tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84595243059548144812024-03-16T18:52:30.803+00:00Man Against The StateJournal of a Libertarian Anarchist and Austrian EconomistGraham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.comBlogger143125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-83242980244605250232017-06-08T16:25:00.000+01:002017-06-08T16:25:53.147+01:00Who will I vote for?As H.L. Mencken said, "every election is a sort of advance auction of stolen goods". It's election day today here in the UK. Time for all of us to place our bids in the auction!<br />
<br />
The last time we voted was in the EU referendum of June 2016, where the question was straightforward: do we want the UK to remain in the EU or leave the EU? In other words, do we want to continue to be ruled by Brussels or would we rather be ruled by London? It was a clear and specific binary choice - and a very simple one for me. More liberty? Yes, please! Thankfully, the British public chose to vote leave and we are on our way out - hopefully.<br />
<br />
General elections are messy. We are not faced with a specific binary question. We have to pick between whole packages of policies and personalities from several different parties. Invariably, each person will agree with some of the policies of one party and some of the policies of another party. <br />
<br />
Choosing between the parties based on their policies is already complicated and difficult - even for people who, like me, have strong ideas about what we want and what the consequences each parties' policies are likely to be.<br />
<br />
In my previous four blog posts, I reviewed the BBC's bullet-point summaries of the manifestos of each of the main parties: <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/review-of-conservative-manifesto.html">Conservatives</a>, <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/review-of-labour-manifesto.html">Labour</a>, <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/review-of-libdem-manifesto.html">LibDems</a> and <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/review-of-ukip-manifesto.html">UKIP</a>. Below is a summary table of the results in each of ten policy areas. I gave a positive score to any policy that would increase liberty and a negative score to any policy that would decrease liberty.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEieBS_VpgbFlXLjnU4t29BYlFJBJ968bairbCJDfWAM0YV6-9tHo4Pgcsi6F9gZNg3Ura3cjVEcaIsRJu_YZpSgV7zPUDEBhoWQ_ZfjX2I0d7eH0CsIGZFAut93aNMIYEhp31rzeN-03TA/s1600/Picture1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="628" data-original-width="1468" height="168" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEieBS_VpgbFlXLjnU4t29BYlFJBJ968bairbCJDfWAM0YV6-9tHo4Pgcsi6F9gZNg3Ura3cjVEcaIsRJu_YZpSgV7zPUDEBhoWQ_ZfjX2I0d7eH0CsIGZFAut93aNMIYEhp31rzeN-03TA/s400/Picture1.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
For this scorecard to mean anything, I have to assume that 1) the manifestos of the parties actually reflect their policy intentions, without omission, and 2) the BBC bullet-point summaries are an accurate reflection of the manifestos. I have my doubts about both of these. For example, Labour's proposed "land value tax" which would replace "council tax" but significantly increase how much tax we all have to pay, does not make it into the BBC's summary. Nor do the worrying Conservative policies around internet and free speech regulation.<br />
<br />
Nevertheless, I will assume the scores above are broadly representative of which parties will increase or decrease liberty. Clearly, I won't be voting for Labour or the LibDems. Their policies on Brexit alone make it impossible for me to vote for them. On top of that, Labour in particular are led by Marxists and would be an economic disaster for the country.<br />
<br />
UKIP scored higher than the Conservatives. UKIP are often described as a libertarian-lite wing of the Conservative Party, so this makes sense. Should I vote UKIP then? Not so fast...<br />
<br />
Just because a particular party wins does not mean their policies will be implemented. As well as deciding based on policies, we also have to decide based on trust. Can we trust the parties and their leaders to stick to their words? Indeed, for many people, this is the only factor they will consider; I have seen people say they will vote Labour purely on the basis that they think Jeremy Corbyn is more likeable or trustworthy than Theresa May. Personally, I do not trust any of them at all, so this is not a factor in my decision.<br />
<br />
Then there is the question of "tactical voting". In reality, there is no way either the LibDems or UKIP will win. The logic of first-past-the-post makes it almost impossible for any party other than the biggest two to have a chance of taking power. Some candidates of the LibDems (and other parties like the Greens) have told their voters to vote Labour so as not to split the left-wing vote and end up with a Conservative victory. The Communist Party aren't even running candidates this year; they have officially endorsed Labour. Some UKIP candidates have done similar, telling their voters to pick the Conservatives to keep Labour out. Many Brexiteers, even die-hard UKIP supporters, are saying they will vote tactically for the Conservatives to keep Brexit on track. It is sad that tactical voting happens, but it is inevitable in a first-past-the-post system and you cannot argue with the logic.<br />
<br />
Related to the "tactical voting" debate is the issue of "safe seats". We do not vote as an entire country, but we vote district-by-district for our local MP. In some districts, the incumbent has such a large majority that there is no chance the seat will change hands. In these seats, there is no point in voting tactically.<br />
<br />
Indeed, the chance that one vote will change the result in any district are practically zero. <br />
<br />
So what is a libertarian to do? In my district, the Conservatives have a majority, but not so large to make it a safe seat. There is a chance that it may swing to Labour. No other party has any chance of winning it. The Libertarian Party has no candidate in my district (otherwise I would vote for them as a show of support, despite the <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/a-missed-opportunity-lpuk-manifesto-2017.html">deficiencies in their manifesto</a>). On this basis, I am inclined to vote for the Conservatives rather than UKIP.<br />
<br />
On the other hand, can I bring myself to vote for a party which has so many policies I disagree with? Maybe the most sensible choice is to stay home, or spoil the ballot paper - perhaps I could scrawl "taxation is theft" across the ballot paper and be done with it!<br />
<br />
I have about 6 hours to decide what I am going to do.Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com221tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-31519483652369692912017-06-04T19:38:00.000+01:002017-06-04T19:38:34.240+01:00Review of UKIP ManifestoThis is a quick review of the manifesto of the UK Independence Party, based on the bullet-point summary provided by the BBC <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39955886">here</a>. I will make a brief comment on each bullet and award a score as follows:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>2 points if I agree and it is important, or I very strongly agree</li>
<li>1 points if I agree but I don't consider it important</li>
<li>0 points if I am unsure or don't care</li>
<li>-1 points if I disagree but I don't consider it important</li>
<li>-2 points if I disagree and it is important, or I very strongly disagree</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
To clarify, since I am libertarian I will give a positive score to any policy that increases liberty and a negative score to any policy that decreases liberty.<br />
<br />
I have done a similar review of the manifesto of the Conservative Party <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/review-of-conservative-manifesto.html">here</a>, the Labour Party <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/review-of-labour-manifesto.html">here</a> and the LibDem Party <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/review-of-libdem-manifesto.html">here</a>. I'll do the same for UKIP over the coming days. I have already written a detailed review of the Libertarian Party manifesto <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/a-missed-opportunity-lpuk-manifesto-2017.html">here</a>.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Health and Care</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEilBu1IhdW-dBVO073-yVFVceXh2XrElgFpDKlogczbnx9BL8HVJNQvxEENzChAZbIHGb7NZkYJugR-MnJazZc6I-tKSUrNGCQj18mzAOW1hUAPDRZZDCVzhyQsyx3UtHJ8VOJtyxbL0ro/s1600/Picture1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="481" data-original-width="606" height="253" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEilBu1IhdW-dBVO073-yVFVceXh2XrElgFpDKlogczbnx9BL8HVJNQvxEENzChAZbIHGb7NZkYJugR-MnJazZc6I-tKSUrNGCQj18mzAOW1hUAPDRZZDCVzhyQsyx3UtHJ8VOJtyxbL0ro/s320/Picture1.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: The NHS doesn't need more funding, the system is flawed and we need a free market in healthcare</li>
<li>-1: Government shouldn't be funding education or training for anyone, even nurses. Students should pay for their own training or find someone willing to voluntarily pay for them. If there were a free market in healthcare, it is likely that private healthcare organisations would pay for nurse training</li>
<li>+1: Those who have not paid into the NHS should not be able to reap the benefits from it without paying. Charitable individuals are welcome to pay for the healthcare of foreign nationals if they wish</li>
<li>+1: The NHS should be moved towards a market-based system, but PFI doesn't do this. It is simply the NHS outsourcing the building of hospitals to the private sector, and in many cases represents a worse deal than if the new hospitals had been funded directly. See the IEA report <a href="https://iea.org.uk/publications/universal-healthcare-without-the-nhs/">"Universal Healthcare without the NHS"</a> for more details.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Brexit</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2lKT2iotkE7kc6mFdgeg2sgpWzgzTuAUgLOnq55jJPjTXCjaGbS297mt0h7-sKWdbcZ5_afmk3ccuY4YJPoDypVWBnV2d6PKRVc58lLZkREqQoisVcisrUEz4cfmDEFT1p4YD9wHhSQs/s1600/Picture2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="450" data-original-width="628" height="229" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2lKT2iotkE7kc6mFdgeg2sgpWzgzTuAUgLOnq55jJPjTXCjaGbS297mt0h7-sKWdbcZ5_afmk3ccuY4YJPoDypVWBnV2d6PKRVc58lLZkREqQoisVcisrUEz4cfmDEFT1p4YD9wHhSQs/s320/Picture2.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>+2: We sensibly voted to leave the EU, including the ECJ, single market and customs union, so this is merely the implementation of the will of the people expressed in the referendum </li>
<li>+2: Fishing rights was an important issue during the campaign, and it is important for the UK fishing industry to take back control of our waters, which the EU has forbidden us from fishing in</li>
<li>+2: We do not owe the EU anything. We have been one of the biggest contributors to the EU budget over the years. If anything, they should be paying us as we are relinquishing control of assets that we have paid for</li>
<li>+1: 2 years is more than enough time for the negotiations.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Immigration</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKVqw8qYnsysQpJhiFEKBcFgO1PHkAH_5Uk5vrtWG-3RpmFPiUbi3abxzA2k9MsISty1RVppCKkXaxv9sNv_VbpxZORlWsahl0ZMeWUzs_VvV3MizMZnqfOFCqcCkKUIjEuaaQIlf_hGE/s1600/Picture3.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="506" data-original-width="640" height="253" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKVqw8qYnsysQpJhiFEKBcFgO1PHkAH_5Uk5vrtWG-3RpmFPiUbi3abxzA2k9MsISty1RVppCKkXaxv9sNv_VbpxZORlWsahl0ZMeWUzs_VvV3MizMZnqfOFCqcCkKUIjEuaaQIlf_hGE/s320/Picture3.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>+1: Freedom of movement is unsustainable while we have a welfare state, socialised industries and subsidised housing</li>
<li>-1: High-skilled immigration is needed and benefits the country. Quality is more important than quantity, and a net figure of zero would mean we are turning away many immigrants that would benefit this country</li>
<li>+1: If an immigrant is economically self-supporting, they should be welcomed, while those that cannot support themselves should be turned away. It is likely that unskilled or low-skilled immigrants cannot support themselves and would be a net loss to this country</li>
<li>+1: Those who have not paid into the NHS should not be able to reap the benefits from it without paying. </li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Economy and Taxes</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNc1fMR47aY-i830r07XVtzhDmE5eO5XhtV8lyum-0dM2byDqegWyHNDETygr7K-9UdFLyWsuml6uO98Mk8078fYVlP5PqI92pZt5jisSznkoDsry7-7tCzVWs_HI3HQui3s6ivN-JOyw/s1600/Picture4.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="459" data-original-width="625" height="235" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNc1fMR47aY-i830r07XVtzhDmE5eO5XhtV8lyum-0dM2byDqegWyHNDETygr7K-9UdFLyWsuml6uO98Mk8078fYVlP5PqI92pZt5jisSznkoDsry7-7tCzVWs_HI3HQui3s6ivN-JOyw/s320/Picture4.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>+2: Taxation is theft and economically destructive. So tax cuts should always be welcomed</li>
<li>+2: See above</li>
<li>+2: See above</li>
<li>-1: See above. Tax loopholes should be opened to everyone, not closed.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Education and Family</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7ERXcdE1J7f_OYWomK_xCuyCGzDsRo-kDkYGTA6X20FyIHf8Wvv4XslmTeRcuYBO7Fz_F2OnbZ5gY9yGd9P6DaSaKupC0Xn_23p2anCwCAH-TT5ds-h4HTm9CpLskMoPaCH8L1_QSI4Q/s1600/Picture5.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="409" data-original-width="628" height="208" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7ERXcdE1J7f_OYWomK_xCuyCGzDsRo-kDkYGTA6X20FyIHf8Wvv4XslmTeRcuYBO7Fz_F2OnbZ5gY9yGd9P6DaSaKupC0Xn_23p2anCwCAH-TT5ds-h4HTm9CpLskMoPaCH8L1_QSI4Q/s320/Picture5.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>0: Grammar schools are better for children than comprehensive schools, so they should be more of them. However, government shouldn't fund them, and this is presumably what is meant by this pledge</li>
<li>-1: Students, their parents (or private charities) should pay for their own university education; taxpayers should not</li>
<li>+1: Government should not be offering or underwriting any loans to anyone</li>
<li>0: Government should not be involved in education at all. However, while it is, it is right to focus more on technical and vocational education rather than frivolous degrees such as gender studies. </li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Housing</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigJnB7vwVEgs6ZqJyo9pUJAYyQj9lZ-_0Ig1JHfaOZOnAXdiWMDvdjE4rtmu-sAZHFkUumArxGsPlW3UQqkRW2d_ktW8WQ33vTSsZiSgoihYsaoS8sIHqFNQd55kbOfHr41KLYJ8C_mEA/s1600/Picture6.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="450" data-original-width="632" height="227" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigJnB7vwVEgs6ZqJyo9pUJAYyQj9lZ-_0Ig1JHfaOZOnAXdiWMDvdjE4rtmu-sAZHFkUumArxGsPlW3UQqkRW2d_ktW8WQ33vTSsZiSgoihYsaoS8sIHqFNQd55kbOfHr41KLYJ8C_mEA/s320/Picture6.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: Government should not be in the business of building houses; it should get out of the way so that the private sector can build the houses needed to meet demand</li>
<li>-1: See above</li>
<li>-1: Compulsory purchase is a euphemism for theft</li>
<li>0: Whether this increases or decreases liberty depends on what the review finds.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Welfare and Pensions</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkFG9eSPomUjgtkK6KuRHhMcoODdtR-_YEgjNkTDyKfbG8a4agrA0T1isA3pKkrU1NCpQd8p8Emqb64eRB-iks1m2uXrmTgN2gCefVy9-6Jbt00n0mO4us9YD_LN0-wKFL3WpWb7WGFEI/s1600/Picture7.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="459" data-original-width="638" height="230" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkFG9eSPomUjgtkK6KuRHhMcoODdtR-_YEgjNkTDyKfbG8a4agrA0T1isA3pKkrU1NCpQd8p8Emqb64eRB-iks1m2uXrmTgN2gCefVy9-6Jbt00n0mO4us9YD_LN0-wKFL3WpWb7WGFEI/s320/Picture7.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: Taxpayers should not be forced to subsidise pensioners. State pensions should be privatised, but until they are they should not increase at a rate above both inflation and wages, because this is effectively a forced transfer to pensioners from younger people who are working hard to make ends meet</li>
<li>-1: Care should be paid for by the individuals receiving the care or by those willing to voluntarily pay for them; taxpayers should not paying for anyone's care</li>
<li>-1: The welfare system should be privatised, so that everyone can decide for themselves who is deserving of their charity. Private charity is better targeted and delivered more effectively than welfare payments</li>
<li>-1: The "bedroom tax" is not a tax; it is a reduction to a subsidy. </li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Foreign and Defence</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzhn2qGXrDzRTRPZBh1EWWM_lzSozQhqOjfeJbgDZKzzoRCzWC-k8kub94wZiCKzpd39EJG267rThvFoGrXuHeJowARhrCRhDunwPYFyyhRQxlS5xKwhi3ElgiR5xQiRjN4thh6XwoYnc/s1600/Picture8.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="479" data-original-width="631" height="242" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzhn2qGXrDzRTRPZBh1EWWM_lzSozQhqOjfeJbgDZKzzoRCzWC-k8kub94wZiCKzpd39EJG267rThvFoGrXuHeJowARhrCRhDunwPYFyyhRQxlS5xKwhi3ElgiR5xQiRjN4thh6XwoYnc/s320/Picture8.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: We already have sufficient armed forces to defend this country. The focus of the armed forces should be changed to be purely defence of this nation, not fighting wars overseas</li>
<li>+1: The EU would benefit much more from military cooperation with us than we do from cooperating with them; we should make use of this during the negotiations</li>
<li>+1: It is good for nations to cooperate together, such as by agreeing free trade deals, as long as they do not give up their sovereignty to international organisations or get involved in entangling military alliances</li>
