Since the RAC help drivers you would expect that they would have drivers interest at heart given that they need to make a lot of money from drivers to keep their business growing. Perhaps this is no longer the case and perhaps it’s been quite a while since it was.

Yesterday a report was discussed which was prepared by the Institute of Fiscal Studies and the RAC Foundation. The fuel duty and vehicle excise, which will be lost to the treasury over the next 15 years, will eventually reach  £13 billion a year. This is due to people buying cars, which use much less fuel and because the road tax rates have been altered to encourage people to drive more fuel-efficient cars. The outcome is that fuel duty will have to increase by 50% and road tax also adjusted upwards. The report suggests that perhaps road tolls and charging per mile travelled might be of some use.

I’m assuming that the people involved in this live on another planet, have no friends or any contact with Earth and take copious amount of impressively mind altering drugs. How could they possibly come up with these predictions and outcomes?

In the first instance the fuel duty is completely ridiculous, bringing in £65 billion a year, yes you read the right! It is a significant driver (oh dear terrible pun – groan) for inflation since most goods have a delivery by vehicle cost content. The road tax has been a joke for years. It was supposed to be for developing and maintaining the road network. Of course politicians just couldn’t keep their hands off it and now it brings in a huge amount with only a small amount actually spent on roads.

The reduction in fuel use is down to the government themselves and the ridiculous green policies they have enacted not to mention austerity and banks going pop! It’s not just petrol and diesel either it’s water, electricity, gas etc. etc. which they have encouraged people to use less off to save the planet and to save money and then they raise the prices through taxation. Regardless of anything else.

Why is it that the government needs all this money anyway? No business could afford to carry on this way unless they had a pretty watertight monopoly and whilst the government thinks it has that may not be the case. The Government should be spending the money it is given by taxpayers and no more. If they get less then they spend less.

Isn’t it just like the government to enact one thing, which then seriously impinges on another? The fact that they have been doing all this green nonsense when there is no proof it is actually needed in the first place. Well done them.

The RAC? They should be fighting this tooth and nail not being part of the team which is trying to make motorists lives even more difficult.

The Government think we are idiots who will take no end of abuse without as much as a whimper. Unfortunately they are probably right on that. It’s our own fault.

What will it take for people to decide enough is enough?

Hence there are countries in the Eurozone who can’t operate in the same economic climate as Germany and the other larger and differently structured economies. The problems are home grown then. Oh dear. Just to keep things in some sort of perspective however, have a look at the performance and debts of the UK and especially the comparison at the bottom with other countries.

Austerity is the name of the game or at least it was as far as Germany was concerned. Thon wee Sarkozy boy from France had a similar approach but he’s had to vacate his desk and his replacement has been making noises about less austerity and more economic growth. Why austerity as a first choice? Well the Germans said so and given the losses and the damage to so many economies around the world there’s a shortage of money to do any investing with. Yes I know China along with some other countries could invest but since their exports have been hit they might want to hold onto their cash until the dust settles over the Euro.

There is another example however, of how things could have been handled. Iceland. Iceland didn’t pay its overseas creditors. I’m not aware of any articles in the press or the TV news showing deprivation, starvation, lawlessness etc. in Iceland. That being the case the people must be fairly happy then?

There’s no austerity in Iceland. The Government went out to the people and a new constitution was created by the people along with the government. The new constitution was to ensure that never again could a banking collapse happen in Iceland. From what I’ve read about it, it sounds like it is pretty good, in fact so good that our own governments as in Westminster and the devolved areas should be doing the same thing.

Lets get real here. There is no way that could happen with Westminster still in the mix. Too many people with too much to lose. The establishment would never allow it. Bearing in mind that this is supposed to be a democratic country those are dreadful things to say but nonetheless that is the situation

The people in Iceland managed it. They also managed an even more startling, amazing I want one event. Almost all mortgage debt was written off. Can you imagine that? Can you imagine waking up one morning and your house was yours; you didn’t have to pay a penny more to your mortgage provider. You don’t believe me? Have a look at this.

Yes lets think of the large sums of money people would then have since they’d be paying NO mortgage! People could spend some of the money on reducing other debts, save some of it and buy some nice stuff with the rest.

