Thursday, 9 June 2022

Why I am not standing in 2022

I'm not planning on standing this time because the voting public gave me a simple choice:

  • I could spend another 14 years (or more) banging my head against the brick wall of utter indifference that is the Jersey electorate

Or

  • I could take my ideas off island to the rest of the world where I will find supporters and thereby change the world - and Jersey along with it as they are part of that same world

Which would you choose?


The reason for this is the refusal of the Jersey people to acknowledge the problems we face as an island – even though they moan about them continually


Jersey faces two sets of problems:

  • Those that under its control

  • Those that are not under its control

Although the 2nd type are bigger and nastier than the 1st, it is actually the 1st type that will destroy us because we utterly refuse to do anything about them


In the 1st type, there is really only one problem:

It is usually described as having too many people on the island. In reality, it is not that there are too many people. The reality is that there are too many arseholes

An arsehole is someone who is only interested in taking from the island and giving nothing back in return. They don't intend to retire here but plan on returning home - whether that's to

England,

Scotland,

Ireland,

Portugal,

Poland

or where ever.

And because they are not going to have to live with the consequences of their actions, they don't care what kind of wasteland they leave behind them.


Now don't get me wrong: there are people from England, Scotland, Ireland, Portugal, Poland and where ever who have made Jersey their home, raised their children here and contribute to the island's life. I consider them as every bit Jersey-born as myself. But that's because they're not arseholes.


This wouldn't be such a big problem if there weren't so many of them. Out of an island population of over 103,000, at least 100,000 of them are arseholes. Note: that also includes many Jersey people there because they have been infected by the same short-sightedness.

And until we get the number of arseholes under control, we are never going to be able to sort out this increasing mess we find ourselves in. Nor are we going to be able to deal with the 2nd type of problems that also threaten the island.


Now the good news is that this problem is self-solving. The bad news is that it will only be solved by a complete and catastrophic failure of the island's economy. The arseholes will inevitably make the island unworkable and then they will leave.

And I expect this to happen in the next 3-4 years - just in time for the 2026 election.


Now this will be very sad because an awful lot of people will get hurt when this happens and this is particularly sad because it is all avoidable if only they bothered to listen to me or someone like me.

However, I don't feel bad about this because they're not stupid and they know that this is coming. But they are not worried because they sincerely believe that they will be able to get out before it all collapses. But they won't because they'll stay here just a little longer to stuff more money into their pockets before they leave – until it is too late


So how is this collapse going to come about?


Well, it will probably start with the loss of the 15,000 jobs in the finance industry due to be replaced by AI. This was put forward at then end of 2018, just after the elections. And as the finance industry now only employs 22% of the workforce, from past highs of 70%, we can see that it is going on apace.


When those 15,000 jobs go, that will mean that at least 10,000 families will no longer be able to support their mortgages – either because they no longer have any work or having found work elsewhere suddenly lose their cheap-bank-subsidised mortgage - and will be forced to leave the island in search of work. That will be a reduction in the island population of between 20,000 to 30,000 people.


The 10,000 properties dumped onto the market will cause the collapse of the property market. This will end all new private housing development. When combined with the massive loss of tax revenues that this exodus will produce, that will end all public spending on property and will effectively mean the end of the construction industry, our second biggest employer after the States of Jersey.


That will result in another 20,000 to 30,000 people leaving and another 10,000 properties dumped on the market.


This will destroy retail and hospitality resulting in further losses and more people leaving the island.


This will bankrupt the States of Jersey resulting in yet another exodus of people as civil servants find that they no longer get paid and so leave the island as well.

At the end of this, the island will be left with a much lower population,

skill gaps,

no economy,

empty properties

and a decaying infrastructure.

In short, it will look very similar to Germany and Japan at the end of World War 2.

In fact, it will look very much like it did at the end of the Occupation in 1945.


Now you can see why some people call me a terrorist. Although there is a certain irony because this is precisely what I have been working to prevent rather than cause it. So technically, I am an anti-terrorist.

However, people consider me a terrorist because I dare to talk about these things rather than pretend that everything is peachy and will be able to continue this way forever.


For me, the saddest part of this whole thing is that all of this pain is self-administered. No one did this to us - we did it to our selves.


We had a booming economy that could survive the destructiveness of even this many the arseholes. And we killed it - because we thought that we were cleverer than Europe.


