Sovereignty Taxation Democracy. All Things Bright And Beautiful

Some little while ago, probably January or February this year, you, Google, sent me a Letter, by Post, telling me to join up for this nonsense about "Add sense". I tried to. And what happened, I was not accepable. Today, 9th of April, 2010, what happens?
Well you are at it again. Then when I try to sign up for the "Magic Carpet Ride", what happens, the bloody lot fall apart again. Another couple of hours wasted. Please,in the future, keep your bloody brilliant ideas to yourself, at my age, 75, I can hardly afford to waste time the way your back room staff can.
I would be only to pleased to join the advanced bits and pieces of the Technology, but even now, this morning, my email is giving me gip it shows a yellow signal with the one word, "Fault". It has done for the last twelve hours or more. So, my dear "broves", please get your sh** together and provide the service I'm paying for. None of this, "Next Generation" magic. And remember, you have yet to venture into the arms of the Politicians. Who want, like yesterday, to put a block on your activities before the Taxpayer realises the power that is in his hands. Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer" (I will ensure all links are posted here.)

Labour and Tories have turned both Houses of Parliament into appointed chambers

2010-04-03T10:07:00.000-07:00

Labour and Tories have turned both Houses of Parliament into appointed chambers

A $200 trillion crisis and why Al'Qaeda provides lessons on how to stop it happening again.

2010-04-02T05:09:00.000-07:00

A $200 trillion crisis and why Al'Qaeda provides lessons on how to stop it happening again.

My Attempt to Explain Why This Contribution of Mine is Only Half Done.

2010-04-01T09:45:00.000-07:00

A link to the origines of this contribution.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jeremywarner/100004659/a-200-trillion-crisis-and-why-alqaeda-provides-lessons-on-how-to-stop-it happening-again/
(I know, but the Telegraph like to get column inches for their money.)

I'm sorry about that, but the Telegraph article is certainly worth reading. I believe I am right in saying that like other Journalists, Jeremy Warner has picked up the flavour of the moment and presented a dish worth savouring.
There is more to this as well. It leads into the area that intrigues because it questions the NWO. What is being asked for, is that Four or even Five Hundred million Europeans, should abandon Sovereignty and chuck Millions, even Billions of Euro's into the pot, for the rest of the world to dip into and take whatever they want. Have these a*se*o*e* any idea what a total nonsense they are creating???
But then, in parallel with this ****** ( Thought six stars was needed to denote the stupidity of the situation.) They have tried to blind the entire Population of Europe with the fraud of "Global Warming". But then, these are Politicians and their shoe shine boys, only these days, the boys are more like the Professor of University College London. Professor Malcolm Grant, the Vice-Chancellor (recreations:"electronic gadgets, opera, woodlands') gets £404,272. It was at UCL that the Detroit"underpants bomber", Umar Fatouk Abdulmutallab, was a pillar the student Islamic society. Professor Grant got publicly furious at the suggestion that his University should be concerned about the extremist speakers who address the society, and invoke freedom of speech.
There was one other thing that this Gov' and supporters will be very proud of, "In another triumph for free speech, UCL students prevented the Officer Training Corps of the British Army from recruiting on campus. Professor Grant gets more than twice the salary of the head of the Army, by the way...

----------------------------------------------------------------

I'll give it a rest at this point, any reply's will be welcome, but be assured, change is on the way! Only this time, YOU the PEOPLE will be in charge. Me, I'm 75, I'll do all I can to show you what to do and where to go to bring this lot of ******
at Westmnster to Heel.
Kind Regards, ATFlynn, Norfolk's Mutineer"

Comments from the Bank of England

2010-04-01T04:59:00.000-07:00

THE $100 BILLION QUESTION

Andrew G Haldane
Executive Director
Financial Stability
Bank of England
March 2010

Comments given at the Institute of Regulation & Risk, Hong Kong, 30 March 2010. I am grateful to
Dele Adeleye, David Aikman, Marnoch Aston, Richard Davies, Colm Friel, Vaiva Katinaite, Sam Knott,
Priya Kothari, Salina Ladha, Colin Miles, Rhiannon Sowerbutts and Aron Toth for comments and contributions.

THE $100 BILLION QUESTION
The car industry is a pollutant. Exhaust fumes are a noxious by-product. Motoring benefits those producing and consuming car travel services – the private benefits of motoring. But it also endangers innocent bystanders within the wider community – the social costs of exhaust pollution.
Public policy has increasingly recognised the risks from car pollution. Historically, they have been tackled through a combination of taxation and, at times, prohibition. During this century, restrictions have been placed on poisonous emissions from cars - in others words, prohibition. This is recognition of the social costs of exhaust pollution. Initially, car producers were in uproar.
The banking industry is also a pollutant. Systemic risk is a noxious by-product. Banking benefits those producing and consuming financial services – the private benefits for bank employees, depositors, borrowers and investors. But it also risks endangering innocent bystanders within the wider economy – the social costs to the general public from banking crises.
Public policy has long-recognised the costs of systemic risk. They have been tackled through a combination of regulation and, at times, prohibition. Recently, a debate has begun on direct restrictions on some banking activities - in other words, prohibition. This is recognition of the social costs of systemic risk. Bankers are in uproar.
This paper examines the costs of banking pollution and the role of regulation and restrictions in tackling it. In light of the crisis, this is the $100 billion question. The last time such a debate was had in earnest followed the Great Depression. Evidence from then, from past crises and from other industries helps define the contours of today’s debate. This debate is still in its infancy.
While it would be premature to be reaching policy conclusions, it is not too early to begin sifting the evidence. What does it suggest?

Counting the Systemic Cost
One important dimension of the debate concerns the social costs of systemic risk. Determining the scale of these social costs provides a measure of the task ahead. It helps calibrate the intervention necessary to tackle systemic risk, whether through regulation or restrictions. So how big a pollutant is banking?

There is a large literature measuring the costs of past financial crises.1 This is typically done by evaluating either the fiscal or the foregone output costs of crisis. On either measure, the costs of past financial crises appear to be large and long-lived, often in excess of 10% of pre-crisis GDP.
What about the present crisis?
The narrowest fiscal interpretation of the cost of crisis would be given by the wealth transfer from the government to the banks as a result of the bailout. Plainly, there is a large degree of uncertainty about the eventual loss governments may face. But in the US, this is currently estimated to be around $100 billion, or less than 1% of US GDP. For US taxpayers, these losses are (almost exactly) a $100 billion question. In the UK, the direct cost may be less than £20 billion, or little more than 1% of GDP.
Assuming a systemic crisis occurs every 20 years, recouping these costs from banks would not place an unbearable strain on their finances. The tax charge on US banks would be less than $5 billion per year, on UK banks less than £1 billion per year.2 Total pre-tax profits earned by US and UK banks in 2009 alone were around $60 billion and £23 billion respectively.
But these direct fiscal costs are almost certainly an underestimate of the damage to the wider economy which has resulted from the crisis – the true social costs of crisis. World output in 2009 is expected to have been around 6.5% lower than its counterfactual path in the absence of crisis.
In the UK, the equivalent output loss is around 10%. In money terms, that translates into output losses of $4 trillion and £140 billion respectively.
Moreover, some of these GDP losses are expected to persist. Evidence from past crises suggests that crisis-induced output losses are permanent, or at least persistent, in their impact on the level of output if not its growth rate.3 If GDP losses are permanent, the present value cost of crisis will exceed significantly today’s cost.
By way of illustration, Table 1 looks at the present value of output losses for the world and the UK assuming different fractions of the 2009 loss are permanent - 100%, 50% and 25%. It also assumes, somewhat arbitrarily, that future GDP is discounted at a rate of 5% per year and that trend GDP growth is 3%.4 Present value losses are shown as a fraction of output in 2009.

1 For example, Reinhart and Rogoff (2009).
2 The levy on US banks announced by the US government in January takes the $100 billion loss and recoups it over
10 years rather than 20.
3 IMF (2009).

As Table 1 shows, these losses are multiples of the static costs, lying anywhere between one and five times annual GDP. Put in money terms, that is an output loss equivalent to between $60 trillion and $200 trillion for the world economy and between £1.8 trillion and £7.4 trillion for the UK. As Nobel-prize winning physicist Richard Feynman observed, to call these numbers “astronomical” would be to do astronomy a disservice: there are only hundreds of billions of stars in the galaxy. “Economical” might be a better description.
It is clear that banks would not have deep enough pockets to foot this bill. Assuming that a crisis occurs every 20 years, the systemic levy needed to recoup these crisis costs would be in excess of $1.5 trillion per year. The total market capitalisation of the largest global banks is currently only around $1.2 trillion. Fully internalising the output costs of financial crises would risk putting banks on the same trajectory as the dinosaurs, with the levy playing the role of the meteorite.
It could plausibly be argued that these output costs are a significant over-statement of the damage inflicted on the wider economy by the banks. Others are certainly not blameless for the crisis.
For every reckless lender there is likely to be a feckless borrower. If a systemic tax is to be levied, a more precise measure may be needed of banks’ distinctive contribution to systemic risk.
One such measure is provided by the (often implicit) fiscal subsidy provided to banks by the state to safeguard stability. Those implicit subsidies are easier to describe than measure. But one particularly simple proxy is provided by the rating agencies, a number of whom provide both “support” and “standalone” credit ratings for the banks. The difference in these ratings encompasses the agencies’ judgement of the expected government support to banks. Table 2 looks at this average ratings difference for a sample of banks and building societies in the UK, and among a sample of global banks, between 2007 and 2009. Two features are striking.
First, standalone ratings are materially below support ratings, by between 1.5 and 4 notches over the sample for UK and global banks. In other words, rating agencies explicitly factor in material government support to banks.

4 The results re plainly sensitive to the choice of discount rate and trend growth rate. Other things equal, the higher
the discount rate and the lower the trend growth rate, the smaller the losses.

Second, this ratings difference has increased over the sample, averaging over one notch in 2007 but over three notches by 2009. In other words, actions by government during the crisis have increased the value of government support to the banks. This should come as no surprise, given the scale of intervention. Indeed, there is evidence of an up-only escalator of state support to banks dating back over the past century.5
Table 3 takes the same data and divides the sample of UK banks and building societies into “large” and “small” institutions. Unsurprisingly, the average rating difference is consistently higher for large than for small banks. The average ratings difference for large banks is up to 5 notches, for small banks up to 3 notches. This is pretty tangible evidence of a second recurring phenomenon in the financial system – the “too big to fail” problem.
It is possible to go one step further and translate these average ratings differences into a monetary measure of the implied fiscal subsidy to banks. This is done by mapping from ratings to the yields paid on banks’ bonds;6 and by then scaling the yield difference by the value of each banks’ ratings-sensitive liabilities.7 The resulting money amount is an estimate of the reduction in banks’ funding costs which arises from the perceived government subsidy.
Table 4 shows the estimated value of that subsidy for the same sample of UK and global banks, again between 2007 and 2009. For UK banks, the average annual subsidy for the top five banks over these years was over £50 billion - roughly equal to UK banks’ annual profits prior to the crisis. At the height of the crisis, the subsidy was larger still. For the sample of global banks, the average annual subsidy for the top five banks was just less than $60 billion per year. These are not small sums.
Table 4 also splits UK banks and building societies into “Big 5”, “medium” and “small” buckets.
As might be expected, the large banks account for over 90% of the total implied subsidy. On these metrics, the too-big-to-fail problem results in a real and on-going cost to the taxpayer and a real and on-going windfall for the banks. If it were ever possible to mint a coin big enough, these would be the two sides of it. have found similarly sized subsidies. For example, Baker and McArthur ask whether there is a difference in funding
costs for US banks either side of the $100 billion asset threshold – another $100 billion question.8

5 Haldane (2009a).
6 Using the end-year yield on the financial corporates bond index across the ratings spectrum.
7 For example, banks’ retail deposits are excluded but unsecured wholesale borrowing is included.
8 Baker and McArthur (2009).

These results are no more than illustrative – for example, they make no allowance for subsidies arising on retail deposits. Nonetheless, studies using different methods
sized subsidies. For example, Baker and McArthur ask whether there is a difference in funding costs for US banks either side of the $100 billion asset threshold – another $100 billion question.8
They find a significant wedge in costs, which has widened during the crisis. They calculate an annual subsidy for the 18 largest US banks of over $34 billion per year. Applying the same method in the UK would give an annual subsidy for the five largest banks of around £30 billion.
This evidence can provide only a rough guide to systemic scale and cost. But the qualitative picture it paints is clear and consistent. First, measures of the costs of crisis, or the implicit subsidy from the state, suggest banking pollution is a real and large social problem. Second, those entities perceived to be “too big to fail” appear to account for the lion’s share of this risk pollution. The public policy question, then, is how best to tackle these twin evils.

Taxation and Prohibition
To date, the public policy response has largely focussed on the role of prudential regulation in tackling these problems. Higher buffers of capital and liquid assets are being discussed to address the first problem. And add-ons to these capital and liquidity buffers for institutions posing the greatest systemic risk are being discussed to address the second.9 In essence, this is a taxation solution to the systemic risk pollution problem.10
There is a second approach. On 21 January 2010, US President Barack Obama proposed placing formal restrictions on the business activities and scale of US banks. Others have made complementary proposals for structural reform of banking.11 Typically, these involve separation of bank activities, either across business lines or geographies. In essence, this is the prohibition solution to the systemic pollution problem.
This sets the scene for a great debate. It is not a new one. The taxation versus prohibition question crops up repeatedly in public choice economics. For centuries it has been central to the international trade debate on the use of quotas versus subsidies. During this century, it has become central to the debate on appropriate policies to curtail carbon emissions.12

9 Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (2009).
10 For example, Brunnermeier et al (2009), NYU Stern School of Business (2009).
11 For example, Kay (2009), Kotlikoff (2010).
12 Stern (2006).

In making these choices, economists have often drawn on Martin Weitzman’s classic public goods framework from the early 1970s.13 Under this framework, the optimal amount of pollution control is found by equating the marginal social benefits of pollution-control and the marginal private costs of this control. With no uncertainty about either costs or benefits, a policymaker would be indifferent between taxation and restrictions when striking this cost/benefit balance.
In the real world, there is considerable uncertainty about both costs and benefits. Weitzman’s framework tells us how to choose between pollution-control instruments in this setting. If the marginal social benefits foregone of the wrong choice are large, relative to the private costs incurred, then quantitative restrictions are optimal. Why? Because fixing quantities to achieve pollution control, while letting prices vary, does not have large private costs. When the marginal social benefit curve is steeper than the marginal private cost curve, restrictions dominate.
The results flip when the marginal cost/benefit trade-offs are reversed. If the private costs of the wrong choice are high, relative to the social benefits foregone, fixing these costs through taxation is likely to deliver the better welfare outcome. When the marginal social benefit curve is flatter than the marginal private cost curve, taxation dominates. So the choice of taxation versus prohibition in controlling pollution is ultimately an empirical issue.
To illustrate the framework, consider the path of financial regulation in the US over the past century. The US announcements in January are in many respects redolent of US financial reforms enacted during the late 1920s and early 1930s. Then, restrictions were imposed on both bank size and scope, in the form of the McFadden (1927) and Glass-Steagall (1933) Acts. The history of both, viewed through Weitzman’s lens, is illuminating for today’s debate.
The McFadden Act (1927) in the US gave nationally-chartered banks broadly the same branching rights as state banks within the state. But it also confirmed the effective prohibition on national banks opening new branches across state lines that had previously been implicit in the US National Banking Act (1864). It covered a wide range of banking functions, including deposittaking and brokerage.

13 Weitzman (1974).

The motivation behind the Act appears to have been in part political, reflecting lobbying by small unit banks under threat from larger competitors. But it also had an economic dimension, as a check on the dangers of “excessive concentration of financial power”.14 The same too-big-to-fail arguments are of course heard today, though the concerns then were competition rather than crisis-related ones. Weitzman’s marginal social benefit curve was perceived to be steep, made so
by state-level competition concerns. McFadden appeared to be fairly effective in limiting the size of US banks from the 1930s right through to the mid-1970s. Over this period, the average asset size of US banks in relation to nominal GDP was roughly flat (Chart 1). As recently as the early 1980s, it was still at around its level at the time of the Great Depression.
The 1980s marked a watershed, with interstate branching restrictions progressively lifted. States began to open their borders to out-of-state Bank Holding Companies (BHCs). The 1982 Garn-St Germain Act allowed any BHC to acquire failed banks and thrifts, regardless of the state law.
Finally, the Riegle-Neal Act of 1994, which took effect in 1997, largely lifted restrictions on interstate branching for both domestic BHCs and foreign banks.
The rationale for this change of heart was a mirror-image of the 1920s. Large banks convinced politicians of the high private costs of restrictions, which inhibited the efficiency of their offering to the public. In Weitzman’s framework, private costs trumped social benefits. The effects of the removal of interstate restrictions were dramatic. The average size of US banks, relative to GDP, has risen roughly threefold over the past 20 years (Chart 1). Too-big-to-fail was reborn in a new
guise.
The US Banking Act (1933) was co-sponsored by Senator Carter Glass and Representative Henry Steagall – hence “Glass-Steagall”. It prevented commercial banks from conducting most types of securities business, including principal trading, underwriting and securities lending. It also banned investment banks from taking deposits. The key functions of commercial and investment banking were effectively prised apart.
The Act was motivated by stability concerns in the light of the Great Depression. The stock market boom of the 1920s had been fuelled by cheap credit from the banks. The stock market crash of 1929 brought that, and a great many US banks, to a shuddering halt. Among many banks, net losses on securities were as great as losses on loans. These losses transmitted to the real economy through a collapse in lending, whose stock halved between 1929 and 1933.

14 Chapman and Westerfield (1942).

Against this economic backdrop, and amid heated banker-bashing, it is easy to see how the social benefits of segregation were perceived as far outweighing the private costs at the time. Kennedy (1973) describes how “Stock dealings which had made bankers rich and respected in the era of affluence now glared as scarlet sins in the age of depression. Disillusionment with speculators and securities merchants carried over from investment bankers to commercial bankers; the two were often the same, and an embittered public did not care to make fine distinctions”. Glass and Steagall made just such a distinction. They underpinned it with legislation, signed by President
Roosevelt in June 1933.
As with McFadden, Glass-Steagall appears to have been effective from the 1930s right up until the latter part of the 1980s. Measures of concentration in the US banking system remained broadly flat between the 1930s and the late 1980s (Chart 2). But competitive pressures were building from the late 1970s onwards. Strains on US commercial banks intensified from alternative lending vehicles (such as mutual funds and commercial paper markets) and from overseas banks. The private costs of restrictions were rising.
Legislators responded. After 1988, securities affiliates within BHCs were permitted, though were still subject to strict limits. In 1999, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act revoked the restrictions of Glass-Steagall, allowing co-mingling of investment and commercial banking. This came as a specific response to the perceived high private costs of restrictions relative to the perceived social benefits – again, in a reversal of the Weitzman calculus from the early 1930s.
As with size, the effects of liberalisation on banking concentration were immediate and dramatic.
The share of the top three largest US banks in total assets rose fourfold, from 10% to 40% between 1990 and 2007 (Chart 2). A similar trend is discernible internationally: the share of the top five largest global banks in the assets of the largest 1000 banks has risen from around 8% in1998 to double that in 2009.
This degree of concentration, combined with the large size of the banking industry relative to GDP, has produced a pattern which is not mirrored in other industries. The largest banking firms are far larger, and have grown far faster, than the largest firms in other industries (Chart 3). With the repeal of the McFadden and Glass-Steagall Acts, the too-big-to-fail problem has not just returned but flourished.

In the light of the Great Recession, and the large apparent costs of too-big-to-fail, does Weitzman’s cost-benefit calculus suggest there is a case for winding back the clock to the reforms of the Great Depression? Determining that requires an assessment of the benefits and costs of restrictions.

The Benefits of Prohibition
The potential benefits of restricting activity in any complex adaptive system, whether financial or non-financial, can roughly be grouped under three headings: modularity, robustness and incentives. Each has a potentially important bearing on systemic resilience and hence on the social benefits of restrictions.

(a) Modularity
In 1973, Nobel-prizing winning economist Robert Merton showed that the value of a portfolio of options is at least as great as the value of an option on the portfolio.15 On the face of it, this seems to fly in the face of modern portfolio theory, of which Merton himself was of course one of the key architects. Whatever happened to the benefits of portfolio diversification?
The answer can be found in an unlikely source – Al’Qaeda. Although the precise organisational form of Al’Qaeda is not known with certainty, two structural characteristics are clear. First, it operates not as a centralised, integrated organisation but rather as a highly decentralised and loose network of small terrorist cells. Second, as events have shown, Al’Qaeda has exhibited considerable systemic resilience in the face of repeated and on-going attempts to bring about its collapse.
These two characteristics are closely connected. A series of decentralised cells, loosely bonded, make infiltration of the entire Al’Qaeda network extremely unlikely. If any one cell is incapacitated, the likelihood of this undermining the operations of other cells is severely reduced.
That, of course, is precisely why Al’Qaeda has chosen this organisational form. Al’Qaeda is a prime example of modularity and its effects in strengthening systemic resilience.
There are many examples from other industries where modularity in organisational structure has been deployed to enhance systemic resilience. Computer manufacture is one.

