wrong place, wrong time

This one has been brewing for a while, but, first, a couple of observations:

Tax loopholes are a 'known', even deliberate, political presence (spelt 'presents'). Big corporations, big earners, all escape their tax liabilities by being permitted to leak their profits into various holes where the taxman cannot get at them (but they can - go figure). And yet, 4 years into the current fiscal catastrophe, the Cameron Conservative government of England has only just seen the fairness of looking at closing off some of these loopholes. What does it say about the moral compass of a government which first looks to cut welfare payments before they consider that the rich might just be expected to pay some tax?

The English Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Rt Hon George Osbourne, continues to sneak around skulking behind two pillars -  "It is the fault of the previous government, they left us in huge debt"; and "it is the fault of the current situation in Euope and the rest of the world". Why would he absolve the rest of the world for any influence on the previous government? Especially when the then oposition were claiming that they were not going far enough in accomodating the wishes of the banking community? On the topic of which, how come the said banking community are now raking in huge, after tax, profits? It is not because they are lending money to British entrepreneurs and small businesses.

Now to what I really wanted to present - two realites which fly in the face of current English public policy: squeese the unemployed, and build houses - the two central planks of a morally bankrupt system.

Cutting the welfare bill is the raison d'etre of the Cameron government - Osbourne never met a poor person yet that he hasn't seen as a workshy scrounger. Now, consider a moment, where are the jobs and where are the people? As in other countries with similar political ideals, the work is not where are the people. Large swathes of the country (essentially those abandoned by the sainted Thatcher who must surely exist in a hell of her own making) are industrial wastelands. Traditional industries were purged by the Thatch and replaced by no support, after all, they weren't merchant bankers (good example of Cockney rhyming slang). Compound that with the SE-centricity of Whitehall and the nether regions continue to wither (whilst the centre festers). How are these people expected to escape the poverty trap? Where there are jobs, housing costs are high, and public transit expensive. A person cannot just upsticks and decamp because that costs money, money they do not have.

OK says Oz, the solution is to build houses, employ builders, fix the problem. House prices are high, people cannot afford to buy, so the 'simple' solution is to build lots of new houses (wherever there is green ground). I can tell you there are loads of empty houses everywhere outside of SE England. Where there is no strong empoyment, houses stand empty for years - why would anybody buy them? Except maybe as an investment opportunity - to rent to all the unemployed and underpaid poor people who cannot afford to buy them.

Two realities - one root cause. Where there is no strong employment base, there is a long spiral down into degeneration. The solution? Back to what real people have been saying for years - spend public money to build things which provide long-term employment (once a house is built it adds nothing to the economy, a house does not a job make). Lend money to local businessmen who want to make stuff. Screw the banks.