Thursday, September 28, 2017

Free Unregulated Market Has Negatively Impacted Standard of Living

UK Prime Minister, Theresa May is at Bank of England as I write this to celebrate its 20th year of independence from direct government control. It was a great feat and a well deserved move by the Blair government in 1997 to implement that state for the Central bank in England. It is great because it placed the bank in a position that removes it from direct political influence while at the same time, keeping it public and under the oversight of the State.

This is not to say that poiticians still do not influence the bank, but its autonomy makes this rather microscopic in the grand scheme of things. At the same time, the bank's current status also means that it is not left to the so-called "free market" where the obsessive capitalists can exploit it and use it as a cash cow to enrich themselves at the expense of all. This helps create a moderate monetary policy that is not affected by individual greeds.

But against the backdrop of Labour Leader, Jeremy Corbyn calling for a public investment, interest and complete partaking in the market to bring a balance, media in the UK are reporting that Theresa May will say,
“A free-market economy, operating under the right rules and regulations, is the greatest agent of collective human progress ever created...
“It was the new combination which led societies out of darkness and stagnation and into the light of the modern age. It is unquestionably the best, and indeed the only sustainable, means of increasing the living standards of everyone in a country.”
But she is making a mockery of herself by insisting free market that is "well regulated" while at the same time railing against 'State-control'. So who will "regulate" the market? Standard of living has not been made better by open free market but by infrastructures like 'State-controlled healthcare.

Furthermore, her argument that
“We should never forget that raising the living standards, and protecting the jobs, of ordinary working people is the central aim of all economic policy. Helping each generation to live longer, fuller, more secure lives than the one which went before them. Not serving an abstract doctrine or an ideological concept, but serving the real interests of the British people.”
is a lie. If anything, all her so-called free market economy has brought the majority of people is more debt burden today, less-secure jobs, fewer prospects of owning a home and the widest gulf between the wealthiest and the poorest. All these are engineered by free market for the rich (capitalists) which only exploit people while making conjured-up profits.

A well-run, thus regulated public utilities will make the real standard of living what its supposed to be: robust, comprehensive, fair and balanced. Otherwise we are heading for annihilation. It is the ridiculous level of poverty and inequality that creates terrorism and all the resulting violence, uncontrolled migration and uncertainty. Get it Madam May.

Wednesday, September 27, 2017

Quirky on Instagram

And finally I started an Instagram account.

I take a lot of random photos and most times share them on Facebook or laterly on Whatsapp (status). But I find these media a bit tawdry for this for reasons of overflow or discreetness respectfully. And what is a photo if it is not seen; especially photos that are not attention-seeking but purely highlighting the ordinary beauty in every day things and our environment.

A post shared by Godwyns (@godwyns26) on

So check out my photos on instagram and feel free to leave a comment if you like. Some of the

Monday, July 03, 2017

Grenfell Tower Exposed The Lack of Contingency Plans in UK

Grenfell Tower burnt-out imageIn the early morning of Wednesday 14th June, a tragic fire consumed a 24-storey tower block in West London. The stark reality of what followed was the shambolic lack of a contingency plan by local and national governments. And that in itself belittles the regrettable fire incident.

For a country that nags on about the need to 'protect' itself with nuclear weapons amongst other high level conventional weapons, it is rather shameful that the UK government could not coordinate a simple relief process to cushion and ameliorate the cases of the victims of this preventable accident. Instead, what followed was an embarrassing and totally crippled reaction by the government.

At the local government level, where its actions in handling fire safety concerns raised by residents has been much to blame, there was no noticeable response.

Wednesday, June 14, 2017

How Theresa May Helped UK Voters Understood Corbyn Better

I have always believed that Jeremy Corbyn will win a lot of votes, possibly a majority had the Labour Party, especially the PLP (Parliamentary Labour Party) accepted and supported his leadership. In fact, until I went to bed by 4am on the election night itself, I was still optimistic for a Prime Minister Corbyn and tweeted it blatantly throughout the campaign. The following are examples of how Mrs May shot herself in the foot at every turn throughout the election;

1. Took a gamble on Corbyn's principles:  Theresa May seems to know fully well that with Corbyn's principled, social standing, an election with him was always going to be a gamble. However, she banked on her poll lead having egged on the PLP to continue the war against their leader, knowing too well that nothing works best against anyone or team than attacks from within.

Saturday, June 10, 2017

Yet Again, UK Electoral System Delivers Undemocratic & Unfair Result

Once again, the First-Post-The-Post (FPTP) electoral system in UK delivers a result that does not reflect the voting pattern of the country (see table below). It is a system that relies on winner-takes-all, which in practice means that so long as a candidate win the most votes out of a line-up of - say - 10 other contestants, that candidate with the majority becomes the winner. In most cases, that majority could [even] be just 20% of the total votes cast.

Although there has been demands in the UK by many in the fringe for a the Proportional Representation (PR) system, which will reflect the real majority and thus bring in governments that are truly representative of the population.

With the PR system, the current result from this General Election would have looked differently and return a more balanced Parliament which would have reflected the voting pattern of the country. The table here compares the current result of the FPTP to what potential PR system. To see the 2015 election comparison, please see here.

Subscribe by Email