I am, of course, referring to Zero/Ten where instead of losing £8 million by the elimination of Offshore Company Tax, we chose to lose around £128 million by cutting how much the banks paid and eliminating company taxation entirely. Although, that was chronically and stupendously stupid, on its own, it was not the cause of the mess we find ourselves in today.


That was the decision that the only way to raise that lost money was by personal taxation. On paper, it didn't look so bad: £100 million divided by 100,000 is only £1,000 extra each year for every man, woman and child on the island and that only represents just over 3% out of the average earnings of £30,000 per year – ignoring the fact that many of those people are not earners – being children, the elderly, the disabled and the unemployed.


The only problem with that is something called Supply-Side Economics which states the paradox that the more taxes a government charges, the less money it actually raises.


Now we can see that clearly operating in VRD where each year it had to be raised because the money it produced was less than the year before until the whole system collapsed and it had to be scrapped/


We're now seeing it again with GST where it started with 3%, it is now 5% and they keep reducing the de minimus so more and more goods are taxed in effort to get more money simply because not only is GST not working, it is also killing local businesses because people are buying more and more online in response to the rises. And as it killls local businesses, it reduces the number of people working in those industries which reduces the income tax that is raised


And we can see the reverse in France. A few years ago, they reduced the VAT paid on building materials from 20% to 5% on a trial and then decided to keep it going because they getting more money from the lower tax.


Yet each year, the government refuses to learn this lesson and keeps adding more taxes.

And you can guarantee that after this next election, they will raise taxes again


However, they do have one idea of how to raise taxes without just increasing them.

And it is this idea that is the worst of them all.


They reasoned that if you just increased the population, it would spread the burden.


And that decision lit a fuse that is inevitably going to blow the island apart


There are 2 problems here:


The first is that we have an immigration policy that actively encourages arseholes and discourages non-arseholes.


If you are a professional people with a useful qualification like

teachers,

doctors,

nurses

engineers

and the like

that would actually contribute to the economy. You could only stay for 3 years, at which point, you would have to give up your job


Then you would be given the choice of staying on in Jersey by getting an unqualified job or leaving the island to pursue your career


What serious professional is even going to contemplate coming over here under those circumstances?


Meanwhile, you can step off the boat or the plane with

no job,

nowhere to live

no money in your pocket

no skillsets to offer

a substance addiction and

a criminal record

and you can stay for as long as you like


Why should we be surprised that the people who come over are arseholes under those conditions?


And the civil service is making it worse. They just keep increasing their own numbers even though those extra people don't actually do anything useful.


We know this because Charlie Parker told us when he first started that there were over 3,000 jobs that were useless and that he was going to get rid of them.


Instead, and in the middle of a pandemic. he actually increased them by 400 in 2020.

Now that is a lie. That is only the 400 that they could not hide by

contracts,

consultants

and quangoes.

So I hate to think what the real figure is. And this is not going to slow down because government doesn't want it to.


Every increase in civil servants, increases the paygrade of the existing civil servants. We know this because in both cases of the appointment of child commissioner and the charity commissioner, we were told that it cost an extra £1million a year. That wasn't the money paid to those two people. It was the money paid to those two people AND all of their managers


So between the arseholes we are bringing in for the private sector and the arseholes we are bringing in for the public sector, we are well and truly screwed


But that is only the first problem


The second problem is that no one has bothered to work out how many people they needed or the sheer cost of the infrastructure that is going to be needed to support them.


During the 2018 elections, the figure put forward was that we needed a 1,000 new houses.


Just after the election, I was told by a civil servant that the number was actually 8,000. So I asked the obvious question “where are we going to put them?” and I got the glib answer “oh we'll find somewhere”. So I pursued it a little further

OK, those 8,000 houses are going to need to be connected to the road system, so how much extra road is that?

Those 8,000 houses are going to need electricity, water and sewage management. How much extra will we need to invest in those utilities to support those 8,000 houses?

And what about waste management? How much extra rubbish will 8,000 extra houses produce?

And 8,000 houses means 8,000 couples or 16,000 people. So they will want car parking for 2 cars per household and an extra 2 car parking spaces in town representing a total of 32,000 car parking spaces. Where are we going to put them?

And 8,000 couples will mean at least 8,000 children. Where are they going to go to school?

So, 8,000 houses mean an increase in population of at least 24,000 or 24% increase in the population.

Can our hospital handle an increase of 24% in population?

Can our airport and harbour handle an increase of 24% more people AND 24% more freight coming into and going out of the island?


How much extra cost will those extra 8,000 houses be to the states of Jersey?