Now do you think for a fraction of a second that the Double Dip Twins, Dave and George would consider this as a good idea? Of course not and if they did they’d put a tax on it so people were left with little more than before. The Double Dip Twins haven’t a clue, not just about real peoples lives but also about everything. Dave is a clever man? In a meaningful, country leading, intellectual way? Fill in your own answer.

According to those that know about such things 40% of the UKs overseas trade is with the EU although I heard a guy on TV last night say it was 50%. Whether it’s 40% or 50% the stagnation within the EU makes its likely that exports to the EU will reduce. 40%-50% of very little is still very little.

So Greece looks odds on to leave the Eurozone. The powers that be will continue to stop it from happening even if it costs us all large amounts of money. In the end Greece will leave but slowly and more gradual since that will facilitate a longer stay of execution for the remaining Eurozone.

Ultimately the Eurozone will fail. It was built to fail because they started off bending the rules, which caused the imbalances, which ultimately and inevitably came home to roost.

I’m talking about the SNP. They are going to implement a minimum price for a unit of alcohol of 50p. They are doing this because they believe it will reduce alcohol abuse and the resulting stresses on the NHS and society in a wider sense: no doubt a worthy aim but surely attempting to address an effect rather than a cause.

The 50p unit of alcohol cost is a bad move in many ways. Firstly, it means that the retailers who sell alcohol will immediately enjoy an increase in profits. This is because the Scottish Government has no tax raising powers and as such cannot raise duty, which would redirect the money, raised through increased prices, into government coffers.

Secondly, people will still buy the alcohol they want. They will adapt their preferences to the best-priced products and if the unit price rises they will look at making their own, buy it from white van man or organise trips to places where it’s still cheap to buy. Some people will probably buy more drugs instead of alcohol. You know, those illegal ones, which could contain all sorts of rubbish, which might impact negatively on the NHS? Also, has anyone in government read up on the prohibition experiment in the USA?

I really doubt that this will make much difference from a health point of view just as the ban on smoking in public places made no difference despite the claims made by the Government, which the official NHS figures debunked. Sure there are bound to be benefits to some extent but they will be diluted because they are treating the effect rather than the cause.

And what is the cause? Large segments of the population think it’s cool to drink and get drunk, some people drink to get outside their problems and they feel better when they’re drunk and some just drink because they like it. Reality check, and shock, horror, probe some people will undoubtedly be doctors, nurses, and all the other medical professionals who are so quick to stand up and pontificate about alcohol abuse.

This raises a question about the SNP. With the Independence Referendum in mind, they need to show good governance to demonstrate they are up to the job of running a country. The introduction of the minimum price for alcohol is one example of this, which is supposed to demonstrate that they will act sensibly and caringly

I suggest it is demonstrating that they may be closer to the main parties in the UK than they think. I think they have demonstrated that they have more than an eye on the “famous meter”. Politicians seem to be spending a lot of time these days looking at the “famous meter” and then trying to introduce policies first before other countries do or they introduce policies which go further than other countries do. Then they sit back and claim they acted more quickly and more stringently and the “famous meter” score jumps up accordingly.

There you go! Fame! That is a line or a paragraph in the history books for the politician. Result!

Of course there are all the people who drink sensibly and who will find themselves having to pay more although initial examples seem to suggest it’s pretty much the low rent alcohol, which has borne the brunt. This is of course bought by the people who can least afford alcohol so a direct hit on the vulnerable then. Good one Nicola!

How about the MSM come up with a wee campaign? Press the retailers of alcohol from the Tescos to the corner shops to donate the extra money they make on alcohol sales from the minimum unit price to alcohol and drug abuse treatment organisations? The retailers say they don’t want to charge more so they won’t mind passing it onto their customers in effect.

It may be that the attempt to enact the levy on alcohol will be illegal under EU law, could this result in it being scrapped and something good coming out of the EU?

The next chapter of the SNP saga will be along shortly.

Of courses at the moment Rangers have a bit more on their plates than football. The takeover of the club by Charles Green has ended up in administration, which has uncovered financial issues left right and centre and another few from other angles. The biggest problem was always HMRC who felt that the way that some players had been paid in years gone by were somewhat, perhaps, over the line of what is acceptable from a tax avoidance point of view.