<li>+2: Obviously the UK should not get involved in any foreign wars.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Future of the UK</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqvTCNSbxQzDAoSUlkfuCVjLlzv8zEWA_4e2FZzd1s2VzivhaWVd5NKlTctOgVLRW0KvzVY7Nvr8aSJKxTQAO2PA31C8NJAN-6K27jjfWZWO-zxhfc2KtQQhLA3qGH-D_esPuloxTRVyA/s1600/Picture9.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="458" data-original-width="628" height="232" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqvTCNSbxQzDAoSUlkfuCVjLlzv8zEWA_4e2FZzd1s2VzivhaWVd5NKlTctOgVLRW0KvzVY7Nvr8aSJKxTQAO2PA31C8NJAN-6K27jjfWZWO-zxhfc2KtQQhLA3qGH-D_esPuloxTRVyA/s320/Picture9.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>0: This would move us towards direct democracy and this is in some ways worse than representative democracy. On the other hand, it may bring about some important changes in the political system that might not take place otherwise, such as increased decentralisation</li>
<li>+1: While we have a state, it should reflect the will of the people, and UKIP getting 13% of the popular vote but only winning one MP suggests there is something wrong with the current system</li>
<li>+1: This would help reduce the costs of government</li>
<li>0: This would decentralise the state which is good, but I would rather see further devolution and secession in Scotland, NI and Wales such that the UK parliament becomes the de facto English parliament.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Transport and Environment</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3HS3qRtSK0KvfJg5Nbd9KNoaU_CQ29Nzs-UjDbzeTmLaZszgwCe6jA8PCoUxJSGzvXVdX4Efyt9FMRwAQPwjus0isoQvioxai0MzCtPR82cX-ctPbQsAMdQMTHos4gLORuaP-38mCmRo/s1600/Picture10.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="425" data-original-width="619" height="219" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3HS3qRtSK0KvfJg5Nbd9KNoaU_CQ29Nzs-UjDbzeTmLaZszgwCe6jA8PCoUxJSGzvXVdX4Efyt9FMRwAQPwjus0isoQvioxai0MzCtPR82cX-ctPbQsAMdQMTHos4gLORuaP-38mCmRo/s320/Picture10.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: Government should not be making this decision. Airports should be privately owned and each owner should decide for himself whether to expand or not. It may be that expanding Heathrow is more efficient than expanding the other airports; government has no way of calculating this.</li>
<li>+1: Government should not be funding new transport infrastructure.</li>
<li>-1: There are very few toll roads in this country. Charging tolls is more efficient (it reduces traffic for those willing to pay more) and it is fairer for the actual users of any given road to be the ones to pay for it.</li>
<li>+1: The Climate Change Act is economically destructive as well as completely pointless.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Overall</h3>
<div>
<ul>
<li>Health and Care: 0</li>
<li>Brexit: +7</li>
<li>Immigration: +2</li>
<li>Economy and Taxes: +5</li>
<li>Education and Family: 0</li>
<li>Housing: -3</li>
<li>Welfare and Pensions: -4</li>
<li>Foreign and Defence: +3</li>
<li>Future of the UK: +2</li>
<li>Transport and Environment: 0</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: x-large;">Final Score: +12</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Have I been fair in my review? Do you agree with how I have scored the policies? Let me know in the comments below.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<br />
<div>
</div>
<br />
Don't forget to check out my similar review of the Conservative manifesto <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/review-of-conservative-manifesto.html">here</a>, the Labour manifesto <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/review-of-labour-manifesto.html">here</a>, and the LibDem manifesto <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/review-of-libdem-manifesto.html" style="font-family: "Times New Roman";">here</a><span style="font-family: "times new roman";">.</span>
Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-75070128231262572912017-06-01T17:59:00.002+01:002017-06-02T20:04:34.574+01:00Review of LibDem ManifestoThis is a quick review of the manifesto of the Liberal Democrat Party, based on the bullet-point summary provided by the BBC <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39955886">here</a>. I will make a brief comment on each bullet and award a score as follows:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>2 points if I agree and it is important, or I very strongly agree</li>
<li>1 points if I agree but I don't consider it important</li>
<li>0 points if I am unsure or don't care</li>
<li>-1 points if I disagree but I don't consider it important</li>
<li>-2 points if I disagree and it is important, or I very strongly disagree</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
To clarify, since I am libertarian I will give a positive score to any policy that increases liberty and a negative score to any policy that decreases liberty.<br />
<br />
I have done a similar review of the manifesto of the Conservative Party <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/review-of-conservative-manifesto.html">here</a> and the Labour Party <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/review-of-labour-manifesto.html">here</a>. I'll do the same for UKIP over the coming days. I have already written a detailed review of the Libertarian Party manifesto <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/a-missed-opportunity-lpuk-manifesto-2017.html">here</a>.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Health and Care</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgi7ScCnSuwQmMc934HRfdqPLtQ21wek3p4PWXVEseEmsE-yWQx9tzjZBvnp2bJXBd_fjLEo9rmligxMm9Oc8u5eBDYxC_7fEgkwMufAYsGcphDb6atj5blYMOulJhyRi2QMYN5S9njSZU/s1600/Picture1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="485" data-original-width="628" height="246" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgi7ScCnSuwQmMc934HRfdqPLtQ21wek3p4PWXVEseEmsE-yWQx9tzjZBvnp2bJXBd_fjLEo9rmligxMm9Oc8u5eBDYxC_7fEgkwMufAYsGcphDb6atj5blYMOulJhyRi2QMYN5S9njSZU/s320/Picture1.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>+2: Taxation is theft and economically destructive. All taxes should be eliminated or reduced, and certainly not raised.</li>
<li>-1: Government shouldn't be in the health care business at all. The waiting time standards for physical health care are abysmal relative to other European countries. Waiting times for both physical and mental health care should be lower, and the only way to do this is move the NHS towards a free market health care system.</li>
<li>-1: See above. </li>
<li>-1: See above.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Brexit</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdewQdQDZ0AkPmF2ALEE6fclE9cNm3pagluai6emV1hYwz7BhIP3-opBqTm3iZOqsqb6qIS7gQQCswovkOB_Sv-SFxOgpecB3k8dc2d0gC4-cDyBI38pQWTwsRM5ga_hAsK-KH6-Jhyphenhyphen74/s1600/Picture2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="519" data-original-width="638" height="260" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdewQdQDZ0AkPmF2ALEE6fclE9cNm3pagluai6emV1hYwz7BhIP3-opBqTm3iZOqsqb6qIS7gQQCswovkOB_Sv-SFxOgpecB3k8dc2d0gC4-cDyBI38pQWTwsRM5ga_hAsK-KH6-Jhyphenhyphen74/s320/Picture2.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-2: We sensibly voted to leave the EU, even knowing there was a "risk" of not getting a deal with the EU. This is blatantly an attempt to overturn the referendum result and is an absolutely terrible negotiating strategy. It creates an incentive for the EU to give us the worst possible deal!</li>
<li>+1: Almost no one wants EU citizens living here legally to be deported. Even if no deal is reached with the EU, they would not be deported. This makes it pointless to use them as a "bargaining chip" in the negotiations, and creates unnecessary uncertainty.</li>
<li>-2: We voted to leave the EU and it was made extremely clear that this included leaving the single market and customs union. This Party clearly has contempt for democracy and the British people.</li>
<li>-2: Freedom of movement is unsustainable while we have a welfare state, socialised industries and subsidised housing. Ending freedom of movement was one of the key reasons why many British people voted to leave the EU.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Immigration</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2dxX5GA3DK2_WH6Wy9Ptj2xUBZpp0uPINn3Z94MgunS6i9rKKEZ6PbnlAmqgwvvas0IDM9Et9NvFHBBJbpbALSA5vYprxocAnuwexQlJqiCf99PrVLnRBUkogizMpMQb3vcTQkdq6NH8/s1600/Picture3.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="482" data-original-width="635" height="242" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2dxX5GA3DK2_WH6Wy9Ptj2xUBZpp0uPINn3Z94MgunS6i9rKKEZ6PbnlAmqgwvvas0IDM9Et9NvFHBBJbpbALSA5vYprxocAnuwexQlJqiCf99PrVLnRBUkogizMpMQb3vcTQkdq6NH8/s320/Picture3.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-2: See above.</li>
<li>+1: High-skilled immigration is needed and benefits the country.</li>
<li>-1: Why? This seems like an arbitrary way to manipulate the net migration figures.</li>
<li>-2: Many of these "refugees" are in fact low-skilled economic migrants, or worse are criminals or terrorists.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Economy and Taxes</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGWzozukLi1OmuAyIOcufyfQF-OY29BRPNVm_T_BYp2tC3V3k1t4Fh-tcFXd_SSuzttS0vy6JxDaAFbC_jHLrK0UcS-DGj5Xx-dDN05cpmoMiT840LVZvBt1HmJWyx5acA9gdHbNAj0nU/s1600/Picture4.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="544" data-original-width="637" height="273" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGWzozukLi1OmuAyIOcufyfQF-OY29BRPNVm_T_BYp2tC3V3k1t4Fh-tcFXd_SSuzttS0vy6JxDaAFbC_jHLrK0UcS-DGj5Xx-dDN05cpmoMiT840LVZvBt1HmJWyx5acA9gdHbNAj0nU/s320/Picture4.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>+1: These are sensible goals to have, but they should be achieved by reducing spending, not by increasing taxes.</li>
<li>-2: Taxation is theft and economically destructive. All taxes should be eliminated or reduced, and certainly not raised.</li>
<li>-2: Government should not be involved in any of those industries, and certainly shouldn't be borrowing to "invest" in them.</li>
<li>-2: See above. The corporate tax rate was cut from 28% to 19% by the Conservatives and this INCREASED corporate tax receipts. By reversing these cuts, receipts would likely reduce, as well destroying marginal businesses and jobs, and making products more expensive. Capital gains and inheritance taxes are similar.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Education and Family</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAdM7jlaYg7qZtF-1gUFK8otWTwG7ryLP_equmcIKIedP_mHhioZz-6V3DcNdhOY_Fd88_j9X3BY8p5cggWPiT59_WJ-Z9-t61O_TfhA8Fi6fLTLcgVeBecFY41JkFxgY9vBYyUC5yTZ8/s1600/Picture5.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="428" data-original-width="634" height="216" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAdM7jlaYg7qZtF-1gUFK8otWTwG7ryLP_equmcIKIedP_mHhioZz-6V3DcNdhOY_Fd88_j9X3BY8p5cggWPiT59_WJ-Z9-t61O_TfhA8Fi6fLTLcgVeBecFY41JkFxgY9vBYyUC5yTZ8/s320/Picture5.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: Throwing more money at the education system is not going to improve education; only allowing free markets in education will achieve that. </li>
<li>-1: All types of schools should be allowed; let parents decide where they want their children to be schooled, if anywhere.</li>
<li>-1: Teachers, like everyone else, should be paid according to the value they produce (their marginal productivity), and the only way to ensure this is to have a free market in schooling and let individual schools decide how much they pay each teacher</li>
<li>-1: Students, their parents (or private charities) should pay for their own schooling; taxpayers should not.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Housing</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgibcaXCAyWCFyKEm3dfOBvKCimoniJxEB8eBxL-o0rjvP5iWSAXyQa6sRyB2bdGxhgKHbmKGjvXnNgayef53TaEparwdSofedZEchp2stEINt7gBGfvYBf2vAmHPYk75Yq3DRYx3DP7As/s1600/Picture6.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="432" data-original-width="635" height="217" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgibcaXCAyWCFyKEm3dfOBvKCimoniJxEB8eBxL-o0rjvP5iWSAXyQa6sRyB2bdGxhgKHbmKGjvXnNgayef53TaEparwdSofedZEchp2stEINt7gBGfvYBf2vAmHPYk75Yq3DRYx3DP7As/s320/Picture6.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: Government should not be in the business of building houses; it should get out of the way so that the private sector can build the houses needed to meet demand.</li>
<li>-1: See above.</li>
<li>-1: Right to buy should be extended and all state-owned houses should be sold to the private sector.</li>
<li>-1: Taxation is theft and economically destructive. All taxes should be eliminated or reduced, and certainly not raised.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Welfare and Pensions</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhP8SO7KZt4bNq7z43C6pJAHJgkJQVr7s9DsfLUgEG76yb4UdR4PRzaY5b-_ssKUM9jcbXC0j17_YjBtdNf4zjwZ-9MwM840sl3rECiMHUX1SGXl6ATvM2REr6hBNXUj1nKAo7bcxkoJ2w/s1600/Picture7.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="400" data-original-width="631" height="202" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhP8SO7KZt4bNq7z43C6pJAHJgkJQVr7s9DsfLUgEG76yb4UdR4PRzaY5b-_ssKUM9jcbXC0j17_YjBtdNf4zjwZ-9MwM840sl3rECiMHUX1SGXl6ATvM2REr6hBNXUj1nKAo7bcxkoJ2w/s320/Picture7.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: Taxpayers should not be forced to subsidise pensioners. It should be up to bus companies to decide whether to allow pensioners to travel for free. State pensions should be privatised, but until they are they should not increase at a rate above both inflation and wages, because this is effectively a forced transfer to pensioners from younger people who are working hard to make ends meet</li>
<li>+1: Government should not be subsidising anyone, let alone wealthy pensioners.</li>
<li>-1: The welfare system should be privatised, so that everyone can decide for themselves who is deserving of their charity. Private charity is better targeted and delivered more effectively than welfare payments. </li>
<li>-1: See above.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Foreign and Defence</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-T7qSq57fO_tu7XGNsn2J49nlAwB48h1YWaJOzHFff9sC9I8hla-9Z6ERHpATtC31FEZUoy1R4V5PaNrJhkviXD5nh90KH5Y76SepnZrJo5L3cmhfIZQE1pjaUBubyML408ZUsoP5drk/s1600/Picture8.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="397" data-original-width="622" height="204" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-T7qSq57fO_tu7XGNsn2J49nlAwB48h1YWaJOzHFff9sC9I8hla-9Z6ERHpATtC31FEZUoy1R4V5PaNrJhkviXD5nh90KH5Y76SepnZrJo5L3cmhfIZQE1pjaUBubyML408ZUsoP5drk/s320/Picture8.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: We are spending about 2% now, and that should be reduced by refocusing the armed forces as above.</li>
<li>-2: Individuals should be able to decide who receives the money they wish to spend on charitable causes. Government international aid is typically ill-targeted, inefficient and increases corruption, such as by supporting dictatorships in Africa</li>
<li>-1: Weapons manufacturers should be able to sell to whoever they please, as long as they are not subsidised by the government.</li>
<li>-1: The nuclear deterrent is nothing but a waste of money and a favour to weapons manufacturers. There are no circumstances in which nuclear weapons should be used, so there is no reason to have them.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Future of the UK</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjogfQTZPUo8fJtcVPeN8nc0OCK8mv_RnWXPexQpxa4qZjxXKfbByr1SzMVgMFz2st7dRygAAeUXXybb-OOcaSRfh8shzCjvOk7gnyam7LncM43HYRWPw4dTfcaiW74Es_-NQKwqznag_Q/s1600/Picture9.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="460" data-original-width="643" height="228" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjogfQTZPUo8fJtcVPeN8nc0OCK8mv_RnWXPexQpxa4qZjxXKfbByr1SzMVgMFz2st7dRygAAeUXXybb-OOcaSRfh8shzCjvOk7gnyam7LncM43HYRWPw4dTfcaiW74Es_-NQKwqznag_Q/s320/Picture9.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>+1: Decentralisation should always be welcomed.</li>
<li>-1 The Barnett formula is a forced transfer payment from England to the other home nations. Each nation should support itself. </li>
<li>+2: This would help with decentralisation efforts in places like Yorkshire, Cornwall and Rutland.</li>
<li>-1: Scotland would be better off leaving the UK - as would the rest of the UK.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Transport and Environment</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidyUR_ZK1e3NjkPq5C5YyeclXFc6PfSUzH0BWic33Xw1xGa8laGNGM60Z2Bj6Onf8PtXAB06fFovJyLk_Ua66KiQVzo6DhegiVaTGLyJv4WPaEEDJ20d46cropOY1Jp949F1EvwBf03-k/s1600/Picture10.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="463" data-original-width="641" height="231" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidyUR_ZK1e3NjkPq5C5YyeclXFc6PfSUzH0BWic33Xw1xGa8laGNGM60Z2Bj6Onf8PtXAB06fFovJyLk_Ua66KiQVzo6DhegiVaTGLyJv4WPaEEDJ20d46cropOY1Jp949F1EvwBf03-k/s320/Picture10.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: Government should not subsidising destruction of any kind.</li>
<li>-1: Government should not be enforcing any kind of emissions targets or zones.</li>
<li>-2: That would be hugely economically destructive (so-called "clean energy" is far more expensive overall than traditional energy sources), and would be completely pointless since the UK makes up only a tiny proportion of greenhouse gas emissions, and the science regarding the effects of greenhouse gases is far from settled.</li>
<li>-1: Government should not be involved in the energy industry or deciding between different forms or methods of generating power.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Overall</h3>
<div>
<ul>
<li>Health and Care: -5</li>
<li>Brexit: -5</li>
<li>Immigration: -4</li>
<li>Economy and Taxes: -5</li>
<li>Education and Family: -4</li>
<li>Housing: -4</li>
<li>Welfare and Pensions: -2</li>
<li>Foreign and Defence: -5</li>
<li>Future of the UK: +1</li>
<li>Transport and Environment: -5</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: x-large;">Final Score: -38</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Have I been fair in my review? Do you agree with how I have scored the policies? Let me know in the comments below.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<br />
<div>
</div>
<br />
Don't forget to check out my similar review of the Conservative manifesto <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/review-of-conservative-manifesto.html">here</a> and the Labour manifesto <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/review-of-labour-manifesto.html">here</a>. Over the next few days, I'll do a similar review of the UKIP manifesto.
Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-22927577159393261582017-05-28T17:03:00.000+01:002017-05-28T17:03:16.699+01:00Review of Labour ManifestoThis is a quick review of the manifesto of the Labour Party, based on the bullet-point summary provided by the BBC <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39955886">here</a>. I will make a brief comment on each bullet and award a score as follows:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>2 points if I agree and it is important, or I very strongly agree</li>
<li>1 points if I agree but I don't consider it important</li>
<li>0 points if I am unsure or don't care</li>
<li>-1 points if I disagree but I don't consider it important</li>
<li>-2 points if I disagree and it is important, or I very strongly disagree</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
To clarify, since I am libertarian I will give a positive score to any policy that increases liberty and a negative score to any policy that decreases liberty.<br />
<br />
I have done a similar review of the manifesto of the Conservative Party <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/review-of-conservative-manifesto.html">here</a>. I'll do the same for the Lib Dems and UKIP over the coming days. I have already written a detailed review of the Libertarian Party manifesto <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/a-missed-opportunity-lpuk-manifesto-2017.html">here</a>.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Health and Care</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlN8pa4-d3VKRBL7TpjBVnQUJrzjCAQftiHJf5RMf_EKdVbmOKMmJATVzBtYkuT-t6TrMoxvc3DfAjY7L_2gMVHLZz1Q7uF6E1cJ7eCvj4UIH2-BCtvqLE2qrJPJZL0iQgVMyJImAXuak/s1600/Picture1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="513" data-original-width="633" height="259" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlN8pa4-d3VKRBL7TpjBVnQUJrzjCAQftiHJf5RMf_EKdVbmOKMmJATVzBtYkuT-t6TrMoxvc3DfAjY7L_2gMVHLZz1Q7uF6E1cJ7eCvj4UIH2-BCtvqLE2qrJPJZL0iQgVMyJImAXuak/s320/Picture1.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-2: The NHS doesn't need more funding, the system is flawed and we need a free market in healthcare. £30bn is a huge increase in funding, far more than the £8bn pledge from the Conservatives</li>
<li>-2: Privatisation should be extended to cover the entire health care system, not reversed. The partial and piecemeal privatisation from the Conservatives amounts to corporatism, where private businesses and the state are in partnership. The full benefits of privatisation will only come when the whole system is private</li>
<li>-1: Such a guarantee would require a massive increase in funding, and even then is doubtful. Private providers operating in a free market are more likely to achieve that target</li>
<li>-1: Every person should pay for their own care or find somewhat willing to voluntarily pay for them; taxpayers should not be forced to pay.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Brexit</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgdr-9i91D48l2G61sjsj_rGyj5Aba_szO81Nr7PdAskvNeMsT3OsmUKmZ4QkKMmoUguwxxuRzUkkZFM0Iv1eqd6FPWrrQd8gsES4LwQRISTIa9Q57f3cD-c5yFFj9EYDA-8OqIoZyzK6U/s1600/Picture2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="566" data-original-width="624" height="290" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgdr-9i91D48l2G61sjsj_rGyj5Aba_szO81Nr7PdAskvNeMsT3OsmUKmZ4QkKMmoUguwxxuRzUkkZFM0Iv1eqd6FPWrrQd8gsES4LwQRISTIa9Q57f3cD-c5yFFj9EYDA-8OqIoZyzK6U/s320/Picture2.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-2: We sensibly voted to leave the EU, and this includes leaving the single market and customs union, as was made clear before the referendum</li>
<li>+1: Almost no one wants EU citizens living here legally to be deported. Even if no deal is reached with the EU, they would not be deported. This makes it pointless to use them as a "bargaining chip" in the negotiations, and creates unnecessary uncertainty.</li>
<li>-1: There are some so-called "workers' rights" and "environmental protections" that should be removed after we have completed our withdrawal, so we should not now hamstring ourselves by committing to maintain them.</li>
<li>-2: I can't think of a worse negotiating strategy than to say that we will accept any deal rather than leaving with no deal! Obviously that creates an incentive for the EU to give us the worst possible deal! The Conservatives and UKIP are right that no deal would be better than a bad deal (and better than remaining in the EU).</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Immigration</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSPH3KZB4WDNkA6coUfyniRrNW74vHpOg-HxbKcUDM360FrwuQjj2a99aGIsUkdfWTcnLdKdVVWRcSSZb-18C6upCsViifb4A9tx5_jA8AxAnq30_8NiZ_e9abaLtWpI5BiTXhV7EV45w/s1600/Picture3.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="457" data-original-width="636" height="229" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSPH3KZB4WDNkA6coUfyniRrNW74vHpOg-HxbKcUDM360FrwuQjj2a99aGIsUkdfWTcnLdKdVVWRcSSZb-18C6upCsViifb4A9tx5_jA8AxAnq30_8NiZ_e9abaLtWpI5BiTXhV7EV45w/s320/Picture3.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>+1: While the UK has a welfare state, socialised industries and state subsidies, freedom of movement is unworkable.</li>
<li>-1: Free markets handle changes in conditions (such as an increased population) better than any state planner ever could, so there is no need for this fund.</li>
<li>-1: Why? This seems like an arbitrary way to manipulate the net migration figures.</li>
<li>0: The main problem with immigration is bad policy, not enforcement; unlike in the US, where ILLEGAL immigration is a major problem, in the UK the problem is uncontrolled LEGAL immigration. Policies should be changed. Having said that, additional border guards may be needed to ensure the new policies are enforced; I would need more information to decide whether I agree with this policy.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Economy and Taxes</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2RhXqhXFvMDBrEvV4lm6ohzRNYCVfkxWXDNUQTrGYz8mUyqQWLxJBlpwBouPO7NaZImnZFtPmCix4jAShvFW4K2_1WEnqvbTE7cjLPpywJ-NPnmb90bWWxo5QPVrfUR9a5FaP0y00VWc/s1600/Picture4.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="423" data-original-width="611" height="221" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2RhXqhXFvMDBrEvV4lm6ohzRNYCVfkxWXDNUQTrGYz8mUyqQWLxJBlpwBouPO7NaZImnZFtPmCix4jAShvFW4K2_1WEnqvbTE7cjLPpywJ-NPnmb90bWWxo5QPVrfUR9a5FaP0y00VWc/s320/Picture4.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-2: Stimulus packages prevent the market from recovering from a previous distortion of the market caused by central banks. It is an immoral transfer of wealth from taxpayers to support companies that are wasting resources. </li>
<li>+2: Taxation is theft and economically destructive, so should be eliminated, or at least reduced, and certainly not increased</li>
<li>-2: See above. Theft from "the rich" is still theft, and still economically destructive.</li>
<li>-2: See above. The corporate tax rate was cut from 28% to 19% by the Conservatives and this INCREASED corporate tax receipts. By reversing these cuts, receipts would likely reduce, as well destroying marginal businesses and jobs, and making products more expensive.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Education and Family</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7rlls1V7lVOShOfF8Z0-bHtlqMSu4KHfeBzXvK7G-I7jqmogsE8P1UeeiiIs6Vq2bXxY_oOoEYesJb5leT7y7ozar43uSsYNbD6IVjAiMRIxMqzWvpV0lz8N4tX8JaZNr1ORtp6Oo6-0/s1600/Picture5.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="447" data-original-width="638" height="224" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7rlls1V7lVOShOfF8Z0-bHtlqMSu4KHfeBzXvK7G-I7jqmogsE8P1UeeiiIs6Vq2bXxY_oOoEYesJb5leT7y7ozar43uSsYNbD6IVjAiMRIxMqzWvpV0lz8N4tX8JaZNr1ORtp6Oo6-0/s320/Picture5.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: People that wish to go to university to pay for it themselves; taxpayers should not</li>
<li>-1: Parents that wish to use childcare should pay for it themselves; taxpayers should not</li>
<li>-1: Teachers, like everyone else, should be paid according to the value they produce (their marginal productivity), and the only way to ensure this is to have a free market in schooling and let individual schools decide how much they pay each teacher</li>
<li>-1: Class sizes should be lower, but the way to do this is to have a free market in schooling, not by increasing funding for a failing socialist system. Parents (or private charities) should pay for their children to eat; taxpayers should not.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Housing</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioBdBhXEVf1mvrZbVh3jE0_RouO3QhAjNjPAxTh__TZNRL9OyUAE1-1OUcnHJpxzy8tqeHxhl3q4JL2m7EpFtpm7ycvq7zPzFjmdRl4Tw-6fnm0AjNeBYVjo4NE17vbn3eSnGIiW9vKNU/s1600/Picture6.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="451" data-original-width="630" height="229" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioBdBhXEVf1mvrZbVh3jE0_RouO3QhAjNjPAxTh__TZNRL9OyUAE1-1OUcnHJpxzy8tqeHxhl3q4JL2m7EpFtpm7ycvq7zPzFjmdRl4Tw-6fnm0AjNeBYVjo4NE17vbn3eSnGIiW9vKNU/s320/Picture6.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-2: Price controls are always economically destructive. Maximum price laws create shortages; a maximum rent law will prevent housing supply from rising to meet demand. </li>
<li>-1: Government should not be in the business of owning houses; all council houses should be sold immediately, and the right-to-buy policy is one way to do this, so it should be kept and expanded.</li>
<li>-1: See above. Government should get out of the way so that the private sector can build the houses needed to meet demand.</li>
<li>-1: See above. Private charities can help people that need help, and can do so much more efficiently and effectively than government can.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Welfare and Pensions</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRPHkyhFvctt28FgE5NSvdPyu-UXFmJwKqHteuHHE4ZpW-f100DtnsNynmCglLqYMLtxa0mUE0fwkzp9FzF8DEsHjWWnuXHym43WebZ7dVTQkelAMKsxucRycqMrvQyk5AnMIV-YNnbA8/s1600/Picture7.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="503" data-original-width="627" height="256" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRPHkyhFvctt28FgE5NSvdPyu-UXFmJwKqHteuHHE4ZpW-f100DtnsNynmCglLqYMLtxa0mUE0fwkzp9FzF8DEsHjWWnuXHym43WebZ7dVTQkelAMKsxucRycqMrvQyk5AnMIV-YNnbA8/s320/Picture7.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: Taxpayers should not be forced to subsidise pensioners. Winter fuel payments, if needed, should be paid by private charities, not the state. It should be up to bus companies to decide whether to allow pensioners to travel for free. State pensions should be privatised, but until they are they should not increase at a rate above both inflation and wages, because this is effectively a forced transfer to pensioners from younger people who are working hard to make ends meet</li>
<li>-1: The welfare system should be privatised, so that everyone can decide for themselves who is deserving of their charity. Private charity is better targeted and delivered more effectively than welfare payments. </li>
<li>-1: The way to increase employment is to allow free markets: lower taxes, fewer regulations, no price controls and by privatising socialised industries. With free markets, employment and wages would be maximised, lessening the need for welfare top-ups.</li>
<li>-1: People that want or need a carer should pay for it themselves or find someone who will pay for them voluntarily; taxpayers should not be forced to do so.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Foreign and Defence</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyC7iFrWazhwqpJnbAmWI8XBLivLAg5dkK8s9jLt-hmaADFS2_UK4knDiulEbPfvKWsDJF0uC4nswdYE_RYeyHaiueUK9pyNDHEi1JmlhHQqCLTTcn35KbVOnLywGaorlyldf8tG3mUOA/s1600/Picture8.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="423" data-original-width="611" height="221" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyC7iFrWazhwqpJnbAmWI8XBLivLAg5dkK8s9jLt-hmaADFS2_UK4knDiulEbPfvKWsDJF0uC4nswdYE_RYeyHaiueUK9pyNDHEi1JmlhHQqCLTTcn35KbVOnLywGaorlyldf8tG3mUOA/s320/Picture8.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>+1: A review is needed, and hopefully it will find that we will be safer if we stop aggressing against foreign nations, and instead refocus the armed forces on defending this country. </li>
<li>-1: We are spending about 2% now, and that should be reduced by refocusing the armed forces as above.</li>
<li>-2: Individuals should be able to decide who receives the money they wish to spend on charitable causes. Government international aid is typically ill-targeted, inefficient and increases corruption, such as by supporting dictatorships in Africa</li>
<li>-1: If veterans want home insulation they should pay for it themselves or find someone who will pay for them voluntarily; taxpayers should not be forced to do so.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Future of the UK</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg9S0yKfQ_JKcliT8nKAT87koxhtOUek1ZhUUtUtcKlZpHHizTuleWTw80zhW2jqiwfMT_USiRDuzlFnqgiYL7_0HHW1jTfttncLN9C_hdStoivmONLaGHcCSwmMgM05Rh5dUN7U9Kw8lY/s1600/Picture9.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="434" data-original-width="610" height="227" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg9S0yKfQ_JKcliT8nKAT87koxhtOUek1ZhUUtUtcKlZpHHizTuleWTw80zhW2jqiwfMT_USiRDuzlFnqgiYL7_0HHW1jTfttncLN9C_hdStoivmONLaGHcCSwmMgM05Rh5dUN7U9Kw8lY/s320/Picture9.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>0: This would be a waste of time and money; as the example of the USA proves, a Constitution is powerless to limit government or prevent them from violating fundamental rights.</li>
<li>-1: Nobody should be able to vote themselves more money at the expense of someone else; suffrage should be reduced, not expanded.</li>
<li>-2: If the Scots want to secede, they should certainly be allowed to. Being kept in the UK against their will is a clear violation of the principle of self-determination.</li>
<li>0: This seems like a waste of time and money, since England already dominates the UK. Far better to allow Scotland, NI and Wales to secede (or grant them more autonomy) so that UK ministers become de facto ministers for England.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Transport and Environment</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBCAiLpRVC9qyRP9GxtDsgXK32TGWRsOO0ND844JJVvJUC5eSiHxr27YCnk6AqXzHDh55KzD3Gka45oM3DrhamZamMHZTl17tjrL003rS9xk4j70AKIlLbr9fbiQ1sXq4_fRfk7kxmcfg/s1600/Picture10.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="421" data-original-width="620" height="217" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBCAiLpRVC9qyRP9GxtDsgXK32TGWRsOO0ND844JJVvJUC5eSiHxr27YCnk6AqXzHDh55KzD3Gka45oM3DrhamZamMHZTl17tjrL003rS9xk4j70AKIlLbr9fbiQ1sXq4_fRfk7kxmcfg/s320/Picture10.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-2: Government should not be involved in the transport industry; it should end the monopolistic Network Rail, stop subsidising and regulating rail companies and allow genuine competition instead</li>
<li>-1: Government should not be involved in running bus services</li>
<li>-1: No legislation should be passed in the name of preventing pollution. The best way to prevent harmful pollution is for the courts to enforce genuine property rights, treating pollution as an invasion of private property.</li>
<li>-1: Government should not be involved in the energy industry or deciding between different forms or methods of generating power.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Overall</h3>
<div>
<ul>
<li>Health and Care: -6</li>
<li>Brexit: -4</li>
<li>Immigration: -1</li>
<li>Economy and Taxes: -4</li>
<li>Education and Family: -4</li>
<li>Housing: -5</li>
<li>Welfare and Pensions: -4</li>
<li>Foreign and Defence: -3</li>
<li>Future of the UK: -3</li>
<li>Transport and Environment: -5</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: x-large;">Final Score: -39</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Have I been fair in my review? Do you agree with how I have scored the policies? Let me know in the comments below.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Don't forget to check out my similar review of the Conservative manifesto <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/review-of-conservative-manifesto.html">here</a>. Over the next few days, I'll do a similar review of the Lib Dem and UKIP manifestos.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<br />
<div>
</div>
<br />
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-decoration-color: initial; text-decoration-style: initial; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
</div>
Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-4232584790124720952017-05-24T20:47:00.000+01:002017-05-25T19:24:04.623+01:00Review of Conservative ManifestoThis is a quick review of the manifesto of the Conservative Party, based on the bullet-point summary provided by the BBC <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39955886">here</a>. I will make a brief comment on each bullet and award a score as follows:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>2 points if I agree and it is important, or I very strongly agree</li>
<li>1 points if I agree but I don't consider it important</li>
<li>0 points if I am unsure or don't care</li>
<li>-1 points if I disagree but I don't consider it important</li>
<li>-2 points if I disagree and it is important, or I very strongly disagree</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I'll do the same for the Labour Party, the Lib Dems and UKIP over the coming days. I have already written a detailed review of the Libertarian Party manifesto <a href="http://managainstthestate.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/a-missed-opportunity-lpuk-manifesto-2017.html">here</a>.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Health and Care</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGF78CETalzA3gsjdkflSQ8IomsXc68j5OGx6jjoPBT_Z0Bc8eHlTIhobb6N8Zt-6C9OLISNWBO6dEzN7RP5dgWAq17gCCc6jBVjzgKajr_anv56jIzTATzRBWBq_Xa1hS4gJ8YF_nsxU/s1600/Picture2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="513" data-original-width="617" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGF78CETalzA3gsjdkflSQ8IomsXc68j5OGx6jjoPBT_Z0Bc8eHlTIhobb6N8Zt-6C9OLISNWBO6dEzN7RP5dgWAq17gCCc6jBVjzgKajr_anv56jIzTATzRBWBq_Xa1hS4gJ8YF_nsxU/s320/Picture2.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: The NHS doesn't need more funding, the system is flawed and we need a free market in healthcare</li>
<li>+1: Every person should pay for their own care or find somewhat willing to voluntarily pay for them; taxpayers should not be forced to pay</li>
<li>-1: There shouldn't be a cap, see above</li>
<li>+1: No problem deferring bills as long as they get paid (though this should be a decision for the each care home to make individually).</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Brexit</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1m0G-hvXn14ofvIPSHxDdI62foIHLPPZg9T9FEIXeaaiA_LF2bgJlpfoZZhBKYGMVfxu2BtkH1PcMLO4Y5qmKTPe2MqlgroSz6N6a50-DFjSzOG45w0FrYpuNO9-n0_3kdSOYRwC49vw/s1600/Picture3.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="494" data-original-width="620" height="254" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1m0G-hvXn14ofvIPSHxDdI62foIHLPPZg9T9FEIXeaaiA_LF2bgJlpfoZZhBKYGMVfxu2BtkH1PcMLO4Y5qmKTPe2MqlgroSz6N6a50-DFjSzOG45w0FrYpuNO9-n0_3kdSOYRwC49vw/s320/Picture3.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>+2: We sensibly voted to leave the EU, and this includes leaving the single market and customs union, as was made clear before the referendum</li>
<li>+2: Correct, no deal would be better than a bad deal, and better than remaining in the EU</li>
<li>+1: The settlement is less important than the ongoing arrangements, but we should still seek to get back some of what we have contributed to the EU over the years, and certainly shouldn't pay a bill to be allowed to leave!</li>
<li>+1: Yes, for an orderly transition, just translate all EU law into UK law, then after we've left we can remove the (many) parts of EU law that are bad for the UK.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Immigration</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5uyeU2nPYntwLx4JkzugR2GmvvreXXAMdKDWp7fFboB_fQDdK4R998p93-TJR-TOgPBDqab0gInyFoKngRHyPjIDqMTJFGGkdyR3c8Hw3GOCAHEohZTa_TpGfLM69jaMXdZLFNq650G0/s1600/Picture4.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="484" data-original-width="600" height="258" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5uyeU2nPYntwLx4JkzugR2GmvvreXXAMdKDWp7fFboB_fQDdK4R998p93-TJR-TOgPBDqab0gInyFoKngRHyPjIDqMTJFGGkdyR3c8Hw3GOCAHEohZTa_TpGfLM69jaMXdZLFNq650G0/s320/Picture4.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>+1: Quality is more important than quantity, but reducing the total number should mean those who get accepted are better quality</li>
<li>-1: Companies should be able to employ whoever they want, so they should not be penalised for hiring immigrants</li>
<li>+1: This would help ensure immigrants are economically self-supporting and therefore a net benefit to the UK</li>
<li>0: This would depend on whether the students are an economic benefit to the country or an economic loss, and I don't know which is the case.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Economy and Taxes</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqchQxXdD3q5MdFLp_4DRE5ufgjsbuCsypCN5YWw3kJu0wylHsLFzgjPF0N65leqABCDs4scFNxscOhS-SnM7TrlrcpQTt7Kn0XNRWdfwxfeGdQGQBxpf8DVPT2Nrx7kexwgdIRJGl3IM/s1600/Picture5.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="420" data-original-width="594" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqchQxXdD3q5MdFLp_4DRE5ufgjsbuCsypCN5YWw3kJu0wylHsLFzgjPF0N65leqABCDs4scFNxscOhS-SnM7TrlrcpQTt7Kn0XNRWdfwxfeGdQGQBxpf8DVPT2Nrx7kexwgdIRJGl3IM/s320/Picture5.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>+1: A balanced budget is important because future generations should not be burdened with the debt of the current generation. This should be achieved by reduced spending, not by increased taxation. It should be done as soon as possible and should easily be achieved sooner than 2025.</li>
