Skip to main content

An Inanimate Debt

I listened to Phillip Hammond the Chancellor talking to Andrew Marr on Sunday the 5th of March 1917 in which he said "our" debt was £1.7 trillion and it cost £50 trillion to pay the interest on this debt. This payment he said was more than the cost of total military budget. 
He calls it "our" debt but in the local newspaper 'The East Kilbride News' of the 1st March 2017 it had an article under the title of "Drowning in Debt" in which it claimed that families with kids are on average £19k in red. The article went on to Comparing the family in East Kilbride with Central Scotland's family which it claims has an average debt being £13,753. 
I can relate to the "Drowning in Debt" article. People get into debt mortgaging a home, losing employment can be a factor. Illness and accidents can reduce income. The debt is theirs, should they not be able to continue payments on the mortgage they can be evicted. They must find the money someway, employment being the only way in most cases. A lottery win would be welcome but remote.
The Chancellor, of course,  will correct himself and point out it is the "country's debt" and this inanimate object must be paid by raising taxes and cutting benefits and clearing these debts by paying not this inanimate object but the people who the government borrowed it from. 
Who are these people? Well in case you didn't know, they are the people who own the means of production and of course the country as well.


Popular posts from this blog

What do we mean by no leaders

"Where are the leaders and what are their demands?" will be the question puzzled professional politicians and media pundits will be asking when the Revolution comes. They will find it inconceivable that a socialist movement could survive without an elite at the top. This view will be shared by some at the bottom. Lenin and his Bolshevik cohorts argued that we couldn't expect the masses to become effective revolutionaries spontaneously, all on their own. To achieve liberation they needed the guidance of a "vanguard party" comprised of an expert political leadership with a clear programme. The Trotskyist/Leninist Left may remix the song over and over again all they want but the tune remains the same: leaders and the cadres of the vanguard can find the answer; the mass movements of the people cannot liberate themselves. The case for leadership is simple. Most working-class people are too busy to have opinions or engage in political action. There’s a need for some…

Lenin and the Myth of 1917

A myth pervades that 1917 was a 'socialist' revolution rather it was the continuation of the capitalist one. What justification is there, then, for terming the upheaval in Russia a Socialist Revolution? None whatever beyond the fact that the leaders in the November movement claim to be Marxian Socialists. M. Litvinoff practically admits this when he says:In seizing the reigns of power the Bolsheviks were obviously playing a game with high stake. Petrograd had shown itself entirely on their side. To what extent would the masses of the proletariat and the peasant army in the rest of the country support them?”This is a clear confession that the Bolsheviks themselves did not know the views of the mass when they took control. At a subsequent congress of the soviets the Bolsheviks had 390 out of a total of 676. It is worthy of note that none of the capitalist papers gave any description of the method of electing either the Soviets or the delegates to the Congress. And still more cu…

No More Propertyless

Socialism is the name given to that form of society in which there is no such thing as a propertyless class, but in which the whole community has become a working community owning the means of production—the land, factories, mills, mines, transport and all the means whereby wealth is created and distributed to the community. The first condition of success for Socialism is that its adherents should explain its aim and its essential characteristics clearly, so that they can be understood by every one. This has always been the primary purpose of the Socialist Party's promotion of its case for socialism. The idea of socialism is simple. Socialists believe that society is divided into two great classes that one of these classes, the wage-earning, the proletariat, is property-less the other, the capitalist, possesses the wealth of society and the proletariat in order to be able to live at all and exercise its faculties to any degree, must hire out their ability to work to the capitalis…