The amount HMRC were chasing was £9 million, or was it £45 million or was it £90 million or more? There was also the lack of paying VAT and PAYE. pretty messy by anyone’s standards. The administrators moved as quickly as circumstances would allow to secure new owners and this weekend such a rare breed stepped forward.

The job of sorting Rangers out was made a bit mode difficult by the SFA and the Scottish Premiere League changing the rules as they went along and they are still doing so now. This is the point where logic goes out of the window.

First up then Rangers are docked ten points for this season. On the face of it not too bad since they were probably going to end up in second place anyway. However, finishing in second meant that they’d play in Europe next season so it seems only fair that they lost that.

Now the rest of the punishments or probable punishments are a bit more difficult. First of all they get deducted points for next season and they are banned from signing any new players for a season at least. They should be demoted to the Scottish Third Division and have to play their way back into the SPL. Both the SFA and the SPL seem to be making it up as they go along.

There’s always been a problem with the other football clubs in Scotland who see the Old Firm, Celtic and Rangers, as having a privileged position and getting all the money, luck and cudos. That being the case, the other clubs want to get more of a share of the revenue and get more of everything else too.

Rangers and Celtic feel they are entitled to more than the other teams because they have a huge support and they are much, much larger clubs with years of success behind and In front of them. And therein lies the biggest issue.

The smaller clubs rely on the big gate receipts, which Rangers and Celtic provide. The TV payments also reflect Rangers and Celtics value on a wider stage. Whilst its obvious that this situation perpetuates the two-tier system how else could it be? Damage Rangers and Celtic and everyone suffers. Other clubs would flounder if the money created by Rangers and Celtic was reduced and without doubt no Rangers and Celtic in Scottish football, would impoverish the whole of game here.

Forcing Rangers to start again in the Third Division would be a disaster for the smaller teams. The grounds at that level are, shall we say, a bit basic. At half time the fans swap ends walking past each other and having a bit of banter with the other side and the lone policeman who might turn up for a few minutes during the match or might not turn up at all.

Celtic need Rangers and Rangers need Celtic. They are a brand. Without Rangers Celtic lose a big part of who they are and you may have noted that the comments made by the Celtic Manager have been muted and, almost but not quite, supportive of Rangers struggles to survive.

The new owners have a bit of work to do. Sort out the debt with a CVA or form a new company. Then they have to restructure the club, sort out the players contracts, buy new players and get the money flowing back in. Not so easy perhaps.

Neither Rangers nor Celtic will be allowed to fail. There is far too much at stake.

What of the taxman? He’ll huff and puff and settle in the knowledge that a successful Rangers will pay lots and lots of tax for a long time to come.

What fun.

There are two things we just have to have to live, the Internet and blogging. Sorry, I couldn’t resist it. No in fact it’s water and air. We need air all the time to breath and we need water, which we have to have, or we die within a few days. Here we stagger into the next upcoming scam from the EU, facilitated by the Double Dip Twins, Dave LOL and George Wimp.

The drought, which has been hammering down at times proved that between leaks and failure to build additional storage, the current water system couldn’t satisfy the needs of the population as it now stands. At the moment, of course, this is all happening in the southeast but it’s likely to be a problem elsewhere if nothing is done about it.

The EU however wants people to pay more for water on the basis of Climate Change. The only people left who believe in Climate Change are of course governments, NGOs, scientists whose livelihoods depend on it, enviro loonies for whom it is a religion and those who can’t be bothered checking a few simple facts. This is a large percentage of the population then.

The EU reasoning is that water is critical to us all so we must all conserve it because climate change will make it scarcer. Now that might hold water (groan) in countries, which are desert like, but not in the UK. Get real EU but they can’t. Making water more expensive by adding levies to customers bills, will ensure water use is reduced.

So the two great and only tools of government tax and fine are employed. If you misuse water you’ll get charged even more which is a form of being fined. If you pay more you will also pay more VAT/tax but in both cases there are of course no guarantees.

Like the council tax, various utilities, and innumerable other products and services we use, be it public or private sector, many services are not subject to a proper Service Level Agreement (SLA). If you are not protected by an SLA you have little possibility of being able to demand compliance by the provider. Even when you have a genuine grievance, which is covered by an SLA, it can be made very difficult for you to receive compensation, to which you are entitled.