15 Merton (1973).

1960s, computers were highly integrated systems. Gradually, they evolved into the quintessential During the late modular system of today, with distinct modules (CPU, hard disk, keyboard) which were replaceable if they failed without endangering the functioning of the system as a whole. This improved resilience and reliability.
In the computing industry, modularity appears to have had an influence on industry structure. Since the 1970s, the computer hardware industry has moved from a highly concentrated structure to a much more fragmented one. In 1969, IBM had a market share of over 70%. By this century, the market share of the largest hardware firm was around a third of that. Modularity has meant the computer industry has become less prone to “too-big-to-fail” problems.
Other examples of modularity in organisational structures include:
„h The management of forest fires, which typically involves the introduction of firebreaks to control the spread of fire;16
„h The management of utility services, such as water, gas and electricity, where the network often has built-in latencies and restrictions to avoid overload and contagion;
„h The management of infectious diseases which these days often involves placing
restrictions on travel, either within a country (as in the case of foot-and-mouth disease in the UK) or outside of it (as in the case of H5N1);17
„h The control of computer viruses across the world wide web, which is typically achieved by constructing firewalls which restrict access to local domains;
„h Attempts on the world domino toppling record, which involve arranging the dominos in discrete blocks to minimise the risk of premature cascades.
These are all examples where modular structures have been introduced to strengthen system resilience. In all of these cases, policy intervention was required to affect this change in structure.
The case for doing so was particularly strong when the risk of viral spread was acute. In some cases, intervention followed specific instances of systemic collapse.
The North American electricity outage in August 2003 affected 55 million people in the US and Canada. It had numerous adverse knock-on effects, including to the sewage system, telephone and transport network and fuel supplies. A number of people are believed to have died as a consequence

16 Carlson and Doyle (1999).
17 Kelling et al (2003).

This event led to a rethinking of the configuration of the North American
electricity grid, with built-in latencies and stricter controls on power circulation.
In the mid-1980s, an attempt on the world domino-toppling record – at that time, 8000 dominos - had to be abandoned when the pen from one of the TV film crew caused the majority of the dominos to cascade prematurely. Twenty years later a sparrow disturbed an attempt on the world domino-toppling record. Although the sparrow toppled 23,000 dominos, 750 built-in gaps averted systemic disaster and a new world record of over 4 million dominos was still set. No-one died, except the poor sparrow which (poetically if controversially) was shot by bow and arrow.
So to banking. It has many of the same basic ingredients as other network industries, in particular the potential for viral spread and periodic systemic collapse. For financial firms holding asset portfolios, however, there is an additional dimension. This can be seen in the relationship between diversification on the one hand and diversity on the other.18 The two have quite different implications for resilience.
In principle, size and scope increase the diversification benefits. Larger portfolios ought to make banks less prone to idiosyncratic risk to their asset portfolio. In the limit, banks can completely eradicate idiosyncratic risk by holding the market portfolio. The “only” risk they would face is aggregate or systematic risk.
But if all banks are fully diversified and hold the market portfolio, that means they are all, in effect, holding the same portfolio. All are subject to the same systematic risk factors. In other words, the system as a whole lacks diversity. Other things equal, it is then prone to generalised, systemic collapse. Homogeneity breeds fragility. In Merton’s framework, the option to default selectively through modular holdings, rather than comprehensively through the market portfolio, has value to investors.
The precise balance between diversification and diversity depends on banks’ balance sheet configuration. What does this suggest? Charts 4 and 5 plot the income variability of a set of 24 global banks against their asset size and a measure of the diversity of their business model.19
There is no strong relationship between either size or diversity and income volatility. If anything the relationship is positively sloped, with size and diversity increasing income variability, not smoothing it.

18 Beale et al (2009).
19 A Herfindahl-Hirschman index of revenue concentration is constructed to measure diversification, with a measure
of zero meaning that the HHI = 1, i.e. revenue is concentrated solely on one activity. Revenue concentration is
calculated across three buckets for the last pre crisis year (2006) - Retail and commercial banking; Corporate and
investment banking; Asset and wealth management.

Charts 6 and 7 look at banks’ experience during the crisis. Size and diversity are plotted against banks’ write-downs (per unit of assets). Again, if anything, these relationships are positively sloped, with larger, more diversified banks suffering proportionally greater losses. This is consistent with evidence from econometric studies of banking conglomerates which has found that larger banks, if anything, exhibit greater risk due to higher volatility assets and activities.20
This evidence is no more than illustrative. But it suggests that, in the arm wrestle between diversification and diversity, the latter appears to have held the upper hand. Bigger and broader banking does not obviously appear to have been better, at least in a risk sense. In banking, as on many things, Merton may have had it right.

(b) Robustness
The Merton result holds in a world in which investors form judgements based on knowledge of the distribution of risk. But in complex dynamic systems, the distribution of risk may be lumpy and non-linear, subject to tipping points and discontinuities.21 Faced with this, the distribution of outcomes for the financial system as a whole may well be incalculable. The financial system may operate in an environment of uncertainty, in the Knightian sense, as distinct from risk.
There is a literature on how best to regulate systems in the face of such Knightian uncertainty.22

It suggests some guideposts for regulation of financial systems. First, keep it simple. Complex control of a complex system is a recipe for confusion at best, catastrophe at worst. Complex control adds, not subtracts, from the Knightian uncertainty problem. The US constitution is four pages long. The recently-tabled Dodd Bill on US financial sector reform is 1,336 pages long.
Which do you imagine will have the more lasting impact on behaviour.
Second, faced with uncertainty, the best approach is often to choose a strategy which avoids the extreme tails of the distribution. Technically, economists call this a “minimax” strategy – minimising the likelihood of the worst outcome. Paranoia can sometimes be an optimal strategy.

20 De Nicolo (2000).
21 Haldane (2009b).
22 See, for example, Aikman et al (2010).

This is a principle which engineers took to heart a generation ago. It is especially evident in the aeronautical industry where air and space disasters acted as beacons for minimax redesign ofaircraft and spaceships.
Third, simple, loss-minimising strategies are often best achieved through what economists call “mechanism design” and what non-economists call “structural reform”. In essence, this means acting on the underlying organisational form of the system, rather than through the participants operating within it. In the words of economist John Kay, it is about regulating structure not behaviour.23
Taken together, these three features define a “robust” regulatory regime – robust to uncertainties from within and outside the system. Using these robustness criteria, it is possible to assess whether restrictions might be preferable to taxation in tackling banking pollution. To illustrate this, contrast the regulatory experience of Glass-Steagall (a restrictions approach) and Basel II (a taxation approach).
Glass-Steagall was simple in its objectives and execution. The Act itself was only 17 pages long.
Its aims were shaped by an extreme tail event (the Great Depression) and were explicitly minimax (to avoid a repetition). It sought to achieve this by acting directly on the structure of the financial system, quarantining commercial bank and brokering activities through red-line regulation. In other words, Glass-Steagall satisfied all three robustness criteria. And so it proved, lasting well over half a century without a significant systemic event in the US.
The contrast with Basel II is striking. This was anything but simple, comprising many thousands of pages and taking 15 years to deliver. It was calibrated largely to data drawn from the Great Moderation, a period characterised by an absence of tail events - more minimin than minimax.
Basel II was underpinned by a complex menu of capital risk weights. This was fine-line, not redline, regulation. In short, Basel II satisfied few of the robustness criteria. And so it proved, overwhelmed by the recent crisis scarcely after it had been introduced.

(c) Incentives
Tail risk within some systems is determined by God – in economist-speak, it is exogenous.
Natural disasters, like earthquakes and floods, are examples of such tail risk.

23 Kay (2009).

Although normaldistribution would imply.24 God’s distribution has fat tails.
Tail risk within financial systems is not determined by God but by man; it is not exogenous but endogenous. This has important implications for regulatory control. Finance theory tells us that risk brings return. So there are natural incentives within the financial system to generate tail risk and to avoid regulatory control. In the run-up to this crisis, examples of such risk-hunting and regulatory arbitrage were legion. They included escalating leverage, increased trading portfolios and the design of tail-heavy financial instruments.25
The endogeneity of tail risk in banking poses a dilemma for regulation. Putting uncertainties to one side, assume the policymaker could calibrate perfectly tail risk in the system today and the capital necessary to insure against it. In an echo of the 1979 Madness song, banks would then have incentives to position themselves “One Step Beyond” the regulatory buffer to harvest the higher returns that come from assuming tail risk. They do so safe in the knowledge that the state will assume some of this risk if it materialises. Tail risk would expand to exhaust available
resources. Countless crises have testified to this dynamic.
This dynamic means it is hazardous to believe there is a magic number for regulatory ratios sufficient to insure against tail risk in all states of the world. Because tail risk is created not endowed, calibrating a capital ratio for all seasons is likely to be, quite literally, pointless – whatever today’s optimal regulatory point, risk incentives mean that tomorrow’s is sure to be different.
In response, some economists have proposed corner solutions to the systemic risk problem – in effect, radical structural redesign. Starting with Irving Fisher in the 1930s, some have proposed narrow banks with a 100% liquid asset ratio to protect the liquidity services banks provide. 26
Others have proposed mutual fund banks with a 100% equity ratio to safeguard banks’ solvency.27
These limiting solutions are proof to risk incentives. The one guaranteed safe hiding place for the risk-fearing policymaker is the corner.
One criticism of these proposals is that they might raise materially the cost of capital to banks and hence to the real economy. For example, 100% capital ratios could cause the economy-wide cost of capital to sky-rocket given the premium charged for equity over debt finance.

24 Korup and Clague (2009).
25 Haldane (2009a) discusses some of these strategies in greater detail and the payoffs they generate.
26 Kay (op.cit.)
27 Kotlikoff (2010).

This same argument is frequently heard in debates about more modest rises in banks’ capital ratios. But there are good counter-arguments that need also to be weighed.
By lowering risk, higher levels of equity ought to lower banks’ cost of debt finance. Indeed, in a frictionless world Modigliani and Miller famously showed that this effect would fully offset the higher cost of equity, thereby leaving the total cost of capital for banks unchanged.28 In other words, the cost of capital for a bank may be unaffected by its capital structure, at least when distortions in the economy are small. Even when they large, some offset in debt costs is likely.
It is possible to go one step further and argue that higher bank capital ratios could potentially lower banks’ cost of capital. The size of the premium demanded by holders of equity is a longstanding puzzle in finance – the equity premium puzzle.29 Robert Barro has suggested this puzzle can be explained by fears of extreme tail events.30 And what historically has been the single biggest cause of those tail events? Banking crises. Boosting banks’ capital would lessen the incidence of crises. If this lowered the equity premium, as Barro suggests, the cost of capital in the economy could actually fall.

The Costs of Prohibition
Turning to the other side of the equation, what does existing evidence tell us about the costs to banks of restrictions, whether on the scale or scope of their activities? In Weitzman’s framework,
how significant are the private costs of restrictions? Fortunately, there is a reasonably rich empirical literature on economies of scale and scope in banking.

(a) Economies of Scale
On economies of scale, the literature tends either to look at the cross-sectional efficiency of banks of different sizes, or the time-series efficiency of banks either side of a merger. As it turns out, both roads reach the same destination. Economies of scale appear to operate among banks with assets less, perhaps much less, than $100 billion. But above that threshold there is evidence, if anything, of diseconomies of scale. The Weitzman marginal private cost curve is U-shaped.31

28 Modigliani and Miller (1958). See also Miles (2009).
29 Mehra and Prescott (1985).
30 Barro (2006).
31 Santomero and Eckles (2000).

Experience in the US following the McFadden Act suggests size in banking can bring benefits.
Over 9,000 US banks failed during the Great Depression, the majority of which were unit banks.
Friedman and Schwarz (1963) blame the absence of bank branching for the high failure rate among US banks. The costs of limited branching were also felt well after the Great Depression in higher-cost provision of banking services, in particular for larger companies using lending syndicates to finance large-scale investment.32
US experience after McFadden chimes with cross-country evidence drawn, in particular, from developing countries. For example, using a dataset of 107 countries, Barth et al (2004) assess the effects of restrictions on the efficiency and stability of the financial system. They find evidence that restrictions are damaging to both, in particular barriers to foreign bank entry.
Do those arguments resonate within advanced country banking systems today? Two
comprehensive studies in the mid-1990s found that economies of scale in banking are exhausted at relatively modest levels of assets, perhaps between $5-10 billion.33 A more recent 2004 survey of studies in both the US and Europe finds evidence of a similar asset threshold.34 Even once allowance is made for subsequent balance sheet inflation, this evidence implies that economies of scale in banking may cease at double-digit dollar billions of assets.
Evidence from banking mergers offers little more encouragement. There is no strong evidence of increased bank efficiency after a merger or acquisition.35 And there is little to suggest crossactivity mergers create economic value.36 That rather chimes with recent crisis experience. Of the bank mergers and acquisitions which have taken place recently, the majority have resulted in the merged firm under-performing the market in the subsequent period. Of course, all econometric studies have their limitations so these results do not close the case. Nonetheless, the uniformity of the evidence is striking.

(b) Economies of Scope
Turning from economies of scale to economies of scope, the picture painted is little different.

32 For example, Calomiris and Hubbard (1995).
33 Saunders (1996), Berger and Mester (1997).
34 Amel et al (2004).
35 For example, Berger and Humphrey (1997) based on a survey of over 100 studies.
36 For example, De Long (2001).

Evidence from US bank holding companies suggests that diversification gains from multiple business lines may be more than counter-balanced by heightened exposures to volatile income- generating activities, such as trading.37 This mirrors the evidence from Charts 4 and 5 and from the Great Depression. Internationally, a recent study of over 800 banks in 43 countries found a conglomerate “discount” in their equity prices.38 In other words, the market assigned a lower value to the conglomerate than the sum of its parts, echoing Merton’s 1973 insight. This is evidence of diseconomies of scope in banking.
On the face of it, these findings are a puzzle. The most likely cause was articulated by Austin Robinson back in the 1930s – “Man’s mind and man’s memory is essentially a limited factor…Every increase in size beyond a point must involve a lengthening of the chain of authority…at some point the increasing costs of co-ordination must exceed the declining economies”.39 Oliver Williamson’s “span of control” theory of organisations made rigorous this intuition thirty years later.
The essence of these arguments is that limits on the optimal size and scope of firms may be as much neurological as technological. Numbers of synapses may matter more than numbers of servers. The history of military units provides a good illustration. In Roman times, the optimal size of a military unit was 100 – hence the Roman centurion. This was the maximum number of
men a general felt able to know well enough to lead and control. The constraint was neurological.
Two millennia have passed. Extraordinary advances have been made in military
telecommunications technology. And the optimal size of the military unit in the US army today?
Just under 100 people.40 The number of relationships humans are felt able to maintain is believed to lie below 150 - so-called Dunbar’s Law.41 For most of us, it is single-digits. That number has been roughly the same since the dawn of time, despite the extra-ordinary recent advance of technology and social networks. As Nicholas Christakis has observed, Facebook “friends” are not really your friends.
With hindsight, this crisis has provided many examples of failures rooted in an exaggerated sense of knowledge and control. Risks and counterparty relationships outstripped banks’ ability to manage them. Servers outpaced synapses. Large banks grew to comprise several thousand distinct legal entities. When Lehman Brothers failed, it had almost one million open derivatives contracts – the financial equivalent of Facebook friends.

37 Stiroh and Rumble (2006).
38 Laeven and Levine (2007); see also Schmid and Walter (2009) for recent US evidence.
39 Robinson (1934).
40 Christakis and Fowler (2009).
41 Dunbar (1993).

Whatever the technology budget, it is questionable whether any man’s mind or memory could cope with such complexity.
To sum up, the maximum efficient scale of banking could be relatively modest. Perhaps it lies below $100 billion. Experience suggests there is at least a possibility of diseconomies of scale lying in wait beyond that point. Conglomerate banking, while good on paper, appears to be more mixed in practice. If these are not inconvenient truths, they are at least sobering conjectures.
They also sit awkwardly with the current configuration of banking.
In 2008, 145 banks globally had assets above $100 billion, most of them universal banks combining multiple business activities. Together, these institutions account for 85% of the assets of the world’s top 1000 banks ranked by Tier 1 capital. If these institutions could be resolved easily, so that the systemic consequences of their failure were limited, efficiency considerations could perhaps be set to one side. Or, put in Weitzman’s terms, the social benefits of cutting banks down to size would be low.
But crisis experience has demonstrated that the apparatus does not currently exist to resolve safely these institutions. There are no examples during this crisis of financial institutions beyond $100 billion being resolved without serious systemic spillovers.42 Instead, those in trouble have been bailed-out. The same 145 institutions account for over 90% of the support offered by governments during the course of the crisis.
In the light of the crisis, and in the language of Weitzman, the marginal social benefits of restrictions could be greater than the marginal private costs. The maximum efficient scale of banking may lie below the maximum resolvable scale. A large part of the effort of the international community over the past few years has been directed at increasing the maximum resolvable scale of banks – for example, through improved resolution regimes and living wills.43
If successful, that effort would shift the balance of the Weitzman cost/benefit calculus in the direction of bigger banks; it could help achieve the modularity, robustness and better aligned incentives which restrictions otherwise deliver.
But if this effort is unsuccessful, past evidence and present experience pose a big question about existing banking structures. Against that backdrop, it is understandable that restrictions on scale and activity are part of today’s debate about solutions to the systemic pollution problem.

42 Washington Mutual, with assets of around $300bn, was resolved by FDIC, but was perceived by many to have
caused systemic spillovers.
43 For example, Tucker (2010).

$100 billion may not just be the question; it may also be part of the answer.

Conclusion
We are at the start of a great debate on the future structure of finance, not the end. Some fear that momentum for radical financial reform will be lost. But financial crises leave a scar. This time’s sovereign scar should act as a lasting reminder of the criticality of reform. Today’s crisis has stretched some state’s sinews to the limit. Both literally and metaphorically, global finance cannot afford another.
The history of banking is that risk expands to exhaust available resources. Tail risk is bigger in banking because it is created, not endowed. For that reason, it is possible that no amount of capital or liquidity may ever be quite enough. Profit incentives may place risk one step beyond regulation. That means banking reform may need to look beyond regulation to the underlying structure of finance if we are not to risk another sparrow toppling the dominos.
Today’s financial structure is dense and complex, like a tropical rainforest. Like the rainforests, when it works well it is a source of richness. Yet it is, as events have shown, at the same time fragile. Simpler financial eco-systems offer the promise of greater robustness, at some cost in richness. In the light of a costly financial crisis, both eco-systems should be explored in seeking answers to the $100 billion question.

References
Aikman, D, Barrett, P, Kapadia, S, King, M, Proudman, J, Taylor, T, de Weymarn, I, and T
Yates (2010), Uncertainty in Macroeconomic Policy Making: Art or Science?, available at
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/speeches/2010/speech432.pdf
Amel, D, Barnes, C, Panetta, F and C Salleo (2004), “Consolidation and Efficiency in the Financial Sector: A Review of the International Evidence”, Journal of Banking & Finance, vol. 28(10).
Baker, D and T McArthur (2009), “The Value of the “Too Big to Fail” Big bank Subsidy”,
Centre for Economic and Policy Research.
Barro, R J (2006), “Rare Disasters and Asset Markets in the Twentieth Century”, QuarterlyJournal of Economics, vol. 121(3), p.823-866.
Barth, J R, Caprio Jr., and R Levine (2004), “Bank Supervision and Regulation: What Works Best?”, Journal of Financial Intermdeiation, vol. 13(2), p.205-248.
Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (2009), Consultative Document: Strengthening the Resilience of the Banking Sector.
Beale, N, Rand, D, Arinaminpathy, N and R M May (2009), Conflicts Between Individual and Systemic Risk in Banking and Other Systems, forthcoming.
Berger, A and D Humphrey (1997), “Efficiency of financial institutions: international survey and directions for future research”, European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 98, p.175- 212.
Berger, A N and L J Mester (1997), “Inside the Black Box: What Explains Differences in the Efficiencies of Financial Institutions?”, Journal of Banking & Finance, vol. 21(7), p.895-947.
Brunnermeier, M, Crockett, A, Goodhart, C, Persaud, A and H Shin (2009), “The
Fundamental Principles of Financial Regulation”, Economy 11.
Calomiris, C and G Hubbard (1995), “Tax Policy, Internal Finance, and Investment: Evidence from the Undistributed Profits Tax of 1936-1937”, Journal of Business, vol. 68, p.443-482.
Carlson, J M and J Doyle (1999), “Highly Optimized Tolerance: A Mechanism for Power Laws in Designed Systems’, Physical Review E, vol. 60(2), p.1412-1427.
Chapman, J M and R B Westerfield (1942), Branch Banking, Harper & Brothers.
Christakis, N A and J H Fowler (2009), Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives, Little Brown and Company.
DeLong, G L (2001), “Stockholder Gains From Focusing Versus Diversifying Bank Mergers”,
Journal of Financial Economics, vol. 59, p. 221–252.
De Nicolo, G (2000), “Size, Charter Value and Risk in Banking: An International Perspective,” International Finance Discussion Papers No.689, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
Dunbar, R I M (1993), “Coevolution of Neocortical Size, Group Size and Language in
Humans”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, vol. 16(4), p.681-694.
Freidman, M and A J Schwartz (1963), A Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960,
Princeton University Press.
Haldane, A G (2009a), Banking on the State, available at
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/speeches/2009/speech409.pdf
Haldane, A G (2009b), Rethinking the Financial Network, available at
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/speeches/2009/speech386.pdf
IMF (2009), World Economic Outlook: Crisis and Recovery, available at
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2009/01/pdf/text.pdf
Kay, J (2009), Narrow Banking: The Reform of Banking Regulation, Centre for the Study of Financial Innovation.
Kelling, M J, Woolhouse, M E J, May, R M and B T Grenfell (2003), ‘Modelling Vaccination Strategies Against Foot-and-mouth Disease, Nature, vol. 421, p.136-142.
Kennedy, S E (1973), The Banking Crisis of 1933, University Press of Kentucky.
Korup, O and J J Clague (2009), “Natural Hazards, Extreme Events, and Mountain
Topography”, Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 28(11-12), p.977-990.
Kotlikoff, L J (2010), Jimmy Stewart is Dead: Ending the World’s Ongoing Financial Plague with Limited Purpose Banking, John Wiley and Sons.
Laeven, L and R Levine (2007), “Is There are Diversification Discount in Financial
Conglomerates?”, Journal of Financial Economics, vol. 85(2), p.331-367.
Mehra, R and E C Prescott (1985), “The Equity Premium: A Puzzle”, Journal of Monetary Economics, vol. 15, p.145-161.
Merton, R C (1973), “Theory of Rational Option Pricing”, Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, vol. 4(1), p.141-183.
Miles, D (2009), The Future Financial Landscape, available at
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/speeches/2009/speech418.pdf
Modigliani, F and M Miller (1958), “The Cost of Capital, Corporation Finance and the Theory of Investment”, American Economic Review, vol. 48(3).
NYU Stern School of Business (2009), Restoring Financial Stability: How to Repair a Failed System, John Wiley & Sons.
Reinhart, C M and K Rogoff (2009), This Time is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly, Princeton University Press.
Robinson, A (1934), “The Problem of Management and the Size of Firms”, The Economic Journal, vol. 44(174), p/242-257.
Santomero, A M and D L Eckles (2000), “The Determinants of Success in the New Financial Services Environment: Now That Firms Can Do Everything, What Should They Do and Why Should Regulators Care?”, Federal Reserve Bank of New York Economic Policy Review (October), vol. 6(4), p.11-23.
Saunders, A (1996), Financial Institutions Management: A Modern Perspective, Irwin
Professional Publishing.
Schmid, M M and I Walter (2009), “Do Financial Conglomerates Create or Destroy Economic Value?”, Journal of Financial Intermediation, vol. 18(2), p.193-216.
Stern, N (2006), Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change, Cabinet Office-HM Treasury, available at http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/sternreview_index.htm
Stiroh, K and A Rumble (2006), “The Dark Side of Diversification: the Case of US Financial Holding Companies”, Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol.80, p.2131-2161.
Tucker, P (2010), Resolution of Large and Complex Financial Institutions: The Big Issues, available at http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/speeches/2010/speech431.pdf
Weitzman, M L (1974), “Prices vs. Quantities”, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 41, p.477-91.

