Poisonous Banks Destroying World Economy

 

Banks immoral behaviour shrinks World supply of money and destroys economy

For our Global system of money to work we have depended entirely on all our banks to act responsibly, with honesty, morality and probity.Because the banking system realised it could get away with being increasingly dishonest, immoral, completely irresponsible and absolutely without the slightest hint of probity or decency, the currency system of the World has been destroyed by their fraud and breathtaking greed.

We have a system whereby nearly all the money is manufactured by the banks issuing loans to their customers. These loans amount to about ninety five percent of all the money in circulation. Nearly all the money we therefore use is created by a bank making a loan to someone else.

A culture of rapacious, greedy dishonesty was created throughout every aspect of the banking system as the banks tried to lend ever increasing amounts of money with a complete disregard of their poisonous behaviour towards borrowers. They wanted to lend as much money as possible because the more they lent the richer the banks themselves could become at the expense of those borrowers.

So, all this had the effect of putting absolutely every business and individual person into more and more unsustainable debt. The currency system is actually called money as debt and a fractional reserve banking system whereby the banks can create unlimited amounts of money out of nothing. If there were no bank loans at all, there would less than ninety percent of money in circulation and no-one would be paying interest to the banks.

This system allows banks to exercise increasing amounts of control over every aspect of business and personal life. Everyone was at their mercy. All of us were really working for the banks – working hard at earning enough to pay the increasingly absurd levels of interest and penalties on all the banks loans.

Businesses were constantly persuaded to borrow more money to expand, individuals were persuaded to borrow impracticably large mortgages to buy homes and consumer goods they really didn’t need. We were all told how silly we were if we didn’t use credit cards to spend money we didn’t actually have.

The banks were in complete control of almost the entire supply of money everyone depended on to enable all trade and personal commerce to exist. All the money in use could be traced backed through debt after debt issued through the dishonest banking system.

The financial well being of every business and individual now depended completely on the banks and how they behaved, and how honest and moral they were.

When the levels of dishonesty exhibited by the banks became so blatant and unsustainable, it became so extreme it had the effect of making the banks themselves too frightened to lend to each other.

They knew better than anyone else how dishonest and fraudulent their system of loans and debt had become and how each bank would try and outsmart other banks by being even more devious with loans to each other.

So the banks stopped lending to each other because they knew they were ripping each other off with dodgy loans which were less and less likely to be paid back.

If the banks weren’t going to lend to each other it interrupted the circular movement of money from bank to borrower and from that borrower’s loan ending up in another bank which, in turn enabled the next bank to issue more loans of many, many times the amounts actually being deposited in the bank. And so on it went around in endless circles.

But once the banks interrupted the entire money supply by being too frightened to lend to each other, it also had the effect of rapidly shrinking the money supply. The behaviour of the banks is making money literally disappear from existence at exponential speed.

This is the reason people have less and less money to pay their debts or to actually buy anything they need. The World economy is being destroyed by all the banks because of their greed and fraud and their fear of lending to each other. They know how dishonest and unreliable other banks can be with lending money and fear their loans to each other may not be paid back because the system they created is so dishonestly fraudulent and unreliable.

Governments around the World thought by lending gigantic amounts of money to all the banks this problem of confidence in the money supply would go away. All the money Governments loaned to banks would enable them to commence lending to each other again and get the circulation of the whole supply of money moving again.

Government were wrong. They were wrong because lending to the banks didn’t make the banks any more honest or improve their morality or common sense in any way at all. So the banks just pocketed any money they could get hold of, held on to it like grim death, carried on paying themselves ridiculous ‘bonuses’ and still refused to lend to each other.

The fact this also meant they had less and less money to lend to anyone else too, didn’t seem to bother them. They didn’t seem to be able to work out their collective behaviour was rapidly destroying the whole World economy and even themselves as they started to go bust one by one.

If something doesn’t change pretty damn quick they will probably all go bust in the end. But they are too pathetic to see that, as they whimper on about how it isn’t their fault at all. It must be someone else’s fault, they say. Meanwhile things will continue to get much, much worse.

They are liars !

Every single single business, and individual wishes to continue to work hard to earn themselves money. Businesses do not wish to sack employees and cease to exist, employees don’t want to sit around jobless and having their lives being destroyed by unemployment. It is being forced upon them by the banks.

We all depend on being in possession of money to trade and prosper as a business, and in turn pay employees’ wages so they can buy things they need from the businesses that are prospering.

Money is simply a token of trust we can use to give to some one else in exchange for goods or services of actual real value we need from them. They can then use that token of money we give them to buy what they need from others.

The banks have manipulated the money system with sheer greed until it has been taken to the brink of complete destruction by their deviousness.

The banks are the only custodians of the money system. No one else at all has control of it. No Government, business or individual has control of the system of money. It is entirely in the hands of the banks. They have abused it, misused it for their own profit and have shown a callous disregard of the damage they do to everybody they deal with. Their behaviour has been, and still is quite simply disgusting.

The banks cannot be trusted. They created the Worldwide financial recession single handedly with no assistance from any one else. They are currently destroying the money supply everywhere with lightning speed. Their self seeking manipulation of the World’s money supply is destroying everyone’s ability to trade, or have a job, or pay back their debts. The entire money system is collapsing exclusively because of the irresponsible, fraudulent behaviour of the banks.