For example your Internet connection goes down. You check it out and it’s not a problem at your end. You phone to report the outage and you get a recorded message, which tells you that they are aware of it and it will be fixed as soon as possible. A few hours later it’s still down and the message has changed slightly indicating it will be back on very soon. The next day it comes back on mid-morning and you call to complain because their SLA says that after a set time they will refund you some money when the service goes down. When you speak to someone they say that you didn’t report the problem so you are not entitled to compensation. You say you called and got the message. They say you should have reported the fault.

Sound familiar?

The chances of getting any sort of real service is pretty low and we are powerless to do anything about it. But we have representatives who can. Our elected representatives will help as will our local council. Oh come on of course they won’t.

If our current parliament, woeful as it is, allows the EU to restrict water access without our MPs, MSPs or MEPs voting this down whilst insisting that the water companies stop leakages and build the reservoirs they should have done years ago…

Well there we have it. We can do nothing. Not a thing. As long as so many people do not vote at election time and our elected members are subject to the whip and care little about voters anyway, we have no recourse. This sounds like a dangerous situation to me.

Where is change likely to come from?

She didn’t sell enough; she knew she wasn’t selling enough even although her normal day-to-day selling activities should have helped her to perform well. Mind you the team ethos was pretty sadly lacking. In the boardroom her erstwhile teammates cited her lack of sales as being the reason they lost. They would say that because they pick up on anything, which deflects their own deficiencies being recognised.

The real failure on this task was of course down to Tom the team leader. He failed to communicate a coherent plan to his team. He failed to recognise the need to evaluate all the artists’ work and then put them in an order of preference. Once he lost his favourite artist to the other team they had to make a snap decision, which caused them even more problems.

They chose an artist who painted at the large end of the score. Big canvases need big walls and big rooms. Not a lot of people have those and certainly those that do are either well off or they work with businesses or galleries etc.

Tom said that he’d gone for that artist because his work sold for £10,000 or so. That made it a risk but if they sold just one they would most likely win the task. Lord Sugar thought this wasn’t a bad thing to do. Now why did he say that? Successful entrepreneurs are normally successful because they take risks, however when they take risks they make sure that they are manageable. There was no safety net for Tom on this task after he made the decision to sell the large canvasses.

Tom also made an even greater error. Artists generally have a bit if an ego at least. It is therefore important to keep them onside and to praise their work and hang on their every utterance. Tom trying to impress them with his knowledge of street art turned the artists off. They aren’t interested in other artists per se they are interested in their own art and how they can sell enough work to continue to live as artists rather than heading down the 9.00 to 5.00 route. Tom failed to recognise this.

In Toms defence he’s young. He’s not old enough to have made his current business really work, he’s still learning and he will continue to learn for years to come. At the moment he will probably be enjoying painful and costly business lessons on a daily basis. He hasn’t got experience to fall back on yet. If he has a degree it won’t support him in the day-to-day cut and thrust that trying to maintain a business, as a profitable entity requires.

Laura had to go. Stephen will go soon and Stephen will go sooner still. Adam however, may be in with a real chance. Pretty boy Nick won’t get employed for being pretty, Gabrielle is worth watching, Jade lacks organisational planning, Jenna may make it to the final or to the interviews and Ricky is hiding.

There is nowhere to hide however.

The judge said “One of the factors leading to that was the fact that they were not part of your community or religion”. He also said that  the girls were “worthless” as far as the guilty men were concerned. That sounds very like racism is it not? No mention of any additional racist charges however.

We all know what would have happened if it had been a 9 British men who were in the dock and the girls had been Asian. The Prime Minister would have been apologising on TV. The BBC would have had this as the main story for days. No punishment would have been severe enough.

I haven’t noticed any strident screeching from the feminists either. I would have thought they would have been appalled by this crime.

I didn’t hear anyone denounce the Asian guy interviewed by the BBC who inferred that the girls brought it upon themselves. How exactly? He inferred that they had loose morals. But they were under the age of consent. It is the responsibility of adults to ensure that no harm comes to them. If the paedophiles in question thought this was the case they should have either left them alone or alerted social services. But they chose to exploit them which is the most immoral choice of all.

It seems that this has been going on all over England at least since 2005. Now I’m sure that the Police had a huge investigation going about sex slaves and people trafficking. In all the years it was in place they managed to find very few examples of this despite all the resources, the high profile and the huge cost.

