The WASPI Women, The Magic Money Tree, Universal Basic Income.

WASPI ALERT: as long as ethical knuckle-draggers with birdbrain logic can tweet rubbish about the SPA scandal, retired British women will suffer injustice.

rogerglewis
June 26, 2017 at 3:53 am
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
What strikes Me about the Waspi pensions fraud, because fraud is what it is, is not the fraud which we expect from this Financial Services Regime. But the implicit assumption that pensions and National Insurance are funded from interest or dividend interest from past premiums.
You mention that the DWP pensions attaching to their Functionaries are similarly unfunded and that is a stab in the direction of the lacuna I see in the whole question.
This question returns back to the “Magic Money Tree”, money is just an IOU it is a claim voucher, a Rain Check, a receipt for value surrendered now for future use. The best explanation for me appeared a year or two back in an Article explaining the unspoken and Taboo issue that no one would broach in the Swiss Referendum on Universal Basic Income.
Here is a link and the Main Meat of its Argument.
” ´However, the nearly universal misunderstanding of money is a major obstacle. For too long we’ve allowed a small coterie of bankers and “court economists” to hold the secrets and “tutor” us. So, it’s time for total openness.
First, regarding the claim that the Swiss proposal would’ve been too costly, what’s entirely omitted from the discussion is that the proposal (and similar proposals elsewhere) appear to call for re-distribution of existing money—taking money from certain sectors through taxation and re-allocating it to the people-at-large.
The implication is that the money supply is basically static and that re-distributing limited funds would require tough budget decisions—sparking tax hikes and associated spending increases in several areas; hence the claim “costs too much.”
But a successful basic-income plan can and must be based on the creation of new money, or “distributism,” not on reshuffling existing money, which is “re-distributism.” That’s the “state secret” that no one wants to touch.
The issuance of new money needs to happen to overcome the huge “gap” between today’s paltry purchasing power and the massive mountain of debt and the towering totality of prices on all available goods and services. We have full stores and empty wallets. (Ideally and importantly, governments should reclaim their interest-free money-creation rights and forbid private central banks from creating money any longer).”´´
It all really comes back to Debt and Leverage, The whole debate is founded upon a basic logical mistake of what Money is, The conflicting functions of money and the inherent conflict of interest that Financialised Capitalism as Poacher and Gamekeeper reserves to its self.
crasstwatThe moronically divisive tweet above appeared on Twitter over the weekend. Mr Groves (who looks on his homepage like a 40-something) could be forgiven…..if it wasn’t clear that he is ‘ex-CEO of Partnership Group, ex-NED Guardian Financial Services, ex-NED at ERC. Current marathon runner, angel investor, PE adviser, Chair of Retirement Bridge.’
God help civilisation if the Chairman of Retirement Bridge is this densely ignorant on page 1 of The Book of Demographic Justice.

I’m not going to linger long on a banal and superficial “opinion” with all the profundity of post-drought Saharan puddles. The step by step deconstruction unfolds as follows:
  • The missing overture: A promise is a promise. The promise was broken with only the last 20 years of a 60 year term to go, after which blatant lies were told by Westminster and Whitehall about how this had been communicated to Waspi women. Had this taken place…
View original post 348 more words
Advertisements
Occasionally, some of your visitors may see an advertisement here
You can hide these ads completely by upgrading to one of our paid plans.