- Inform Your Friends: National Strike, April 15th - 18th

2010-03-31T00:52:00.000-07:00

- Inform Your Friends: National Strike, April 15th - 18th

A $200 trillion crisis and why Al'Qaeda provides lessons on how to stop it happening again.

2010-03-30T20:20:00.000-07:00

A $200 trillion crisis and why Al'Qaeda provides lessons on how to stop it happening again.

National, Lawful strike against the Establishment. By Fausty.

2010-03-30T07:29:00.000-07:00

Fausty my dear, there is an objection to your suggestion in the comments, listed below the possible action that should be taken. It suggests that the employer will not be at all happy about his employees walking out for the four days as indicated.
What I suggest is that we join forces with the employers, change them all, from being a Company or a Business, and set them up as Holding Companies. As such, they can engage an Agent to employ all Staff and services as required. This Agency will of course, also be part of the company or business but independant and based Off-Shore. At a stroke, 99% of your Taxation obligations are now the responsibilty of an Off-Shore business that isn't liable under any British law to pay Taxation in Britain and is beyond the jurisdiction of any British Court. That is the first step.
For all Staff, working and living here in Britain, as far as Westminster is concerned,all you have to do is visit your Local HMRC. office and explain that you are now working for some Foreign Co. based in so and so, and that you will inform them of all monies remitted to this Country. You can also volunteer to pay a special NIC. payment. The last time I looked, possibily three or four years ago, the cost was just £2.50 each week.
If you set up the Agency as I would advise, you will be able to make payments for your cost of living without ever exceeding your "Tax Free Allowance", also, your falily have entitlement to Tax Free income. There is no reason why you cannot make that allowance.
Enough for now. I'll get back to this tomorrow. AH! Before I go, you did ask how I became familiar with Tax Law. Well, I'm now 75 years old, I no longer work and I pay no direct Taxation. But, I spent much of my life, since the army in 1953, January, travelling the world. And before late 1960s or early 1970s, Tax was not enforced on any overseas earnings. I used to bank my money in Jersey and make a weekly allowance to my wife. Life was so simple before the Europ-ing Zups. (Arabic for Penis.) Until about 2004, I had very good contacts at the Treasury as well as my local Tax Office. Although we have never met, the Chairman of HSBC. was also a friend, he still is. And I do have contact at quite a few Gov' offices, but I do not abuse the fact. Well must go, the wife is on about something, it's one of those times when being a bit deaf, is an advantage. (An alternative system of Public Service Funding will be necessary and it should be based on the County Council Structure.)
Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

Fausty's Libertarian Blog: EPP: EU's latest assault on our freedoms - ACT BEFORE THE ELECTION

2010-03-05T03:40:00.000-08:00

Fausty's Libertarian Blog: EPP: EU's latest assault on our freedoms - ACT BEFORE THE ELECTION

Council leader turns his hand to advertising - Norma's Weird World - Bizarre, odd and weird news - Norfolk News - EDP24

2010-02-22T20:29:00.000-08:00

Council leader turns his hand to advertising - Norma's Weird World - Bizarre, odd and weird news - Norfolk News - EDP24

WHY, WHY, WHY, Should you pay This amount of TAXATION when it is possibl to avoid all direct Taxation. Allowing the Taxpayer to control Direct Taxation

2010-02-13T16:00:00.000-08:00

2010-02-13T00:31:00.000-08:00

We are now about to enter another fase of this utter political nonsense. That bunch of over grown school kids, pretending to be grown ups, have found another playground game of swapsees to play. Only this time it's with your pensions and other investments and savings. They are going to Tax you even more and then that money is for didtribution in Africa and othe poor nations, such as India and places East in Asia that needs your Tax money to buy food and other things such as clothes and school books. But never mind, you can afford it.
I remember the start of this, back in the beginning of the 1970s. I read in the Herald Tribune, a report about the American auto Industry building a production plant in South Korea to get the locals to assemble cars. It was then noticed that while the locals were very good at this, they were not able to earn enough money to buy the goods they produced. So, up went their income so that they were able to join the rat race and acquire all the habits of the modern society. Borrowing and spending. So that the production line was never still. And the Banks had customers queuing up to borrow money at a price.
And again, in 1975 when there was just one Bank in London that got out of hand and had to be rescued by the Bank of England and the Taxpayers. Even then, safe-guards were put in place to prevent this happening again. Only Gordon and the Treasury plus Blair, removed the restrictions and let the Bankers loose again. I suppose it was in return for the Political funding they received.
Well, this time the final say on any of these "new Taxes" , plus allowing the European Central Bank to lay down the law, should only take place if the British Taxpayer agrees. After all, it is their Money. I think the British Taxpayers should take complete control of direct Taxation and introduce a return to the local economy. Paying direct Taxation to the County Council. (Sorry about this, but I have to take a break for now. The wife wants to go shopping, that will take about two hours so back about 10:30 AM.)
Regards for now, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

And Now Three Months of Electon Campaigning.

2010-01-12T03:46:00.000-08:00

Have you noticed though, all that talk of Europe and European Taxation, three new Tax and Finance Committee's plus all the other guff, thats been kicked into the long grass until the summer. Boy David, him of the "Turnip Taliban" who thinks the people of Norfolk should shut-up and do as they are told. This is the Lady Dave has chosen for your Member of Parliament, now shut up and vote for her. In the mean-time argue over this and don't mention Brussels.
Very early this morning, 0430hrs. GMT. I was watching the BBC. TV. programme, "Hard Talk". There were three men from the Financial Industry, Stephen King, Group Chief Economist, HSBC. another man from Dubai, (I did at one time live and work from there.) and then there was the man from Wasgington.
The conversation was about the state of the World Economy. And as we should all know, it's mark time on that subject and wait to see who sneezes first. And yet the biggest danger to the whole house of cards, was not even mentioned. Governments, Politics and half arsed Politicians. As one of the Three said, this whole shebang, involving all of the world, started here in London, then to protect itself, America had to make a move. They chose to slack off and remove some of their financial safeguards. That is how we got to this point in the circus. It isn't over yet, by a long way. The stupidity of Politics, to protect their own backsides, and pensions, has yet to increase Taxation unto the point of killing off employment and creating Mass Unemployment. That will be with us by Easter. Sunday the 4th. of April is Easter Sunday that is 82 days from now.
That is what I think is going to take place. And that will require another two years possibly three, to get the world economy back on track.
Unless of course, you do as I have been suggesting for a number of years, change the way you work and are paid so that Westminster has NO power to legally impose Direct Taxation on anyone. Then build your own system of Public Service Funding, based on the County Council Structure. I can assure you, there is nothing Westminster can do to stop you.

SATURDAY and PEOPLE WHO SHOULD KNOW BETTER, HIDE BEHIND THE NEWS HEADLINES AND TOTAL FRAUD.

2009-12-05T08:06:00.000-08:00

Monday and all that glitters is NOT gold. If my wife has a hand in it , much of it will be detritus. Waste of this world and the bits and pieces that are left, are the bonuses of the Banks and others, imposed upon the Taxpayers of this world. Tell me brovs' are you up for this, or would it be more in your interest to see some utter, but fundamental change to the whole system and a totally new begininning.
Have a look at this website :- http://wwwanthony-flynn.blogspot.com/
Or you could try this, http://www.atflynn.co.uk/

I am attempting to encourage most of the Taxpayers, to abandon Westminster and adopt a system based on the Local County Structure.

Why the bl***Y hell should you half arsed wage earners, crippled by this or that nonsense, be obliged to pay the full amount of Taxation, just to satisfy some half-arsed
half intelligent bumhole at Westminster. Please, give me best IT IS THE TAXPAYERS WHO PAY FOR THE HAND OUTS THAT TAKE CARE OF SOME TWELVE MILLION IMMIGRANTS AND ASYLUM SEEKERS.
Now, after that assertion, I stand ready to be Shot Down. I have noththing at all to be ashamed of. So take aim you arseholes who think this country is for the needy greedy shit from all the world. I have news for you, before the end of 2010, there will be a change. Again, it is best to let the British People have their say.
More Tomorrow. Kind Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

TODAYS DAILY EXPRESS, PAGE 12, PATRICK O'FLYNN.

2009-12-01T12:31:00.000-08:00

I did telephone the Web editor to ask permission for this, so here goes.

            THIS BENEFIT RACKET
            IS A GROSS INSULT TO
             BRITISH TAXPAYERS

If you could be guaranteed to win the jackpot on the National Lottery on Wednesday evening would you buy a ticket for it? It's a ridiculous question, of course you would.
   Let's put it another way. If you were born and grew up in one of the poorest and most violent countries in the world would you leave it if you became aware of an alternative country that was both relatively peaceful and would keep you in the lap of luxury for the rest of your days? Of course you would.
     So who can blame Nasra Warsame and her husband Bashir Aden for enjoying to the fullest extent the largesse of the British welfare state? This Somalian-born couple and their eight British-born children are in receipt of an astonishing £1,600 a week in housing benefit.
      Mrs Warsame and seven of the children reside in a £1.8million London townhouse. It has six bedrooms-some with balconies-four bathrooms and three sitting rooms. Unemployed Mr Aden and another child live in a council flat nearby.
       The per capita annual income of Somalia is estimated at $600 (about £400). Average life expectancy is 48 years. According to the Encylopaedia Of The Nations, "the typical Somali house is either a cylindrical hut with a conical thatched roof or rectangular hut with an angular roof of thatch or metal". Presumably no balconies, then.

        Life in London also affords this couple, who have both been granted British citizenship, full access to the National Health Service (Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, we have recently learned, does a widely- admired line in special baby care costing taxpayers £1,400 a day per infant but free to users from all over the world). Then there are all the other unemployment and family-related benefits expanded by Labour in its crusade against child povety.
         Cases such as that of the Warsame-Adens are at the extreme end of the spectrum but are far from uncommon. Most of us recall the equally shocking story of the Afghan migrant Toorpaki Saiedi, who was put up with her seven children in a seven-bedroom house in West London that cost more than £12,000 a month in housing benefit. Altogether her family had a taxpayer-funded income of £170,000. The average income per head in Afghanistan is $800 (approx£650) while life expectancy is 44 years.
         Let's return to the lottery for a moment. Remember that syndicate of overjoyed BT workers in Liverpool who won about £5million each a few weeks back? Well, their lives are no doubt being transformed as we speak.
         Let's assume each of them has had the good sense to invest the winnings prudently and secures a five per cent annual return. That would give each of them £250,000 a year to live on, about 10 times the average household income in Britain. How many of us would love to have such a thing happen to us?
         Yet for Third World immigrants with big families a much more dramatic lifestyle transformation is up for grabs. This nation is a guaranteed winning lottery ticket for them provided they can get in.
         The British State will pay them money at a level only enjoyed by the most privileged in their countries of origin. It will house them in conditions available only to warlords and princes back home.
         There are many countries in the world as poor as Somalia and Afghanistan: Ethiopia, Eritrea, Niger, Liberia, Burundi, Zimbabwe, ans Sierra Leone to name but a few. Many other very populous countries such as India, Bangladesh and Pakistan are only a little richer.
         No wonder so many people from such countries are so determined to penetrate our borders by legal or illegal means. Many die during the journey, drowned trying tocross the Gulf of Aden or the Mediterranean. Others live in squalor in French channel ports waiting for people-smugglers to spirit them to Britain.
         Given their desperate circumstances it is perhaps rather callous them "welfare tourists". But it is beyond dispute that there is an almost unlimited supply of them and that this country is already buckling under the strain. Hopelessly lax benefit rules based upon estimates of "need" rather than genuine entitlement are creating an enormously strong pull factor that reaches across the globe and draws a tidal wave of humanity towards us.

        These benefits jackpot cases have another severely detrimental effect. The already demoralised taxpayers of Britain, working the longest hours in Europe are struggling to stay afloat in the recession, are left to question their sanity.
         Why should they bother to be self-reliant when a life of leisure can be had simply by reproducing? Supporting the domestic underclass is one thing and it is truly galling to see them being kept in flatscreen TVs and the new season's football shirts while contributing little but delinquency in return. But finding your duty extends to the poor of other countries who pitch up in Britain is an outrageous imposition.
         Our political class tut-tuts such conclusions as being mean-spirited. It can afford to - most of its members also live in taxpayer funded luxury. For it to offer all-comers, via taxpayer funded benefits, standards of living far higher than those enjoyed by the vast majority of working people is a sign of its decadence and a betrayal of everything that made this country great.
                               -------------------------------------------------------
Thank you Patrick O'Flynn. It is a great relief to know that at least someone can read the lie of the land and has the courage to write it as it is.
Westminster has now had its day. Tomorrow I'm going to the local 'paper and I intend placing an advertisement for Taxpayers, employers and employees, to put together an alternative system of Public Service Funding, based on the County Council Structure. I did speak to the Business Manager at the Bank and they also think it now time to act. The advert' will be in next Wednesdays 'Paper, the 9th. Dec.
By the way, the Express and this article are at-: http://www.express.co.uk/
Well past my bedtime, so I'll say good night.
Kind Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

THE BEGINNING OF THE CHANGE. A NEW START FOR POLITICS AND WESTMINSTER.

2009-12-01T01:16:00.000-08:00

             LAUGH AND THE WORLD LAUGHS WITH YOU,

             WEEP AND YOU WEEP ALONE.

       FOR THIS SAD OLD EARTH MUST BURY ITS MIRTH

THE TAXMAN IS STILL ON HIS THRONE.

-----------------------------------------------------

(With respect to-: Ella Wheeler-Willcox )

Yesterday, Monday the 30th. of November, I had some spare money to hand, so I paid a visit to the Bank in Diss, South Norfolk to make a deposit. While there, I asked to see the Business Manager for a quick chat. I explained that I thought the time might be right for an attempt on my pet subject, changing the system of Direct Taxation across the Country.

I explained that any serious attempt would need to be made after the Christmas festivities. But it might be for the best, if we tried to catch the mood just now with a glimpse of promise for the New Year and so the one off advertisement for the benefit of all employers and all employees, to counter the absolute nonsense of Golden Gordon's £10Billion give away to all and every third World Country, and some who are not so third World. Yet only a few days ago, three or four at the most, it was announced that £Millions of £Pounds of Taxpayers money has gone missing from another Multi £Billion £Pound fund. Now theres a thing, who would have thought these good people would steal all that money that is supposed to be for poor people.

So.With a walk down Mere Street, I entered the office of the Local 'Paper and I was seen to by Richard Spratt. He explained things to me, the cost and other bits and pieces, and now I shall be going back tomorrow, Wednesday, to place the add' and pay the damages. Enough for now, one or two things I must do. Regards, ATFlynn,

"Norfolk's Mutineer"

Time to Start the End Game. Kick Westminster and the Clown's into the Long Grass

2009-11-30T06:43:00.000-08:00

On the ninth of February 2008, I sent this email to Tim Aker at Taxpayers Alliance.com. The Subject title is, Suggestions to alieveate pressure of rising costs on Mortgage and Taxpayers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The original was sent to -:
For the Attention of, Chris Walton
Democratic Services
South Norfolk District Council
Long Stratton.

First, thank you for allowing me to address this meeting. It is not my intention to be objectionable, but I do intend to point out the possibilityof legally changing the way that Direct Taxation and P.A.Y.E., is paid to HMRC. The system as it now operates, is very expensive. In 2005/6 you the poor old TaxPayer, coughed up a staggering £487billion. £1.3billion each day. (TPA. figures.)

The year 2006/7 looks like it will have confiscated at least £600billion. And if the TaxPayers do nothing, there is no end of it. Ever onward ever up. We will have the answer next month.

I know that in a legal sense, it is not possible for the District or the County Council, to encourage the TaxPayer to defy what is a lawful demand from Central Government. And I have no desire to disobey a lawful demand. But it is legally possible to circumvent any request in relation to any demand for the payment of Direct Taxation. In fact, it is legally possible to remove enough Taxation from the jurisdiction of the Government, that the TaxPayer would be in a position to dictate all spending policy of any Westminster Government.

So we now come to the reason for my request to speak. Public spending and Public Services cannot be ignored as a civil society must be maintained and paid for. My argument is with the nonsense that masquerades as governance.
The only way to achieve the successful conclusion desired by the TaxPayer, is for the TaxPayer to control the Amount of Public Money available for Public expenditure. That will only happen if the Parish, Town, District and County Council were to act as the collectors and Treasurer of the Public Revenue.

In re-building the financial system, the one objective, like the cardinal point of a compass, is to make sure that the Low Wage earners, are kept out of Taxation until their weekly income is above £500. And all pensioners are Taxfree including Free from paying Council Tax.

In conclusion, my request is very simple. It is that you do not object to my campaign for a system of Taxation that is intended to increase the Working TaxPayers earned income after Tax is paid. Allowing that worker to maintain a standard of living and pay off his mortgage.

To finish, I must say that it has been very generous of you all, to allow me to address you tonight. It is my belief, that the economic fiasco we are in, could take some ten years to overcome. In 1985, I believe it was, the House of Lords warned of today. I forget the details but they are still available.
I am much obliged to you all. Regards, A T Flynn "Norfolk's Mutineer"

An Explanation, in part, for the Telegraph Letter.

2009-11-20T07:13:00.000-08:00

I was looking throu' some old letters and cuttings from the early 1990s this morning and found one or two quite interesting bits. And as we now have a new President of Europe, I suppose joining the armed services to Fight for Queen and Country, is no longer a lawful act. It will have to be, Fight for President and United States of Europe. I don't think I could swear an oath for, or even to that.
Now it seems we are going to have an Election very soon, so remember this, there are only three ways to go; Abandon the LibLabCon Trick. Then start with the British National Party, first choise. Next, United Kingdom Independence Party. And thirdly, Don't Bloody bother. Tell me, what the bloody good is Westminster now? There will be no more pretence that we are a Sovereign Country. We are now on a par with the Isle of Wight. (No disrespect intended.) In which case, why should we bother electing another bunch of Kippers to sit in Westminster twiddling their thumbs? Or for that matter employ the millions of Whitehall Staff that cost £Billions of £Pounds to employ every year. We can quite easily manage with a governance based on a County by County structure. And a bloody site cheaper than Whitehall. Massive savings all round, what are we waiting for.
I have the money available, it isn't mine, but a very large International Bank is prepared to fund this. Another thing, this is not a commercial venture. Yes, you will be paid, but this idea is for the benefit of working Taxpayer and the Country. There aint no bl***room for Politics except Parish and Town Councils the district and County Councils. Sod that silly game of Party Politics, thats what has caused this total nonsense.
There is another website that has more information about my past and it also has clear contact information, it is-: http://www.atflynn.co.uk/

Enough for now, please join mein this, at my age, 75 in January I need some younsters to show me around the Technology. Oh yes, the promise of funding was first made in 2004. I have made sure the funds are available every year since then.
Kind Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

A LETTER I WROTE TO THE TELEGRAPH, 24TH. JULY 1997

2009-11-20T06:36:00.000-08:00

Dear Sir, I have written to the Sunday Telegraph on the same subject but my letter was not published.
As Boris Johnson almost wrote on the 23 rd. July, total control of this country from Brussels is the object of that Empire. Westminster collaborators may sugar the poison pill but it is still poison and will kill every aspect of the British way of life.
So far the City is keeping its head down. If they think they can keep their powder dry I believe they are in for a shock. They will be over run without a shot being fired. The Bank of England is to be the whipping boy, and while all attention is focused on the arguments in London we will discover that Frankfurt is dictating the future of our monetary policy. Simple, not a shot fired in anger. Goodbye the City as we knew it, hello command economics in a new suit.
It is a fact that the people of Europe have no control at all over this nightmare. Freedom and choice are not on the menu, the majority political activists are all of the same sickening post war, happy clappy whacky baccy stupidity. They are going to hell together.
THIS IS OF COURSE ONLY MY OPINION.
I can think of only one answer to this problem, take their pocket money away. It is not illegal to avoid paying Taxes, in some cases it is a religion, many people worship at that shrine.
I will put together a simple set of instructions, perfectly within the law, that circumvent 80% to 90% of all Government Taxation, but not Local Authority Tax.
Boris Johnson makes the Scottish and Welsh referendums sound almost quaint. Something only those two peoples have an interest in. I have news for Mr. Johnson. Do you seriously think the English will sit there with there heads in the clouds while the Scots and the Welsh have their hands in the English pocket? Never Mr. Johnson.
I have no objections to their asperations, only think on this: does the question go far enough? Surely England have something to say on the subject, after all would it be fair for England to pay the dues of Great Britain into Brussels? While Scotland have the power in law, to reduce their Taxes at the expense of English Taxpayers, and would not Wales be forever after more "resources" to build their nightmare.
I say, no you silly fools, if you think you can crack the cork and let only part of the genie out of the bottle, you are mistaken. Its all or nothing.
And so I say, goodbye Great Britain as you disappear into the pocket of Evlyn Waughs,
Belgium ticket collectors never to be seen again. THE END.

STATE OPENING of PARLIAMENT

2009-11-18T09:03:00.000-08:00

Time to wake up the Taxpayers. I did write a comment for the Telegraph news paper yesterday, only they wouldn't publish it. I think it was a comment about a Simon Heffer article. Still, that was yesterday.
Now, I remember that I have posted similar arguements about now, being the time when Westminster has reached the end of the road as far as our Day to Day governance is concerned. And that our Local County Authorities should take command of our Taxation, provide all our Public Service requirements, including Health, Law and order, Education and Provide and Pay for all the Welfare that is necessary, health, happiness, prosperity and wellbeing. In addition to this, if those bumholes at Westminster want to import any more immigrants, they, the MPs., had better find some very well paid work to do. Because they are the ones who will have to pay for them. The Taxpayer is going on strike over welfare for immigrants and asylum seekers.
Another thing, as there will be only a little work for the HoC. and the HoL. about 172 MPs. in total is all that are needed.(That is English MPs.) The House of Lords would need about the same. Only I think it would be much better if we returned to the real Hereditary meaning of the High Born who's purpose is the Wellbeing of the Realm and the subjects of the Crown.

