Globalists Target Farming

 In January os 2021 I posted this blog: Delphius' Debate: USA: Watch The farms (delphiusdebate.blogspot.com)

Where I expressed concern that farms were being bought out by large corporations.

Well, look what's happening now. In Sri Lanka a government has been toppled because of it's severe environmental restrictions. The Sri Lankan government banned fertiliser. Yes, it banned fertiliser use in farms. 

So yield dropped and farmers (and the people generally) revolted.

In The Netherlands, the Farmers are being teargassed for protesting against a government that is trying to bring in rules that limit nitrogen use. Banning fertiliser and also limiting livestock. That's strange, a government on the other side of the world doing exactly the same thing. It's almost like there's a plan being followed across the globe, like someone else is telling governments what to do.

I have said before that moves are afoot to corporatise the farms of the world. By banning essential things like fertiliser or limiting livestock numbers then the farms become unprofitable and ripe for the picking. Who will pick them up? Big corporations will. Big corporations will take them over and run them using their genetically modified crops that require less fertiliser. The move will be greenwashed around the globe as a triumph. 

Even those farms that hold out will eventually be forced to use the corporate GM crops as they will be the only ones approved by government. Available at huge cost no doubt. A cost high enough to bankrupt the private farms eventually. While the corporate farms get the GM goodies at preferential rates. It has to happen once the corporations get involved, because their whole reason for being is to maximise profits and remove competition.

I see what you are doing big corporations. I see what your end goals are you treacherous elites.

Reduce CO2 so that global yields will suffer, reduce nitrogen so they fall even further. Let the root of food production and the safety of the countryside fall into the hands of global corporations.

What could be scary about that?

What could be scary when you have no alternative then to swallow the corporate protein pill. 

What could be scary when food is limited or priced out of your reach?

Where do you go to eat if food is controlled by a corrupt cartel?

I can se far enough ahead to see what the farmers see already. A threat to the supply of food and along with it their livelihoods. 

This scorched Earth Environmentalism, backed by big business, corrupt corporations and corrupt government cronies need to be stamped out immediately.

I've said it before: Do these big businesses really have your welfare or the welfare of the world at heart? Do you believe that? Are you an idiot?

Globalism: The Short-Sighted Ideology

 I'm nearly 60. With that sort of maturity (I hate to say age, I'm still a teenager in my head) comes a certain perspective.

I tend to think more in strategic terms, rather than tactically. More long-term.

So to me, globalism seems very short-sighted, very tactical, very short-term. Why?

Well, because over the long term there will always be something that happens to eliminate the a short-term gain.

Hence we have the absolute global shitstorm after Covid. Something that we haven't recovered from six months or more after restrictions were lifted. Either countries are holding onto outdated medical advice and restricting travel and imports while other countries have opened up and are gobbling up the world's resources as their consumerist needs re-emerge.

During Covid, a lot of old container ships were scrapped. During the lull, companies preferred not to pay wages and mooring fees for hulls that were not earning. Instead they scrapped the least efficient ships and made their crews redundant.

Now we're all better and we want to buy stuff, there isn't enough capacity to bring it to us. So now instead of £1500, a 40ft container will cost £20,000 to £30,000 to ship from the far east to the UK. Supply and demand. You can't pay less because shipping it by rail across Asia would still be more. 

If what you're shipping is large and you can't get many of them into a container, that a massive price hike per unit. Even if you're shipping 30,000 items in that container, that could in effect be an extra £1 per unit on the landed price of the item. 30,000 items in a container: they can't be that big and by extrapolation that expensive. So you may have doubled the landed price per item of your product. 

Hence inflation. 

This is where Globalism falls down. Removing whole industries from countries and relying on a single country like China, or even a small handful of countries on the other side of the globe to make everything you consume is a risky strategy. Not risky for the manufacturer: they will move on to the next product, not risky for the shipper, they will just ship something else and still be paid, not risky even for the seller in the West: they just put the price up. It's the poor sap at the end of that supply chain that gets handed the shitty end of the stick. All the price increases get handed to the consumer. 