With each question, the civil servant's jaw dropped a bit more. This was the first time, he had considered this – and it was his job to consider it.


You see, each new person in the island is not just a new taxpayer. They are also a new cost for the infrastructure to adjust to in order to support them.


The question I have repeatedly asked is: can we actually afford to increase the population? To put it another way: is each new person actually costing us more than we will ever get back in tax?


And no one will answer that question because it is too damn scary


OK, so what comes after this End-of-the-world scenario I have painted?


Does the island just sink beneath the waves and become the stuff of legend like Atlantis?


Well that is one option. But it is not the only option.


There is one other option: we do what we did after World War 2 – we re-build


To do that, we must return to the spirit and vision we had before 1961: we must learn to look beyond our shores. find new markets, develop new skills and export to the world as we did in the past with such things as

lace,

cider,

ship building,

knitting Jerseys,

farming,

tourism

and even finance

and a whole bunch of things I've missed.

We have faced this very problem so many times before, and overcome it so many times before, you'd think we would be used to it by now – or at least not act quite so surprised when it happens again.


So, what new markets can we get into?


Well, it's quite obvious that we are at a real disadvantage if we move physical objects. The English Channel is a real barrier to the movement of physical objects.


So that rules out the primary and secondary economies of extraction and manufacturing – and that only leaves the tertiary economy known disparagingly by some idiots as the services economy.


The smug farmer sitting on their tractor thinking that they are contributing something of real value to the economy unlike those useless tertiary jobs forgets that

  • that tractor only exists (like the plough before it) because an army of tertiary engineers designed it – and the factory that built it – and the roads that connected the factory to the farm

  • That the farmer is only able to grow so much food because an army of tertiary chemists developed better fertilisers and pesticides to increase their yield

  • That the farmer is able to sell their produce because tertiary logisticians and tertiary marketers connected buyers with the farmer and organised to get that produce to those buyers

  • That some tertiary marketer told the farmer what was the most profitable crop to grow in the first place

  • And all the while, some tertiary teachers are providing the farmer's children with an education for a better future

  • While at the same time, tertiary doctors and nurses, tertiary firefighters, tertiary policemen and tertiary military forces keep the farmer and their family safe and healthy all of the time.


The true effect of the tertiary economy on our lives is as profound as it is ignored.


I mean, do you really think about the sheer number of skilled people it takes to keep your internet connection working? Not just locally and nationally, but internationally as well? No you don't. You just switch on your laptop and order from Amazon and never give a second thought to the army of people who make that possible.


And to take advantage of that tertiary economy and the opportunities it provides, all we have to do is reverse our present immigration policy and actively seek to encourage qualified professionals to make Jersey their home rather than actively discourage them.


And then we would have access to the very people we need to help us tackle that second set of problems I mentioned at the very beginning.



Sunday, 27 May 2018

Thank You

To the 976 who voted for me: thank you.

Was it enough to create change?

In 2008, 47 votes were enough to scare the Income Tax Department back into obeying the law

In 2010, 97 votes were enough to persuade the government to create a Sovereign Wealth Fund.

So what will 976 votes be enough to do the job this time around?

Will it be enough to force government to start obeying the law again and sort out the problems I highlighted?

Well, we'll have to wait and see on that.

The first changes won't be seen until everyone has forgotten the election so it will still be a couple of weeks yet.

An interesting glimmer of hope is the number of politicians who claim to have voted for me or have said that they found my videos thought-provoking.

If just 30 of those 976 votes came from States Members, then things can change.

Again, we'll have to wait and see

I'll keep you posted here as to developments

Once again, thank you to everyone who voted for me

Saturday, 12 May 2018

The End Of Government

This generation is going to see the end of government

According to Nobel Prize-winning economist Fredrich Hayek, it is a fundamental right of every person to be able to produce their own money.

This right was taken away from us by government and then shared with the banks which is why we're in the mess we're in, why there are periodic collapses like the one ten years ago (and the one just around the corner) and why no one can seem to fix it.

While government has control over the money supply, it has control over you.

Now that control has been returned to you by two little things called the internet and block chain technology. Now I'm not talking specifically about BitCoin - but the technology that runs it because that technology means that anyone and everyone can produce their own crypto-currency and are now free to set their own value in the world marketplace.

Once you have control over your own money, you no longer need government

You're free to pursue whatever you believe in without having to wait for the government or even the majority to agree with you first.