By 1999, I was well into the immigration and asylum troubles that had begun to take place because of the Home Office changes at that time. To begin with, immigration could only take place by visa. And just 80,000 a year were allowed. But this Government abandoned all these restrictions and started opening our boarders to all-comers never mind any check on how many in or how many out. Now today, because only head of household is counted as an immigrant or asylum seeker, it is quite probable that Britain now has a population of immigrants and others, totalling some TWELVE Million. Europe as a whole, has some 53 Million islamic immigrants. (There is an article in the Express archives with details.) That is why the budget for Benefit Payments is now a staggering,
£190 Billion Plus. Now at a stroke, that should be reduced to a small fraction of that sum. Without the money, many of these people would depart in a flash.

I have already mentioned the House of Commons and the House of Lords, but I come back to them now. If you do as I suggest, and take control of Direct Taxation away from Westminster, 90% of Whitehall will no longer be needed. And as it costs you Taxpayers some £90 Billion each year to pay that (almost) useless lot, think of the money you will keep in your pocket instead of theirs. There is more of this to take note of, but just now is time for tea. I'll be back tomorrow, promise. I must convince you lot that you shouldn't just roll over and submit to that bunch of creeps who pretend to know what they are doing. And we must put a stop to Brussels, as "Jonesy" kept saying, "They don't like it up'em." See you tomorrow.
Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

HAVE YOU SEEN THE SOVIET SECRETS OF THE LABOUR PARTY, IN THE SPECTATOR

2009-11-14T08:00:00.000-08:00

These last two weeks, the Spectator has had reports about the Labour Party the Soviet Union. On the 7th. of Nov' it was, "Labour's Soviet Secrets." Then this week, the 14th. of Nov', it is, "Kinnock and the Kremlin", with secrets revealed by, Pavel Stroilov. http://www.spectator.co.uk/
Have a look at the Magazine for the 7th November and again today, the 14th. the story tells you everything you need toknow about "Left Wing" politics since the bloody year dot. Next, please let me insert a couple of links, I'm not capable of those smart links or even short links, I have to use the whole ball of wax.

Here goes; http://www.brugesgroup.com/ http://www.express.co.uk/post/view/140345
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/12/tax-transparent-scrutiny/print
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnist/christopherbooker/6521422/The-min...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnist/simonheffer/6539877/When-it-comes..

I have posted comments on five articles, but the most important thing is the way opinion is moving away from Westminster and looking for an alternative. Yet there is only one way to go. The Taxpayer has to take complete control of all Government spending. If you do as I suggest, there is absolutely nothing Westminster, Politics or Politicians can do to stop you. You, who have been forced to pay ruinous amounts of money to keep this bunch of crap in office, must now take your money beyond the reach of this bunch of fraudsters.

Earlier today, I was working out what it would cost to collect the Taxation as I imagine the way it should work. I came to the conclusion that at 50pence a week for each Taxpayer, would work out at £7million, and certainly not more than £8million each week. If you are like me, you can almost taste the savings. I can assure you, my intention is to allow the Taxpayers to use their ability to do as Margaret Thatcher said,
Government spending and Government Economics, are only House Keeping. As banal as that might sound, it is absolutely correct. And if you ever meet my wife, you will understand in an instant, just what I mean. Enough for now,
Regards to all, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer".

WHAT WITH THE EXES, CAMERON'S BACK TRACKING ON A REFERENDUM, HAS WESTMINSTER GOT ANY FUTURE???

2009-11-03T09:02:00.000-08:00

This is only a short remark, I want to see what the news has to say about Cameron and his cop-out.
As it now stands, there is only UKIP. and BNP. worth voting for. The alternative is, don't bother. Why waste time as well as money voting for the crap at Westminster. I must say though, I do feel sorry for a number of MPs. But it does look as if most of them kept quiet while others took advantage. And no one spoke out against it. Even now, they still demand you pay what they say you owe in Taxes, and all the time they have to be always aware of the fact that these bankers and these money men, are the same business contacts who will pay the expence and all the costs of the next election. Hoping to pick the winner so that they get an easy ride for the next four or five years and make another few millions of £Pounds or $Dollars.
Enough for now, time for a cup of tea. Kind Regards to all, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

TO CONTINUE WHERE I LEFT OFF. NOW, WHERE WERE WE ??

2009-11-03T04:52:00.000-08:00

Ah yes, I remember. (while I think of it. Yesterday, I must have spent some ten or twenty minutes trying to increase the font size. Complete waste of time. Today, no problem it worked first time. Why???)

Strange isn't it, how things work out. I had chosen page Four of yesterdays Daily Express and an article by Padraic Flanagan entitled, "Millions face a £540 hike in bills thanks to meddling eurocrats". Well, I don't know, but take the case of wind turbines. A total fraud. Each turbine will cost the Taxpayer, £600,000. Then the on shore ones will cost another £20,000 for every year in ground rent, then the cost of building the access for installation and maintenance. worked it out yet? Every Ten Turbines cost you Taxpayers £6 Million. And these "People" in Westminster are talking in thousands of Turbines. Oh! By the way they might work, but I can guarantee over their complete lifetime, they will only ever work for about 25% of the time. And to cap it all, you are going to need either or both, Coal Fired generation and N-Power generation. It is a total fraud intended solely to extract more money from the punters.-: http://www.express.co.uk/
I would suggest you go to the Express and have a look. Another reason is the comments from Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers Alliance. He is rather more correct by saying, " The EU's Emissions Trading Scheme is a stealth Tax, that imposes large costs on ordinary consumers." the URL-: http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/

Then go merrily along to page 18, and Donna Bowater's article, "£20 Million for Foreign Children. The poor Lady has only got part of the story. And that is only the short end. She didn't get around to all the countries of North Africa, then India and Pakistan, then on to the Philippines and all places East. Only last year, I believe it was, there was a report of the £90 Billion paid out in benefits of one sort or other, to many countries in all parts of the world. (This is one of the main reasons for you poor bloody Taxpayers to take control of the entire Public Service Finances and the funding of such. You do not have to pay any money in direct Taxation to Westminster.)

But not to worry, the whole Global economy is at it. Cheating the punters and the poor bloody Taxpayer, again. Not just my opinion, have a look at this, from a very prestigious Research Investment and Advisory Group. This link is just one paper, but go to the Website as well.
-:http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/the-great-hoax-of-2009-2010-36244
Enough for now, I'll be back later to add to this.
Kind Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

HOLD ON TO YOUR HOLLYHOCKS FOLKS, CAMERON HAS AGAIN RENEGUED ON HIS PROMISE OF A REFERENDUM

2009-11-02T09:52:00.000-08:00

Still the silly tomtit expects people to vote for a Con', or should that be, another Con' party?
Me? There are two or three alternatives, UKIP., BNP., or just don't bother to vote. I'll see how things look at the time. But one thing is for sure, the LibLabContrick won't get a look in.
NEXT. Have you seen the daily Express today? If so, any comments on Leo McKinstry's article on page 12 ? For those who don't read the Express, and after all, it is an acquired tast, especially if you are used to reading the Telegraph, Guardian, Daily Mail or the even lower orders of the print media. Still where were we?
The title of Leo Mckinstry's article is-: "Our vain socialist elite is oblivious to suffering at home". And then it goes on -: "The more rapidly our nation declines the more vain our ruling elite becomes. During the last twelve years, Labour has presided over the longest recession in history, an unprecedented rise in violent crime, the destruction of our national identity, two unnecessary wars, a breakdown in social cohesion, a collapse in educational standards and the degradation of our enviroment.
Yet the socialist politicians responsible are hitting new heights of self-importance. Far from showing contrition they become increasingly extravagant in their rhetoric and grandiose in their scheming. They cannot deal with benefit fiddlers or teenage yobs but they have an array of utopian plans for combating climate change, world povety and international terrorism.
Gordon Brown is a classic example of this pattern. He has proved one of the worst prime ministers in history, a bullying, neurotic incompetent who has ruined the public finances. Yet he arrogantly struts from one summit to another, urging us to cheer him on a global mission.
Only last month, in a typically vainglorious move, he described the countdown to the forthcoming Copenhagen summit on climate change as "50 days to save the planet". Such absurd language is indicative of the mindset of the Left-wing politician, aiming to portray the summit's participants as heroic crusaders battling to rescue Earth.
Depressingly much of the media takes this bombast seriously. The Danish gabfest is a monument to political conceit. Its only achievement will be to give control freaks more power over our lives. Brown's deadline for planetary salvation is completely arbitrary, as if we are all doomed if politicians do not reach a deal by a fixed date.
As they preen and posture on the global stage the Labour Cabinet is all too reminiscent of the old Soviet politburo, which constantly trumpeted its ability toto create utopia at some distant point in the future, even though Russia was engulfed by oppression, economic crisis and bureaucratic paralysis. Like the Soviet bosses Labour ministers are full of talk about five year plans and radical social engineering projects, summed up in Harriot Harman's sinister phrase about creating "a new social order". In the present, however, they cannot even deliver a functioning postal service, clean hospitals, decent rail network, or a justice system that protects the vulnerable.
But it is precisely because our politicians are so inept that they love to indulge in delusions of grandeur. International summitry is a form of psychological displacement activity. Pontificating at conferences gives them a chance to escape the realities of failure.
Surrounded by fawning assistants, whisked between luxurious hotels, they dream they are important people rather than despised mediocrities. That is also why they adore trans-national organisations such as the UN, G20 and EU. Indeed the European Union, with its byzantine structure and cocoon of privilege, is the perfect arena for narcissists. Last week at the Brussels summit Brown and his Foreign Secretary David Miliband boasted of getting the EU. to agree to set up a new fund to help the developing world fight climate change.
But it is ridiculous to present this as a British triumph. The EU has always been eager to waste public money on politically correct causes. In this case the fund will swallow between £20Billion and £44Billion, money that could be better spent at home, especially amid warnings of cuts in public services because the national finances are in a mess.
Vanity is the true impulse behind the drive for EU intergration. The creation of a United States of Europe is nothing to do with meeting public needs. It is all about making EU leaders and bureaucrats feel big on the diplomatic circuit. EU fanatics always speak of the need to "challenge China" as a global superpower. Personally, I would rather have my bins emptied properly and my council tax bill reduced.
In a telling comment last week, Miliband said Tony Blair should be the first EU president because Europe needed a figure who "could stop the traffic" in the worlds capitals.
Blair is egotistical enough already. A politician who truly cared about his country would be more interested in keeping the traffic moving than halting it. It's this sort of thinking that can be seen throughout our public life.
The police talk about the fight against "organised" crime but it is the disorganised crime that really blights our lives. Instead of puffing themselves up as worriors against a global underworld network they should put more officers on patrol to tackle muggers and drug peddlers.
Similary Labour keeps telling us that blood-soaked war in Afghanistan is vital for the struggle against Islamic terrorism at home. Yet by destroying effective boarder controls it allows thousands of radical Muslims, many of them illegal immigrants, to settle here.
Instead of sacrificing brave troops in the Afgan desert ministers should bring in a programme of deporting illegals. It is equally ridiculas to spend £8Billion a year on overseas aid, much of which props up corrupt regimes, when the neglect of the elderly is rife at home.
In a democracy the government should deal with the needs of its own people. But public service is a meaningless concept to our current bunch of grasping egomanics.

I intend to add my own postscript to this most impressive diagnosis by Leo McKinstry.
But it will have to wait until the morning. There is also material on Pages, 4 and 18, all of it to do with the absolute wastage of Taxpayers money.

The 1st. of November 2009. The end of the Old World and the Beginning of the New.

2009-11-01T06:10:00.000-08:00

I have spent all morning getting to this point. I've got a Brother printer and try as I might, I cannot increase the print size. the only answer is to add the URL -: http://www.gopetition.com/online/16745.html      Then there is another link, but this one is a bit of a killer. Ready, URL -: http://www.flexmail.be/r/3838156a4013333539353032313d2135393332
It is a website named Europe's World, I think the 27 Countries each had a hand in choosing the numbers, there are 38 of them.
                  £££££££$$$$$$$$$$$$$££££££££££££££$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$£££££££££££££

                                           AND NOW FOR THE FUTURES OUTLINE

Just about the first reports out of yesterdays meeting in Brussels was the DEMAND for more money from the poor bloody Taxpayers. What a bunch of absolute Crap that we now have roosting in the Offices of Government and the Legislative Councils of the once Great Nations of Europe. And all they can think about is how they can get more of the money out of the pockets of the Working Taxpayer.
And guess what, even America has now joined the race for the scrapheap. Rather, America's         Politics of the left, have joined in and the poor old Taxpayers now being ripped off at a magnificent
rate. Like the poor old Brits, who are paying out "scrapage" money to help the sale of Auto's, that money, again Taxpayers money is being given away to foreign Manufactures. But you must always remember, America has an Ace in the hole. In fact, the way the Markets are moving, they probable have a pair of Aces.
Please forgive me, I'm wondering off course. The reason for that is the overwhelming and prodigious
amount of debt that now exists in the world when only fifteen years ago, or so it seems a house, the biggest item you will ever purchase, cost about £40,000, £50,000 or not much more than that. I remember reading that in Ireland, the same quality of property at the same time, was costing the equivalent of £500,000. That was when you knew it was falling apart. There was no going back for recovery.
That was yesterday, now we have only Government spending and printing more money with
which to make good the awful damage this Government in London, has done to this Country. That is why I call upon all working Taxpayers in Britain, and all those others in the European Union proper, to abandon their Elected Politicians and avoid paying any direct Taxation. Start your own system based on your Towns and your villages. I don't know about the Continent, but here in Britain, there is absolutely nothing to stop you building your own alternative system. Try It. What more have you got to lose??         Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"
                            *************************************************************
That other URL -: http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/      The report I refer to on that site is dated,
Saturday, October 31, 2009. The Title is - The Most Undervalued Currency in the World.
                                                                            by   Bryan Rich

Remember, just because you elect some of these people, does not mean they OWN you. It is your money and it is your world.

Against the nomination of Tony Blair as "President of the European Union"

2009-10-10T07:01:00.000-07:00

Against the nomination of Tony Blair as "President of the European Union"

Hour After Hour, Day after Day, the Waffle goes on. But Not One Word is Believable.

2009-10-06T05:16:00.000-07:00

Day two of the third waffle week of this years LibLabContrick's, and their promises of how they intend to put right, all that bloody nonsense the Gay Gordon has left for you poor bloody Taxpayers to pay back. Let me assure you, there isn't one person living in this Country today, who will live long enough to see an end of it.
Now have a look at todays Daily Express. http://www.express.co.uk/ On page seven, there is a story of migrants in Calais being flown home to Afghanistan with both France and Britain paying the costs. On the other hand, the Conservative Conference is talking about changes to the Welfare payments. As well as other benefit payments. Then look again at the size of the Benefit Budget, some £193 Billion. This is why there isn't any money to build Prisons, Properly Equip the Armed Forces. Why we must cut our FLEET of Nuclear Submarines, that is Deep Six, just one of them and make do with just a fleet of THREE Subs. What a bloody nonsense. (I have to keep using that expression, my disgust and loathing at the total stupidity of Westminster and most of its members makes me want to use stronger language that would be offensive.)
So !!!! My little old victims of the Westminster Wireworms, that serious pest of the Westminster underground, there is only one remedy for this infestation of worms, remove the food sourse. That is to say, take away the Taxation that sustains these pests and then we can control them. Before I forget, this morning I heard on the TV., that we, the British Government that is, are paying the United Nations some £20 or Thirty Billion a year. From the way they keep issuing orders in our direction, that is a total waste of Taxpayers money, it should be stopped at once.
Enough for now, Regards, ATFlynn, Norfolk's Mutineer"

THE GOING NOWHERE DOING NOTHING WEBSITE.

2009-10-06T03:24:00.000-07:00

Why is it that every time I increase the font size, as soon as I start to type, it reverts to size; SMALL. Or bloody small. I'm an old man, and I need a bigger font size so that I can see my mistakes. You silly buggers.
=========================================
I have wasted far too much time buggering about with this, I'll post my comment on another website. This is just a total loss.

TO CONTINUE WHERE I LEFT OFF. IT WAS MY MISTAKE.

2009-09-26T03:55:00.000-07:00

I must apologise for this, I'm having a bad time just now. Now, the point where we left off; Only this morning, the BBC. announced that the Gordon Brown Gov' was going to introduce a car parking Tax on all suppermarket shoppers at a stroke. Each Supper Market, would be charged some £600 a year, for every parking space, this cost, would be added to the BILL as you pay for your shopping when you leave. Don't go, there's more. Every time you pay any money into your Pension Account, it looks almost Good. Bloody nonsense. The Pensions providers and the Gov'. are ripping you off for the minimum of some 40/45 % At the end of the day , you might as wel have put your money o0n the favourite at Epsom, on Darby Day. Much more fun.

NOW THEN, Enough of this, please, tell me what is the answer to the total nonsense that drips from the rear end of Westminster???? All of those Members of Parliament, 464, or some such figure. I don't know. But I do declare that I know what to do to Establish Democracy in this Country, again. SOVEREIGNTY is our first objective, once reclaimed, it must never leave a man standing while others oppose the WILL OF THE PEOPLE. Believe me my friends, this is your bloody money, they are stealing it from you. IT WAS EVER THUS..

THE FUTURE. WHAT BLOODY FUTURE. THAT BUNCH OF NUTTERS HAVE JUST GONE BACK TO THE DARK AGES.

2009-09-26T03:25:00.000-07:00

Sorry about this, but I am well adrift with this update. I did start to explain the ins and outs of the Globalisation on my Facebook site, but it became sidetracted.
The gist of it was the fact that the population of the world has to earn enough money to afford to buy the goods that they produce. That puts the developed world in a position of "Paymaster". Your Taxes, as paid on a weekly or monthly basis are then thrown into the pot and ladeled out to all and sundry that turn up. Only those that stay at home are paid as well.
However, it has come to the notice of some of the money men and others, (Opposition Politicians.) that Taxpayers money is being misused. But then, just this morning

WHO'S IN CONTROL OF THE CLATTERING TRAIN ?

2009-09-08T08:25:00.000-07:00

Tuesday, September's Parish Council meeting this evening. It has been one of those days. The Silly Old Meadow Lady has got a cob on, she isnt the most talkative of Meadow Ladies at the best of time, but today has been ******, shall we just say, one to forget.
Thursday, I'll be at court for the hearing of Barbara Lockwood's case. I did leave a comment on one of the Guardian articles about allowing the Lockerbie bomber Megrahi go, so that there was at least one cell empty in Norwich Prison just in case.
It has just turned a quater to Five in the afternoon, and the wife has the evening meal on the table so I had better go and eat before it is given to the dog. I'll see if I can get back to this later. There is so much change on the financial sector, you can't take your eye off of it for more than an hour at the most.
Back as soon as possible. Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer" http://www.atflynn.co.uk/

YESTEDAY IS ONCE AGAIN, ALMOST TOMORROW

2009-09-05T14:40:00.000-07:00

I have now spent at least two or three days working on an arguement against Taxation. It is so bloody obvious that the next Gov', can only survive by massive cuts in spending. And the write down of public service spending and future pension s. Or the posible mass unemployment that looks to be Westminsters answer.
Ask yourself, "Why, oh! Why, is our future now so worthless" ???
The answer is just a simple, "The politicians, as ever, wanted it thus. (Arguements were there none.) You want contact URL's ? You can have them.
When you look at the World all over, Nowhere is there any comeback against the order of the State that, Banks and other financial organisations should come under the absolute control of Politics and Politicians. Now that should make you sleep sound in bed at night. Shouldn't it ???
Like me, you should be secure in your support of Westminster. But never forget, there are times to support an Opt -out, big time. And in my opinion, now is your last chance to kick this lot of garbage, Westminster garbage, into the arms of every MP.. who voted for it. Then give the lot of them a good kicking when they fail. As they will. Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's mutineer"

Additional Information .

2009-09-01T05:27:00.000-07:00

I did add a link to another website that is one of the best I have seen when it comes to financial information. It is-: http:// www.moneyandmarkets.com then look out for : The Weiss Global Forum.

TODAYS POLITICS DO NOT OFFER ANY FUTURE FOR EUROPE OR AMERICA

2009-09-01T03:31:00.000-07:00

I'm afraid that Europe or even America has very little to offer in the way of a settled or prosperous future. Unless the entire spending programme of the American and European Governments are abandoned, Business, Industry and Manufacturing will not have the capital to risk and alongside of that the overheads and Taxation, costs prevent any chance of exports or of expanding their market share. Meaning that there is no profit in employing a workforce that is priced out of the market even before they open the doors or turn on the light at the beginning of the day.

The Western World has but one chance. And that is to remove the outrageous cost of their Governments and their administration. Then, with just the Banks and the Business and Industry Directors to manage them, they will be able to compete for profit and reward with just about anyone in the world. Europe and the Western World could be back in Business tomorrow.

I have spent the last few days posting comments on the Guardian, Telegraph and my favourite, The Daily Express. But looking at the product, I believe the print media, newspapers, about half of them are for the "chop". And do you know what ? The sooner the better. The next thing to bring to heel, will be the BBC.

Thats about it then. Except for the fact, that if any of you want to have a go at setting up an alternative system of Direct Taxation on a County Council basis, get in touch and I'll see about the financial support that is needed. You will find a contact point on the profile page.

Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer".

SOWING THE SEED OF TAXPAYERS INDEPENDENCE

2009-08-14T07:19:00.000-07:00

I have just completed the second 'phone call that has enlisted the third person to our initial Bank meeting. This is to explain our objective and how it is intended to construct an alternative system of Local Taxation that over-rides any attempt by Westminster to impose any type of Direct Taxation.

I would go as far as to suggest, that what is proposed, is a system of Public Service Funding that is usable across the whole of the European Union and some other parts of the world.

I must now put together the outline of the agenda for our first meeting and then post it here. This is going to be a system that the Taxpayers control, it is only right and proper that they know all about it.

Over the weekend, I'll post the agenda and any comments you Taxpayers want to make, you can. And as I have said, we will begin with just three of us.
I'm hoping to get some feedback from this, given time. But come Monday I will need to start recruiting Businesses and Companies to see if we can enlist them.
Until then, I will need to get quite a lot done, so, Regards, ATFlynn,
"Norfolk's Mutineer"

THE POLITICAL CHANGE ACCORDING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT.