So Inflation.

Globalism also falls down when it comes to security. The Globalist mantra is we all trade together, so we can't go to war with each other. But look at what's happening in China: with vast amounts of money coming into the country for goods being shipped to the rest of the World, they are now investing that money in ever more capable military assets. They are not buying from abroad. They are making their own assets in-country. They can do that, because they have all the production capacity right there.

If the UK wanted to make a bespoke microchip in quantity in the UK, could it happen? I doubt it. Could we produce and supply ALL of our military assets in the UK? Nope, not a chance. 

Think we can? I'm sure all the chips in the electronics in our military kit are made in the UK. I'm sure the missiles our aircraft are armed with are made in the UK. I'm sure the sensors on the engines in our tanks and Army vehicles are not made in...China.

This is important. If it ever comes to a shooting war, logistics are key. EVERY general and field-Marshall in every historical war knows the importance of logistics. 

If the supply of sensors for our diesel engines or the supply of components to solder to our UK-made circuit boards dries up, then we cannot fight. 

Globalism hamstrings countries. It make them reliant on outside sources of supply. It works, until that source of supply is cut off by your enemy, or worse still your enemy is the source of supply. Or even of that source then becomes the sole source on the planet and increases prices.

Globalism doesn't work.

Where is All the Money Going?

 I do wonder why no-one has asked the question above before. Where exactly is all the money we give to government going?

Lets let's just step back a few decades, to the 1970s. Back then we paid a smaller proportion of our wage in overall taxation, but we got a lot more in services from the government.

Our armed services were massive. A vast Army was placed in Germany to counteract any threat from The Soviet Union, our Navy had several hundred ships available and on patrol around the World and our Airforce had a large number of aircraft available and several types of aircraft to chose from depending on the role.

We had a Nationalised Railway, Utilities (Gas, Electric, Water, and National Distribution Networks of all of those), a National Health Service, a Welfare System, a Civil Defence Network, etc.

But over the the decades, these have been whittled away. Some more silently than others. 

Gas, Electricity and Water were sold off during the Thatcher years, with the Railways following later.

So, we lost the need to subsidise those industries when they were privatised. Or that should be the case.

The Army, Navy and Air Force have been reduced by each successive Government since the Seventies. The "Peace Dividend" provided by the fall of the Soviet Union was supposed to reduce the cost of employing a standing Army in Germany and "Force Multipliers" in the shape of more capable ships and aircraft in the Navy and Airforce should have also provided benefits as well as general reductions in numbers.

Then we come to the more silent reductions: We used to have a vast Civil Defence Network across the UK in case of War. If the war came home, they would aid the defence of the UK and co-ordinate assets across the country to repel aggressors and also plot the attacks and their aftermath in the case of a nuclear attack. Not that there was much else to do after nuclear Armageddon. 

That whole civil defence network has disappeared. The bunkers are defunct, the communications network closed down and the airspace auctioned off to private companies.

So why I ask, is the tax burden still so high?

If we've sold off all the utilities and their associated liabilities, is we've reduced the armed forces to a fraction of their former strength and we've eliminated an entire civil defence network. All that expenditure is no longer required. 

So why did the tax burden not reduce?

Is the burden of the NHS so great that it's eaten into the spare cash? Is the privatisation of GP services a poorly implemented  attempt to reduce that burden?

Has repaying government borrowing done the same? Have we borrowed so much is using up all that spare cash in repayments?

Are we paying too much to supranational organisations? Are we paying the EU and the UN so much money we've had remove our defensive capabilities to almost zero?

Where exactly is all that money that we did spend on important stuff actually going? 

Or, is it that the tax take has reduced, it's just that wages have shrunk so much the tax burden appears the same or greater than before?

Does anyone have stats on this at all?

Work No Longer Pays.

 How can it be that a joint household income of £40,000 before tax isn't enough to pay rent and bills? 