<li>+2: Taxation is theft and economically destructive, so should be eliminated, or at least reduced, and certainly not increased</li>
<li>+2: See above, any and all tax cuts should be welcomed</li>
<li>0: Depends what the review finds, obviously. Hopefully it will reach the sensible conclusion that reducing business rates will help businesses thrive, create jobs, economic growth and cheaper products.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Education and Family</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiUXEQnu-DaNTCEjGlIXvgyzTlJcnw8_SMCLmCC_QRcWyGOq-OneAB2SKIYRepwJIL9009IBdPHhp5EMzG8HER9cdEQbjPwUMeUGF0ENCM7Qau4Q5cCWDoUGJ6uEWadghSdWYZm8UYc68/s1600/Picture6.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="441" data-original-width="592" height="238" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiUXEQnu-DaNTCEjGlIXvgyzTlJcnw8_SMCLmCC_QRcWyGOq-OneAB2SKIYRepwJIL9009IBdPHhp5EMzG8HER9cdEQbjPwUMeUGF0ENCM7Qau4Q5cCWDoUGJ6uEWadghSdWYZm8UYc68/s320/Picture6.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: The problem with state-run schools is the same as with any socialist system (waste, inefficiency, bad incentives, lack of innovation, inability to rationally allocate resources, etc). Since the problems in the schools are systemic, throwing more money at them would just be a waste of taxpayers' money. Homeschooled children and children that go to schools outside the state system get a better education than those in state-run schools.</li>
<li>-1: All state schools should have their budgets cut - to zero!</li>
<li>+1: All types of schools should be allowed</li>
<li>-1: Tinkering with the qualification system (again!) is not going to help anyone.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Housing</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0xHe0a8uEh8rp0HQDcq0pVkpZOxaF7hECec6FBTXmD_X-v2NLOWMQ3jT8_phefINW2FFykbA98XH703prKEo97JAUJQdjWZNqlmDDm0r_7bZ0NzcAMvm2qSP09LIEzZdr2NIPUxZyKUI/s1600/Picture7.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="471" data-original-width="601" height="250" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0xHe0a8uEh8rp0HQDcq0pVkpZOxaF7hECec6FBTXmD_X-v2NLOWMQ3jT8_phefINW2FFykbA98XH703prKEo97JAUJQdjWZNqlmDDm0r_7bZ0NzcAMvm2qSP09LIEzZdr2NIPUxZyKUI/s320/Picture7.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: Government should not be in the business of building houses; they should get out of the way so that the private sector can get on with it. All council houses should be sold immediately</li>
<li>+1: I presume this means reducing regulations so that the private sector can meet the strong demand for more houses in this country, rather than building council or subsidised housing</li>
<li>+1: Government should not be owning any land, so if this means freeing up government-owned land for the private sector I am all for it</li>
<li>-1: Government should not be in the business of making sure people have houses. If some people need the kind of help this Act proposes, let private charities provide it. They will do a better job and won't use force to obtain funds.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Welfare and Pensions</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRKhlaFMFOBgKOPHfX9y_lbO3QHmJlK9em2d2fvUt6jXUbj078hx_mzoJlELCgi8fZcX0bJ4fIMdsFXnXua453WyRqZ7ctvI0vBtWjaPcjkIq3HDIznba-gF3MqmHgIQWj_Pgdmv0CdZo/s1600/Picture8.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="526" data-original-width="616" height="273" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRKhlaFMFOBgKOPHfX9y_lbO3QHmJlK9em2d2fvUt6jXUbj078hx_mzoJlELCgi8fZcX0bJ4fIMdsFXnXua453WyRqZ7ctvI0vBtWjaPcjkIq3HDIznba-gF3MqmHgIQWj_Pgdmv0CdZo/s320/Picture8.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>+1: State pensions should be privatised, but at least this will ensure that pensioners don't benefit from income increases above both inflation and wages, at the expense of younger people who are working hard to make ends meet</li>
<li>+1: Winter fuel payments should be paid by private charities, not the state, but at least this will ensure that wealthy pensioners who do not need the money will not receive them any more; any private charity would adopt a similar policy</li>
<li>0 (-1 and +1): It should be up to bus companies whether they allow pensioners to travel for free, they should not be state-subsidised. The exclusion from having to pay for a TV license should be kept, and extended to everyone, i.e. it should be abolished immediately as an unjust, unfair and archaic method of funding what is mostly state propaganda</li>
<li>-1: All regulators should have less power, not more power; people should be free to make exchanges with anyone they please on any terms they wish so long as there is no force or fraud involved.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Foreign and Defence</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEivgy3bRTHM1CnSs5XaS3GLEfl6K3doHDFuEv40DgT_VXFTd58Y36MM2CXzhuKx-xkSUp3xv5aw4VEZqhYVb3U5i8k5wE1dT6in6BV4cH8ueYrRTyOz6k2u9AF50g_rEG4edcmZ7V0Pj8w/s1600/Picture9.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="561" data-original-width="624" height="287" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEivgy3bRTHM1CnSs5XaS3GLEfl6K3doHDFuEv40DgT_VXFTd58Y36MM2CXzhuKx-xkSUp3xv5aw4VEZqhYVb3U5i8k5wE1dT6in6BV4cH8ueYrRTyOz6k2u9AF50g_rEG4edcmZ7V0Pj8w/s320/Picture9.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-2: The UK should withdraw from all these organisations, and work with other nations to address international issues on a purely case-by-case basis. No entangling alliances!</li>
<li>+1: The UK should definitely become a global champion for free trade, but not by signing new trade deals, which are totally unnecessary. The UK should declare universal free trade unilaterally, setting an example for other countries to follow</li>
<li>-2: Individuals should be able to decide who receives the money they wish to spend on charitable causes, by donating to private charities. Government-to-government aid is typically ill-targeted, inefficient and increases corruption, such as by supporting dictatorships in Africa</li>
<li>-1: UK defence spending should not be bound to any target set by NATO or anyone else; defense spending should be reduced by cutting out all overseas spending.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Future of the UK</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqN4gB57M2Mt6_jeDBK_VEdZQ5AWSujilnRzJ155AinKMzCHwbHGrqx6xzxaWbawQX6lg9FExN-oC5w_3lOYzgLBuUmv7DftRZ5PsBcoqsLLm7L4gQiVnqnks2RFhc9zueyVfOWEv0PiA/s1600/Picture10.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="519" data-original-width="623" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqN4gB57M2Mt6_jeDBK_VEdZQ5AWSujilnRzJ155AinKMzCHwbHGrqx6xzxaWbawQX6lg9FExN-oC5w_3lOYzgLBuUmv7DftRZ5PsBcoqsLLm7L4gQiVnqnks2RFhc9zueyVfOWEv0PiA/s320/Picture10.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>+2: Decisions should always be made as close as possible to the individuals affected by them, which means devolution should be extended, and certainly not reversed</li>
<li>-1: Each nation (indeed each county and even each individual) should be allowed to declare independence from the UK whenever they wish. It should not be up to Westminster to decide when Scotland has it's second referendum, but the Scots themselves. Personally, I'd advise the Scots to wait until Brexit is finished, but it should be up to them</li>
<li>0: The number of civil servants should be reduced. What would be the point of moving them out of London and the South East?</li>
<li>-1: This fund is apparently to be used to reduce inequality between regions, effectively a new subsidy payment from the south to the north, to replace EU subsidies. Government should not be involved in transfer payments of any kind, including to reduce inequality. Let the regions secede if they wish.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Transport and Environment</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUas6nELjce3F6iJfLOscHxqWpfRK7i87ttbcfaOOed0FW1_3LOPEx-yRVmP-_4dGLwuARu6Q6mzK6HCqa3DtKqqgEQRYCQXr_GiDMRhZB4Yrl5rm7_RyvGDJBLjEJ-d_ppNX08emzLNg/s1600/Picture11.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="476" data-original-width="613" height="248" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUas6nELjce3F6iJfLOscHxqWpfRK7i87ttbcfaOOed0FW1_3LOPEx-yRVmP-_4dGLwuARu6Q6mzK6HCqa3DtKqqgEQRYCQXr_GiDMRhZB4Yrl5rm7_RyvGDJBLjEJ-d_ppNX08emzLNg/s320/Picture11.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>-1: Government should not be involved in the transport industry; all transport infrastructure should be privatised and government should get out of the way for the private sector to deliver a better service at a lower price</li>
<li>-1: Government should not get involved in any disputes between companies and their employees. Employees should be allowed to strike, as long as they do not initiate violence against anyone. Companies should be allowed to fire employees who strike</li>
<li>-1: Heathrow Airport should be completely private, and the question of expanding it should be made on a commercial basis by the owners of the airport</li>
<li>-1: Rail tickets should be priced in whatever way the rail companies believe is best and it is no business of government how they price their tickets. Genuine competition in the rail industry (no monopolies, no regulations, no subsidies) would help ensure that rail companies make decisions based on what is best for their customers.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<h3>
Overall</h3>
<div>
<ul>
<li>Health and Care: 0</li>
<li>Brexit: +6</li>
<li>Immigration: +1</li>
<li>Economy and Taxes: +5</li>
<li>Education and Family: -2</li>
<li>Housing: 0</li>
<li>Welfare and Pensions: +1</li>
<li>Foreign and Defence: -4</li>
<li>Future of the UK: 0</li>
<li>Transport and Environment: -4</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: x-large;">Final Score: +3</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Have I been fair in my review? Do you agree with how I have scored the policies? Let me know in the comments below.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Over the next few days, I'll do a similar review of Labour, the Lib Dem and UKIP manifestos. I wonder if any of them will get a higher score than the Conservatives.,.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-48110010059502557082017-05-12T19:42:00.000+01:002017-05-12T21:57:53.410+01:00A Missed Opportunity: The LPUK Manifesto 2017The <a href="https://libertarianpartyuk.com/">Libertarian Party UK</a> is a minarchist, or classical liberal, party. This means they consider government to be legitimate only when it is limited to activities relating to defense, both from domestic and foreign violators of the Non-Aggression Principle. In other words, governments should operate a military, a police force and a judicial system of courts and prisons, and should leave all other industries to the free market; there should be no involvement of government in welfare, healthcare, education, transport, energy or other industries.<br />
<br />
As a voluntaryist, naturally I disagree with this position from a theoretical point of view: since governments by definition violate the Non-Aggression Principle by their very existence, I believe all governments are illegitimate and that even defense should be provided by private organisations operating in a free market.<br />
<br />
I also disagree from a strategic point of view: there is no hope of LPUK getting elected, so the best use of a libertarian political party would be to run an educational campaign. I believe there would be value in a voluntaryist Libertarian Party that explains the libertarian philosophy from first principles and applies it to the issues of the day. Making exceptions to the Non-Aggression Principle, to allow for government in the defense industries, as a minarchist party does, undermines this educational message.<br />
<br />
Nonetheless, I will here review the <a href="https://libertarianpartyuk.com/manifesto-2017/">LPUK 2017 election manifesto</a> section-by-section against the standard of minarchism.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Introduction </h3>
<br />
The introduction is incredibly weak. In the very first paragraph, it promotes a bizarre conspiracy theory about why the election has been called, which is bound to rile up Conservatives. It goes on to make petty remarks disparaging the Labour and Liberal Democrat parties. This is not a good start to what is essentially a marketing document aimed mainly at voters of these other parties. Why not present a positive vision of a libertarian society?<br />
<br />
In the fifth paragraph, we come to what LPUK sees as the “main issue that is not being addressed”. What could that be? The growth of big government? Socialism? Overseas wars? Violations of civil liberties? High taxes? Interventions into free market? No. Apparently, it is that we do not have a written constitution! It seems to have escaped the notice of LPUK leaders that the (largely libertarian) American constitution has been a complete failure at restraining the American government. As Lysander Spooner put it:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.” </i></blockquote>
<br />
The LPUK wants to see more Swiss-style referenda in the UK, more direct democracy, and the abandonment of the First Past The Post system. But recent libertarian scholarship has shown that democracy, especially direct democracy with universal suffrage, tends to make governments larger, not smaller. If you allow people to simply vote themselves more money and privileges, is it any surprise that they do so? As Frederic Bastiat said:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<br />
<i>“The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else.” </i></blockquote>
<br />
Or as Hans-Hermann Hoppe put it:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>“Democracy has nothing to do with freedom. Democracy is a soft variant of communism, and rarely in the history of ideas has it been taken for anything else.” </i></blockquote>
<br />
A libertarian manifesto ought to advocate directly for smaller government. Advocating changes to the form of government should be secondary at best – and it should certainly not advocate changing it to a form that will make government less libertarian!<br />
<br />
At the end of the introduction, finally taxation gets a mention. Perhaps here we will be told which taxes will be eliminated or reduced under a LPUK government? No. We are instead told that LPUK plans to create a new form of taxation! This “Gordon Brown tax” is specifically for paying down the national debt. A libertarian party true to its name would support an immediate default on the national debt and the elimination, or at least reduction, of all taxation and all government spending.
<br />
<br />
Apparently, no libertarian principles or solutions whatsoever are considered worthy of mention in the introduction to the LPUK manifesto!<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Balancing The State </h3>
<br />
Libertarianism is all about reducing the size of the state and shifting power from the state to the people. And yet, the first main section of the LPUK manifesto does not talk about reducing the state, but “balancing” it - and even supports measures that expand it!<br />
<br />
LPUK want not only a written constitution, but a new Constitutional Court, a new English Parliament, compensation to be paid to people “injured by the State” (adding insult to injury for taxpayers!), and a new system of tribunals to hear cases of public corruption and commercial disputes (and to decide whether someone can hold a commercial Directorship!). These things all increase the size of government, not reduce it.<br />
<br />
They also support abolishing the House of Lords, reducing the number of MPs, reducing the time the Parliament sits, ending First Past The Post, eliminating the payment of deposits for standing in elections, and limiting the granting of honours to those who do military service. These all amount to mere tinkering with the system of government; they will not reduce the size of government, nor make it more libertarian – possibly the contrary.<br />
<br />
These are not libertarian principles, but principles of democracy, which should be rejected by libertarians.<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Defence </h3>
<br />
The subtitle of this section is “The only legitimate role of the State”, which is what I would expect from a minarchist party. I welcome this statement; I only wish the rest of their manifesto reflected it.<br />
<br />
This section begins with an excellent quote from Thomas Jefferson:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>“Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.” </i></blockquote>
Oddly, however, the manifesto then goes on to say that LPUK supports membership of NATO: an entangling military alliance!<br />
<br />
The LPUK aim is “to ensure a strong, independent, sovereign nation” with the Armed Forces “geared for the defence of our nation and shipping”. Why “and shipping”? It goes on to explain that the LPUK believes that the UK armed forces should not just defend the UK, but also “project force… globally” and protect “supply lines”. This is a surprising expansion of the typical minarchist role for the military of defending the people against foreign invasion. Why should the UK military defend commercial interests overseas?<br />
<br />
LPUK wants to retain and replace the nuclear deterrent. Why? In what possible circumstances would an LPUK government use nuclear weapons? They also want to create new military pensions and military hospitals, and pay a “living wage” (whatever that means) for the armed forces. There is no explicit mention of any policy that would reduce military expenditure.<br />
<br />
There is no explicit rejection of overseas wars. What is the LPUK policy on Syria, Iraq, Iran, Israel, ISIS, etc? Does the protection of overseas “supply lines” include military interventions in the Middle East on behalf of oil companies? Would the LPUK support NATO in such operations?<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Immigration </h3>
<br />
There is no “correct libertarian position” on the issue of immigration, because in a true libertarian society there is no state and therefore no issue of who is to be allowed to cross state borders. In a minarchist state as envisioned by LPUK, immigration is still only a minor issue, because there is no welfare state and no socialised industries, therefore all immigrants must be either self-supporting or living at the expense of some private charitable party. Immigration is only a major issue when it is possible for people to immigrate and then live off the state in the form of welfare payments, subsidised housing and “free to use” socialist systems like public healthcare and schools.<br />
<br />
The LPUK manifesto states that the “core tenet is that there should be free movement of peoples” but that that is “not practical whilst we have a large welfare state”. In light of this, I expect LPUK to support interim immigration policies that mimic as far as possible the situation when there is no welfare state, i.e. no welfare payments for immigrants, no subsidised housing, no free access to the NHS or state schools, and so on. Instead, the only restrictions proposed are limits on the issuing of NI numbers, a requirement for medical insurance, and stricter rules for asylum seekers. Nevertheless, as long as LPUK plan to eliminate the welfare state and socialism quickly (we shall see later whether this is the case), perhaps their interim immigration policies are not especially important.<br />
<br />
In addition to free movement being impractical whilst we have a large welfare state, the manifesto also says it is impractical while “other countries are themselves not broadly Libertarian in nature”. I do not understand the thinking behind this at all. Why would UK immigration policy be dependent on the policies of other nations?<br />
<br />
Another questionable policy in this section is support for CANZUK, which involves free trade, free movement of people and foreign policy cooperation between the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Given the LPUK’s laudable rejection of EU membership, and the above considerations regarding free movement of people, why would it support membership of an international body that appears to be very similar to the early form of the EU? Why should these three countries be treated differently to all others?<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
The Rule of Law </h3>
<br />
This section correctly states that “a central tenet of Libertarianism is that we are all equal before the Law”. (That this principle leads directly to the view that all governments are illegitimate seems to have escaped the notice of LPUK). It states that LPUK wants law that is “understood by the Layman” and is “enforceable”. It says it wants “less Law and regulation,” although it doesn’t explain exactly what laws or regulations it would remove. Price controls? Product controls? Prohibitions? Which laws and regulations would LPUK eliminate?<br />
<br />
LPUK advocates a “legal insurance system”, though it is unclear what is meant by this or whether it would be mandatory, or why the current system of “legal aid” is insufficient.<br />
<br />
LPUK supports the Nine Peelian Principles of policing, locally-elected police constables, simplified police targets, a reduction of paperwork, stricter rules on discarding DNA, and various other changes to police procedures. While these things sound reasonable to me, I am not an expert on policing and, I presume, neither are the authors of this document. Surely the details of police policy should be left to the experts – ideally entrepreneurs providing police services in a free market – and not politicians.<br />
<br />
LPUK claims to be able to “ensure that sufficient prison places are available” but does not explain how this will be done. They support longer prison sentences (in the form of “an end to early release”) and “harsher” prison conditions for “uncooperative” inmates. Will new prisons be built, or will the prison population be reduced, and if so, how?