2009-08-01T06:54:00.000-07:00

Over the last few weeks, June and July, I've waited for the bank fraud to break. It's there. Just waiting for the word GO. As it is still quiet, I must concede I could be wrong. But somehow, a feeling in my water tells me a shooting match is on the cards.
Today is the 1st. of August, what next in these last 22 Saturdays of the year. At any moment now, part of the global Economy is about to collapse. And when it does, you the silly bloody Taxpayers are in the chair to pick up the pieces.
Well, let me tell you ONE more time, that money is yours. It does not belong to a bunch of useless crap at Westminster, you have every right to abandon Westminster and begin an alternative system of Taxation, that you, yes, you, the poor bloody Taxpayer, is in control of.
As the Law stands, only Westminster is legally allowed to impose Taxation upon the working population of this Country. But if you look again at the detail, you will find that you, the working Taxpayers are in a position to object to that system and impose your own system of Taxation on a County by County basis. This approach to the legal obligation of Public Service Financing, has only now been explored owing to the abuse and misuse of the excessive Taxation upon the working Population.

2009-07-29T04:14:00.000-07:00

What now you arseholes!!!! I have taken time to explore this piece and that piece and examine the protruding bits and pieces that are the future of our economy plus the number of people that are employed on a regular basis, but still, this Political circus continues. How many bloody times must you people be told, it is not Legally necessary for you Taxpayers to continue to pay any demands from Westminster for the payment of Taxation. Change the way you work and are paid, alter the way you recieve your income and more or less tell this, or any other bunch of bastards, "I'm not paying any more Taxation to you lot of Fraudsters."

There is absolutely no reason for you to pay them another penny in Taxation. Set up your own system of Taxation on a County by County basis, and pay for all of your Public Service functions on a Local basis. It isn't bloody Rocket Science.

Now, get yourself organised, and show these Politicians just how it should be done.

Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

have you Bumholes lost your bottle

2009-06-27T12:21:00.000-07:00

How many of you silly buggers read the Daily Express every day ? I know, there are a number of days the paper annoys me as well. But what is the alternative ?
Sorry my friends, but earlier this afternoon, about 1400hrs. I put together the records of my arguement about the very sad state of our Politics today. And now at 2030 eight o'clock in the evening, the dog is sleeping on the pile of Exprexx news papers and I'm left with a wife sleeping as though there is no tomorrow, when it comes to the washing up, I'll remind her. She hasn't done it.

Sorry my friends, but I must call it a day; I did start at about 0300hrs this morning. And now to crown the whole bloody event, the wife is awake and in full flow. I'm off to bed.
Good Night my Friends, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

FROM THE BEGINNING; By Quentin Willson. The Spectator

2009-06-27T09:35:00.000-07:00

And so a window opens, and as awakening from a dream, these words echo from the walls. These words, amongst others, disturb my thoughts of tomorow-: Awake for morning in the Bowl of night , has flung the stone that puts the stars to flight. Or even this. A Loaf of Bread, a Jug of wine, and you beside me in the wildernes, and wilderness is Paradice anow. Or even this-::::, The moving finger writes, and having writ moves on, nor all thy piety nor whit shall lure it back to cancell half a line, nor all thy tears wash out one word of it. Such beauty in so little effort. Such love for mankind in so few moments. Such simple things that make our world the viable and only universe we will ever know.
Now take time to examine the utter nonsense that an awful lot of Politics and Governments, insist you, you the poor bloody Taxpayer, are responsible for and must pay for, then do as I suggest, and abandon all central Government demands for the payment of Direct Taxation.
Have a look at this for an alternative:- The following is from the DAIRY of Quentin Willson, as published in the Spectator, 27th June 2009.
" It used to really bother me. Sitting in what I thought was the presence of greatness, I'd leave hugely under-whelmed. Top people in the top jobs who seemed to be rubbish. I even used to tell myself off. Intellectuall snobbery, I self- scolded, is a smugcharacter flaw. But the sneaking suspicion that lots of important people were actually really useless wouldn't go away. I internalised my doubts until they squelched. For years I listened patiently to their patent nonsense. Heads of car companies, television commissioners,private sector chief executives, council bosses and entire government departments all seemed to speak in a language strangely detached from meaning. So many acronyms and abbreviations, so many clumsy invented words, so much tosh and flannel signifying nothing. Why did they all talk such blue-sky tripe?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is but the first part of the entire page of the SPECTATOR Magazine. And worth every penny. That is if you can stand some of the bits and pieces. Still, I've just sent off another cheque for another year. Must be bloody daft, or something.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whatever next. It has taken me fifteen minutes to set this colour. What chance when it comes to setting the fuse for man kind ????
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And now the end is near, and now we face the final curtain,
My friend I say it clear I state my case of which I'm certain,
I've spent a life of this I've traveled each and every highway,
But more much more than this, I did it my way.

And now, and now again;;; All I want to do is show you, you the silly Bloody Taxpayers, how simple it is for you:::, you, yes you the little people, the "Ordinary People", as Blair the Bastard, used to call you. But what next ???? First, sit down with a cup of tea, or even a large glass of Whisky or even Whiskey, and think of your tomorrows. Yesterdays are long gone. Tomorrow is all that counts.

It must be my age, I was born on the 19th January 1935. I feel as if I'm 90, it must be the whisky. It's a bit of a bugger when you end up being older than the whisky you are drinking. There aint much future in that!!!
Still, I did have thoughts of much to say of this Sojourn amongst the be-wildered and lost tribes of Great Britain and Europe. There is only one thing you need to know;
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION ARE A LOAD OF
UNMITIGATED FRAUDULENT BASTARDS.
THAT IS MY OPINION

Once Upon A Time We Had a Gov' at Westminster.But now our Government

2009-06-14T05:38:00.000-07:00

But now our Government resides in Brussels and is a bunch of unelected Commissioners.
Mandelson and Chris Patton were both commissioners, and with their monster pensions, from Brussels, Westminster, HoC., and the HoL., then again from Oxford University that man must be picking up some £5.000 a week.
I have been watching the BBC, "The Politics Show." Is it just me? or are all these people walking backwards to the very edge of a cliff? Think about these things for a while and see what answers you come up with.
FIRST: Back in the middle of the 1990s, there was 500.000, family farms in the UK. Today there isn't even 100.000. And then here in Norfolk, Suffolk and Part of Essex, there was at one time, 2000. Dairy Farms. Today there arn't even 200.
I can't tell you the figures, I've given up because whenever I have mentioned this in comments posted to on-line 'Papers, much of the time I get a reject. Except for the Express.
This, I believe is going to be one of the biggest disasters in years.
We have closed many of our Coal Fired Power Stations and now our Nuclear Generaters are on the way out. From where I'm sitting, I can't see enought time left to build any replacements. Which means we will have to rely on French Nuclear Power across the Channel. Or buy lots of candles.
As with the food, electricity is no longer in our control. Brussels has really got us by the BALLS this time. But then, it was always the plan by Westminster.
Yesterday I was talking with Barbara Lockwood, a pensioner from Hellesdon just north of Norwich. She is due to go to court again soon, to object about the increase in council Tax. In the last ten years or so, the Tax has increased by 130% but the pensions increase has been just 30%. The Old lady is refusing to pay the increase. And she is quite prepared to go to jail to make her point. Then again, they let Murders out to kill again. That is the Stupidity of our Politics.
I have been saying for some years now, that people just leaving school or colledge or Uni', should not pay any Taxation until they are earning at least £500. a week. That is what it costs these days these days to live. Then of course, people who are retired, and on a pension, would get the same treatment. But to get there, the welfare State would need a complete over-haul. And as with Westminster, I wouldn't let any Politicions within a mile of the place while it is being worked on, except for Frank Field. Thats the only man who knows what is needed.
Enough for now, but remember, this is your Country, the Politicians and the Civil Service do NOT have ANY power, only what you allow them. Any time you want to change
the Status Quo just let me know. It is only a simple manoeuvre.
Kind Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer."

Why My Last Comment Is so Badly Put Together.

2009-06-11T08:19:00.000-07:00

I did start early enough, but I got caught by a thunder storm and the PC was knocked out twice. Once I got it up and running again, I hurried the comment.
I wanted to have a little go at the Print Media. Until now, the Guardian has been as good as gold to me. And I have posted comments about Taxation on their website many times. I have also mentioned the fact that, even with their objection to Tax Avoidance, the fact that the Guardian also takes very large strides to avoid Taxation as do others, like Sir Philip Green, only he avoids Billions of £Pounds Sterling. Me ?? I have absolutely no objection to that at all. Every one should take steps to avoid paying any money to Westminster or any other Gov' Office.
Any way, because of the Guardians rejection, I have now logged out and shall not bother with them again. This is where the threat to the existence of the Press begins. Not that long ago, I used to buy the Telegraph, seven day a week. Then the Daily Mail. Without abusing the Editor, I could within reason telephone and talk to
Mr Dacre. The man was always a Gentleman.
Then there was the Guardian, probably three days a week. And of course, the Daily Express, seven days a week. But all of that has changed. I don't remember the date, but at one time my Paper bill was £12.50 each week. Today it is only just over the £2.00 a week. The Telegraph was the first to go. How many of you now remember that Quentin Letts use to work for the Telegraph ? Again, I think it could be about half the Daily Papers that will go to the wall. And considering their Editorial Policy, they deserve to.
Like the Accountants, and Auditors, only E&Y took the trouble to examine my proposals regarding Taxation Policy. The other three were making too much money with consultancy and other services in the many different Gov' Departments. You Little People, or as Blair was fond of calling you, "Ordinary People", have almost no chance with that lot at Westminster about to re-write the rules and then change the way MPs are elected. But let me tell you this, today, with all this technology, you can run rings round any Politician who steps out of line. You can dictate to Westminster and Parliament what you are prepared to do. What you are prepared to pay in the way of Taxation. And you will have the choise of saying how many MPs you are prepared to pay for and how much you are going to pay them. This is YOUR COUNTRY and this is youe bloody money. Legally, the only Taxation that is enforceable, is the Local County Taxation in the area of your Home.
OH!! and by the way, this goes for America as well as the Poor Old Taxpayer across the whole of the European Union.
Now,I would suggest that these 'Papers, get their smelly stuff together and start thinking about the future. Because it's time for the People to take control.
Regards To All, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

WHO IS RUNNING THE GUARDIAN ? POLLY TOYNBEE

2009-06-11T03:39:00.000-07:00

Yesterday,the Guardian newspaper, printed an article by Hugh Goodacre entitled, "The Globalisation Illusion". I thought it was very good and left a comment to say "thank you". I also left one or two other comments that supported the article, including a speach made in the House of Lords in 1987 or so, and a link to find the report plus a copy of the speach should anyone wish to read it. Well, the Guardian would not publish my comment.
So this morning I logged into the Daily Express and left a comment there. I explained my concern is the fact that a number of News Papers are worried about the fall off in advertising revenue and have said as much. But still the 'papers pretend that they are National Daily 'Papers, when in fact they are nothing more than the Governments propaganda sheets. And none so much as the Guardian. What with all of that Ad. money. Still, never mind, it's only Taxpayers money!
Do you know, I would be most greatful, if one or two of these daily rags, would just take time to look at their archives. In the early 1990s, there used to many stories about Rivers and agricultural policy. these comments, printed in the 'Papers, talked of the change in River maintenance especially dredging. Here in Norfolk, out through Redgrave Fen towards Cambridgeshire, the river bed was dredged to a normal winter level, only for the maintenance crew to be ordered to refill the bed with ballast to leave only a shallow level of water. You can imagine what happened. For the first time ever recorded, that part of Cambridgeshire was flooded. It isn't because we are having more rain to that extent, it's because everything these Politicians touch turns to dross. Well thats one word for it.
It has just been announced that the end of the recession has been sighted, and yet no one has got even a glimps of the hyper inflation that is about. This bunch of **** at Westminster, that calls itself a Government, has allowed, encouraged even begged, all these immigrants and asylum seekers here. Some Twelve Million and more. That means, since 1997, our economy has had to expand by at least One Fifth. That amounts to Twenty percent inflation over the last twelve years. Marvelous how the Gay Gordon managed to keep the lid on the truth and we all believed inflation was only 2% or 3% all this time. By the way, figures will be produced about this in the next two or three weeks, where-as inflation is on the point of 10%, we will be told that it is below four percent.

Now, as I have said many times since I first wrote to Barclays Bank in 1996, about Taxation, if you want to change the system, let me know. County by County, you can simply abandon Westminster and start again, with a system of Public Service Funding imposed by the Taxpayer and administered by the Parish, Town, District and County Council's. MPs should be reduced to a maximum of Four to each English County.
Scotland, Wales and N/Ireland, would need to join the system, or go their own way.
Until we recover our Sovereignty, Westminster, Whitehall and all of our Elected Members of Parliament, are just toothless pieces of Crap.
Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

UKIP, and the EUROPEAN ELECTION.

2009-06-01T08:22:00.000-07:00

I was not going to do this, but after listening to the BBC. castigating UKIP on the Daily Politics programme, I've changed my mind.
Me, I am totally against the European Union. Westminster had no right whatsoever giving away our Sovereignty to that bunch of crap at Brussels. And yes, that does include those British members who think that the euro and all things Continental amount to a Wet Dream. People like Mandelson, Chris Pattern, Lord Brittan and some of the other Bumholes who can't get enough of that bunch of crappy Politicians across the water. Don't get me wrong, I spent much time in Germany, France, I used to work for Comex, then Spain Portugal Italy, where I worked for a shipping Co. Oh! yes, must not forget one of my all time favourites, Holland. Nothing wrong with any of them except their Politicians.They used to be so much worse than anthing we produced. But now, I understand they, the Europen Politicians, come over here to learn the tricks Westminster and Whitehall have devised. Enough of this waffle, down to the nitty gritty.
I take it that most of you who intend to vote on Thursday, will Vote for UKIP or the BNP. there is no other choise. The Lib-Lab-Con-Trick has shot its bolt. Cameron says he will allow a referndum, then he says he won't. I'm convinced he is not to be trusted. I wouldn't vote for him or the Party, as long as he leads it. I shall vote UKIP. or BNP., and in the local Election, I will vote for my usual rep', Bev Spratt
he has served us well in South Norfolk, and if it wasn't for Westminster and the Bloody Treasury, (and of course the Chancellor) Norfolk would, or at least might get the funding that it should be entitled to, all things being equal. Time to get some tea. I'll see how things go, and I'll get back to this tomorrow or later.
Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

TIME FOR THE TAXPAYERS TO TAKEOVER WESTMINSTER.

2009-06-01T02:56:00.000-07:00

I have been reading the Daily Express and in particular, Leo McKinstry, "Our political class is the problem, not the solution." Sub-titled, "It's like the Mafia taking charge of law and order".
How right he is. Only on Saturday, when I was looking for comments to use for this chapter in my appeal to the common-sense of the British Taxpayer, did the words cesspit, stench and pollution come to mind, along with others. But then, what we are seeing and reading about is only part of the criminal activities of Westminster and Whitehall. Who now remembers Quinetiq ? Or the sale of the Inland Revenue buildings ? Or the fact that at least two civil servants became Millionaires overnight by this activity ?
Don't take my word for it, go to-: http://www.express.co.uk and read todays 'paper. Another thing, go to my profile and link to- Money Money Money you will find I was saying then, in 2005/6
exactly what Im saying now. Have a look at todays editorial, the changes made in 2001 and 2002, regarding gov' Pensions. And remember who told Wanker Brown it would not hurt the Private Pension Industry if he raided the Investment returns and took some £5. Billion a year out of the Private Pensions Funds. Remember, it was "Redadair" now Lord Turner.That was after he left the CBI. Blair and Brown found a hole for him, as they did, or at least Brown did, find a hole for Digby, now Lord Jones. I offten wonder where the money comes from to run the CBI. the IOD.(The Taxpayers?) When I spoke to Ruth Lee, by 'phone I must add, she said, "we are winning the argument with Gordon Brown. Taxation is being reduced and Red Tape is being rolled back". That was when she had the top job at the IOD. They still hasn't recovered from her tenure.
The next problem to hit the man, Brown, is the fact GM (Motors) will be taken under German control. They are the ones to put up a very substantial amount of money to protect their jobs. The rest of it, GM Europe, will migrate East to that part of Europe with much lower costs. I would think that overall, it will mean about another million people out of work and on the dole. Still why worry, all or at least most of these politicians will be gone next year if not before. Imagine, they are spending a little more than £2Billion Each Day. £14 and more Billion Each Week. I will admit,
£2Billion a week goes to Brussels. £150something Billions is Benefit's money.
£100Billion is to pay for the NHS. and the multi-Billionaires it has spawned.

If you, any of you, think that allowing them to change the system or re-write the rules will make one iota of difference, think again. Within a week or two they will be back to their old tricks. THE ONLY ANSWER IS TO TAKE THE MONEY AWAY FROM THEM.
Start another system that is controlled by the Taxpayers. Use the Parish, Town and District Council with the County Council in overall control of Administration.
Enough for now, time to watch the Daily Politics Programme.
Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

Another day Another Dollar, and all of it Taxpayers Money

2009-05-30T05:20:00.000-07:00

While I do not intend to cast aspertions upon the American Economy, what with GM going bankrupt and much more to come here in Europe, it does seem to me that only the poor old Taxpayer can now save civilisation from total collapse.
Well, the bumholes we elected here in the UK. have done their best, I think the intention was to stich the UK. into the European Union to such an extent that we could never regain our Sovereignty.
What I can't understand is the benefit to the Taxpayers of the whole of Europe, if we allow this nonsense to endure or continue to exist. Already, this bunch of EU. Bumholes have, or seem to have, allowed some 53 Million Islamic immigrants and asylum seekers to settle across Europe. And we are now witnessing the turning point where the patience of the indigenous population is overwhelmed purely by the weight of numbers. Fifty Three Million and rising.
Many years ago now, or so it seems, Terry Wogan, on the BBC. Radio, used to joke about "Gatport Airwick", and the fact that it had its own system of immigration policy. It sold entry visa's to whoever could pay for them. And this was in the 1970s
Yes, he made jokes about it on the radio, almost every morning. But the joking stopped once one of the Immigration Officers was Jailed for Fraud. I do know it was one. But it might have been more than that. Still on a Par with the HoC and the rest of the CRAP at Westminster and Whitehall. Oh. By the way, please go to my Profile and link to the, Money Money Money title. It is my posts from 2006.
Kind Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

WHAT NEXT FOR THE LIB-LAB-CON TRICK.

2009-05-26T11:31:00.000-07:00

What next for the print media also. For some time I have posted comments on the Daily Telegraph, but for some time now they have allowed me to post on the MyTelegraph, but comments place on articles or editorial, have just been deleted. So I gave them a hand and remove a lot more. Sod 'em. And then the Daily Mail starts the same trick. I have just logged out of that rag as well. I'm still using the Daily Express and the Guardian. By the way the Mail did have one last story link I would advise you to visit,-: http://synonblog.dailymail.co.uk
It gives an example of just how corrupting the European Union can be.
Westminster has now shot its bolt. Since it abandoned my, well yours and mine, plus all the other English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh mans Sovereignty, there dosen't seem to be anything to hold the Country together.
I notice that today Barack Obama or rather the Fed' and others are now saying that the idea of a bail-out has not worked. It would seem that this idea of throwing good money after bad has failed. I don't know who first suggested it, but Gordon Brown in Westminster has claimed the credit for it, so what now for McBrown the Clown ? David Cameron is pontificating about changes to Westminster and this and that, but really has no idea what he is talking about.
The Country is not that far from total Bankruptcy and he talks as if the cricket match has been cancelled. I don't know, it seems that billions of £Pounds Sterling has been given to the Banks, but still they are foreclosing on peoples mortgages. And most of these Banking people were in place when this all started.
There is only one answer left now. And that is for the people, the Taxpayers, to take control of the system, and that includes the Welfare State. As I have been suggesting for some years now, we just cannot afford all these freeloaders. And as the Express pointed out last week, the British Taxpayer is paying £1.million a time to send aircraft into France to repatriate the immigrants and asylum seekers from there. The home grown ones, it seems, we are keeping. Well, to pay for them, we had better use the money that would normally be used for the payment of Westminster and Whithall. I believe that amounts to many £Billions of Pounds. They are the silly buggers who caused the mess. They can bloody well pay for it.
Enough for now, it has been avery long day. Kind Regards to all, ATFlynn, Norfolk's Mutineer"

WHAT NEXT FOR THE POOR OLD TAXPAYRS ??

2009-05-21T02:11:00.000-07:00

I was trying to remember some bits and pieces from a few years ago and I had a look at the remains of an old BBC. Action Network, website. The URL. is,
www.atflynn.co.uk
At the bottom of the Intro' Page in a link, "actionnetwork". There are some post dating from 2005. Have a look,it shows I was predicting todays problems as far back as 1996, I have the letters I wrote to Barclays Bank, and other Banks. And I have their answers. The Title of the 'site is of course, "Sovereignty Politics,Taxation".
All things Bright and Beautiful.
Only yesterday, the Daily Express had an article by Ann Widdecombe, that contained a reference to this, Sovereignty that is. It goes like this-: "We have to choose whether we want to integrate further into the EU. or attempt to hold the line at the already high level of absorption we have reached. We have to decide if Britain should be ruled from Westminster or Brussels and Strasbourg. Either we have some fight left in us or we do not. The Conservatives say we have but Brown has given up defending our Sovereignty. UKIP is not the answer to any of this. It will never form a government but the Conservatives can and must and will then need their people in place in Europe as well." She goes on to say some other odds and ends about Brussels, Westminster, the Labour Party,,,,, just about all of it nonsense. It is the Lib-Lab-Con. trick that has created the whole bloody shooting match. And Westminster it was, gave away our Sovereignty. Only this morning, it is announced that Brussels is to insist that Lloyds Bank, begins a break-up and sell of, of Departments. This will cost the Taxpayer some £Billions of their Tax Money. Laugh, I almost fell off my chair.
If you look at that link I put at the beginning, go to-: Sir Ronald Cohen :
Midas with a Mission; Posted on-: 12th. May 2007.
There is another piece, "The Golden Paradigm" that dates back to 1987, and is a forecast of the financial melt down. I had this posted on the BBC. Website and they claimed people were not able to avoid the Northern Rock and other problems ? Well then, how about the coming storm ? America, Germany, France and the rest of Europe. Hold on to your Hollyhocks, this could get as nasty as anything ever will.
Whatever, the one thing you must always remember, America has massive Oil Reserves. Europe has none. The US$ is the Worlds dominant currency. And one last Ace, America also has, Probably, the largest Gold Reserves in the World.
And Gordon Brown still says, Britian is well placed to weather the storm.
Time I had a comfort break.
Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN. GOOD INTENTIONS DELAYED.