Between us, that's what myself and the wife earn. But between us, it seems it's not enough to rent a house, pay the bills and run a car. Right now we both don't have any spare cash, our disposable income has dried up. 

So much so that it looks like it's baked beans on toast for tea on a regular basis from now on. It's not a life, it's subsistence.

Right now I'm dreading the energy increases in the Autumn, because if it's anything like this spring's increase, then I won't earn enough to pay the bills. I have at most about £50 spare cash to spend on non-essentials.

It does make you wonder if work pays. Would we be better on benefit? 

There used to be a time when the Tories were the party of low taxes, of making work pay. But these days they've joined the homogenised morass of Social Democrat MPs in Parliament. Literally we do not have any choice in how we vote. Every party is bent on increasing taxes and environmental levies and stiffing the poor. 

Just what do you do if working no longer pays the bills? 

More importantly, why is this government policy? Why is it policy to add levies to energy? Surely renewables have had a decade of development and by now the technology should be mature and able to be installed and generate energy without subsidies? Or are we just spaffing money to big corporations for the sake of it? 

Fuel: why are we importing refined Diesel from abroad? Why are the refineries at Stanlow, Fawley, et al not back refining crude oil? 

Why are we paying more money to Government for less in the way of services? 

Why are we putting up with all of this shit?

Cucks, the lot of 'em and the Despair of the Politically Homeless.

 Why is it when I see any of the male contenders for the Tory top job, the only word that comes to mind is "Cuck". And I mean "Cuck", In the sense of he'd let someone else screw his wife. No Guts, no Gumption (good Northern Word that), a distinct lack of spherical object-da dangling where they should be. 

The number of contenders I would vote for if there was an election is exactly zero. 

I am politically homeless. None of the major parties reflect or respect my personal viewpoints. The Reform party is close, but I just can't bring myself to trust anyone in leadership at that party. Too posh, too "Gentleman's Club", way too close to being a bit Grammarschooly, a bit too "we know what's good for you". Still looking down on the working poor despite eschewing policies that say would benefit them and vying for their vote.

I want a party who's policies benefit everyone equally. No quotas, no positive discrimination, no "writing historic wrongs". Deal with the here and now, propose a future where everyone working towards that future reaps the benefit.

Government, Public, Rich, Poor, Corporations and Companies, Banks, Builders, Stock Markets and Socialists. 

I want Everyone to work towards the benefit of the country as a whole.

No me, me, me, no greed.

I want people that work against the benefit of the country to be penalised. Tax the greedy corporations that maximise profits and payouts for shareholders and pay poor wages. Reward those businesses that invest in workers, reward those that embrace competition and slam those that create cabals. We want low prices, but do it by doing business in a better way. Maximising profit at the expense of workers should be as socially unacceptable as paedophilia. Make them pay triple the standard rate of N.I. if they keep paying poor wages.

I want people that pay their fair share to be rewarded. I want companies that raise their workers out of poverty and away from in-work benefits to get tax breaks. 

I want us to work for the common good, not greed. 

I want us all digging in the same direction: out of this shitty hole we find ourselves in.

The Demise of Disposable Income

Well, it had to happen: I no longer have any disposable income. Checking my bank account has become a daily thing, making sure there is enough in the account to last the month.

Despite changing to a smaller, more economical car, the rise in petrol prices since I swapped has negated the benefit. I've also had a 2 grand pay rise, a rise of 10% because I went to the boss and said that if things got worse I'd have to look at working more locally. Even though I only work seven miles away. 

Now, all those attempts to keep the wolves from the door have been negated. I'm still in a worse place than I was at the beginning of the year and back then I was on less money and had a bigger car.

I hate to think what's going on with people that were already at the point of having no spare cash at the beginning of the year.

But we are the forgotten group: the working poor. Those on wages lower than the national average, those that don't qualify for any benefits, that struggle to survive only on what they can earn. No hand-outs for us, no cost of living benefit for us. 

Who will fight for us? Who will recognise our struggles? 