LPUK will “investigate the possibility” of prisoners being able to perform paid work “if they wish”. Surely a more libertarian position would be to force criminals to pay for their own incarceration, easing the burden on the long-suffering taxpayers.<br />
<br />
LPUK rightly opposes capital punishment, torture and RIPA, and supports decriminalisation of all sexual activity between consenting adults (presumably this means legalising prostitution, which is of course the libertarian position, but this is not explicit).<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
The Welfare State </h3>
<br />
Just three paragraphs of the LPUK manifesto are devoted to the welfare state. No actual changes to it are mentioned! There is a strange sentence that states that “all these changes will be phased in over a twenty year period”. I have no idea what changes they are referring to, or why they would need to be phased in over such a long time period. An excellent opportunity to explain why private welfare is superior to state welfare is missed in this manifesto. It looks like they just couldn’t agree which parts of the welfare state should be cut first, so they are left saying nothing at all about it.<br />
<br />
This section also includes the out-of-place statement that “all A&E services will remain free at the point of delivery.” And here I was thinking this is a minarchist party – why do they support a role for government in providing A&E services?! Surely as libertarians they must understand that A&E services could be much better provided by free market firms than by governments!<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
The NHS </h3>
<br />
The libertarian solution to healthcare is quite simple: sell all state-owned hospitals and healthcare facilities to the private sector and privatise healthcare insurance, with no government intervention thereafter in either healthcare or any related industries such as pharmaceuticals.<br />
<br />
Rather than taking this position however, the LPUK merely want to change the current system into a “National Insurance Board” which pays for all treatments and decides who and where treatment can be administered. It is unclear what LPUK supports in regard to ownership of healthcare facilities, and (other than allowing opt-outs for those with private medical insurance) it is unclear how this “new system” would be any different to the current system. Changing the name is not the same as changing the system. No vision for the future of healthcare is presented.<br />
<br />
A fundamental libertarian principle is that of self-ownership, which means, among other things, that each individual has the right to decide for himself what drugs he consumes. LPUK advocates decriminalisation of drugs “following the Portuguese model”. Decriminalisation is not the same as legalisation. Drugs are still illegal in Portugal; small-scale users have their drugs confiscated and are forced into treatment, while large-scale users and dealers are still considered criminals. This is not a libertarian policy. Only full and proud support for complete legalisation of all drugs can be called libertarian; the LPUK manifesto falls woefully short even on this straightforward issue.<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
The Economy </h3>
<br />
Libertarians support a free market economy, which is known to produce more wealth than any other kind of economic system. This means no (or low) taxation and no (or little) government intervention into free markets.<br />
<br />
LPUK laudably supports abolishing personal income tax (and inheritance tax and capital gains tax). This is a good start. However, they propose an “initial” policy of raising the personal income allowance to £21k and introducing a flat rate beyond that. Why not eliminate it immediately?<br />
<br />
They support lowering corporation tax to 10% (why stop there?), simplifying the tax system, and shifting it towards consumption rather than income. They say they will “investigate the viability of a 5 years exemption from Corporation Tax for start-ups”. Why does this need to be investigated? What would prevent this policy from being “viable”? It should be done immediately, and ideally corporation tax eliminated not just for start-ups, but for all businesses.<br />
<br />
As mentioned earlier, they wish to repay the National Debt, rather than default on it, as would seem to be the correct libertarian position. A sovereign default would ensure governments don’t overspend in future much more surely than any new “constitution” would! LPUK propose a new “Gordon Brown tax” to pay down the debt – about as unlibertarian a position as you could get!<br />
<br />
LPUK rightly stress the difference between free markets and corporatism and claim to support the former, although they do not specify any particular policy proposals that would move us from the latter to the former. They might have explained that corporatism involves government privileges to businesses, and freeing markets means simply removing these privileges.<br />
<br />
In another example of the manifesto seeming half-baked, it says “Attempts to reform our economic system would flounder if we ignore… the question of how our money supply is created”. Then they ignore the question completely! Again, the libertarian position on money is very simple: we support competition in the production of money. This means repealing legal tender laws, all monopoly privileges of the Bank of England and all regulations of the banking industry. None of this is mentioned in the LPUK manifesto; perhaps another issue where disagreements within the party resulted in a manifesto that is silent about it.<br />
<br />
At the end of this section, it says LPUK supports “The Spending Plan” produced by The Tax Payers Alliance. Having briefly looked through that plan, it looks very good, significantly cutting government spending. LPUK should have been bold enough to explain to their readers what this plan entails.<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Education </h3>
<br />
The libertarian position is that the government should have nothing to do with the education of children, which should be the sole responsibility of parents or guardians. There should be no state-owned or state-run schools, no state regulations, and no tax money should be spent on schooling.<br />
<br />
Once again, the LPUK manifesto falls well short of this standard. While they claim to support parental responsibility for education, they do not mention any plans to privatise schools or repeal compulsory school attendance laws. They propose “as an interim measure” (interim on the way to what, it is not explained) that each child would receive an educational voucher to spend at a school of their parents’ choice. While this proposal may be preferable to the current system, it has problems of its own, and it is entirely unnecessary: no interim measures are necessary here. Sell all the state-owned schools, colleges and universities, and get government out of the education sector entirely. Those parents who cannot afford to pay for schooling (even after they have been privatised and freed from regulations and thus become very cheap) can home school or appeal to private charities.<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Public Works </h3>
<br />
LPUK would scrap HS2, which is good, but this appears to be the only mention of transport in the entire manifesto! What is the LPUK policy on roads, railways, airports, etc?<br />
<br />
LPUK would end all foreign aid, which is also good, as it inevitably is used to prop up foreign dictators and fuel corruption. Private charity is much more effective and efficient at helping people that are in need of help.<br />
<br />
LPUK will cancel the building of Hinckley Point nuclear power station “in favour of smaller British built nuclear plants”. This is the only mention of the energy industry in the entire manifesto. Why is a supposedly minarchist party taking a position on which form of energy is better? Why not leave it to the market?<br />
<br />
LPUK would cancel the restoration of the Palace of Westminster, and build a new Parliament building instead. Surely a libertarian position should be to privatise the Palace, and find a suitable existing location for Parliament to move to, if it is to be retained!<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Not Mentioned in the Manifesto </h3>
<br />
I understand that space is limited in a manifesto, but there are some key issues that are barely even mentioned, or not mentioned at all. As I already pointed out, there is very little about the welfare state, nothing about money or central banking, and nothing about transport or energy. There is also no mention of gun rights, intellectual "property", labour regulations (eliminating the minimum wage alone would be a massive benefit to the poor), business regulations or the environment. There is no mention of Scottish secession; libertarians should support all secession movements.<br />
<br />
Perhaps the biggest omission of all, given the timing of this election, is Brexit. It is mentioned in the introduction that LPUK supported and campaigned for Brexit and are “confident that a new European settlement will be reached for Free Trade”. This election is a great opportunity to put forward the libertarian position of unilateral free trade. We don’t need a “trade deal,” even a “free trade deal,” with anyone. If another country wants to impose tariffs on our products, that is their prerogative and it is their own consumers who will be harmed the most by such a policy. Regardless of the policies of other countries, the UK should impose no tariffs on any foreign imports, because tariffs always harm domestic consumers. LPUK should heed the advice of Professor Patrick Minford and his “<a href="https://www.economistsforfreetrade.com/">Economists for Free Trade</a>” group, and highlight their common-sense libertarian position as widely as possible. The rights of existing (legal) immigrants to remain in this country should also be affirmed immediately; they should not be used as bargaining chips in any negotiation with the EU.<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Conclusion </h3>
<br />
The LPUK manifesto represents a missed opportunity to promote libertarianism in the UK. Even by minarchist standards, it is tepid and shies away from taking any controversial positions that would significantly reduce the size of the state and increase liberty. If we libertarians are truly confident of our principles and our belief that liberty is the solution for a wide range of social issues, we should proudly state, explain and defend our positions, even at the risk of hostility and the widespread rejection of our ideas. The LPUK has shown through this manifesto that it lacks the courage to do this.Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-23636260723359683312016-10-08T16:18:00.000+01:002016-10-08T16:19:38.026+01:00What is Voluntaryism?<u>Summary</u><br />
<br />
Voluntaryists believe that:<br />
• ideally all human interactions should be voluntary: mutual consent<br />
• the initiation of coercion is never permissible by anyone for any reason<br />
• the libertarian theory of property rights is superior to all others; laws should be based on this theory<br />
• governments are illegitimate as they inherently violate the libertarian theory of property rights.<br />
<br />
<br />
<u>1. Types of Interaction </u><br />
<br />
All interactions between human beings can be classed as one of two types:<br />
• A <b>voluntary interaction</b> is one that both parties consent to. Both parties are free to avoid the interaction, but choose to interact because they expect to benefit from the interaction.<br />
• A <b>coercive interaction</b> is where one party does not consent. These interactions occur because the non-consenting party (the coerced) is prevented from avoiding the interaction due to the use or threat of physical force by the coercer.<br />
<br />
The vast majority of human interactions are voluntary. The difference between a voluntary interaction and a coercive interaction can be seen in the difference between charity and theft, between employment and slavery, and between consensual sex and rape.<br />
<br />
<b>Voluntaryists believe that ideally all human interactions should be voluntary. </b><br />
<br />
<u><br /></u>
<u>2. Types of Coercion </u><br />
<br />
In recognition that there will always be some people who engage in coercive interactions, we distinguish between two classes of coercion:<br />
• <b>Initiatory coercion</b> is where an individual uses coercion against someone that has not previously coerced him. Initiatory coercion is also referred to as <b>aggression</b>.<br />
• <b>Responsive coercion</b> is where an individual uses coercion against someone that has previously coerced him. He is responding to coercion that has been initiated against him. Responsive coercion is also referred to as retaliatory coercion or <b>defense</b>.<br />
<br />
Voluntaryists believe that proportionate defense is permissible, but that <b>aggression is never permissible by anyone for any reason</b>. This is known as the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP). It applies to all individuals, regardless of identity, occupation or employer.<br />
<br />
<br />
<u>3. Property Rights </u><br />
<br />
Distinguishing between aggression and defense requires an underlying <b>theory of property rights</b>.<br />
<br />
The purpose of a theory of property rights is to help <b>prevent and resolve conflicts</b>, by telling us who is the rightful ultimate decision-maker (owner) regarding each scarce resource (property). A scarce resource is anything over which conflicts about usage may occur.<br />
<br />
Every theory of property rights specifies:<br />
• how property rights in <b>previously unowned</b> resources can rightfully be acquired<br />
• how property rights are rightfully <b>transferred</b> from one individual to another.<br />
<br />
<br />
<u>4. Libertarianism </u><br />
<br />
Voluntaryists believe that the <b>libertarian theory of property rights</b> is superior to all others. This belief may be based on a <b>deontological</b> theory of ethics (arguing that all other theories of property rights are immoral), or on <b>consequentialist</b> grounds (arguing that the libertarian theory of property rights creates the best outcomes), or both.<br />
<br />
The libertarian theory of property rights comprises three basic principles:<br />
• The <b>principle of self-ownership</b>: that all individuals rightfully have property rights over their own physical bodies.<br />
• The <b>principle of homesteading</b>: that property rights over external things that are previously unowned can only rightfully be acquired through an act of original appropriation; a mere verbal declaration is insufficient.<br />
• The <b>principle of voluntary exchange</b>: that property rights over external things previously owned by someone else can only rightfully be acquired through voluntary exchange.<br />
<br />
<br />
<u>5. Law </u><br />
<br />
Law is <b>a service produced to help prevent and resolve conflicts</b>.<br />
<br />
Producing laws involves <b>applying a theory of property rights to a particular conflict</b> or potential conflict. A lawmaker gathers facts and evidence about a conflict that has he has been asked to help resolve, then refers to a theory of property rights to identify which party is the aggressor and which party is the victim of aggression.<br />
<br />
He then specifies certain actions that the aggressor must take in order to make amends for his act of aggression, by referring to a <b>theory of justice</b>. Those actions may include paying restitution and damages to the victim and/or receiving retributive punishment. Law enforcement may be used to ensure that the aggressor carries out the actions specified by the law maker.<br />
<br />
<br />
<u>6. Government</u><br />
<br />
A government is an institution that is a <b>territorial monopolist producer of law</b>. That is, government is a producer of law that uses coercion to prevent other producers of law from operating and competing with it within a specified territory.<br />
<br />
Within any territory where a government is operating, all conflicts must be brought before the government, because no other producers of law are allowed to exist there. This includes conflicts involving the government itself.<br />
<br />
Invariably, using it’s power of monopoly, a government will exempt itself from certain laws that it enforces on others. For example, it will exempt itself from laws against theft, allowing it to commit theft with impunity, calling it “taxation”, and it will exempt itself from laws against murder, calling it “war”.<br />
<br />
<b>Voluntaryists therefore consider all governments to be illegitimate</b>, because they inherently violate the libertarian theory of property rights and they are the biggest aggressors in society. All voluntaryists are anarchists: individuals who support competition in the field of producing law, rather than law being monopolised by a government.<br />
<br />
Voluntaryists seek to eliminate governments and bring about an anarchic society where lawmakers compete with each other for customers and produce laws based on the libertarian theory of property rights.
<br />
<br />
<br />
This was originally posted at the Voluntaryism UK forum: <a href="http://voluntaryismuk.freeforums.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=7">http://voluntaryismuk.freeforums.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=7</a>Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-86904999109213146322016-09-25T15:10:00.000+01:002016-09-25T15:10:10.981+01:00Brexit: Assessing Remain Claims – 3 Months On<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
It is 3 months since the UK voted to leave the EU. The Remain campaign – dubbed Project Fear by
the Leave campaign – claimed that Brexit would lead to disaster. To quote from the official campaign website:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<i>“Leaving the EU would devastate UK trade,
businesses and economic growth, and put millions of people out of work. There
would be less trade, less economic growth, less investment and fewer businesses
meaning higher prices and fewer jobs and opportunities for you and your family
now and in the future.”<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 36.0pt; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<i>“Economic experts forecast a drop in the
value of your home, your pension and the pound.”<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Let’s look at their claims in more detail and see how many of them have
come true and how many have proven to be false.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Political Events<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 1</u>: David Cameron
said he will stay on as PM even if we vote leave.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. Cameron <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/24/david-cameron-resigns-after-uk-votes-to-leave-european-union">resigned</a>
as PM the day after the vote, saying that his strong pro-remain views made him
not the appropriate person to lead through Brexit. Theresa May, who was also pro-remain was
elected as his replacement.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 2</u>: David Cameron
said Article 50 will be activated immediately, to start the process of
withdrawal.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. Article 50 still hasn’t been activated. Theresa May quickly stated that it would not
be activated before the end of 2016. It
is <a href="http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/704316/Article-50-when-triggered-used-Brexit-talks-date-start-exit-Britain-leave-EU-referendum">widely
expected</a> to be activated in 2017, but bookmakers believe there is a good
chance it won’t be activated until <a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/when-will-article-50-be-triggered-2016">2018
or later</a>. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Political-Economic Response<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 3</u>: George Osborne claimed
there will need to be an emergency “Brexit budget” involving higher taxes and
reduced spending.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. There was no emergency budget after the
referendum and Osborne instead <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36699642">proposed tax cuts</a>. The new chancellor Philip Hammond quickly <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/14/philip-hammond-there-will-be-no-brexit-budget">ruled
out</a> the possibility of any emergency budget. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 4</u>: The BoE will
have to increase interest rates.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. The BoE <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36976528">reduced interest rates</a> six
weeks after the vote.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 5</u>: Farming,
scientific and medical research will suffer through losing EU funding.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. The chancellor <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/12/britain-will-cover-cost-of-billions-in-eu-subsidies-for-farming/">announced</a>
on 13<sup>th</sup> August that subsidies to these industries will continue to
be paid, using the money saved by no longer contributing to the EU budget.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 6</u>: Workers’ rights
will be in doubt.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. There is no appetite to remove any workers’
rights that have come from EU legislation.