2009-05-20T12:02:00.000-07:00

It was my intention to post a very considered comment here tonight. But needs must. The poor old cat needed my attention for an hour or two and the dog had to be fed. The wife ? She needed to be avoided.
I must admit, I did spend much time watching, listening and reading about this that and the other, but even so, the fact that the world is facing the most horrific melt down in the next few weeks, and apart from Westminsters Politics looking up each others back passage, the world seems almost normal.
Today is wednesday, 20th. May 2009. By the 25/6, I expect to hear of two or three Banks in Europe folding, going under. By the end of May, it is possible that another million or two workers will be layed off, out of work and on the dole. But that is only the beginning.
The next big one; the one that provides about 50% of our Tax income, the City of London, is on the very edge of melt down. It is about to Go Off Shore. Operating here is now so expensive, the LSE. will end up east of the Med', China
even. The Labour Party at Westminster is about to go nuclear and destroy the lot. America is also about to be shafted. Wall St. has played some wrong 'uns.
Enough for now my beauties, time for a large one and then off to bed. Good night and Kind Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

2009-05-06T11:51:00.000-07:00

Whatever next, I have spent most of today adding bits and pieces to this blog, and then just a few moments ago, I lost the lot::: what next for bad language and desparation. Or arguments that are based on a time that is older than half the population of the world ?? If I said, "go back to the 1970s/ 1980s, and looked at the Local Newspaper reports on River maintainance and Fishing Club reports as to the standard of bygone years and the Stupidity of the Newage EU Directives, many of you will understand the problems of Flooding today. This is not "New, not Global Warming or Global anything. It is just another nonsense dreamed up by arsehole Politicians in their attempt to purloin even more money from your pocket.
But please, please, please; let me point out; "You have it within your power, to abandon the system of Taxation as imposed by Westminster. As do the Taxpayers of Europe and also the Taxpayers of the United States of America. Let me say this once more, and only once more, "This is your bloody money, Politicians must adapt their spending policy, or policies, so that they match the money or funding available. They should not construct their Spending Policy, and then adjust their Taxation Policy to pay for their stupidity.
ME. ? I can only say that it is within your remit to tell Westminster what to do, but it is whithin your power to adjust your income so that: YOU, YES YOU, : are in the position to dictate to Westminster, just how much money you are prepared to allow Westminster to remove from your income. As I have said, I am now Seventy Four years old. My last ambition is to die a pain free death. And some mornings I admit that I am not that well pleased to awake at all.!!!!
But then others are in a much more advanced state of "meltdown than I am. (I believe)
Enough of the doubts... Enough of yesterday.... Tomorrow.. The Future.... Abandoning The Past...
But the future ? The future? Where do we go from here.
Please start with the BASIC's. What price food in the near very near, future ??? It would seem that the United Nations is intent to make an entire nonsense of the availability of foodstuffs. Today is the 6th Day of May. In fact, Wednesday 5th. May 2009. What a bloody day,???? Why have we, we,
the little people; those who would allow an honest governemt to govern, been subject to this absolute GLOBAL nonsense ??? WHY why why. I can't for one moment believe that all of you , you arseholes, believe that you have NO VOICE, to broadcast the fact, you have no sympathy with this or that VIEW. YOU ARE ENTITLED TO WHATEVER VIEW YOU SO DESIRE, BUT YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO EXPECT ALL OF THE TAXPAYERS TO FINANCE YOUR DISABILITIES OR ANY OTHER CHOSEN WAY OF LIFE YOU WISH TO ADOPT.
THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE THAT I WISH TO ACKNOWLEDGE, ( back to the almost normal.) Please foregive me, but I did lose almost 24 hrs. of what I believed to be, part of the Banking and the financial nonsense, that I believe will last another generation. (((( There is the possibility that most of this could be negated. That is managed. But what is going on at the moment, is just about an absoloute denial of the facts..
Would it be in order to ask, "how will it be possible to return to a normal Banking arrangement that works in the intrest of the """Customers"""/ and still allow the banks to recover the nonsense that is lost to bad practise. (And all that Debt Debt Debt,)
There is much more of this to say, much more to allow you, yes you the victim of this bloody political nonsense to place before the VOTERS, and I say why should it be expected that you, YOU, the Working Taxpayer, who is the only real victim of the Westminster and also the Washington , WHY THE BLOODY HELL SHOULD YOU, ME OR ANY OTHER SILLY BUGGER, BE EXPECTED TO PAY FOR THIS TOTAL NONSENSE OF A aaa, WORLD ORDER.
Remember, you are paying..
There is more, much more. Back again tomorrow/ Regards ATFlynn, Norfolk's Mutineer*

TIME TO REMOVE THE POLITICIANS HAND FROM YOUR POCKET.

2009-05-05T08:28:00.000-07:00

A long time ago, 1970 to 1976, I was working for Oceaneering International and we were based in Singapore. I remember reading an article in the Herald Tribune about the introduction of Automobile Manufacture in South Korea.
There was this argument about the locals being able to earn enough money to buy the cars produced. This discussion was going on about Africa as well as other parts of the Far East. This was my first introduction the idea of Globalisation. How it must be possible for the Population of the least developed parts of the world, to earn enough money to buy these products that other parts of the world had to produce so that they had the income to be able to be part of the consumer population and then part of the Global economy.
As things stand now, this very day, the world seems to have hit a brick wall. For ten years, here in Britain, the government has expanded the economy and increased the money in circulation to the extent that the entire Banking and Financial Industry is now in grave danger of total meltdown.
In the meantime, Politics has come up with another scam to defraud the Taxpayers of money. This is the Global Warming Fraud. As we are now producing an abundance of just about every domestic gadget imaginable, some sort of occupation is needed to employ as much spare labour as possible. So it is decided we will build thousands of wind terbines and instal Wind Farms. And at some £600,000 a time, these turbines are a good start. Then of course there is the cost of the site to errect them. At £20,000 per annum for the site and then the cost of errection, the whole bloody exercise is just absolute nonsense. And will cost you Taxpayers many Billions of £GB.
I'll come back to this later, if not tonight then Tomorrow.
Until then, Regards, ATFlynn,"Norfolk's Mutineer"

St. George's Day. And the Dragon's are still at the Palace of Westminster.

2009-04-23T02:41:00.000-07:00

I know I have been saying this for some years now but, the alternative to you, the poor old taxpayers taking charge of Taxation, is nothing short of total collapse.
What is the true state of immigration ? How many asylum seekers are living in the Country and how much money is it costing the poor old Taxpayer ? I have just looked at a letter,dated 25th. March 1999. It is from "Future Business Security", Room GW53, Quarry House, Leeds, LS2 7UA. It is a part, or rather, was a part of the DSS and had a function to do with Visa's and immigration but it was part of the Conservative control of Fraud Stratagey Branch at the Adelphi Buildings, John Adam Street London. At this time, total immigration was kept to 80.000 a year.
Robin Cook was at the Foreign Office, Jack Straw was at the Home Office and David Blunkett was making a proper balls-up of the NHS. Cook resigned (?) Jack Straw went to FO. and Blunkett to the HO. At the end of the first year, Blunkett had thrown out the rule book and allowed 250.000 immigrants into the Country. Well just with "pocket money" the £40 or so each week, that is a lot of money. Then there is accomodation "services, water light and heating" plus other costs. Sandy Bruce-Lockhart, Leader of Kent CC. at the time wrote and asked me how these People Smugglers made a profit, I explained that the housing and food cost per person, once a landlord had housed the immigrants, came to £319 each week. Three immigrants = £957. a week. In Slough they have, or had, three bedroomed houses with Thirty immigrants, thats just on £10.000 a week. Not bad for a buy to let mortgage. And you poor old Taxpayers were paying the Bill.
That was that side of the problem. And as we had now imported some Millions of Immigrants, (It could be as many 10 Million with asylum seekers.) the next problem for Gordon and the Treasury, was Expanding the Economy and the money in circulation to be able to pay everyone. When was the last time you saw figures for Money in Circulation ??
There is one other vast problem that Politicians ignore, and not only Politicians.
The BBC.never mentions it. And all of the print media ignore it as well. Newspapers like the Telegraph and the Express. I mention those two because I have posted both of them a copy of a PFI. contract. I believe it was in 2003/4 that I sent the copy. It starts off as a £129 Million Hospital with about 900 beds. And even though we are told again and again, that it is a twenty year contract, Page Three has a paragraph entitled "How long is the contract ?" and it states;- The original contract term is 60 years from the date of completion (14 August 2001)- ending 14th. August 2061. As it stands, the Hospital has been re-financed once, on the 14th. August 2006. The cost of re-financing was an additional £116 Million. Making a total at this five year stage of:- £129m + £100m + £116m =
£345m. In addition to this there is a "service charge" paid every year. The figure I have is £37.6m. This figure is adjustable every 12 months. I have lost count now, but I believe there are some 7 or 8 Hundred contracts just like this in existance. You, the Poor bloody Taxpayer, is looking at nothing less than the NEXT ONE HUNDRED YEARS of paying off the Blair Brown bandwaggon.
Your only answer is to do as I suggest and take control of the Economy. Or at least Taxation

That was then. Today is the anniversary of Saint George, Patron Saint of England and now is an excellent time to suggest that we, or rather you, the Taxpayers of England, make a new start. Let me assure you, there is nothing to stop you changing the way you work and are paid, so that Westminster cannot enforce any demand for the payment of Direct Taxation.
It is also a very simple manoeuvre and once you have control you will find that County by County you will be making the Rules and Setting the Rate of Taxation deciding what the threshold is.
There are also one or two things from the past that need resurrection. Years ago a "Tax Code" took account of a persons responsibilities and allowed a reduction in Tax required, to cover these Family Expenses. Today, a very expensive Tax Credit system is used. All that really does is create more work for Taxpayers to pay for. A nonsense.
As I say, this is meant as a system to roll out across the 43 (?) Counties of England. Scotland, Wales and N/Ireland must decide if they want to join in. Now the finances to start this are available, at my age 74, I find it hard enough getting about, but I would love to make a start here in Norfolk, I have spoken to Daniel Cox, Leader of the Norfolk CC. and I believe he, and some others, are sympathetic to this idea, so my beauties, lets be 'aving you.
Kind Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

AGAIN, AS QUINTIN LETS EXPLAINS, "THE FLOATERS" WIN.

2009-04-20T10:59:00.000-07:00

Do many of you remember the remarks of Quintin Lettst, of the Daily Mail, formally of the Telegraph. (when it was an original newspaper and worthy of its position.) Or are you like me, and couldn't give a toss.
Today I have posted a reply to a "story" published by the said 'paper. But then, as with the Telegraph and the Express, these 'papers do not have any confidence in their own future. Like the BBC., the ITV., ITN., and all the others, if you insist on publishing the crap that is the menu of the lower order, all you will get is the support of the lower order. That doesn't pay the bills.
Earlier today, I took the trouble to travel back along the road the BBC took to abandon so much of its beautiful past, only to suspect that most of the faults were deliberate.
Do any of you now remember that man, ????, John Bert, now, I believe Lord Birt of the blue skies. He took the job, at I believe some £500.000 or £600.000 a year. It could have been as much as £700.000 a year, as it is today, whats money, the Taxpayers have an abundance of it. Any way, John Birt took the job and worked as an off-shore Company, having his income paid into an off-shore company account. Now don't get me wrong. There is nothing illegal about this. But after the publicity, the system was changed. I am of the opinion that, any other Company or business, and John Bert would never have been named or identified.
So, let me say to you again, and again, and again, this is your bloody money. Yours.
So my dears, and my dearies, take Bloody good care of it. Don't let those bastar**** rob you when your back is turned or you are on the john.
Get in touch and join the club. IT IS YOUR BLOODY MONEY. STOP THAT BUNCH OF CRAP STEALING IT. WESTMINSTER HAS HAD ITS DAY.
Enough already,I'm off for a very large whisky.
Kind Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

WESTMINSTER SPEAKES, AND AGAIN THE TANGLED WEB REDUCES HONESTY TO NOTHING MORE THAN A JOKE

2009-04-20T08:47:00.000-07:00

Today is the 20th. of April. On Wednesday 22nd. the Budget is reported at Parliament. What next for this beknighted Country ???
Have you, like me had just about enough of this Pantomime Politics as now practised at Westminster. Never mind the Bl**** Party, just about every one of the silly buggers are clowns. Never mind the fallout, "ITS ONLY MONEY" and the Taxpayer is going to anti up for that. We make the Tax Laws here in Westminster.
Today, I have just read the, Daily Express; the Daily Mail; the Telegraph. Some years ago, I used to read the Telegraph as first choise. The Daily Mail second and the Express third. Now, I buy no more than four Newspapers each week. Today, Monday, I have bought the Express and the Mail. In the last hour, I have tried to post a comment on the Mail. Nothing doing. In the last few weeks, about four or five, the Mail has refused to accept any comment I have made. I see no reason why I should waste any more time. Likewise the Express and the Telegraph.
It is expected that a number of print media will fold this year. Here in England, I would expect at least five or six Daily Papers to go. And then the Locals ?? Sad to say, they offer no alternative either in Local News or in any attempt at a national coverage. Here in Diss, we have the Express, that is published by the Johnson Press in Scotland. As it stands, it does us proud. But it does its best to avoid Politics. And Politics are about to kill it off.
Unless that is, you join me and make an attempt to rescue our Democracy and Retrieve OUR SOVEREIGNTY from the Dung Heap of Brussels. WHO'S WITH ME ???
Kind Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

Reference to Another blogspot

2009-04-18T00:41:00.000-07:00

http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2009/04/ebay-skype-goldman-morals-and.html
This blogspot, explains how the little people are ripped off on a regular basis. How the "ordinary" people are just so much fodder for unprincipaled Company and Business Directors. In addition to the corrupt Commercial World, there is then the totally Corrupted Political World.
I'm sorry, time I have to go shopping. So my wife says. Back later.
Regards, ATFlynn "Norfolk's Mutineer"

The G20, Golbal Economy and now the circus is back in town.

2009-04-08T08:32:00.000-07:00

I was looking at the problems about to arrive in the Private Pensions industry. Again. Only this time it could be terminal for many poor buggers soon to retire here in Britain and I'm betting America will be even worse.
When you look at the trouble these Politicians have created, think of the promises of the G20. Then read about the Billions of £Pounds Sterling you poor bloody Taxpayers are going to pay that Indian owner of Jaguar LandRover and again, possibly another bale-out of Nissan. You will understand, these Jokers from Westminster and Whitehall, are the same Jokers who caused the whole bloody mess in the first place yet NO ONE is calling Foul on this nonsense. WHY ??
Then there is the Guardian Newspaper, up in arms about Tax Avoidance and off-shoring
your income to avoid paying the ruinous demands from Gov'. I take it that most, if not all of you know by now that the Guardian also uses off-shore Tax Havens to avoid paying the full amount Demanded by HM. Gov'. As do Tesco's who placed the ownership of some Millions of £Pounds of Property off-shore and I would expect them to now be charging Rent at some top whack so as to move money beyond the Taxmans reach. Me ? I have absolutely no argument with any of that. If we, the British, had a simple straight forward system of Taxation, there would be no Bloody need for anyone to Avoid Taxation.
My suggestion is that every Taxpayer in Britain, both Employer and Employee, should change the way they work and are paid so that the Taxpayer ends up in full control of Taxation. Don't laugh, as I see it, it is possible for the American Taxpayers and then just about all of the European Union Taxpayers, to join this way of being Employed and paying Taxation.
This is the First Chapter of this Explanation. Tomorrow I will explain the next step.
But I will say now, in 2005, it took me just half an hour to secure the Funding to beging this process. It has taken since then to generate this much interest. And much of that is because of the total stupidity of Westminster and Whitehall.
Enough for tonight, Kind Regards until the morning. ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

WHAT NEXT FOR THIS POOR OLD COUNTRY ?

2009-02-17T06:49:00.000-08:00

At my age, 74, there can't be too many tomorrows left. And there was I sitting here thinking of many years ago when I would get up each morning and every new day was an adventure. Now, every morning is the beginning of a new Nightmare.
It is my opinion, that unless you Taxpayers take control of Taxation, you are done for. Before many more months go by, this Country will be bankrupt. Already the Gay Gordon has an off book debt of some £2000.000.000.000 or more. Only yesterday, I posted a comment about it on the Daily Telegraph website, but they removed it. I did point out that some two, three or even four years ago, I posted a copy of one of the PFI contracts to the Telegraph, and when that received no action, I sent it again. I had been asked to provide it. I also commented on some correspondence I had with Neil Collins, City Editor. I have made comments about this on the "Your Telegraph" page, but it looks to me as if the DT. is going down the Swannie. I don't think it will see 2010.
I notice David Cameron MP. is now going on about "Local Democracy". More power for the County Authorities. But of course, that isn't quite what is intended. They want you to elect local Mayors. And of course, all the extra expence. What I would suggest is a simple County Council structure and a purely local Economy. Here in Norfolk, all we really need is four MPs at the most. Elected here and paid here. None of that nonsense you get at Westminster. And why have that lot of rubbish at Whitehall ? why pay for that nonsense ?
Earlier today, I came across a "pamphlet", the author is Patrick Barbour, (I hope he will forgive me) Chairman of two public companies, Barbour Index plc and Microgen plc
He is a Trustee of Civitas and was one of the three founders of Reform. The Pamphlet title is "Better Government". The opening introduction is-: " The current system of government in the UK is failing because it is fatally flawed. The system needs changing - regardless of the party in power - to prevent the UK from becoming a third-rate country. This paper deals with the structure of government not the ideologies of political parties."
The Panphlet was published by The TaxPayers' Alliance, in January 2007.
The TPA Tel. No. 0845 330 9554 ask for a copy.
And if any of you readers want to take action against that half arsed bunch of Pirates now at Westminster, go to http://www.atflynn.co.uk and contact me. The only thing I can promise you, is that in the end it will save you a great deal of money. All I want to show you, is how to set up an off-shore Bank Account that Avoids Taxation. For every £10 you pay now, you will only ever pay £1 in the future.
Kind Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

RAINDROPS ON ROSES AND WHISKERS ON KITTENS

2009-02-05T06:16:00.000-08:00

I had another go at leaving a comment on the Daily Telegraph today. No problem at all. It must be me. For about a week now my comments have been refused. The other thing is, the Guardian has also been refusing my efforts.
Anyway, I saw a part of the BBC. TV. News, about the HoC. Select Committee questioning
Journalists about the reporting of the Banking fiasco and meltdown. And of course the journalists defence. As usual, the HoC., was trying to get the Journalists to accept blame for stirring the pot and frightening off the investers and the money, and destroying confidence in the financial markets in the City. One of the people being questioned was Robert Peston of the BBC.
A couple of years ago, I posted an article on the BBC. Actionnetwork about this very subject. Now, if you go to-: http://www.atflynn.co.uk you will find at the very bottom of the page a link to "Actionnetwork". There, when you scroll down, you will find an article Titled, The Golden Paradigm. This is the speach, by Lord Beswick in the HoL. in 1985, about Banking and the abuse of the money supply, debt and other bad habits of the Money Men. Oh Yes!! and the suggestion that we were on the road to ruin. And this is 1985. If you have a look through the content of some of that link, you will see that four and more years ago, myself and others were convinced we were heading for a brick wall. Next, anyday now, certainly by April, May, the European Union will collapse. The nonsense of the ECB. and other unaccountable "Committees" will create so much debt that the cost paid by the half a dozen members who actually fund the whole fraudulent circus will break another half-dozen Banks.
There is about four to six weeks to go before the big bang. Keep your head down.
Regards, to all, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

REVISE THE GLORY OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

2009-01-30T08:19:00.000-08:00

That does of course mean we restore the Hereditary Peers to their rightful place at the Top Table with the King and Queen. They are as Heralds of the Monarchy and Har

MY THANKS FOR THE COMMENT AND THE INFORMATION

2009-01-21T12:20:00.000-08:00

I had intended to expand my comments of yesterday, but as the gay Gordon will tell you, events dear boy events. I have been hit by an overload of bad news.
My reaction is to hit back. I don't think it a good idea to sit back and let them, that rabble at Westminster, walk all over you and steal your money to pay off the failed "get rich quick" brigade in the City of London and elsewhere.
And then that bunch of ***(I just can't put words to thoughts, when those words are offensive even to myself.)
What with some of the actions that created this awful situation, the fraudulent stastics and, only yesterday, the very iffy inflation figures. Everything about Westminster and Whitehall is now so suspect you know without a second glance, "they are trying to *con* you again.
Well, I have a thought that might give you all a reason to sleep easier tonight. Why not use the good old "Human Rights" argument and promote the Sovereignty of the Poor Bleeding Taxpayer. Don't Taxpayers have Human Rights ???? Have they NO right to object to silly sods in Westminster and Whitehall, stealing their money and giving it away to those, who are too tired to get up in the morning ???
Enough for now, I'll get back to this tomorrow, Kind regards to one and all.
ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

WHAT NOW FOR THE GLOBAL ECONOMY ?

2009-01-20T20:02:00.000-08:00

I turned on the television just before 0300hrs. this morning, and what did I see ? Barack Obama, walking down a stairway, now the President of The United States of America. There was a look on his face, that was a first as far as I know. At first I thought it was a mixture of pride and satisfaction. And that he deserves. But no, I believe what I saw was triumph. A very dangerous emotion.
It made me remember the BBC. statement that Obama had been able to amass a warchest of $5Billion, to fund his campaign. And it was also said, that the money was not donated in $5 and $10 contributions. This was serious money. So now today is the start of Payback Time. What are his first Meetins as President ? Exactly.
I think it is time that, "RESTORE THE REPUBLIC", began to think about changing their Washington Administration for a more local governance based on the individual States
and allowing Washington to look after Foreign Affairs. Enough of these multi Billion $Dollar hand-outs that somehow only ever grease the bottom half of the pole, preventing others from climbing out of the swamp.
Enough for now, time to watch the early morning Business News on BBC. TV.
Back later, Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer".

TIME WE CUT ADRIFT OUR TOXIC PAST.

