Wednesday, 18 February 2009

Stelzer attacks Brown

Respected American economist, Irwin Stelzer has come out and attacked Brown's premiership in this article for the Daily Telegraph.

Stelzer argues that despite Britain's current problems, the country can be fixed - but crucially NOT BY BROWN.

Brown's attempts to 'save the world' are distracting him from the task in hand - that is to deliver for the people of Britain. At the moment he is not doing this, and we are poorer, both financially and politically for it.

Time for an election, anyone?

Tuesday, 17 February 2009

Brown on bonuses

Over at the Times our Dear Leader is empathising with the "millions of hard-working people" about how those nasty bankers that he claims have ruined the economy (No, it couldn't perhaps be anything to do with him, him being the Chancellor under Bliar) are now getting bonuses for their misdeeds. Obviously, our Dear Leader wants to distance himself from the fact that now UK PLC has a significant shareholding in many of the UK's highstreet banks, and so is in effect paying these nasty bankers such sums.

However, his analysis forgets to mention one crucial nugget of information. If it had not been for his Government's insistence that all the banks needed saving by partial nationalisation, then there would not be such a 'moral hazard' of taxpayers paying bonuses. He has created this situation.

Also, if those nasty bankers realised that the taxpayer would not jump straight in when things had gone a bit pear-shaped, then perhaps the remuneration structure would have been slightly different. Bonuses might have been awarded for long term performance, as they would have known that in order to keep the gravy train rolling, the bank paying their bonus still had to be solvent!

Oh well, we can rest assured that "we are taking further steps towards building a successful, competitive and responsible financial sector of the future." Whatever that will mean.

Smoking status

Earlier today, I received a phone call from my GP’s surgery enquiring as to my “smoking status” that is whether I currently smoked or had done so in the past. I replied honestly that I did not smoke and the woman on the other end of the phone said “Good, right answer.” Now, whether I’m reading into this too much I do not know, but it seemed quite outspoken of her to suggest that by me not smoking I had got the answer ‘right’ and that had I been a smoker this answer would have been ‘wrong’

As far as I’m concerned, what business is it of the State to intrude into the private lives of its citizens and ask them such questions?

If I choose to smoke that is my business, I would go out to the shops buy a pack of cigs and a lighter and smoke happily away, however if I chose to do so, I’d be castigated every now and then by this anonymous receptionist sitting at the other end of the phone for choosing the ‘wrong’ answer. Furthermore, she stated that these smoking status requests would be made every year until I am 25!!

What next? Phonecalls checking when the last time I ate anything that the State deems ‘junkfood’

Smoking has now become Thoughtcrime.

Liberal Test

Have a go for yourself over at The Libertarian Party website

Created by LPUK


Welcome to my first blog – The Cynical Libertarian. This blog may change quite a bit initially until I am satisfied with it, as I’m new to the blogosphere any help would be appreciated.

The focus of the blog is on current affairs and issues in the UK, but global issues that affect me personally or the UK may be covered from time to time, depending on whether I can find the time and effort.

Please comment on the articles and have your say, although reading them is also fine as well.

That’s it for now, more articles will be added as time passes and the news moves on.

Thanks, CL