Most workers’ rights legislation is already written into UK law; some
was written into UK law before the EU rules were created; some UK legislation
goes further than EU rules. A bill
presented to parliament on 7<sup>th</sup> September to guarantee all EU rules
on workers’ rights are preserved in UK law after Brexit received <a href="http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/melanie-onn-s-bid-to-keep-workers-rights-faces-no-opposition-in-parliament/story-29695282-detail/story.html">no
opposition whatsover</a> from any MPs. Workers
rights’ legislation is popular with the UK electorate, which is why there is no
threat to them from leaving the EU.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Market Reactions<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 7</u>: Foreign companies
will decrease invesment in the UK and jobs would be lost.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. All the companies that threatened to withdraw
or reduce investment, such as AstraZeneca and GSK, have since done a u-turn and
confirmed that investment will continue and no jobs will be cut. Wells Fargo has just spent £300mil on its new
European HQ in London. Tata Steel is now
reconsidering its pre-Brexit decision to withdraw from South Wales. (<a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1835366/tory-mep-on-why-its-brilliant-in-brexit-britain-and-how-project-fears-lies-were-exposed/">source</a>)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 8</u>: There will be a
reduction in trade.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. The rate of business start-ups has increased
since the vote, retail sales are rising, and manufacturing output is up. (<a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1835366/tory-mep-on-why-its-brilliant-in-brexit-britain-and-how-project-fears-lies-were-exposed/">source</a>)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Economic Performance<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 9</u>: The UK will fall
into a recession.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. GDP continues to be positive. The UK is growing the fastest of all the
major world economies. Almost no one now
believes a recession is likely. (<a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1835366/tory-mep-on-why-its-brilliant-in-brexit-britain-and-how-project-fears-lies-were-exposed/">source</a>)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 10</u>: The stock
exchange will collapse.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. After an initial drop, it took only 6 days
for the <a href="https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=ftse%20100">FTSE100</a>
to recover back to its pre-Brexit level, and is now very close to being at an
all-time high. The <a href="https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=ftse+250">FTSE250</a>
took about a month to recover and is now also close to being at an all-time
high. UK stocks are the best performing
in Europe.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 11</u>: Unemployment
will increase.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. Unemployment has continued decreasing. It fell by 8,600 in July when the ONS
predicted it would rise by 9,500. (<a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1835366/tory-mep-on-why-its-brilliant-in-brexit-britain-and-how-project-fears-lies-were-exposed/">source</a>)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 12</u>: Wages will
fall.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. Wages <a href="http://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/datasets/averageweeklyearningsearn01">increased
by 0.44%</a> in July, continuing the trend from the first half of 2016.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 13</u>: Prices will
increase.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. The CPI shows price inflation continues to be
low, with no change in the trend between Q2 and Q3.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 14</u>: House prices
will fall dramatically (18% according to George Osborne).<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. House prices <a href="http://static.halifax.co.uk/assets/pdf/mortgages/pdf/August-2016-Halifax-House-Price-index.pdf">have
fallen</a>, but only very slightly: 1.1% in July and 0.2% in August, and commentators
are predicted a strong housing market for the rest of the year. These are the fifth and sixth single monthly
falls in the last 12 months.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 15</u>: The value of
the pound will fall.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: #00b050;">TRUE</span></b>. The pound <a href="http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=GBP&to=USD&view=1Y">fell
by about 10%</a> against the dollar immediately following the vote and has
remained at that level ever since. For
comparison, the pound fell 25% against the dollar between July and November in
2008.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 16</u>: The value of
pensions will fall.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. Pension pots received a <a href="http://www.express.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/686927/Pension-pots-jump-in-value-since-EU-Referendum">boost</a>
from the vote.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">International Relations<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 17</u>: The EU will erect
trade barriers with the UK.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">PROBABLY
FALSE</span></b>. Whether the EU will
erect trade barriers with the UK is to be decided during negotiations. The Leave campaign argued that there would be
no benefit to the EU in doing so, and that the EU would be impacted worse than
the UK by such barriers. Since the
referendum, many politicians and business leaders in Europe have echoed this
view, so it now looks even more likely that free trade between the UK and EU
will continue, either via a bilateral free trade agreement or through the UK
joining the EFTA. The German finance
minister who said during the referendum campaign that we would be treated the
same way as non-European countries after Brexit has now stated that he only
said that because <a href="http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/686239/German-Wolfgang-Schaeuble-says-George-Osborne-ASKED-him-to-condemn-Brexit">George
Osborne told him to</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 18</u>: Non-EU
countries (like the US) will put us to the “back of the queue” for trade deals.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. Non-EU countries have put us to the front of
the queue. 26 countries have expressed
that they are eager to agree trade deals as soon as possible. The UK-US trade deal will happen before any
EU-US trade deal. (<a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1835366/tory-mep-on-why-its-brilliant-in-brexit-britain-and-how-project-fears-lies-were-exposed/">source</a>)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 19</u>: EU nationals
living in the UK, and UK nationals living in the EU, will be at risk of
deportation.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">PROBABLY
FALSE</span></b>. EU nationals that have
lived in the UK for 5 years or more (80% of the total) are granted an <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36849071">automatic permanent right
to remain</a>. The government has
irresponsibly refused to guarantee that the other EU nationals living in the UK
will be able to stay after Brexit. Theresa
May has said that she “<a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/28/theresa-may-warned-plans-to-curb-eu-migration-is-likely-to-be-op/">wants
and expects</a>” them to be able to stay, but that it depends entirely on
negotiations with the EU: in particular, whether the EU allows UK nationals to
continue to stay in the EU. But UK
nationals abroad are highly beneficial economically to EU economies, and <a href="http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/354">collective expulsions
are illegal</a> under both international law and the EU’s Charter of
Fundamental Rights. So it seems
extremely unlikely that Brexit will force anyone to return home. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u>Claim 20</u>: France will
expel our immigration officers from Calais.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Result: <b><span style="color: red;">FALSE</span></b>. Just two days after the vote, the French
government confirmed there will be <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/25/french-border-deal-wont-be-affected-by-brexit-paris">no
change</a> to arrangements, despite threatening before the referendum that the
border camp could be moved from Calais to Dover.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Conclusion<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Out of 20 claims analysed, only one has proven correct: the pound has
decreased in value. All the other
indicators suggest the UK is experiencing a post-Brexit boom, in stark contrast
to the bust predicted by the Remain campaign.</div>
Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-1048692765578049782016-06-16T18:19:00.000+01:002016-09-25T15:11:19.968+01:00Brexit: Why I CareGiven that I am a libertarian anarchist, it might be wondered why I am campaigning for Leave vote in the EU referendum. Why do I think this is worth doing?<br />
<br />
I have never been actively involved or voted in any prior UK* election or referendum, because I have never felt that any of the options presented to me are worth my time or effort. They are always a choice between varying flavors of statism. But this is a different matter.<br />
<br />
To draw an analogy, suppose income tax is 20% and there is a referendum on whether the tax should be increased to 30% or be lowered to 10%. Should a libertarian bother voting? Would a vote for 10% be a violation of the libertarian principle that the ideal tax rate is 0%? I don’t think so. The vote is signalling which direction you want to move in; it does not imply that you want to stop at 10%.<br />
<br />
In this referendum the choice is simply between more government and less government.<br />
<br />
A vote to Remain is to endorse the EU, which is a layer of government on top of the UK government, and one which:<br />
1) controls a larger territorial area,<br />
2) is more interventionist, and<br />
3) is less accountable to voters than the UK government.<br />
<br />
A vote to Leave is a rejection of the EU, an endorsement of the idea that if governments are to exist they should:<br />
1) control a territorial area as small as possible,<br />
2) intervene as little as possible, and<br />
3) be as accountable to voters as possible.<br />
<br />
To vote Leave does not mean I want to stop at seceding from the EU government; I want to secede from the UK government as well; but it is a vote to signal which direction I want to move in: less government, more liberty.<br />
<br />
This viewpoint is consistent with the principles of libertarian strategy outlined by Murray Rothbard <a href="https://mises.org/library/strategies-libertarian-victory">here</a>. We won’t get to total liberty overnight, but when the opportunity to increase liberty arises, we should embrace and support it as <i>a step in the right direction</i>, rather than sitting on the sidelines moaning about the increase in liberty not being as great as we would like.
<br />
<br />
<br />
* I added the term UK, because I did get involved in the Ron Paul Presidential campaigns of both 2008 and 2012, albeit from afar. Ron Paul is a unique politician in that he is a voluntaryist, as I explained in my videos <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoUrrlbDoVs">here</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Unkun3aA2o">here</a>.Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com20tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-51230116037683128952016-05-07T21:30:00.000+01:002016-09-25T15:11:57.759+01:00Brexit: The UK Contribution to the EU BudgetThe primary question in the Brexit debate is: is the UK a net beneficiary or a net contributor to the EU budget? The answer is indisputable. The UK is the second largest net contributor to the EU budget, behind Germany. We put in more than we get out. Only a fool would belong to a club where one gets out less than what one puts in.<br />
<br />
The Remain campaigners tend to quote the UK’s <b>net</b> contribution to the EU budget. The Leave campaigners tend to quote to <b>gross</b> figure. Which makes more sense?<br />
<br />
In 2014, the UK gross contribution to the EU budget was £18.8bn (£361m per week). A rebate is deducted before the money is sent, bringing this figure down to £14.4bn (£276m per week). The EU sent £6.0bn back to the UK in the form of payments to support things like agriculture, regional development and university research, meaning the net contribution from the UK to the EU was £8.4bn (£161m per week), or about £314 per household on average.<br />
<br />
Does it make more sense to quote gross or net contribution figure?<br />
<br />
At first I thought it was disingenuous of Leave campaigners to quote the gross figure. However, when tax contributions are quoted, gross figures are always used. For example, when income tax contributions are discussed, the figures are always gross. It would be strange to say that an individual’s income tax contribution is zero (or negative!) on the basis that it is all returned to him in the form of government services. Nobody bothers trying to subtract the value of government services from an individual's tax contributions, in order to quote net income tax contribution. It should be the same for the UK contribution to the EU: the £6.0bn paid to the UK should not be subtracted from the UK gross contribution figure; so it is fair to say that the UK contributes £276m per week to the EU.<br />
<br />
What about the rebate? Does it make a difference that it is subtracted before the money is even sent? Perhaps. But on the other hand, the rebate could be revoked at any time, so on that basis it could be argued that it is fair to say the UK contributes £361m per week, not £276m per week.<br />
<br />
The 2014 figures are taken from here: <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35943216">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35943216</a><br />
<br />
Although it is based on 2010 data, here is a useful infographic showing EU contributions by member state: <a href="http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2012/01/26/EU27_Money.pdf">http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2012/01/26/EU27_Money.pdf</a>Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-38617553885044349782016-04-22T21:43:00.001+01:002016-09-25T15:12:18.740+01:00Brexit: "Europe" vs "The EU"The main group supporting a vote of Remain call themselves “Britain Stronger In Europe”. That name is deceptive. The referendum is not about whether the UK (or Britain) should be in “Europe”. It is about whether we should be in “the EU”.<br />
<br />
Europe is a geographical location. The EU is a political organisation. It is impossible for the UK to NOT be “in Europe”. We cannot move our island to North America or to Asia. No one is arguing that we should isolate ourselves from Europe. No one is in favor of building a wall in the English Channel to prevent travel or trade between the UK and the people of mainland Europe.<br />
<br />
The conflation of the EU with Europe is convenient for BSE. It is in their advantage for the UK public to conflate leaving the EU with isolating ourselves from Europe.<br />
<br />
As an example, a BSE leaflet that came through my door a couple of weeks ago states as “key facts” that “over 3 million UK jobs are linked to our exports to the EU” and that “200,000 UK businesses trade with the EU, helping them to create jobs here in the UK”. They leave it up to the reader to consider what will happen to those jobs in the case of a Brexit. They presumably hope the reader will conclude that those 3 million jobs will be lost.<br />
<br />
But the UK will continue to trade with the EU whether or not we are part of it, or whether the EU even exists. Those 3 million jobs are not going to be lost; it is possible that none of them will be.
Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-51978506065009315552016-04-19T21:39:00.000+01:002016-09-25T15:12:34.982+01:00Brexit: The Principle of SecessionOn 23rd June the UK is due to hold a referendum on whether to remain in the EU or leave it (“Brexit”). Both the "Leave" and "Remain" camps have started making their arguments, and the official campaigning period has begun. I plan to post regularly on this subject between now and the referendum.<br />
<br />
I am in strongly favor of the UK leaving the EU and I will be voting that way.<br />
<br />
My primary argument is a very simple principle-based argument. I support the principle of secession, without exceptions. That is, I believe that any group of individuals has a right to dissociate themselves from any other group of individuals, if they so wish. It does not matter what size the group is. It could be a single individual. No one should be forced to belong to any group they do not wish to belong to.<br />
<br />
This immediately implies, of course, that I not only support the UK seceding from the EU, but that I also support:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>The UK or EU seceeding from any world governmental organisation, like the UN, IMF or WTO </li>
<li>Scotland seceeding from the UK, or Catalonia from Spain, or Veneto from Italy, etc </li>
<li>The establishment of free cities and free communities, independent from any nation state </li>
<li>Individuals seceeding from their government to become self-governing. </li>
</ul>
<br />
To me, these things all go together. Either you support the principle of secession, the principle of freedom of association, or you don't. I do.<br />
<br />
I have not seen this argument raised in the Brexit debate so far. I do not expect to see it raised. The reason is obvious. If the principle of secession is raised, then it is clear that these principles apply at a lower levels than just the limited question of whether the UK should secede from the EU. Anyone who suggests that the UK should secede from the EU <i>on principle</i> cannot then consistently oppose, for example, the secession of Scotland from the UK, because the principled argument is exactly the same: no one should be forced to belong to any group they do not wish to belong to.
Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-78565250843085212632014-01-07T22:15:00.000+00:002014-01-07T22:15:25.779+00:00Man Against The State Videos<span style="font-size: large;">Original videos by Graham Wright
</span><br />
<br />
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUS1m5MSt9k">Government Explained</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhSqzANQvbk">Government Explained 2: The Special Piece of Paper</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khRkBEdSDDo">Law without Government: Principles</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kPyrq6SEL0">Law without Government: Conflict Resolution in a Free Society</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qmMpgVNc6Y">Law without Government: The Bargaining Mechanism</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GazZBvHhgQ">The Philosophy of Liberty</a> (by ISIL) </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoUrrlbDoVs">Ron Paul is a Voluntaryist</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Unkun3aA2o">Where Do Ron Paul’s Ideas Come From?</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAI70cIGynk">Economic Coordination and the Business Cycle</a> (in V For Voluntary library)</li>
</ul>
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">Articles read by Graham Wright </span><br />
<br />
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocqRooE_79Q"><b>Bastiat, Frederic</b> (adapted) – A Question for Occupy Wall Street: What is Government?</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO0LlC_WAAw"><b>Boettke, Peter</b> – 10 Propositions Austrian Economists Believe</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se0VmSaJDvc"><b>Childs, Roy</b> – An Open Letter to Ayn Rand</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aklTqDktrR4"><b>Graf, Konrad</b> – Bitcoin, The Regression Theorem, and that Curious But Unthreatening Empirical World</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4Orn44aTMo"><b>Higgs, Robert</b> – Ten Reasons Not To Abolish Slavery</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNTDqAunbCc"><b>Hoppe, Hans-Hermann</b> – Of Private, Common and Public Property and the Rationale for Total Privatization</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDCEUpQBkP0"><b>Hoppe, Hans-Hermann</b> – A Four-Step Healthcare Solution</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enx5AKPS67Y"><b>Kinsella, Stephan</b> – What Libertarianism Is</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4vYwm4-sO4"><b>Kinsella, Stephan</b> – How We Come To Own Ourselves</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQvjZ12Vpko"><b>Long, Roderick</b> – Funding Public Goods: Six Solutions</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbVAhGz2VLA"><b>Long, Roderick</b> – An Open Letter to The Peace Movement</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaqD81dDW94"><b>Long, Roderick</b> – Defending a Free Nation</a> (2 parts)</li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0od6RZDOtk"><b>Matson, Kaleb</b> – Why You Should Quit Politics</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTz3bKh8X14"><b>Mises, Ludwig von</b> – Liberty and Property</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L29JXmeYkaM"><b>Mises, Ludwig von</b> – The Place of Economics in Learning</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7fJCtv90Pc"><b>Murphy, Robert</b> – But Wouldn’t Warlords Take Over?</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCaPdETbS1g"><b>Pascal, Blaise</b> – Definitions and Logical Method</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLVRO8Inu_-EUNgDyS7ZgIC6ykOhs18Vgi"><b>Rideau, Francois-Rene</b> – Government and Microsoft: A Libertarian View on Monopolies</a> (4 parts)</li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRHH5coO3qc"><b>Rockwell, Lew</b> – The Evil 1%</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL679DBBDBC762A8C6"><b>Rothbard, Murray</b> – Anatomy of the State</a> (7 parts) </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqNcttYWMI8"><b>Rothbard, Murray</b> – Totalitarian Communism in Munster, 1534-35</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLr40CCDtAg"><b>Sanchez, Daniel</b> – Why Liberalism?</a> (in V For Voluntary library) </li>
</ul>
Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-72541011036834259792012-12-20T21:53:00.000+00:002012-12-20T21:53:08.238+00:00Thoughts on Stefan Molyneux and FDROriginally <a href="http://mises.org/community/forums/p/32742/510181.aspx#510181">posted</a> on mises.org: <br />
<br />
Molyneux is an excellent communicator of libertarian ideas; there can be little doubt about that, with great videos like <a data-cke-saved-href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xbp6umQT58A" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xbp6umQT58A">this</a> and <a data-cke-saved-href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLCEXtpTNYU" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLCEXtpTNYU">this</a>.