2009-01-19T08:40:00.000-08:00

And as we emerge the other side of yesterday, and into today having abandoned the baggage of Westminster and Whitehall, we are presented with the view of a clean bright future unsullied by the lowlife that now occupies the lower Chamber. I know, not all of the Members are wasters, just most of them.
The point is, what the bloody hell can you, we, us, do about it? Well, this is my answer.

The very first manoeuvre is to arrange for all employers and all employees to move their legal obligations for employment, Off-Shore and beyond the jurisdiction of the British Courts. There is no reason why any business, registered in Britain, cannot be changed into a holding Company. Allowing the Directors to engage an Agent based off-shore, to employ and pay, the workforce needed to fulfil the duties and functions the employment requires.
Don't worry, there is nothing to stop you doing what I suggest. Except you should ask some Accountancy Company or business. I believe I am right in saying that it would be illegal for any one of them to even say, that it is legal to avoid Taxation. And yet people do so every minute of the day.
To start with, I want to remove the whole of Norfolk, from the clutches of Westminster and Whitehall. For that reason today, I attempted to speak to Daniel Cox, Leader of Norfolk County Council. He is out of the office until Friday.
Last April, I attended a full Council meeting at South Norfolk District Council and put the case for the Taxpayers, to Legally remove their income from the Jurisdiction of Westminster and build an alternative system based on the Parish, Town and County Council. My efforts were received with applause. Since then I have spoken to, and met with Daniel Cox at least twice.
Daniel Cox is trying to prevent the re-organisation as ordered by Westminster, in favour of a single Unitary Council for all of Norfolk. This it is believed would allow for a reduction of some Hundreds of Millions of £Pounds each year in Taxation. But the powers that be, in Westminster wont hear of it. They object to the extent that Mr. Cox has been de-selected as a Conservative Councillor.

Another point I would high-light, is the fact that Norfolk, with a population just short of one million people, has to Elect Eight MPs. Electing Four MPs, is a bit strong and over the top don't you think ? And of course, each County must pay its own MPs. That is the only way you will ever get them to do your bidding. Remember, they are your servants not just Party members.
What is needed is for the Counties to exert the wishes of the People over and above the the Money Men, buying favours from the Political Parties.
Enough for now, time I was in bed. Kind Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

PAY BACK TIME. WAGE EARNERS AND TAXPAYERS FOOT THE BILL

2008-10-02T02:01:00.000-07:00

I have spent the last two hours reading past comments and if you go
to-: www.atflynn.co.uk you can go back a little more than two years, on this site, and find comments relating to this melt-down. There are two other web-sites that also paid much attention to the problem. That is, The TaxPayers Alliance, and in its own way, The Daily Express. Both of these are still chasing the "Spivs" of Westminster and Whitehall. The problem is, whatever Party is in Power, the House of Commons will still carry on its merry way just like a drunk at a Christmas Party. They can't resist it.
Others did make reference to the problems. But I mean as a News Paper, the Express chased this problem for more than two years. Ever since the acrid smell of fraud wafted out of HM. Treasury with the news of the enormous number of PFI. contracts. I did manage to get a copy of the contract for the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital. Last week Fraser Nelson and Peter Hoskin, published a two page article in the Spectator about PFI. "jobs". I would point out tho', that the 30 year duration they describe is in fact only the first part of the contract.
The building work required is first completed and the job handed over. Next, the first re-financing takes place and the annual "service charge" is agreed. The service charge is a yearly ground rent (as it was explained to me by the NHS Care Trust in Norwich.) This charge is up-dated every year, and the re-financing takes place every five years. So far the N.N.U.H. has had one re-finance and it cost the poor old Taxpayer another £116 Million £Pounds making the cost so far, £345 Million without the Ground Rent, and that is £37.6 Million for the year, 2003/4. And yes, at the end of the first 30/31 years, the contract is extended for another Thirty years and then it is open ended allowing for further periods of payment. Copies of the contract are available on request.
Oh! yes. In this contract time, until 2061, it is a safe bet the re-payment time will last far longer than the building itself, it is an abortion of a place. It even takes the security dept. ten minuts to get from their office to the end wall of the Hospital Building. And it covers a 63 acre site.
http://www.HM-Treasury.gov.uk/mediastore/otherfiles/greenbk_mottsrep02.pdf
*****************************************************
I did have an idea of how many of these contracts there were, but records were piling up and my wife had a moan about it, so last week I ditched a dustbin full of information to make room. For a moment I wished I hadn't.
Still, we can all see the problems the NU-Labour Party, NU Nonsense has now created. And if any of you think that Westminster and Whitehall are going to "fix" it, I have news for you.
How many of you remember Len Cook?? At the ONS?? Len-Cook the-Books. Since his time, not one piece of information from the ONS. is believable. Everything you are now told by this bunch of Baby snatchers and Pensions thieves, is suspect even if it is not an outright lie.
London, Westminster and Whitehall, are finished. Time now that you, the Poor Bloody Taxpayer, called an end to the nonsense that comes from Brussels. To start with, at a minimum you are paying £6 Billion a month to them. At the very least, £72 Billion a year. And then there is the "Customs and Excise", how many of you realise that every penny that is collected by customs duty, is turned over to Brussels and you poor old Taxpayers even have to pay the cost of collecting it. There are other payment that go straight to Brussels, like the "Carbon Transfer Tax", what, you didn't know you paid one??? On the hugh rise in your Electricity bill it still says you pay VAT. at 5%, well let me inform you, part of that cost-hike was another Tax imposed by Brussels. Do you know, at a guess, I would think that if you abandoned the European Union, you could save yourself at least £2 Billion of Taxation,
EACH BLOODY WEEK.
****************************************************

All that is needed is for all Employers to Employ all Staff, including yourself, from an Off-Shore location using an Agent based in that location. As long as you only remit your Tax Free allowance, and of course a similar allowance for any family members you are responsible for; All money NOT remitted is Tax Free and beyond the Jurisdiction of any British Court. That money can however, be accessed and used by any account holder, to pay bills or other charges, even standing orders, without becoming liable for Taxation. Even VAT. could be ignored before the first year of this system of Taxation is over. There will need to be Taxation to pay for all the necessary Public Services that are required. But believe me, once we get Taxation broken down to a County by County structure, and the Welfare State under controll, I will guarantee you will pay no more than 20 pence in the £Pound and it could be as low as 10 pence in the £Pound. One last thing. It would be illegal for any Elected Councillor to suggest this or be part of system of Tax Revenue Collection. But it is possible to ask the Elected Council to take charge of the Revenue and be responsible for the Administration of the Spending Policy. But the Taxpayer should always be in control of formulating and setting the Spending Policy.
I'll come back to this Policy Suggestion later.
Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

Tax Justice Network: Dr Doom and the offshore dictionary

2008-09-14T07:38:00.000-07:00

Tax Justice Network: Dr Doom and the offshore dictionary

Tax Justice Network: Guest blogger: tax and health

2008-09-14T07:15:00.000-07:00

Tax Justice Network: Guest blogger: tax and health

HOW ABOUT THIS FOR A POSSIBILITY!!

2008-08-25T08:14:00.000-07:00

I was looking through some old copies of the Daily Express earlier. The stoties of the total mess this Government has made of most things. Only this morning another report about funding for Cancer Drugs. It is only my guess, but it must be costing you poor bloody Taxpayers near enough £300 and some odd Millions of £Pounds a day, to fund the NHS. Imagine, there are people, individuals, who have become Millionaires and then some have become Multi-Millionaires. Then again there are others who have become Billionaires and some have even become Multi-Billionaires. Again, just imagine, all that bloody money is Taxpayers money. No wonder they can't afford to buy the drugs patients need to stay alive.
And of course there is all the other fraud and the total uselessness of that heap of rubbish at Westminster and Whitehall. There's that little fellow, whats his name? Rubberband? No; Miliband. I can even now, see Gordon, waiting for the moment, October the 16th.17th. 18th. And then calling a snap Election. The Labour Party would be left with no more than 50 seats. You could then pull the chain on the dregs that have settled at the bottom of the pan.
But then again, do as I have been suggesting for some years. You, the poor bloody Taxpayers, you take control of Taxation. It isn't a difficult manoeuvre and it is perfectly legal the way I have set it up. If any Employers want to have a look at it, they are more than welcome. No more PAYE, or NIC's, pay your Taxation County by County, and the Public Services you want to support, it will be all down to you.
Enough for now. Regards, ATFlynn "Norfolk's Mutineer"

SOVEREIGNTY and the BASTARDISATION OF WESTMINSTER

2008-08-22T09:08:00.000-07:00

Well my beauties, what next from the arseholes of Westminster?? Chunter yea not. Join our attempt to destroy the financial power of Westminster and Whitehall. Bringing these misbegotten but elected pieces of detritus into, or under, the control of the Taxpayers. You the Taxpayer,take a turn at being in control of Taxation and Government Finances. And that is, "How much of your money THEY spend."
Oh yes! Only last night, Gordon the Glorious, our ???Leader, was reported to be in Afghanistan playing soldiers with what remains of the glorious British Army. ( I would like to grab him by the neck and ram his head up some ones back passage. Preferably Blairs.) And now he is on his way to the Olympics in Beijing. To me this looks like a "presentation" in preperation for an Election in late October or November even, Gordons thinking being, "If they, (the Labour Party), want to play silly buggers, lets call an unexpected Vote and see how many survive. Me, I like the idea. I'm not going to win an Election, so why bother about anyone else??? What a bloody mess.
And while I am on about our glorious Political leaders and other members of the Chamber, why do we all seem to insist that their word is "law" when it comes to Taxation??? Let me tell you something for nothing about the Bloody nonsense of Taxation. First things First. The bloody money is yours to start with. You can arrange to work and be paid in such a manner that those bloody wasters at Westminster and Whitehall, have NO LEGAL power to demand, even one single penny from you. There is however, the Local Council Tax, and that is the only Government Tax that is Legally Enforceable. Not that many accountants are going to agree with me or tell you the truth. Because half the buggers would be out of a job tomorrow if they did. They are not in the business of helping you; only themselves.
All of you Business men, Companies big ones or small ones, it isn't the size, it is the Taxation and cost of compliance. Have a good look at what I'm saying and I will guarantee to cut your costs, on this matter, by 75%, if not more.
Enough for tonight, I'll get back to this tomorrow.
Kind Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

TIME FOR A CHANGE FROM WESTMINSTER.

2008-08-19T04:01:00.000-07:00

The Politicians haven't the faintest idea what they are doing, everything they bloody well touch, falls apart.
If they were to concentrate on families, husband and wife in a legal union, or even a man and a woman living together with children, and supporting a married life but without the benefit of Church, it would be acceptable. But this bloody lot. Look at it. Even those Heing and Heing can adopt children and claim family Benefits. How bloody ridiculous. And you even have women receiving IVF treatment on the NHS. (Not all deserve the service.) All sorts of un-natural medical bits and pieces. Mens organs turned into female(?)receptacles. So I'm told. Whatever goes on costs money and the poor old bloody Taxpayer is always there to fill the ever open hand of the needy, and the greedy avaricious spongers that are home grown and those that have flocked to our shores for the free ride.
People who have followed this Blogspot, will know my opinion. Whether you agree or not, as far as money is concerned it is long past time for those Businesses and working Taxpayers who pay this enormous amount of money so others get a free ride, it is time those Poor Bloody Taxpayers, took complete control of Taxation. Politicians are not Intelligent enough, Honest enough, or in any way Reliable enough. What they do best, is just sit about talking. As for Levers of Power, never again.

HOW IMMIGRATION AND WELFARE MONEY HAS DESTROYED THE ENGLISH AND ENGLAND.

2008-07-10T03:44:00.000-07:00

What a mess. Those who now control Westminster and the House of Commons, now seem to have complete freedom to do exactly as they want to in this Island Frotress. And that foul bunch of misbegotten garbage calling themselves, Politicians, would rather argue for Africa and Zimbabwe than stand up for Britain and the British.
Enough of that stinking filthy Party Politics and their con-men at Whitehall, just set up your own Bank Account off-shore so that all Employer and all Employees, can have their income paid straight into a TaxHaven beyond the reach of HM. Government and HMRC. There are then a number of ways that you can access your money and again, you can buy your groceries paying for them by card, and the Supermarket can Bank that money off-shore Tax free.
Westminster hasn't got a chance, you can leave them standing.
This idea is also viable across most of Europe if not quite all of it. Even the German Taxpayer could take control and reduce the mountain of money he is obliged to give away to others. A total nonsense.
Earlier today I posted a version of this idea on the Daily Express website and it has been a subject that I am hoping to use as the "Policy Intention" to break the Political Party Domination of our daily life. Foreign Policy is another country, but Home Policy is for the British people. Brussels has no place at my table or by my fireside. Time to reclaim our Sovereignty once and for all-time.
Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"
Before I forget, one last thing. The money to get this Policy off the ground and Running, has been secured.

NOW IS THE TIME FOR A CAMPAIGN OF ACTION

2008-04-28T08:49:00.000-07:00

Come this Thursday, 1st. of May and the Local Elections. I have not taken much of an interest because we do not take part this year. My interest is in getting our little group working on how to remove the total control of power from Westminster. It is our intention to put the Electors and especially the Taxpayers in a position to exercise a measure of censure or disapproval, over their elected representative. The people must be in a position to hold these MPs to account.

And to my mind, the way to do that is to take control of Taxation. If you control the money, you control the events. And it is the Taxpayers money to start with.

To this extent, I have posted a notice on the Daily Telegraph, in fact about three notices. I also posted the same message on the Daily Mail, but they wont have anyone challenge the authority of Westminster. The Mail prints a lot of garbage about politics, but when push come to shove, the Mail is always missing. As is my contribution.

I seem to have forgotten to mention the fact that we had a meeting at South Norfolk House, Long Stratton, on the 23 April. We set out a suggestion for a programme that will allow the Taxpayers to change the system of paying Taxation so that Westminster is no longer in control of Direct Taxation. Instead, all money is to be paid to Parish, Town and then District Councils, then passed to the County Council. In effect investing more power in Local Politics than Westminster.

My intention is to avoid the changes Westminster intend, of imposing regional authorities on areas and destroying the ancient County system and giving Brussels the control as they want it.
Another assault upon the Sovereignty of Britain, and a mockery of democracy. The final insult being Westminsters connivance in all of this treachery.

If you want to put a stop to it, County by County, you must take control of Taxation. It is perfectly legal, Westminster cannot stop you. Almost every day, you hear of, or read of someone or other, moving their money off-shore and beyond the Jurisdiction of the British government. The last to be mentioned was Lord Sainsbury and Carla Furse. I do not object. My complaint is that the system should be available for everyone. That is what I intend to offer. All I want is to reduce Direct Taxation to a bare minimum. You do realise that the NHS., is now costing almost £300 Million each day?
Regards, ATFlynn

Thought For The Day: as per Westminster.

2008-02-28T19:48:00.000-08:00

Last Tuesday we had a Parish Council meeting. I walked into the Parish Hall only to be confronted by a large group of older women indulging in flower arranging. The Parish meeting was taking place in a committee room.
While awating the arrival of others,the chat turned on "wind turbines", amongst other things, and I entered a remark about the £600,000, cost to the TaxPayer for every wind turbine that is erected, plus the ground rent of some £20,000 a year.

In 2005/6, the average cost of electricity for each household was £361, just pennies over £1. a day. Now, in 2008, the cost is £3. a day and rising. What has happened is "Globalisation". As far as I can see, or rather, understand, about two dozen people in the world have got a hold on certain of the worlds essential commodities and these people, with the help of Politicians across the world, are now holding you to ransom. At stake is the TaxPayers money plus the "consumer price" market. Think about it, once this is in the control of these two dozen or so people, they have world dominance. And do not forget, they have already set up a committee to consider the introduction of a world order for the regulation of Taxation.

Remember when oil was $4. a barrel? They said then that it would never reach $10. now it is $100. These people are dangerous, but the other people who are manipulating the world population and making it possible, are the Politicians. And that Bloody Loopy bunch at Westminster are the worst of the bloody lot. And remember, "The Media" to a great extent, most of them are at it as well. With the BBC, at the very top. Enough for now, time to get a cup of tea. Regards, ATFlynn, "Norfolk's Mutineer"

IS TESCO SHOWING THE WAY AHEAD???

2008-02-28T03:40:00.000-08:00

Now that Tesco has transfered 80 of its stores to an off-shore fund, explaining that it is for "Tax Efficiency" purposes, and not Tax Avoidance, it only takes a small adjustment to remove all staff from the clutches of those rapacious Tax Collectors. All they need to do now is to use an Agency, located in the area where they have parked their stores and then at a stroke, they are at liberty to trade here and pay business Tax, and some other local charges, but 90% of their Taxation is now, "not legally collectable".

I pointed this out to Barclays Bank in 1996, I still have the letters. Not only that, I also wrote the CBI, IOD, FPB, other High Street Banks, most of them in fact. And the four main Accountants. The only one of them that showed any interest was Ernst & Young. Oh yes. There was one of the International Banks that agreed to fund the idea provided I came up with enough interest from Industry and Business.

Now that these clever buggers have made such a mess of things and Politics have allowed it to happen, the voters and the working TaxPayers might, just might see the sense of removing the power over Taxation from that bunch of wasters at Westminster. I know, and I agree, not quite all of them are wasters.

My proposal is that the TaxPayers then construct another system of Taxation based on the Parish, Town, District and County structure. With the local population deciding what the local Public Services should be. And what is to be spent on providing this service. I'm not suggesting that I know all the answers, but I do know we cannot go on as we are. And I must stick with my belief that a liveable wage today, is a minimum of £500 each week.

I have had some feedback by e-mail and I am greatful, so could you keep it coming? I would be pleased if you could.
Regards, ATFlynn. "Norfolk's Mutineer"

Could Tomorrow be the First Step to a New Beginning

2008-02-19T06:57:00.000-08:00

Tomorrow evening, 7:30pm. I am attending a District Council meeting at South Norfolk Council and I am privileged to be allowed to address the meeting on the subject of Taxation, Sovereignty, Westminster, and an incompetent useless Government. Not bad for starters.

I have informed the local press and they have said that they will be there. So I want to champion local Democracy for all it is worth. I can assure anyone who will listen, today, our Local Authority can, and does, provide a fairer out-come than Westminster. Even with their manipulation and corruption of the Local Funding of Public Services, Central Government seem to be way out of their depth. And now with Northern Rock around their necks, you could say they have hit "rock bottom".

There is only one answer to this mess and that is for the TaxPayers to take control of Taxation. It is a simple and legal manoeuvre that Westminster cannot prevent. Not only that, it is also a system of Government funding, administered by the TaxPayers, that would ensure the elected representatives remained the servants of the Electors and not the masters. This would apply to most Countries in the European Union, if not All of Them. And I have no doubt, it would be adopted in other parts of the world.

How about some feed-back on this?? Regards, atflynn.co.uk "Norfolk's Mutineer" (as named by the Bruges Group, to whom I am grateful.)

TIME FOR A BIT OF DIY ON TAXATION AND THE ECONOMY

2008-02-05T11:44:00.000-08:00

I have spent most of the day looking over newspaper blogs, posting a comment here and there and taking note of the days news.
The MPs expences of some thousands of £Pounds a week, and the downright Piggery of the House of Commons is absolutely disgusting. At my age and retired, I pay no Direct Taxation. But there are OAP's with an income of a little more than the £4,000 to £5,000 a year (whatever it is.) who at an advanced age, are dragged into paying more Tax than they can afford. Leaving them almost destitute or very nearly so. But do that heap of dross at Westminster care? Their only concern is making sure their trough is full at all times.
All those MPs and their Meadow Ladies getting fat on the money that should be going to the Pensioners. With Politics and Politicians, it was ever thus.
Time for all the Payers of Direct Taxation, to make arrangements to Legally ignore all demands for you to pay up. Just as the rich people do, and the very rich people as well. Like the two MPs who have placed their home, or one of them, into a trust fund and then claim something like £20,000 a year, to rent it back from their own trust fund. Only MPs would dream up such dishonest manoeuvre to get their hands on the TaxPayers money.
I have often wondered why people working in the Administration were allowed to get away with stealing the TaxPayers money in so blatent a manner. Even Tax Inspectors working for Inland Revenue, (as it was) stole £13 million in cash, and I have part of the confession by David Varney, supplied by the BBC. And yet the Elected MPs do nothing about it. Now it is so obvious WHY.
The whole bloody lot of them at Westminster and Whitehall are stealing your money by the truck load.
Have a look at the TaxPayers Alliance website:- www.taxpayersalliance.com Or go back to the "Norfolk's Mutineer" and look up the "Links Page.
Oh, yes, one other thing. The TPA are an organisation that survives on donations, have a good browse, crawl all over it and if you feel you want to make a difference, send them £20. or so. That could be the drop in the ocean that could change the world. Put an end to the EU, UN, and all this bloody nonsense about Globalisation. It's no more than another big rip-off, like the cost of Gas and Electricity and the cost of food. The whole cost of living is now being manipulated by half-arsed Politicians and their very rich friends in business. Enough for now, I'll get back here in the morning. But do give the TPA., website a look. You won't be disappointed I promise.

Another Day Counting Northern Rock's Massive Debt

2008-01-12T11:45:00.000-08:00

I have spent an hour or two looking at the Financial pages. Again. I must admit that from my point of view, and that includes the TaxPayers position, the biggest maggot in the "pie" is the finagling of the Chancellor, FSA and the Prime Minister.

If only the Bank of England had been allowed to deal with the problem as it first suggested, it would all be over by now. Mervyn King was correct. Yes, depositers and shareholders would lose money. But now. I hope all you working TaxPayers understand that "Some" shareholders will make lots of money out of this. Others though, are going to lose everything. And you, the TaxPayers will end up with the bill, to be paid over many years, a bill of at least £112 Billion. Plus another £500 million. And that is just Northern Rock. there could be others in the woodpile. (I have mentioned somewhere on this site that I'm not very good with figures.)atf.

I am basing my opinions on the Lead Story by Simon Duke page 110, "City & Finance", of the Daily Mail. And the comment section, by Alex Brummer, the City Editor. The Mail publishes a News Paper that is written for the benefit of the average working TaxPayer and those responsible members of the working, TaxPaying Society. It isn't perfect, but it very nearly is.

These are the very people, "ordinary people", as the Labour Party and most other Politicians call them, who fund the massive pay and expenses that MPs and all the other hangers-on pick up every month. And their hands don't even shake. The same "ordinary" people who pays that waster, Adam Crosier at the Post Office an outrageous £1, 250, 000 each year. And a Pension.

