of the Fabian Society's grand plan as part of their dictator support at the time and having scientific principles instead of religion guiding government policies.

In reply to by OverTheHedge

Batman11 Batman11 Tue, 06/13/2017 - 05:15 Permalink

What do the wealthy in the US do with their money?The Asian Century, sponsored by US capital and businessmen.Let's offshore everything for higher profits.Let's invest in Asia for higher returns.The US was starved of investment and went into decline.Adios America, hello Asia.American exceptionalism, exceptionally silly ; unless this is all part of the plan to shift power to Asia.

In reply to by Batman11

Batman11 Glyndwr will return Tue, 06/13/2017 - 07:13 Permalink

It fitsThe BoJ bought down the successful Japanese economy.The ECB is at work in the EU.The Asian Crisis was engineered.Richard Werner’s “Princes of the Yen” tells the story of how the shocks are being applied to the developed world through independent Central Banks.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5Ac7ap_MAYNaomi Klein’s “Shock Doctrine” tells the story of how the shocks are being applied to the developing world.2008, anyone could have seen it coming if they looked in the right place.https://cdn.opendemocracy.net/neweconomics/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/04/Screen-Shot-2017-04-21-at-13.52.41.png 

In reply to by Glyndwr will return

Batman11 Batman11 Tue, 06/13/2017 - 07:19 Permalink

Everything is nearly set to crash on planet ponzi.Neo-liberalism’s underlying economics is neoclassical economics, which was around in the 1920s and it has the same private debt blind spot.“Stocks have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau.”Irving Fisher 1929.Irving Fisher looked into his mistakes and in the 1930s comes up with a theory of debt deflation.Hyman Minsky carried on with his work and came up with the “Financial instability Hypothesis” in 1974.Steve Keen carried on with their work and spotted 2008 coming in 2005.They found out what was wrong with neoclassical economics after its last outing, the corrections were never included in today’s economics.Twelve people were officially recognised by Bezemer in 2009 as having seen 2008 coming, announcing it publicly beforehand and having good reasoning behind their predictions.They all saw the problem being excessive debt with debt being used to inflate asset prices (US housing and US mortgage backed securities).They all think you can’t solve a debt problem with more debt, but this is the Central Banker solution.After 2008, the emerging markets also start to saturate with debt.Planet Ponzi.If you look at the US graph you will see the rapid rise of private debt in the 1980s, this is S&L crisis building up.When you are looking in the right place these things are easy to see.

In reply to by Batman11

ByTheCross Batman11 Tue, 06/13/2017 - 09:13 Permalink

Your choice is either to conclude that the central banker 'solution' won't fix the problem you (and/or others) perceive there to be and that therefore it is flawed, or, that it is a solution, but to a problem that you haven't as yet perceived, and that actually, its success is a fait accompli.You can't fix the planet, but you can fix yourself. More percipience needed...

In reply to by Batman11

medium giraffe Tue, 06/13/2017 - 05:12 Permalink

A nice young lady from the Labour party asked me if I would be voting.  I told her that I would not be and tried briefly to explain why.  Though I'm sure much of what I said challenged her unexamined beliefs, she was at least polite and receptive.Hopefully my position is becoming a little more clear to her by now.

TrumanShow Tue, 06/13/2017 - 05:18 Permalink

Apparently the cost estimate of giving free university tuition is around GBP11 billion annually.Actually university education is not a privilege but an investment by the country, so Corbyn is correct on that front.We have a budget deficit of around GBP80billion per year but still send GBP13billion aid to overseas despots, criminals and other people who don't deserve it and have to raise debt for every penny of that charity.Corbyn would give the free education and would still give the aid, so far higher taxes, or more debt - but he looks like a hero to the usefull idiots under 22.Tories would still give the aid but would not give the education so look like idiots to the plus 30s and look like demons to the under 22s.We are truly run by morons.