But they didn’t notice this type of “grooming”. Grooming? Luring and exploiting children! The Police were aware things were going on as they have admitted during this trial. There are a number of cases exactly like this one all over England. Is there a task force set up to investigate and prosecute those who are involved? What about all the other Asian gentlemen who were offered the girls, any sign of those being rounded up and added to the Sec Offenders List?

The Asian community are like every other community. The vast majority just want to live quietly and get on with their lives. However, there is an element in all communities, which cause trouble and are unlawful and to our collective shame we either fail to recognise it or choose to do nothing about it.

I’ve been in two minds to publish this particular blog item. I may be branded a racist although I am nothing of the sort. The race card is played far too often, far too readily and far too triumphantly by the left and of course by some of the minority ethnic groups. In fact the paedophiles above also tried to use the race card when they were arrested.

Racism isn’t just by whites it is every colour and every race.

Over protection of some ethnicity may actually exacerbate the likelihood of people not feeling the full force of the law.

Criminals are criminals no matter what!

Things were a bit warmer inside the Lords Chamber. Call me Dave from the Connedpurgatory Party and Ed Moribund from the Slavour Parrty chatted amicably about their children apparently, complete with the obligatory hand waving. It would be better telly if they were having a “heated debate” as they walked along.

The contents were just ridiculous. Getting the energy utilities to cut their bills to help households? Yes there is no doubt reductions should be made although they’ll all have to check with their owners around the world first. Of course there are other ways of lowering energy bills and the Government know this and so do the press but they both keep very quiet about it.

Firstly they government could remove any stupid levies for windmills and the like, Easy, at least 20% of the bill gone straight away. Oh yes and say sorry for doing it in the first place. The EU wouldn’t be happy? Shame.

Secondly, get the extraction of shale gas speeded up significantly to the point that we want it tomorrow or the end of next week please. That could well reduce gas and electricity costs by 50% and maybe 25%. Smiles all round. Everyone gains. More money in people’s pockets, more tax take for the government and more smiling all round. Well apart from the greens anyway but they don’t smile on principle because it’s not a good thing to do.

Sorted.

While they’re at it they may as well scrap the fuel duty increase later this year as well. They’ll also need to be very careful with the changes they might make to the Lords. If the lower house goes too far they might end up in the same position as Monarchs did in years gone by. Omnipotent. Actually that would be the best thing that could happen. If they achieve that then they will be swept away much more quickly when we all finally get of our bums and take things up with them directly.

Bottom line is of course there is nothing of any serious issues within the coming parliament. A complete lack of imagination? Too much friction between the coalition? Too much stuff being transferred to the EU? No bloomin’ money left to do anything one way or another?

All of the above and more.

The world is a big place although our technology can make it seem smaller at times. The population has reached 7 billion, which is a lot by anyone’s standards, but like all things it is relative. In this case it’s relative to the size of the planet and the resources available to feed, house and support the population. On the face of it there are people who suggest that the population is already too great, our Malthusians fellows.

To clarify a wee bit about Malthusians you might to have a quick look here. You may be already aware of one of the more high profile organisations Populations Matters (PM) (previously know as The Optimum Population Trust), it doesn’t sound so bad does it? The PM has some high profile supporters such as David Attenborough that nice man who hugs gorillas, talks in a nice soft voice and was involved in a sleight of hand incident with a polar bear. The Duke of Edinburgh, President Emeritus of WWF, also believes that the world population has grown too large. Another name for you is Paul Ehrlich described by the Guardian as “the world’s most renowned population analyst, It’s strange that anyone at all listens to him as he has been predicting doom in the shape of mass human deaths due to food shortages for 40 years. In fact this gentleman should surely be a recipient of a Nobel Prize for getting so many predictions wrong!

To put things into perspective all of the current world population could be contained within the State of Texas. Okay the density of people would be similar to New York but not as dense as in some other parts of the world. Texas is a fairly big place but in terms of the world it’s not that big and I think this points to an issue about how space, land and resources are owned, controlled and used. Could it be the rich have a huge amount of space to live in which might get pressured if population growth continues?