I check in at the FDR forums occasionally to see what's going on
there. It used to be more academic and focussed on philosophy and law
and anarchy theories and so on, but discussion has shifted towards
mainly threads on parenting, personal relationships, and people seeking
advice about recovering from the effects of having had "abusive" (in the
extremely broad sense used on FDR) parents. There is a strong sense of community at FDR, especially since this shift took place.<br />
<br />
Whether
they are a cult depends on your definition of the word, but I do see
Molyneux and the Freedomainers sharing many similarities to Rand and the
Randians. I think some of <a data-cke-saved-href="http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard23.html" href="http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard23.html">what Murray Rothbard said</a> about the latter applies to them. In addition to the <a data-cke-saved-href="http://www.molyneuxrevealed.com/" href="http://www.molyneuxrevealed.com/">Molyneux Revealed</a> site, there is also <a data-cke-saved-href="http://www.fdrliberated.com/freedomain-radio-destructive-cult/" href="http://www.fdrliberated.com/freedomain-radio-destructive-cult/">FDR Liberated</a> if you want to read more about the cult angle.<br />
<br />
With
regard to Ron Paul, I disagree with Molyneux. Most of his criticisms
of Paul fade away when you realise that Paul's primary goal is spreading
the libertarian message, and being in office and running for President
was for him purely a means or strategy for doing that effectively - for
better or worse. Molyneux is wrong to conflate <a data-cke-saved-href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Unkun3aA2o" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Unkun3aA2o">Paul's strategy</a>
(i.e. Rothbard and Rockwell's strategy) with the flawed strategy of
'dismantling the state from the inside', which is what basically all
so-called "libertarian" politicians that aren't Ron Paul are trying to
do. Whether Paul's strategy or Molyneux' strategy has been or is going
to be more effective at spreading the message of liberty is an
interesting debate to have, but Molyneux never really gets round to that
debate, because he never addresses Paul's actual strategy, just a
strawman version of it.<br />
<br />
<a data-cke-saved-href="http://lewrockwell.com/block/block180.html" href="http://lewrockwell.com/block/block180.html">Walter Block</a> made some negative and entirely unjustified remarks about Molyneux recently. And <a data-cke-saved-href="http://mises.org/daily/6101/" href="http://mises.org/daily/6101/">David Gordon</a>
critiqued Molyneux' UPB, quite reasonably. I expect these events left
some Freedomainers with a dislike of mises.org (see threads <a data-cke-saved-href="http://board.freedomainradio.com/forums/p/31936/247011.aspx" href="http://board.freedomainradio.com/forums/p/31936/247011.aspx">here</a> and <a data-cke-saved-href="http://board.freedomainradio.com/forums/t/35887.aspx" href="http://board.freedomainradio.com/forums/t/35887.aspx">here</a>).
But I think it's extremely unlikely you were not allowed to join the
FDR forum just because you mentioned mises.org. The knowledgable
posters there link to mises.org quite often. Have you tried joining
again or emailing for an explanation?<br />
<br />Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-4573561896404145702012-12-09T21:03:00.000+00:002012-12-09T21:07:06.567+00:00Ten Reasons Not To Abolish Slavery (by Robert Higgs)Some of these may sound familiar...<br/><br/>
<iframe width="500" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Z4Orn44aTMo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-13197868216274877712012-12-09T21:00:00.000+00:002012-12-09T21:00:26.875+00:00An Open Letter to the Peace Movement (by Roderick Long)A consistent peace activist must be an anarchist. If you love peace, work for anarchy.
<br/>
<br/>
<iframe width="500" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/PbVAhGz2VLA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-47155663751313396822012-11-29T21:29:00.001+00:002012-11-29T21:29:28.497+00:00Totalitarian Communism in Münster (by Murray Rothbard)<br /><iframe width="500" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/TqNcttYWMI8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-38038416443525185562012-11-29T21:23:00.000+00:002012-11-29T21:23:56.004+00:00Death on the NHS: The Failure of Socialised HealthcareEconomics tells us that monopolised healthcare is a bad idea. Here are some of the predictable results of monopolised healthcare in the UK.
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-outline-level: 1;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: large;">2012 </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9591814/Patients-starve-and-die-of-thirst-on-hospital-wards.html">Patients
starve and die of thirst on hospital wards</a> (6 Oct 2012)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-122995/You-blind-eye-NHS-treat-you.html#ixzz2DdyTqq13">You
must go blind in one eye before NHS will treat you</a> (30 Jun 2012)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2126379/Sentenced-death-old-The-NHS-denies-life-saving-treatment-elderly-mans-chilling-story-reveals.html" target="_blank">Sentenced to death for being old: The NHS denies life-saving
treatment to the elderly, as one man's chilling story reveals</a> </span><span style="color: black; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;">(7 Apr 2012)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2161869/Top-doctors-chilling-claim-The-NHS-kills-130-000-elderly-patients-year.html#ixzz1yK7gbr7D" target="_blank">Top doctor's chilling claim: The NHS kills off 130,000 elderly
patients every year</a> (20 Jun 2012)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2170792/Elderly-patients-deprived-food-drink-die-quicker-save-hospitals-money.html" target="_blank">Elderly patients are being 'deprived of food and drink so they
die quicker and free up bed space', claim doctors</a> (9 Jul 2012)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://mytechnologyworld9.blogspot.in/2012/07/hundreds-die-from-strokes-at-weekends.html" target="_blank">Hundreds die from strokes at weekends because of poorer NHS
care: study</a> (9 Jul 2012)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9591814/Patients-starve-and-die-of-thirst-on-hospital-wards.html" target="_blank">Patients starve and die of thirst on hospital wards</a> (6 Oct
2012)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2240075/Now-sick-babies-death-pathway-Doctors-haunting-testimony-reveals-children-end-life-plan.html#ixzz2DcUKj73D" target="_blank">Now sick babies go on death pathway: Doctor's haunting
testimony reveals how children are put on end-of-life plan</a> (29 Nov 2012)</span><br />
<br />
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: large;">2011</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-GB</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:DontVertAlignCellWithSp/>
<w:DontBreakConstrainedForcedTables/>
<w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
<w:Word11KerningPairs/>
<w:CachedColBalance/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0cm;
mso-para-margin-right:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0cm;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
</div>
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12964360" title="UK surgeons raise the alarm on waiting lists (4/5/11) ">UK surgeons raise
the alarm on waiting lists</a> (5 Apr 2011)</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.thisistotalessex.co.uk/news/NHS-trust-director-dies-operations-cancelled/article-3390891-detail/article.html" title="NHS Director dies on due to waiting list at hospital she oversaw (3/31/11) ">NHS
Director dies on due to waiting list at hospital she oversaw</a> (31 Mar 2011)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8324569/NHS-shamed-over-callous-treatment-of-elderly.html" title="NHS providing substandard care to seniors (2/14/11)">NHS providing
substandard care to seniors</a> (14 Feb 2011)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jan/01/maternity-care-uk-verge-breakdown" title="Maternity care on verge of breakdown in UK (1/1/11)">Maternity care on
verge of breakdown in UK</a> (1 Jan 2011)</span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1366426/Swine-flu-Virus-killed-rock-musician-son-medics-assumed-junkie.html" title="Man turned away from hospital 4 times, left to die. (3/17/11)">Man
turned away from hospital 4 times, left to die</a> (16 Mar 2011)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8649289/Nurse-arrested-over-hospital-sabotage-murder.html" target="_blank">Nurse arrested over hospital sabotage murder</a> (20 Jul 2011)<span style="color: black;"><br />
</span><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12964360" target="_blank">Surgeons
raise alarm over waiting</a> (5 Apr 2011)</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1371861/NHS-director-dies-operation-cancelled-times-hospital.html" target="_blank">Former NHS director dies after operation is cancelled four
times at her own hospital</a> (31 Mar 2011)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.ems1.com/ems-news/973528-uk-student-died-after-wait-for-treatment-outside-of-hospital/" target="_blank">UK student died after wait for treatment outside of hospital</a>
(14 Feb 2011)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/may/19/nhs-hospital-waiting-times-longer" target="_blank">NHS budget squeeze to blame for longer waiting times, say
doctors</a> (19 May 2011)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/health/s/1421402_two-patients-died-after-waiting-in-ambulance-outside-full-oldham-hospital-unit" target="_blank">Two patients died after waiting in ambulance outside 'full' Oldham
hospital unit</a> (21 May 2011)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://uk.news.yahoo.com/maternity-ward-putting-lives-risk-122801766.html">Hospital
Slammed After Mum And Newborn Die</a> (16 Jun 2011)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2019622/NHS-rations-knee-hip-replacement-operations-save-money.html#ixzz2DeEmu1hv">NHS
rations knee and hip replacement operations to save money</a> (28 Jul 2011)</span><br />
<br />
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: large;">2010</span><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-GB</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:DontVertAlignCellWithSp/>
<w:DontBreakConstrainedForcedTables/>
<w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
<w:Word11KerningPairs/>
<w:CachedColBalance/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0cm;
mso-para-margin-right:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0cm;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/007620.html" title="Sick Americans live as long as health British (11/3/10)">Sick Americans
live as long as health British</a> (3 Nov 2010)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/oct/01/premature-babies-corticosteroids-shortage" title="Lack of drug availability endangers preemies (10/1/10)">Lack of drug
availability endangers preemies</a><b> </b>(1 Oct 2010)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1307250/Frail-elderly-patients-left-hungry-hospitals-admit-thirds-NHS-nurses.html#ixzz2DdsyAPuG">Frail
elderly patients 'left to starve in hospitals', admit more than two-thirds of
NHS nurses</a> (30 Aug 10)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/7908742/Axe-falls-on-NHS-services.html" title="NHS to make cuts to basic services (7/26/10)">NHS to make cuts to basic
services (24 Jul 10)</a> (24 Jul 2010)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/7896737/Cash-crisis-in-NHS-leaves-patients-lying-on-operating-tables.html" title="Cash Crisis In UK leaves patients without beds (7/18/10)">Cash Crisis In
UK leaves patients without beds (18 Jul 10)</a> (18 Jul 2010)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1273196/Horror-story-thousands-cancer-patients-denied-miracle-drug-NHS.html" title="Thousands denied routine cancer drug in UK (5/4/10)">Thousands denied
routine cancer drug in UK (6</a> <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1273196/Horror-story-thousands-cancer-patients-denied-miracle-drug-NHS.html" title="Thousands denied routine cancer drug in UK (5/4/10)">May 10)</a> (6 May
2010)</span><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small; font-weight: normal;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small; font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/apr/11/nhs-data-organ-transplants">NHS
blunder changed organ donors' wishes (11 Apr 10)</a> (11 Apr 2010)</span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1259364/Cancer-scans-delayed-NHS-funding-crisis-doctors-fear-slash-burn-cuts.html" title="Dealys increase due to funding crisis in UK (3/20/10)">Delays increase
due to funding crisis in UK (3/20/10)</a> (20 Mar 2010)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1258510/Quarter-NHS-trusts-failing-hygiene-standards-health-watchdog-finds.html" id="ix0b" title="A quarter of NHS hospitals fail to meet basic hygiene standards (3/19/10):">A quarter of NHS hospitals fail to meet basic hygiene standards
(3/19/10):</a> (19 Mar 2010)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1267707/Grandmother-refused-brain-surgery-she-lived-200m-away.html" title="UK Woman denied lifesaving surgery for living two streets away (4/21/10)">UK
Woman denied lifesaving surgery for living two streets away (4/21/10)</a> (21
Apr 2010)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1268092/Boy-8-died-kidney-failure-neglectful-ambulance-service-refused-send-ambulance-999-call.html" id="njd-" title="8 year old boy dies in UK after being refused an ambulance (4/23/10)">8 year old boy dies in UK after being refused an ambulance (4/23/10)</a>
(23 Apr 2010)</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: large;">2009 </span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1209034/The-babies-born-hospital-corridors-Bed-shortage-forces-4-000-mothers-birth-lifts-offices-hospital-toilets.html" title="British newspaper reports on serious persistent shortages (8/26/09)">British
newspaper reports on serious persistent shortages</a> (26 Aug 2009)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6092658/Cruel-and-neglectful-care-of-one-million-NHS-patients-exposed.html" id="c_ns" title="British newspaper reports on a study of substandard care throughout the UK (8/27/09)">British newspaper reports on a study of substandard care throughout
the UK</a> (27 Aug 2009)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1174592/Kidney-cancer-patients-denied-life-saving-drugs-NHS-rationing-body-NICE.html" id="kh56" title="British report on denial of life-saving drugs (4/29/09)">British
report on denial of life-saving drugs</a> (29 Apr 2009)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1168911/Number-children-going-hospital-teeth-pulled-soars-66-1997.html" id="luld" title="British children going to hospital instead of dentist due to shortages (4/12/09)">British children going to hospital instead of dentist due to shortages</a>
(12 Apr 2009)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://news.scotsman.com/health/Cancer-survivor-confronts-the-.5095291.jp" title="Scotland has long delays in cancer treatment (3/21/09)">Scotland has
long delays in cancer treatment</a> (21 Mar 2009)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/staffordshire/7948293.stm" id="ns59" title="Emergency care inadequate in UK (3/17/09)">Emergency care inadequate
in UK</a> (17 Mar 2009)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/mar/04/wheelchair-wait-children" id="e6on" title="Children in UK wait up to two years for a wheelchair (3/4/09)">Children
in UK wait up to two years for a wheelchair</a> (4 Mar 2009)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6127514/Sentenced-to-death-on-the-NHS.html" target="_blank">Sentenced to death on the NHS</a> (2 Sep 2009)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1207151/Woman-gives-birth-pavement-refused-ambulance.html" target="_blank">Woman gives birth on pavement 'after being refused ambulance'</a>
(17 Aug 2009)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6092658/Cruel-and-neglectful-care-of-one-million-NHS-patients-exposed.html" target="_blank">'Cruel and neglectful' care of one million NHS patients exposed</a>
(27 Aug 2009)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1209034/The-babies-born-hospital-corridors-Bed-shortage-forces-4-000-mothers-birth-lifts-offices-hospital-toilets.html" target="_blank">The babies born in hospital corridors: Bed shortage forces
4,000 mothers to give birth in lifts, offices and hospital toilets</a> (26 Aug
2009)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6049107/Over-45000-NHS-staff-call-in-sick-each-day.html" target="_blank">Over 45,000 NHS staff call in sick each day</a> (19 Aug 2009)</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: large;">2008 </span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/nov/24/mrsa-hospital-hygiene" title="Less than 10% of UK hospitals tested passed basic hygiene rules (11/24/08)">Less
than 10% of UK hospitals tested passed basic hygiene rules</a> (24 Nov 2008)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9272" title="A report on worldwide deficiencies in countries with socialized care (3/18/08)">A
report on worldwide deficiencies in countries with socialized care</a> (18 Mar
2008)</span><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small; font-weight: normal;"> </span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small; font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://cnsnews.com/node/8994">Elderly
Patients Being 'Written Off' in UK</a> (7 Jul 2008)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jan/18/health" target="_blank">NHS
accused of 17,000 unnecessary deaths</a> (18 Jan 2008)</span>Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-2014229866808787722012-10-15T22:22:00.000+01:002012-10-15T22:22:25.477+01:00From Scarcity to MoneyAn attempt to show in diagram form the progression from the observation that objects are scarce/rivalrous, to the necessity of property laws, to the development of money.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDFcqLveh2ktdJ2xt_SJAmLA0wNI4qwWnQOUZnY52mHEoLB1NL8uRamc41wiPyuKhRpDODz-zschaGy86bngVWcaO_ffa6HWo7_UtZCq9SgJPJ-_LNOnuJ3pb4mVeBwvV9w8vIwg3naLU/s1600/Diagram+from+Scarcity+to+Money.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="257" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDFcqLveh2ktdJ2xt_SJAmLA0wNI4qwWnQOUZnY52mHEoLB1NL8uRamc41wiPyuKhRpDODz-zschaGy86bngVWcaO_ffa6HWo7_UtZCq9SgJPJ-_LNOnuJ3pb4mVeBwvV9w8vIwg3naLU/s400/Diagram+from+Scarcity+to+Money.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-41418734260529183612012-10-14T22:11:00.001+01:002012-10-14T22:11:43.095+01:00Transcript for Government Explained 2: The Special Piece of PaperAlien: So tell me more about your ‘leaders’. Who is the current leader of your species and where are they leading you?<br />
<br />
Human: We don’t have just one leader for the whole world. The world is divided into countries, and each country has a leader of its own, and a government of its own.<br />
<br />
Alien: You don’t have one government that rules the whole planet?<br />
<br />
Human: No, this planet is really big and there are billions of people on it. The world is divided up, because people in different places want different kinds of leaders and governments.<br />
<br />
Alien: How many countries are there?<br />
<br />
Human: A couple of hundred, I think.<br />
<br />
Alien: So there are millions of people per country?<br />
<br />
Human: Yes, or hundreds of millions, in some of them.<br />
<br />
Alien: And all the people in a country live under one single government?<br />
<br />
Human: There can be layers of government, but there’s only one government in each country. That is how it works.<br />
<br />
Alien: But you can have multiple governments on the same planet?<br />
<br />
Human: Yes and its better that way. If you had single government for the whole planet and it turned tyrannical, there’d be nowhere to escape to and no one to oppose it. And I wouldn’t want to be ruled by a bunch of people living thousands of miles away on the other side of the planet. It’s better having government more local, because then it’s more accountable.<br />
<br />
Alien: How far is it from here to where the rulers of this country live?<br />
<br />
Human: The capital of this country is hundreds of miles from here.<br />
<br />
Alien: So you don’t want to be ruled by a bunch of people living thousands of miles away, but you don’t mind being ruled by a bunch of people living hundreds of miles away?<br />
<br />
Human: That’s just how it is, I guess.<br />
<br />
Alien: Why don’t you and your neighbours set up your own country here, so you can keep a close eye on what the individuals acting as your government are doing?<br />
<br />
Human: I don’t think our government would allow us to do that.<br />
<br />
<br />
Alien: So you have these countries, some big and some small, and the individuals living in each country separately choose which people are going to be their politicians and as act as government of that country?<br />
<br />
Human: Yes, although not everyone is lucky enough to live in a country where we get to choose our leaders. A lot of countries have kings or dictators or warlords running their government. People in un-democratic countries don’t get to choose their leaders.<br />
<br />
Alien: So you consider yourself lucky because you live under a democratic government, where you, along with millions of other people, get to vote, and whoever gets the highest number of votes becomes leader of the government, the gang that tells you what to do and robs you.<br />
<br />
Human: Yes. But there’s more to it than that. Democracy isn’t the only thing that’s great about the government of this country. In fact, democracy itself is not an ideal system at all – everyone knows that. With a pure democracy, the majority rules, because the politicians do whatever the majority of people want them to do, and this can be a problem for minorities. We know this. The real reason why we’re lucky in this country is that our government is not a pure democracy, but a republic. With a republic, minority rights are protected against the tyranny of the majority.<br />
<br />
Alien: How?<br />
<br />
Human: Our rights are listed in our Constitution, the document that established our government. It lays out how government is supposed to work. It says what government is allowed to do, and what it isn’t allowed to do.<br />
<br />
Alien: What does it say government is allowed to do?<br />
<br />
Human: Government is allowed to collect taxes for things like national defense...<br />
<br />
Alien: Hold on - the Constitution says that government is allowed to collect taxes? So it says that the individuals who are acting as government are allowed to rob everyone else using threats of violence?<br />
<br />
Human: Yes, but only to do good things.<br />
<br />
Alien: Where did the Constitution come from?<br />
<br />
Human: It was written by the Founders of this country, the people who first set up the government.<br />
<br />
Alien: The first politicians of the country?<br />
<br />
Human: Yes.<br />
<br />
Alien: So a bunch of regular people just got together and wrote on a piece of paper that they’re allowed to rob everyone else, as long as they call themselves “government” and call their robbery “taxation”. Then because they have this special piece of paper, everyone just sits back and lets these guys rob them?<br />
<br />
<br />
Human: You’re missing the point. The Founders wrote the Constitution to restrain government. They made sure there was a separation of powers, so there were checks and balances in the system. They did this to strictly limit the power, size and scope of government. They made a list of things the government can do and must do, and everything else the government can’t do. They even wrote about specific things that the government can’t do, like violating the inalienable rights of the people to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.<br />
<br />
Alien: OK. But I don’t see why the piece of paper is so important. I mean, hypothetically, what if the majority of the people want government to do something that the Constitution says government shouldn’t do? Couldn’t the people vote in politicians who promise to do it for them, regardless of what the Constitution says? How does having your rights listed on an old document help protect your rights today?<br />
<br />
Human: Well if the politicians who get voted in want to pass unconstitutional legislation, then the third branch of government, the judicial, will step in and not let the legislation pass. The Founders recognised the problem of democracy, so they gave us a Supreme Court, and their role is check whether legislation is constitutional or not.<br />
<br />
Alien: But the Supreme Court is itself part of the government?<br />
<br />
Human: Yes. Politicians get voted into positions in the Executive and Legislative branches, but the Judicial branch is made up of judges. So if a majority supports the government violating the rights of a minority, the judges of the Supreme Court simply won’t let it happen.<br />
<br />
<br />
Alien: Are these Supreme Court judges just regular humans?<br />
<br />
Human: Yes.<br />
<br />
Alien: So how does a regular human become a Supreme Court judge?<br />
<br />
Human: They are appointed.<br />
<br />
Alien: By who?<br />
<br />
Human: The politicians.<br />
<br />
Alien: But then what is to stop the democratically-elected politicians just appointing judges who will allow their popular but unconstitutional legislation to pass?<br />
<br />
Human: Well, they just aren’t allowed to do that.<br />
<br />
Alien: By who?<br />
<br />
Human: By the constitution.<br />
<br />
Alien: The piece of paper?<br />
<br />
Human: Yes. I admit it’s not a perfect system. I suppose what you’re saying could happen.<br />
<br />
Alien: Does the government of this country, which you consider yourself lucky to live under, ever do things its own Constitution explicitly forbids?<br />
<br />
Human: Yeah, a lot of things actually. The government is a lot bigger now than it was when the Constitution was written. The politicians pay lip service to the Constitution, but they trample over our rights anyway.<br />
<br />
Alien: What about the Supreme Court?!<br />
<br />
Human: I guess that system hasn’t worked very well lately. Government does pass unconstitutional laws all the time. The separation of powers worked for a while though, it’s not a bad system!<br />
<br />
Alien: Powers were separate? I thought you said that the powers were all in branches of the same government?<br />
<br />
Human: Well yes. The branches of government are totally independent and separate from each other, except that they are all part of the same organisation and all funded by taxation.