Go to the TaxPayers Alliance, website.-: http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/ and see what they have to say about the abuse of your money. Paid to the Treasury and HMRC. I do have a part copy of a confession by David Varney, Chairman of the Inland Revenue in which he confesses, that his Staff, and I believe he ment in His London Office, have stolen £13 Million in cash from the Tax Revenue. This confession was supplied to me by the BBC.

Time I called it a day. I want to spend an hour or so trawling the financial news and then I'm off to bed. My objective is to find enough information, such as Labour Party Funding and the dishonest, if not illegal, way people can buy their way into the governance of this Country and manipulate the Law and buy any Political Policy that suits them. A million £Pound here or there and Westminster falls over in its wish to sell the Voters and the TaxPayers any old rubbish going. Even Global Warming or Genetically Modified Crops. I watched Sir David King, a government advisor on science or whatever. I have come across his work and his opinions before, and my opinion is that he is too close to being a fraud to be taken seriously. He should look again at the "original" concept of GM, as published, and he would then understand why people refuse to eat that Poison. Enough. Good Night All, Pleasant Dreams.
Regards, atflynn.co.uk "Norfolks Mutineer"

Politics and Politicians Are at it Again

2008-01-11T06:03:00.000-08:00

I have been watching the Business and Financial news at every chance I get, these last few days. And overall, there is only one place that any relief from the cost of living inflation can come from, and that is by HM. Treasury and HMRC. reducing Taxation by at least 50%. As it is, for every £1 you earn, that lot want 50 pence of it to buy votes and finance their constituency strongholds.

Every Friday, "The Business Magazine", is delivered to the house. And today, so far, from my point of view, Fraser Nelson and Political Notebook is the most interesting of the articles this week.

David Cameron, leader of the conservative party, is saying that he wants to "reform the Welfare State". Bold words. The last man to attempt that task was Frank Field. Only Blair sacked him. Because Mr. Field, like me, and I'm sure some millions of others, thought that Blair meant what he said.

Mr. Field by the way, is one of those odd-balls. Out of, what is it, some six hundred and fifty MPs. Frank Field is one of the very few, Honest and absolutely Truthful men you will find anywhere in Westminster or Whitehall, What I would call unique.

And as such, I believe it is now impossible for Politicians of any Party, to execute even a light pruning of the DSS. when what is really needed is a policy of "slash and burn".

In which case what is required is for the TaxPayers to change the system completely and quite Legally, take control of Public Finances by way of their Local Parish and Town Council. Change the way you work and are paid so that you receive your income in your off-shore Bank Account beyond the Jurisdiction of any British Court.

It is only by such action, that the working TaxPayer will recover the Power and the Ability to pay his way and afford his standard of living without incurring debt or other Financial Difficulties.

On Tuesday, 8th. January, I attended the Local Parish Council meeting at Tivetshall Parish Hall.
It was mentioned, in passing, that there is talk of disbanding the Parish Council system. There is also a number of options for the Local Government Reorganisation. Details at-: http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk

There are changes being planned across the country that are going to cost you poor bloody TaxPayers millions of £Pounds, if not Billions and Billions, of £Pounds. You, and most, if not everyone alive today, will never live long enough to see this debt paid off. Your only chance is to take control of Taxation, and default on the Debt. Make it payback time for the money men who are now on the point of ruining so many lives and destroying so many dreams. These stupid Politicians, in their attempt to create a client electorate, dependent on the State for their very existance.

Nothing our Government at Westminster or the Administration of Whitehall declare, is believable. I have now set up another Campaign website and if you are interested, you can submit your name and/or e-mail, there will never be any cost involved to joining this Campaign, and in time, it is my intension that all TaxPayers should start with a "Threshold" of £500, or so each week. And Tax will be paid at a rate of 10% on all money money above that £500.

Why should you give so much money to a bunch of dishonest people at Westminster? It is your money and I want you to keep it in your pocket or Bank Account.

Enough for now, Regards, atflynn.co.uk "Norfolks Mutineer"

Saturday 5th. Jan' Another Year of Bloody Politics.

2008-01-05T06:29:00.000-08:00

I have been watching those Americans, Democrats Republicans, starting their election for the next President of The United States of America. I am now 72, 73 in a few days from now. The one thing that has always annoyed me is the way American Politics has always dominated world affairs. Now though, it would seem that France has entered a long handled spoon to stir the pot. But keeping well back from the "Devil". I'm no expert, but America would not have such a problem with Sub-prime mortgages debt, if it hadn't been for other world-wide Banking centres jumping in with both feet. Many made millions, if not billions of $Dollars, £Pounds for their Banks and for their own pocket.

Let me point out that France and much of Europe, is in thrawl to "Afflictions" and other monetary and mental sufferings. Being the result of challenging the power of the Euro against the $Dollar. But never worry, before the end of this year, 2008, the Euro will collapse. There is no place on the World stage for a "foe" currency, no matter what "hand" has delt the card.

Well back to square one. It is entirely up to you, the poor bloody TaxPayer and that is across the World. Do you want to go on playing Bogymen? Picking your nose for hours at a time? Or do you want to own your little part or England or wherever? Your Parish ? Your Town ? Could you begin to select your MPs, vote for them and send them to the Home of your Government? Without the guidence of the Party or the Media? Party Politics have now made such a mess of the World since 1957 and the Treaty of Rome. The founding of the EEC.

What I propose, is that you are big enough and bloody ugly enough, to do this amount of damage on your own. Now get your backside together and sort this out. It is your Country. You elect the MPs. You Pay the Bloody Taxes and You have the right to say, "Yes or No" to the Policy of our Future Government. It is now time that you took complete control of Our Country by taking charge of the process of Taxation. It is all very Legal. And here in Britain there is nothing to stop you. I'm sure that most of Europe will be the same as well. I will Guarantee you one very important point. Every day you avoid doing this, the cost of living will increase. And every time you are compelled to obtain any of the necessities of life and living, it will be more expensive on a daily basis. Regards, atflynn.co.uk "Norfolks Mutineer"

IS IT AN ABYSS, A DEEP HOLE OR OUR FUTURE

2007-12-29T07:02:00.000-08:00

Well, the "Moneymen" have done it again. All you poor little "Ordinary" TaxSlaves, with mortgages, are now looking into a big hole. And all the snotty little Bankers, are in the driving seat and can take off at any time. With your money, leaving the poor old TaxPayer to take the "hit". (But Politics will cover them.) So?

Why should Westminster worry? All those MPs will be long gone before it is realised just what a mountain of debt the Poor Old TaxPayer is left with. "Mt. Everest" will look like a molehill beside it. And unless the TaxPayer takes control, you are looking at an everlasting mountain upon mountain of debt and a Century of payback time at the very least. And then some.

It must be your fault. It was you who voted for these people at Westminster. It was you who trusted the Nu Labour Treasury Team at Westminster and expected at least "some" truth from the Political Party that promised to be Purer than Pure. Well you know what they say, "there is none so pure as the purified" I don't know. Is any of this worth getting out of bed for on a cold winter morning?

Words fail me, more to the point, words that are acceptable, fail me. Sit back and listen to, or rather read, the words of those who inspired one to take up arms and defend this Country, die for this Country. And then ask yourself, would any of that sorry bunch at Westminster convince you that it was worth joining the cause and fighting for Iraq or Afghanistan. I'm inclined to say, let them get on with it.

What we are seeing now, today, is the result of all those years of smoking dope and taking illegal
drugs. Years of abuse have addled the brains of many people in our Education community. Will it ever recover?

My dear boy, this is what comes with all that whacky-backy. Look at that lot, now elected to Parliament, 90% of them, flower people, or sons or daughters of flower people. Somes few years ago now, I wrote to Charles Couger, American Bankers Association, about the same thing. The Ruling Class have lost the plot, but they are now in a position of power across the whole Country. Or is that World??

Now is the time for the "Ordinary" people to take care of their own future. Or is it to late? But the only thing the "Ordinary People have, that is to their advantage, is there weight in numbers.
And it is my contention that you, the PAYE TaxPayer, "Ordinary People", as Blair calls you,
should take charge of the system of Taxation, and adapt it as should be done, so that you the Ordinary People, are now in control of all Taxation. Income tax. IHT. VAT. , and all those snotty little Taxes that are added on when you are not looking. You. Yes, You, that lazy- lay about no good, probably an MP, get your bits and pieces together, This Is Your World Your Country. Your Future. Take hold of it with two hands, and kick any half-arsed Politician who wants a- piece, into next week. Regards, ATFlynn. atflynn.co.uk
"NORFOLKS MUNTINEER".

And What Is For Christmas In 2008??

2007-12-22T07:42:00.000-08:00

Unless you the TaxPayer, gets a grip of Direct Taxation, the future is about as inviting as the "Work House".

Come next April, a Financial melt-down will take place. (If it hasn't already by then.) I can't imagine what the Housing and Mortgage situation will be. But the word "Devastation" keeps flashing across my mind.

I would suggest that it is time for the Parish and Town Councils to prepare for the takeover of Public Finances. And when ready you can, quite Legally, just abandon Westminster and Whitehall. What I propose is within the Law. All you poor Bloody TaxPayers will need every penny you earn to pay your way. MPs, Civil Servants and hangers-on? Pensions? Forget-it. That money will be needed to bail out working TaxPayers.

And as Will Hutton, of "The Work Foundation", said on the BBC Programme Hard Talk, the other morning, "the system of Financial Regulation, has to change." I really did believe that Mervyn King and the Bank of England were in control. That when we were told that Gordon Brown had given them the "Independence" necessary to regulate the British Economy, that was true. What a Bloody dunder-head.

Over the last year or so, the BoE. Govenor has made a few comments about the level of "Personal Debt", being taken on by Loans, Credit Cards and other means. When I heard this, I was under the impression that all the Bloody man had to do, was turn off the tap and it would all come to a stop.

How wrong can you be in one life-time. That is why I have come back to this "Blog", I have started another Web-site, -: http://atflynn.co.uk and it is linked to this site. The intention being to try to start a Local Campaign against the destructive amount of Taxation people are obliged to pay, when only about 25% to 30%, of the population, Pays Bloody Taxation.

Have a look at that-: atflynn.co.uk website, keep an eye on it. You never know, with a little bit of luck we just might Change the Whole Bloody World. See if you remember any of this from years gone by:

I come from haunts of coot and
hern,
I make a sudden sally
And sparkle out among the fern
To bicker down a vally

By thirty hills I hurry down,
Or slip between the ridges,
By twenty throps, a little town,
And half a hundred bridges.

Till last by Philip's farm I flow
To join the brimming river,
For men may come and men
may go,
But I go on for ever.

I chatter over stony ways
In little sharps and trebles,
I bubble into eddying bays,
I babble on the pebbles.

With many a curve my banks I
fret
By many a field and fallow,
And many a fairy forland set
With willow-weed and mallow.

I chatter, chatter, as I flow
To join the brimming river,
For men may come and men
may go,
But I go on for ever.

I wind about, and in and out,
With here a blossom sailing,
And here and there a lusty trout,
And here and there a grayling,

And here and there a foamy flake
Upon me as I travel
With many a silverywaterbreak
Above the golden gravel,

And draw them all along, and
flow
To join the brimming river,

For men may come and men
Men may go,
But I go on for ever.

I steal by lawns and grassy plots,
I slide by hazel covers;
I move the sweet for-get-me-nots
That grow for happy lovers.

I slip, I slide, I gloom, I glance,
Among my skimming swal-
lows;
I make the netted sunbeam dance
Against my sandy shallows.

I murmur under moon and stars
In brambly wildernesses;
I linger by my shingly bars;
I loiter round my cresses.

And out again I curve and flow
To join the brimming river,
For men may come and men
may go,
But I go on for ever.

ALFRED. LORD TENNYSON.

This is what belongs to the future. Not the socialist "Manifesto".
Regards, ATFlynn.

2007-09-06T08:37:00.000-07:00

I'm Not Quite Sure Who Is The Most Dangerous

2007-09-06T07:00:00.000-07:00

The Bank of England has had a few words to say about things. It sounds serious, but why did they allow the Investment Banks and other investment funds to recover the money for now? These are the people responsible for the mess, they should take the hit. But of course, it will be the ordinary working TaxPayer who is going to foot the bill, again. Bloody Bankers.

Most of the Banks and much of the Financial Industry, have only a vague idea of the amount of debt they are committed to. The rules on Liquidity have been rather stretched and in some cases broken.

That plus the Housing Market inflation, then the fact that Gordon wants to spend £8 Billion on more housing for Immigrants (at the TaxPayers expence) and then another £45 Billion re-building ALL the schools in England and Wales, you Poor Bloody TaxPayers are going to need a lot of overtime to pay for this next lot of Waste and Drivel coming out of Politicians and Parliament. The Bill for all this Debt, must now be in the region of £2000Billion.

I was thinking only this morning about the Bloody Nonsense that Westminster and Whitehall have stacked up for the next two, three and possibily four Generations of TaxPayers. I would expect to come back to this world in the year 2107, and find just the same thing. TaxPayers struggling to pay off Gordons debt. And I wouldn't be at all supprised to see Gordon still here. If it isn't him, I'm sure I will recognise the smell.

Tomorrows Programe, Banking on the 6th. September

2007-09-05T11:57:00.000-07:00

Just a quick note to let you know that tomorrow is the beginning of the wind up for the Financial Sector.

The World Economy starts to recognise who is up and who is down. It is only my opinion, but watch Barclays Bank. I think there is at least one major Bank in serious trouble. Only time will tell.

I'll post again tomorrow. Regards, ATFlynn. WatchKeeper.

What Price Politics Now Policies Are At An End?

2007-09-05T08:56:00.000-07:00

What Price The British Army Now that It Has Lost Again? What a pathetic shower of "Pretend Politicians", and Armed Forces Commanders, "The Comedy Commanders". Jackson, while in office never said a word out of place in public. And now he has the Bloody cheek to say the Americans got it wrong. The only wrong they did, was to trust the Labour Party and Blair.

The British TaxPayer is providing Billions of £pounds to the UN, and then throwing in the Army the Air force and the Bloody Navy. And is it true, that the MoD in London has more Staff than the British Army has Soldiers? And the Royal Air Force has only 12 Twelve pilots, trained to fly after Sunset? Where, Ten years ago, the Royal Air Force had Five Squadrons of Air Defence to cover London. Now there are No Squadrons. Let us not forget either, that only a year or two back, alright, five or six years ago. The Royal Navy on exercise, had to shout "Bang" to save the cost of a "blank" for the Guns. Can you imagine the Naval Ratings running about going "Bang", then falling over laughing. And yet we can still pay Billions of £pounds to the UN, take in all the Waifs and Strays that turn up at the door. At the cost of more Billions of £pounds of Bloody TaxPayers Money.

And again, look at the cost of Housing now today. But what can you expect when the Poor Bloody TaxPayer is forced to pay-up to provide the money to pay the Housing Benefit. Ten Thousand £10,000 a Week to Landlords of three Bed-Roomed Houses, crammed with as many as thirty occupants, the Ten Thousand £10,000 since the late 1990s. Sandy Bruce-Lockhart, at that time Leader of the Kent County Council and a victim of the Government Policy on immigration, wrote and asked me how these Criminal People Smugglers made a profit out of the crime. I have just looked out the Letter dater 28th. November 2001. It turned out that the Government had to pay Kent some Six Billion £pounds compensation in what they called a "Public Service Agreement". And it is now, Lord Bruce-Lockhart. Not Mister.

This was a time when the Government had a "Visa Control" unit in Leeds. I was in touch with them from about 1998, until Jack Straw or David Blunkett closed them down. Every time my contact and I came up with an answer to immigration problems we were told that we were "Extreme and Politically Sensitive". Now it turns out that this Government had no intention whatsoever, of closing down the flow of Immigrants and Asylum Seekers. This is what was Planned. And going back to the Price of Housing, the Government is planning to use Eight Billion £pouns of TaxPayers money to build more Houses for more Immigrants.

I'll tell you once again, your only chance, yours and your family and the Grandchildren's only chance, is to take away the Governments power to levy Direct Taxation. You the TaxPayers, set up your own system of Taxation on a Parish Council and Town Council system. You, the poor Bloody TaxPayer, take control of the whole shooting match. When a Politician wants to spend money, he, they, will have to come and ask the Parish or Town Council for permission. Thats how it should be. Most of the Money is yours any way.

Let me know what you think. Enough for now, time for a cuppa. Regards, ATFlynn

Is Globalisation Another Name For Monkey Business

2007-09-03T08:22:00.000-07:00

I was listening to a radio report on WTO farm agreements and bits and pieces. And I wondered if the people in America, Canada, Gt. Britain and Europe have any idea what the shape of the future is going to look like if the general public don't wake up and put a stop to all this bloody nonsense.

America, Canada, Gt. Britain, Europe and other countries, Australia, New Zealand are in danger of being sold out to a bunch of other countries over Farming and Agriculture. The plan is, that developed countries must cut back on farm production, closing down their Industry and buying up the "surplus" from the undeveloped countries.

If the Western countries plus Aust' and NZ and especially America, stick to their guns and tell these people to get lost, the alternative is only too predictable. You will be at their mercy before a year is out. But from the talk and from the Politics of some countries in Europe and some people in Britain even, this is a game and the winner Dominates the World.

No, I haven't missed the United Nations. How can I when at every turn, Labour Politicians in London love to play off the UN against the USA, or any other Government that has an opposite point of view. How can you miss the UN. A week ago, perhaps two weeks, the Express News Paper printed a short piece about the corruption at the UN. I was thinking that the EU, wants the British seat on the council, I say let them have it and the Bloody great Bill that goes with it. It would knock at least £5. a week off of every TaxPayers Demand. I think it is long past time the Americans kept more of their money in their pocket and stopped giving it away to a bunch of people who already have shed loads of it. Give your TaxPayers a rest, they certainly deserve it.

Enough for now. You Americans have been propping up much of the world for the last Sixty years. Time you took a Bloody break. (And Thanks.) Regards, ATFlynn, WatchKeeper.

WHAT PRICE SOVEREGNTY WHEN HUNGRY

2007-09-02T06:01:00.000-07:00

I was going over old ground this morning. Mostly the off-book debt that this government has taken on.

Our local Hospital. At the planning stage it was to cost less than £100 Million. Then it jumped to £129, Million and then when it was built and handed over in 2001, the cost was £229, Million. But that is only the start of the complete and utter nonsense that must have addled the so called "brains" of British Politics. (It could have been the "weed" they smoked.)

The Hospital was handed over to the NHS, in 2001 and the initial building cost was paid, £129. Million. In addition, a further £100. Million was handed over making a total payment of £229. Million.

Then, in 2006, the first Five Yearly, Re-Financing took place and another £116. Million was paid to the assorted people holding the debt, plus of course the Annual Servicing Fee, of £37.5 Million. And don't forget, this goes on for Sixty bloody years. A Service Charge every year, that is adjustable every year. And a Re-Financing every Five years. Even in the year 2061, there is provision to extend the arrangement futher. There is no completion date for the payments. And I do have a copy of this "contract" direct from the DoH.

Another surprise this month, there are now TEN Million people of working age, now living on Benefits of one sort or another, in this country. But of course, these poor people are not un-employed. Only about One Million are un-employed.

I always look at the Election figures. The number of votes available, those that did vote and those that didn't bother. The other figures to take into account are the numbr of working TaxPayers compared to the numbers on the Elactoral Roll. Since 2001, the number of voters has jumped from 27 Million, to 39 Million in '07. Yet the number of working TaxPayers has change from 28, Million to 29,Million. And then, the last time I checked the Tax Revenue's, was in 2005. I still have thoes figures somewhere.

Apart from the very fragile Global Economy, more than 50% of the employed in Gt. Britain
are now occupied with non-jobs. Look at this nonsense with re-cycling, HIPS, Home Information Packs, and that bloody Monsterous, Global Warming. Yes, there is Climate Change but that isn't man-made. This might be a wet year, but the flooding has been made even worse by the change from spring sowing of arable crops, to the autum sowing. Most of the autum and winter rain fall now has to be drained off the land and channeled into the water-courses in a matter of an hour or so. That is the cause of most flooding. The reports are in some country News Papers. Have a look at the EDP archives where the river Bailiff was made to restore the riverbed and not allowed to remove some weed growth. That spring, the river flooded for the first time in many years.

And now that we are on Agricultural matters, what about the worst possible disaster that can happen to the Western world now that we have all but abandoned food production? Has no one
thought of climate change to the extent that given we have now had a very wet period, isn't it just, ever so slightly possible, next year could make up for that and we could have a very very dry year and we lose all our, or nearly all of our food production.

When you consider that the world is over-populated by one or even two Billion people, now would be a good time to re-adjust the Human Population of the world. Have you not noticed that when man starts to get too cocky and thinks he can run the world, change this or that, nature has a most effective way of giving him a good kick in the arse. I have that feeling it is due now,or even over-due.

Hang on to your Hollyhocks folks, there are three or even four Disasters lined up out there just waiting to for the next move. I think you should pray that a major British Bank fails in the next ten days. There is going to be a shortage of food, prices are already on they up.

Regards, ATFlynn.

Remove Westminsters Powers. Abandon Whitehall.

2007-08-03T03:26:00.000-07:00

For the last seventeen years, since our Sovereignty was so carelessly given away to Brussels we, as a country have had to ask others to allow this course of action or that change of practice or function. Of course, politicians love it. When things go wrong, as they invariably do these days, they always have Brussels to blame. ( the old seamans excuse, "not me chief, I'm a cripple".

Well, if all you Employers and all you Employees get together, you can change the way you are paid and, using an Agent, have your income, wages, earnings, paid to yourself Off-Shore free of any stoppages.

What I am proposing is that the 29 million, well if we take out some seven or eight million Central Government and Local Authority workers, the other working Taxpayers, can use their Parish or Town Council and nominate these "First Tier Councillors" to become your Tax Collectors. By doing it this way you avoid having the off-shore Bank inform the HMRC, of your Account, because the Bank will not know your name or address.

Any Company or Business needing to make the change to become an off-shore company or to still be registered here as a Holding Company and conduct their financial affairs in a Tax Free haven, will have no problem. Avoiding Taxation legally, is not only easy, but you can save a massive amount of money you now spend on Accountants, Advisers Consultants and other hangers-on. Think about it.

Enough for now, Regards, ATFlynn WatchKeeper