As far as resources are concerned food production is higher than it’s ever been although it could be better still if we stopped using fertile ground for growing bio-fuels, soya and such like. We have the technology and the skills to continue to grow more from less without indulging in any unpalatable practices (Solyent Green anyone?).

The is another way of thinking about this.

All the evidence we have of increasing population sizes within established countries point to the fact that prosperity reduces populations. It does so because people have more choices, one of which being how many children will they have and the answer is always less than before prosperity. There are good reasons for people to have more children when they live in poverty –

• high birth mortality rates;
• high child mortality rates up to, and beyond 5 years of age,;
• having more children so there is someone to look after the parents in their old age;
• having more children who will get jobs and bring money into the home;
• having children to sell them.

No matter how you view this it s a disgrace when there is so much wealth in the world.

The biggest issue of course, following a decision to reduce the world population by at least half, is how would it be done? I’d assume that those of a Malthusian persuasion would be first in the queue. Okay I jest they’d be the last not the first. So how would it be done? Crims first? Oldies next? People with health issues, then bankers, and so on and so forth? Does this sound familiar?

Of course there would also be a need to maintain the population at or just below the decreed size. How would that be managed? Replace someone who dies with a new baby? What happens if someone gets carried away and has twins when they don’t have permission?

The whole thing is ridiculous, as ever there is only one solution although in two parts. Firstly make the whole world prosperous, be honest it’s ridiculously overdue, criminally actually and secondly rely on mans ingenuity to progressively find solutions to food needs whilst also planning a future which would include more then one planet.

The past few days reading has been one non-fiction followed by a second non-fiction. How exciting is that. I’m a devil aren’t I. Wall to wall excitement with me you know. Oh yes.

I read “The great cholesterol con” by Malcolm Kendrick first and then moved on to “The Meat Fix: How a lifetime of healthy eating nearly killed me” by John Nicholson. You may note a certain similarity of topic there and you’d be right of course.

I didn’t set out to read either of these books, I sort of fell in to them. I started out with the aim to research the topic of cholesterol and in doing so found a link to Malcolm Kendrick a Scottish GP with a practice in England. Why did I want to research cholesterol? Simple. My Doc was keen to get me to start taking statins stating that we will all be on statins soon for the rest of our lives.

I don’t do drugs. Well I’m Scottish and male so I don’t do illness. I only go to the Doc if I’m very ill. I’m not a fan of doctors and hospitals and the like. I think they’re okay for broken legs and wee stuff but on the more complicated stuff… Well let’s just say the jury is out.

Anyway to the research, I found Mr Kendrick’s book and read it. He basically suggests that cholesterol is necessary as one of the main building blocks within our bodies and forms the synapsis connections in our brain. There is also a very strong suggestion that the drugs companies may well be selling statins based on dubious science, which they control. Does that sound familiar? If I were to mention, “global warming” would that help you make a connection?

In fact there are so many parallels with the two topics from the way the science has been manipulated, the scientists and institutions needing the research money and the cost to taxpayers. The cost of statins to the NHS is estimated to be around £2 billion a year. That would pay for 70,000 nurses or two large teaching hospitals every year!

The science is so wrong that it is 180 degrees away from the truth. The diet known as the healthy diet according to “experts” is anything but. This is helpfully explained in the second book I read, written by Mr Nicholson who was a vegetarian/vegan for twenty-five years.

He ended up with serious health issues to the extent that in desperation he reverted to eating meat, which transformed his health and his life. He had great problems with doctors and medicine in general. I find the account of his journey as a vegan/vegetarian an interesting tale, which provides a balanced view of nutrition and the way that it has become hijacked. Food is essential obviously, but it should be fun and enjoyable whilst delivering what our bodies need so we can live our lives to the full.

The relationship between science, scientific academia, big business, government and the media does the population at large little good if any. Far too many vested interests, far too many dependencies and far too many loonies pushing a political agenda at any cost as long as it isn’t theirs.

Salt, cigarettes, alcohol, DDT, lead in petrol, high blood pressure, the climate, the environment, … All of these topics have suffered from hype, political interference and loony interference at a significant cost.

How many lives have been lost to the nearest few million? How much money lost from household budgets to the nearest multi-trillions of pounds? How many people’s lives have been blighted instead of improved?

Postscript – you might want to look up the following organisation on the web – The International Network of Cholestrol Skeptics