If you want more renewable energy, go online, connect with like-minded people, crowdsource it, crowdfund it, do it.
If you want to stop deforestation, go online, connect with like-minded people, crowdsource it, crowdfund it, do it.
If you want affordable housing, go online, connect with like-minded people, crowdsource it, crowdfund it, do it.
If you want to save the penguin, well don't take the wrapper off.

The only question remaining is:
What do you want to do first?

Is The New Hospital Building Making Things Worse?

So in an earlier post, I talked about Paul who had suffered outrages at the hands of the Social Security.

But they weren't the worst thing to happen to him.

As I said, he got cancer. They performed an operation to remove a chunk of liver and a kidney and put him on this course of drugs to deal with a cancer too small to be operated on. Over the months, this cancer seemed static.

Then his blood calcium levels rose. The consultant said that it was nothing and indeed Paul's blood results were better than his.
The blood calcium levels continued to rise. He was given some drug to counteract it and told not to worry. The drug didn't work
Over the months, his blood calcium levels contained to rise. Paul's condition worsened. His wife, who was an ex-Nurse, knew something was wrong and demanded that he be seen by another consultant.
The second consultant told Paul that elevated blood calcium was usually a sure sign that the cancer was attacking the bones. So he did some tests and required Paul to stay at the hospital until the results came back. As soon as the consultant got the results, he strapped Paul to a stretcher and flew him to the mainland for emergency Radium treatment. Paul's body was riddled with cancers. Well, it was too little too late and Paul died a few months later.

That was over 15 months ago and Paul's widow has been trying to get a meeting with these specialists. She's not interested in suing any one or pointing a finger of blame. She just wants to find out how Paul could have got so bad whilst under the hospital's observation. That's a reasonable question, isn't it?

The hospital is ignoring her.

To add insult to injury, a friend of Paul's widow had exactly the same condition as Paul but because he didn't have Paul's consultant, the problem was spotted early, treated and the doctors have given him another 2 years at the least.

So has life and death in Jersey become a lottery depending on which doctor you see?

So would Paul be alive today had he seen a different consultant? I can't answer that because I'm not a doctor. All I know is that there is definitely something very wrong with a society where we even have to contemplate a question like that.

So I'd like to end by leaving you with 2 questions to think about:
  1. Would the outcome have been different if we had built a new hospital building.
  2. Do the problems with the hospital go deeper than that but the building is diverting vital attention and resources away from the real problems and putting peoples lives at risk?

A Cure For Tax Addiction

Just a quick update on the health warning I raised earlier about tax addiction

Initial reports stated that the number of people who were suffering from tax addiction was only 91 and restricted to the group calling themselves politicians. Well there have now been reports of major outbreaks amongst the general population as well

A nasty symptom of tax addiction is that you want everyone else to pay more tax than you by suggesting a new tax that doesn't include you. So we have a suggestion of a tax on the rich, or a tax on businesses or politicians who don't care who they tax because they can always vote themselves a pay increase that more than compensates for any extra amount of tax they might have to pay - at your expense of course.

Is there a cure for tax addiction where we don't have tax anybody any more than we do now? Well there is hope
In 2008 and 2010, I suggested an alternative to tax in the form of the Sovereign Wealth Fund and the government listened and created one - although they called it a Combined Investment Fund so they didn't have to give me any credit. In those intervening 8 years, it has generated at £220 million or £27.5 million a year. Without it, every taxpayer would've had to stump up £500 a year of £4,000 over the 8 years.

So, it proves that you can make money as a government in ways other than taxation.

Are there others?

Yes there are:
  1. A smaller Sovereign Wealth Fund dedicated to offering venture capital support to local businesses for a piece of the equity. There are plenty more industries on this island than just finance, farming and tourism. There's online gaming, for example. That's not online gambling. These are games like "Farmville" which generates £600 million a year. Wouldn't it be nice to have a slice of that pie? Or how about "World Of Warcraft" that makes £110 million per month, every month. Wouldn't a chunk of that help with our economy. Are our kids up to it? Yes they are, they just need a little guidance.
  2. A bank of Jersey. When I raised this idea to Mr Cook in an email, his reply was that he couldn't see a need for one. Well, if you're reading this, Mr Cook: Because banks make money. I would've thought someone who is head of Jersey Finance would've known that. We could loan money for housing and even student loans at much lower and more sensible rate rather than leave them fending for themselves and at the mercy of less compassionate banking
  3. Lose the Club of Quality. Having our own bank would open us to more flexibility with banks which are not part of the top 500 - banks like Tesco Bank and Aldi Bank.
  4. Bonds. What is wrong with letting islanders fund capital projects like the airport?
  5. University Hospital. What about setting up our hospital as a centre of excellence and learning? That would attract better staff than a new hospital building
  6. Keep the money in the local economy. The worst offender is the government. Every chance they get, they give the money away to some other country. They grow richer and we grow poorer.
  7. Use the civil service. The same problems that we're facing over here are faced by everyone everywhere in the world. If we fix them here, we can sell the solution anywhere. We could send our people out as consultants. Imagine that
  8. Use the ageing population. Just because some is retired doesn't mean that they are useless. There are tons of ways for them to still be useful that they would love to do. They're not a burden, they're a wealth of knowledge and expertise that we're failing to tap