Alien: So when you said the system had checks and balances in it, you meant that the government would check itself, and balance itself?<br />
<br />
Human: That was the idea.<br />
<br />
<br />
Alien: So, let me get this straight, a long time ago a small bunch of regular humans had a meeting and created a document called a Constitution that said that they can rob everyone else – millions of people – using threats of violence to make everyone obey their rules and commands. But so that the masses of the people would let them get away with this robbery and slavery, that small bunch also promised in the same document that there were some things the government would never do, and they described a way to structure government so as to restrain it. But, over time, the promises have proven to be worthless, the restraints have proven to be useless, and government has grown significantly in size, power and scope, violating more and more of the rights of the people. It sounds to me that if the Constitution was written to constrain government, then it has been a complete failure.<br />
<br />
Human: Well, the real problem is that people just don’t believe in the Constitution any more. The Constitution only works when people know what it says and why it’s important. If people just knew that, then they wouldn’t vote for politicians who violate it. An informed populace: that’s the only way to really restrain government.<br />
<br />
Alien: Wait, you said you feel lucky because this country is a republic not a democracy, and a republic has these supposed “checks and balances” that prevent government from violating people’s rights, even when a majority wants to violate the rights of others. But now you’re telling me a republic can only work if people refrain from electing politicians who will violate the rights of others in the first place. That’s the same as a democracy. We’re back to where we started.<br />
<br />
Human: I see your point.<br />
<br />
Alien: Is there anywhere on the planet where government is, despite the imaginative labels, anything other than a gang of thieves and bullies?<br />
<br />
Human: But there’d be chaos without government!<br />
<br />
Alien: I’m sure that’s what they tell you…<br />
Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-80781889289426269332012-10-14T22:04:00.000+01:002012-10-14T22:04:32.655+01:00Government Explained 2: The Special Piece of Paper<iframe width="500" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/NhSqzANQvbk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
<br />
<br />
Continuing from where the original video ended, the human now tries to explain to the alien the concept of "countries", the difference between a democracy and a republic, and the purpose of a Constitution.Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-36948324916412509072012-10-05T23:48:00.000+01:002012-10-05T23:48:14.956+01:00Message to the Voting Cattle (Larken Rose video)<u><b><span style="font-size: small;">The Complete and Undeniable Truth - Larken Rose</span></b></u><br />
<br />
"Message to the Voting Cattle". Simply incredible...<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/_5mZ5FBHg0A" width="500"></iframe>
Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-39186842081070301542012-09-16T21:57:00.000+01:002012-09-16T21:57:16.707+01:00Critique of Patri Friedman on Folk ActivismPatri Friedman, founder and chairman of the Seasteading Institute, has an article at Cato Unbound called <a href="http://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/06/patri-friedman/beyond-folk-activism/">Beyond Folk Activism</a>, in which he criticises the advocacy approach taken by many libertarians, which he refers to as “folk activism”.<br />
<br />
Libertarians tend to spend a lot of time debating with non-libertarians, and amongst themselves, in an attempt to promote liberty to the masses, and bring about a large-scale change in public opinion, one person at a time. Friedman says this tendency to debate stems from “an instinct to seek political change through personal interaction, born in our hunter-gatherer days when all politics was personal.”<br />
<br />
He continues:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“In the modern world, however, bad policies are the result of human action, not human design. To change them we must understand how they emerge from human interaction, and then alter the web of incentives that drives behavior. Attempts to directly influence people or ideas without changing incentives, such as the U.S. Libertarian Party, the Ron Paul campaign, and academic research, are thus useless for achieving real-world liberty.” </blockquote>
<br />
This seems to overlook completely the insights of Mises and many other thinkers who have pointed out that the opinions of the masses are the ultimate determinant of what kinds of institutions exist and how they operate. Mises wrote:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“The masses, the hosts of common men, do not conceive any ideas, sound or unsound. They only choose between the ideologies developed by the intellectual leaders of mankind. But their choice is final and determines the course of events. If they prefer bad doctrines, nothing can prevent disaster.” </blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“The supremacy of public opinion determines not only the singular role that economics occupies in the complex of thought and knowledge. It determines the whole process of human history.” </blockquote>
<br />
Murray Rothbard was also very clear on this:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“The world, at least in the long run, is governed by ideas.” </blockquote>
<br />
And so is Ron Paul:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“Fighting for liberty with ideas makes much more sense to me than fighting with guns or politics or political power. With ideas, we make real change that lasts.” </blockquote>
<br />
Etienne de la Boetie understood the implications of this when he wrote:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces.” </blockquote>
<br />
The idea that societal institutions reflect the attitudes, opinions and values of the people at large seems irrefutable. Consider first a society where everybody believed in the necessity and benevolence of government. Then there would be government. Now consider a second society where everybody identifies the notion of government as a scam and considers anyone who proposes setting one up as immoral. In this society, no government could exist.
50 years ago, pretty much everyone did believe government was necessary and benevolent. Since that time however, and particularly in the last decade, there has been a seismic shift and now a sizeable minority of the population are anti-statist, or very close to it. If the trend continues, eventually anti-statism will be the majority view, bringing us closer to a situation where we know no government could exist.<br />
<br />
So this raises the obvious question: when will we start to see visible changes that reflect this change in public opinion?
De la Boetie is certainly poetic, but what does he mean the Colossus will "fall of his own weight"? What will that look like? What events will take place to make that happen?<br />
<br />
This is a widely debated question. One idea is that when a sufficient number of people are anti-state, they will elect representatives who will put an end to state activities “from the inside”. This strategy is the one taken by organisations like Cato and Reason, and recently the Libertarian Party. It is a widely rejected strategy, and in his article Friedman points out some of the problems with it: he describes it as libertarians “bashing their heads against the incentives of democracy”.<br />
<br />
Secession and nullification is another strategy, and one that is far more likely to be successful. Hans Hoppe outlines the strategy in theory in this lecture. The Free State Project and The Seasteading Institute are both attempts at putting this theory into practice.
While these projects are very important for bringing about liberty, it must not be forgotten that these projects are only possible after sufficient numbers of the masses are in favor of liberty. It seems that Friedman forgets this when he writes that:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“This plan [Seasteading] is one of immediate action, not hope or debate. It makes use of the people we have now rather than trying to convert the masses” </blockquote>
<br />
He goes on to say:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“Seasteading is far from certain to succeed, but this is a hard problem, and there will be no easy answer. Two of the greatest risks are the expense and danger of the marine environment, and the chance that states will interfere. The latter is a systemic risk for any reform (if they'll interfere with a new city in the ocean, then no place is safe[7]), but the former is an idiosyncratic risk that could be diversified away if seasteading was part of a portfolio of freedom projects.” </blockquote>
<br />
The risk that states will interfere is the key risk and it is worth spending some time thinking about how this risk can be mitigated. What will determine whether or not the state will interfere and how might they interfere? If a Seastead or a town in New Hampshire declares independence, the state has a very strong incentive to ignore the declaration, and send in an army of police, regulators and tax collectors, if they have to. It is not just the immediate lost tax revenue, but the risk of further secessions, until the state becomes obsolete, that will make the state extremely keen to prevent any secession.<br />
<br />
Will they be able to send an army of police to prevent secession? That depends on how the situation will be perceived by the masses. If it is obvious to the masses that the secessionists are peaceful people who want to try out living in an independent state, then they may have no objection to the secession, and may be strongly opposed to the state moving in on them. The public may simply wish the secessionists good luck. If, on the other hand, the state can convince the public that the secessionists are "bad guys" in some way, they will be far more likely to accept the government moving in to put an end to the secession.<br />
<br />
The state will do everything it can to turn public opinion against the secessionists. They will call them terrorists. They will say the seceding region will be a drugs haven and tax haven. They will call the secessions free riders, exploitative and unpatriotic. The state will do whatever it takes.<br />
<br />
Will the state be able to convince the public that the secessionists are "bad guys", so they can go Waco on them? This is the big unknown, but the chances of this are surely directly related to the extent the masses favor liberty and the concept of secession. The charge of “tax evaders!” will fall on deaf ears if taxation is considered illegitimate. The charge that the seceded region will be a drug haven will fall on deaf ears if people are opposed to anti-drug laws in their own nation. If the public recognise secession as legitimate, it will be very difficult for the state to act against the secessionists.<br />
<br />
Friedman presents Seasteading as though it is a path to liberty that sidesteps the difficult task of “converting the masses”. But, on the contrary, the success of the Seasteading project depends on how the masses feel about secession. This is why “folk activism”, aka promoting liberty and the idea of secession to open-minded people through debates and discussion, is <i>not</i> “useless for achieving real-world liberty”.<br />
<br />
I applaud the efforts of everyone involved on a practical level with the Free State Project and the Seasteading Institute, but I reject Patri Friedman’s claim that trying to change minds is a useless endeavour. Public opinion determines the whole process of human history.<br />
<br />
To use de la Boetie’s analogy, when a town, country or Seastead comes to secede, it will be like starting to pull the pedestal out from under the Colossus. Certainly somebody needs to do this if the Colossus is to come down. But whether the pedestal can be removed, and whether the Colossus falls and breaks into pieces after this happens, or is able to remain standing strong and repair itself, depends on the reaction of the masses. We need people working on removing the pedestal, but we also need people working to make sure that when the pedestal starts to move, it will be moved easily, and that the collapse will then ensue, in the form of a torrent or snowball of secessions, until the state is obsolete.
Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-27573019812911885952012-09-16T19:44:00.001+01:002012-09-16T19:44:48.299+01:00Fat Head<a data-cke-saved-href="http://vimeo.com/27652100" href="http://vimeo.com/27652100">http://vimeo.com/27652100</a><br />
<br />
I just watched this documentary. I was already familiar the thesis (fats are good, carbs are bad, basically), having read <a data-cke-saved-href="http://www.amazon.com/Good-Calories-Bad-Controversial-Science/dp/1400033462" href="http://www.amazon.com/Good-Calories-Bad-Controversial-Science/dp/1400033462">Taubes</a> and <a data-cke-saved-href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Great-Cholesterol-Con-Disease/dp/1844543609" href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Great-Cholesterol-Con-Disease/dp/1844543609">Kendrick</a>,
but I was pleasantly surprised by how libertarian the documentary was.
These kinds of documentaries tend to have a leftist "it's all the
greedy corportaions fault, we need more government" feel to them. But
this one didn't have that at all. It placed the blame entirely on the
government where it belongs.Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8459524305954814481.post-3535900664417311232012-09-15T14:35:00.000+01:002012-09-15T14:51:57.062+01:00What will future generations think of us?Here in the 21st century, we look back at people in past centuries with a sense of amazement that they actually believed the things they said, and apparently saw nothing wrong with doing the things they did. Most people in past centuries were, by today’s standards, incredibly violent, vindictive, racist, sexist, homophobic bigots. We are rightly appalled that slavery - ownership of one man by another - was not only tolerated and accepted, but supported and rationalized, by almost everyone in society – even the slaves themselves. We are appalled that brutal forms of punishment, like hanging, beheading, burning at the stake, torture, having limbs cut off and eyes gouged out etc, were once the norm, even for the most trivial of crimes or sometimes for no crime at all. We are appalled that even in the 20th century, racism and sexism were the norm, and nobody seemed to have much of a problem with it.<br />
<br />
We believe we are now more enlightened. But what will future generations think of our values, attitudes and morals? Is there anything we consider normal (not immoral) today, that future generations will be appalled and ashamed of? Do we have any blind spots? I think we do.<br />
<br />
A lot of people today make arguments in favor of government actions. Take the statement “I think the government should enforce a minimum wage law.” This statement doesn’t seem so bad – it is economically ignorant, to be sure, because it hurts the very people it is supposed to help – but is it immoral? It doesn’t seem immoral in the same way that a statement such as “I think black people should be slaves of white people” is immoral.<br />
<br />
But are they really that different? Both statements are supporting the use of violence by one class of people against another. Supporting a minimum wage law means supporting the use of violence by one class of people – who call themselves ‘the government’ – against another class: employers and employees, who are trying to make a voluntary exchange with each other for mutual benefit. In both cases, the violence is aggression: whites initiate violence against blacks when they enslave them; the government initiates violence against employers and employees when it threatens them with fines or imprisonment them for breaking the minimum wage law. How could it possibly be that one initiation of violence is moral while the other is immoral?<br />
<br />
Most people today support a great many different kinds of government action, ranging from having government merely operating courts, police and defense services, to controlling schools, healthcare, money and banking, and regulating markets, through to all-out socialism, where government controls everything.
I believe people in the future will look back at us today with bafflement, confusion and shame, for the way most of us not merely tolerate, but actively and passionately support this institution called government. Future generations will ask of us: <i>what were they thinking?</i><br />
<br />
Could they not see the contradiction inherent in having an institution set up to <i>protect</i> rights and liberty, which must necessarily <i>violate</i> rights and trample on liberty in order to exist?<br />
<br />
Could they not see anything immoral with having one small group of people acting “above the law” and controlling the lives of everyone else, using threats of violence? Why did they think that <i>taxation</i> was anything but <i>mass robbery</i>? Why did they think <i>war</i> was anything but <i>mass murder</i>? Why did they think mass robbery and mass murder were OK as long as they were done by someone acting as government?<br />
<br />
Why did they keep turning to government to help solve the problems that the government itself had created? Was it not obvious to them that the cause of all the war, poverty and suffering they complained about was the very same government they supported so zealously?<br />
<br />
Why did they think more violence was a good solution to social problems? Why did they keep demanding more laws, regulations, central planning and control? Why did they keep giving up their rights for empty promises of security and prosperity?<br />
<br />
How did they ever expect to be able to find some selfless angel to run the country? Why did they think that someone needed to run the country in the first place? How arrogant/ignorant/utopian were they to think that, even if they found such an angel, he would be <i>able</i> to run the country better than the country runs itself?<br />
<br />
Could they really not imagine a world without government?
Graham Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288585420579413704noreply@blogger.com20