Not the Conservatives; they're in power and haven't helped us at all save the 5p a litre cut in fuel duty that lasted 3 days. Oh, and the £150 quid one-off refund that everyone got through council tax. Big deal.

Not Labour either, content as they are to increase immigration to bolster their vote because the working class won't vote for their Communist woke shitery.

And certainly not the Liberals, so focussed are they on pressing the middle classes.

We really needs party of the poor right now. A party that supports what the poor working class of this country supports. Patriotism without extremism, socialism with a smalls and conservatism with a small c. It supports workers and especially the working poor. It penalises the most excessive corporations that do not give back to the country, it penalises the rich who avoid taxes.

We need it now.

Conservative at Crossroads: Do they Elect a Vote-Winner, or The Same Old Bland Globalists?

 So the Conservatives are at war. Not just the battle between MPs vying for the top position, but MPs are not clashing with Conservative party donors!

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

Donors wanted Boris to stay in position as a vote-winner. MPs smelled blood and pulled the trigger and resigned en masse anyway. 

Right now Tory MPs are sticking two fingers up to that people that actually keep the party going. Without them they're in the same wilderness  as the Labour party. Not a good plan moving forward.

I see that Steve Baker has been sidelined and that faction of the party is promoting Suella Braverman as their preferred candidate for PM. Haven't we had enough of Female Conservative PMs? Thatcher was, well, Thatcher. Theresa May was an ineffectual disaster. Even High-ranking Conservative Female MPs haven't exactly covered themselves in glory: Priti Patel talks the talk, but sadly can't walk the walk. Despite tough words on Immigration, we're receiving ever higher immigration numbers and the whole Rwanda thing has descended into farce.

If she had the gumption, there would be armoured convoys delivering failed asylum seekers to military airbases and armed guards ordered to shoot anyone daring to trespass on the base. Or just cut out the middle bit. Just puncture the dinghies as they cross the channel but whilst being escorted by French Navy boats. Then bugger off and let the French pick them up and take them back to France. Or alternatively a Navy Picket with shots across the bows of any French government vessels that escort dinghies across the channel and don't take them back to France. 

Braverman seems to be talking the talk, much like Priti Patel, but I get the feeling that like Patel, she's incapable of delivering any substance. The lights are on, but there appears to be no-one home. She doesn't seem shrewd, or clued up on anything regarding policy.

With Braverman it's just the same old platitudes just to get in power. It like listening to Kier Starmer prattle on without anything to back him up. 

This is the problem with most modern MPs: lack of substance. Kier Starmer could just as well be talking about washing powder, or some domestic appliance. Braverman is the same: I'll clean brighter, wash cleaner, do better than other brands of MP. No detail on exactly how any of the hogwash that comes out of their lips gets delivered. 

Right now, MPs need to be addressing exactly how they would address the cost of living crisis. First by accepting that previous Government Policy of printing money and hoping imported labour and cheap Chinese goods would keep inflation at bay. Then move on to how they intend to solve the problem. Promoting production and manufacturing in the UK for export would be one way. Just pick your industry and give it some tax breaks. 

Green policies need to be scaled back. They are unaffordable for a large proportion of the population. You can't keep blindly following dogma and ignoring the devastation in your wake.

Not everyone can afford an electric car, not everyone has the ability to charge one up, not everyone has a drive they can park it on. I'm sure my local council will applaud my green efforts as my charging lead is let out down and across the road in front of my house. I don't have a drive and the only parking space is on the other side of the Road. 

MPs need to deal with reality and not some pie-in-the-sky promises. They need to confirm they understand the hardship ordinary people are facing at the moment. I've already mentioned capping duty and VAT on fuel. Removing VAT on Gas and Electricity would be another way to ease the pain. Also now that Green energy companies are well established with hundreds of renewable wind and solar farms built, isn't it time we started to taper off any benefits to green energy companies? Surely the economies of scale have kicked in by now after more than a decade and building a wind farm should be no more expensive than building a coal fired power station?