How much would they have to earn? Well first off, they would target the £100 million deficit left by Zero/Ten that no tax has been able to fill. After that, if they earn even more then we could even think of tax cuts.

Gosh! What an idea!

Saturday, 5 May 2018

How We Really Treat The Ageing Population

I wanted to show how just how bad the government's money grabbing was by showing you the pettiest example I could find

And it is this.

My proposer Richard has recently celebrated his 93rd birthday. Because he has been sensible and has a private pension in addition to his states pension, he has been informed that he earns just a few pounds too much each month to qualify for a free TV licence and so must pay for it himself

Well, that sounds fair enough, doesn't it? This is something that is mean tested to ensure only the most deserving get this benefit.

The problem is that it is all a lie

The BBC TV licensing law clearly states that anyone over the age of 75 automatically qualifies for a free licence from the BBC themselves. There is no mention of size of earnings or anything else. No, as far as the BBC is concerned, if you reach 75 years of age, you deserve to view their programmes for free.

So my question is: what happens to the money that Richard pays each year for a licence that he should be getting for free?

Is it given to the BBC? I don't see why because they don't want it.

So keeps it? And what do they do with it? What essential plan could justify stealing this money from a pensioner?

Now a couple of years ago, The French government honoured Richard and small number of his compadres with the Legion d'Honneur for his part in helping to liberate the people of France in World War II. So in another country, he is an honoured war hero and a national treasure.
Over here, he is just a vulnerable cash cow for some civil servant to cheat and steal from.

Does that make you feel proud of your island?

But it's not all bad.

At least now we have an answer to the perennial question - what is going to done about the ageing population.
And the answer is: why, they're going to fleece us for every penny they can get, of course.
Isn't that something to look forward to?

The Need For A Department of Re-Training And Re-Deployment

What do you think of Charlie Parker's new plan for turning Jersey into a copy of Whitehall?
It all looks very exciting, doesn't it?
It promises to save money and reduce jobs. Well we've never heard that before.
What a steaming pile of bovine faeces that is
Except it isn't in its present form. Instead it is going to be a repeat of the nonsense with Ag & Fish where the department was closed, but the staff continued to go to the same place, sit at the same desk for the same money and pension - and no one knew what to do with them any more until they eventually gave up and they became invisible. I recently asked a civil servant how many people from Ag & Fish were still there being paid to twiddle their thumbs all day and I was told "Not many"
How many years has that been?
To stand any chance of success, the plan needs another department. Let's call it the Department Of Re-Training and Re-Deployment to put these "unemployed" civil servants in.
Why bother with a whole new department? Two reasons:
  1. Because Charlie Parker states that 22 senior civil servants are going to lose their positions and that some 3,300 job profiles are barmy and inappropriate. 3,300! That's almost half the official number of the civil service. The last thing we want is them disappearing into the background and getting paid to do nothing We need to keep track of them over time because if we can't fire them, we're going to have to re-train them and re-deploy them.
  2. How much is training going to cost? If we're talking about 3,300 needing re-training, that is not a small amount and it needs to be budgeted for - and planned. You know, things like timetables and deadlines.

Do you know who has least faith in this plan? Charlie Parker himself. He thinks that all of this change and re-training is only going to save over £1 million a year. That's a saving of 1/6% of the budget. 4 years ago, Senator Ozouf was promising an annual increase in efficiencies of 2% or 12 times higher

And how long is it going to take to realise that £1 million a year saving? Well the first 2 1/2 years will pay for the pension plan pay-off of the previous CEO. Probably another 1 1/2 years will be needed to pay for all of the consultants we're presently consulting with. Oh that's 4 years of upheavel for nothing to show for it just in time for the next election.