They are utterly callous in turning tens of thousands of people out of their homes, leaving houses empty, vandalised and pointless useless. They are equally callous as they take away the jobs of millions of people by destroying businesses with toxic loans and making it impossible for trade and commerce anywhere to function normally any more .

With this vicious control of money the banks have, allowing them to say who has a business and trades or who has a job and who doesn’t, who starves or who has a home or who is thrown out of their home onto the street by bank bailiffs, to have their entire lives destroyed by being made homeless, is a grotesque condemnation of modern times.

BANKS BECOMING INCREASINGLY INSANE

I overheard this conversation in one of those ‘chatrooms’ on the internet today and I found it priceless. A little cameo of just how mad the banks are becoming now. It’s no wonder they are busy destroying the Worldwide economy – they have completely taken leave of their senses !

0845/0870 calls from banks

Has anyone else received any? I started getting calls from 0845 3312320 on Tuesday purporting to be from LloydsTSB – an automated message that asks you to ring the number and leave your personal details before you can speak to anyone, which of course I didn’t, thinking it was a scam.

After much hassle and about 20 more of these bloody calls I find out they are indeed from Lloyds and am pretty pissed off. In these days of mass fraud how irresponsible is it for banks to be cold calling and asking for your personal details? Am also doubly annoyed because I’ve had endless problems with fraud in the past five years or so, including my ID and cards being stolen, cloned etc, all of which the bank knows about.

Anyone seen any articles about this kind of thing as I’ll be pitching to the money pages if it’s not been done to death.

……..Yep I regularly get them from HSBC too, even though I switched banks a year ago
 

……..Natwest is doing something similar. My bank and other companies have rung me before now and been astonished when I insist on ringing them back before giving any personal info.

……..I did an article about this for the Telegraph – my husband received an automated call from Lloyds when they stopped his card when we were in Morocco. Actually the article was more about cards being stopped when you are on holiday, but that was in there.

……….Lloyds stopped my card after my tenants paid money INTO my account. Their excuse was that it was an unknown transaction – all £750 of it.

…………Lloyds are quite heavy handed about stopping cards. They stopped Alex’s because of “suspicious payments” – it was £30 for our regular Friday night take aways.

……………Whaat?!

…….I know, I thought I’d heard everything. It was a Saturday too, so I couldnt’ even go into a branch. Luckily I was with a friend and she lent me some money so I didn’t have to pay for my bus fare, bagel and coffee with my credit card. I then spent a frustrating hour trying to explain to Lloyds that freezing someone’s account because a couple of hundred quid had been paid into it was not in any way, shape or form helping to safeguard against fraud. And then they ring you up and ask you tell all to machine. Ha!

Aren’t the banks simply a delight to do business with these days !

Or perhaps they are just run by half wits who are so obsessed with their own culture of rapacious greed and vicious treatment of customers, they don’t understand how destructive and immoral they really are.

They seem to be so arrogant they actually think they can do absolutely anything they please with a total disregard of honesty and law.

THIS IS A SERIOUSLY NASTY LABOUR GOVERNMENT

Leftie Mafia close ranks over Baby P

“WHY did Gordon Brown react so violently when asked in the Commons about Baby P’s shocking death?

Was it a guilty conscience?

The unforgivable death of Baby P has revealed Labour’s dirty little secret — the arrogance verging on corruption of entrenched Socialism”.

Not such a secret now, after the hideous catalogue of incompetence leading to what anyone but our modern justice system would regard as murder.

This avoidable tragedy tells us about the way the Left works when, as in Haringey, it has unbridled power.

Baby P’s fate was the culmination of a blinkered authoritarianism in which rigid political correctness supersedes human decency.

Haringey is a bastion of the loony Left.

Its website boasts: “We are committed to eliminating discrimination on the grounds of age, colour, disability, ethnic origin, gender, HIV status, marital status, nationality, national origin, race, religious belief, responsibility for dependants, sexuality, or unrelated criminal conviction.”

Great. But they can’t tell when a baby has a broken back and hours to live.

It swallows £100million a year for a child “protection” programme, and allows TWO of them to die in unimaginable agony.

Hard-faced “welfare” chief Sharon Shoesmith won’t apologise and it takes two days before anyone in Haringey says sorry.

Yet when Shoesmith IS finally kicked out, she could win £200,000 in compensation. That’s blood money. It’s disgusting.

Nobody in today’s blame-free public services walks away without a bung.

We hire armies of new nursing assistants, classroom assistants and police support officers. to help the professionals.

Yet we won’t sack any of the 20,000 rubbish teachers identified by Whitehall – or the hundreds of thousands of other idiot State employees doing nothing useful except causing lots of harm.

Superbugs kill thousands and strike terror into us all, yet no nurse or orderly has been fired for shoddy hygiene. Just fill in the forms and tick the boxes and it’s a job for life.

Look at Dr Sabah Al Zayyat, still practising after failing to spot Baby P’s ripped fingernails, let alone his bust ribs and broken spine.

The herd of State employees closes ranks, bound by a Mafia-style code of Omerta.

Speak out, like Haringey whistleblower Nevres Kemal, and you are sacked and legally gagged.

Why is such primitive tyranny tolerated?

Public service unions are Labour’s paymasters. That’s why Gordon Brown has put 800,000 more of their members on the state payroll.

It’s why they can retire at 60 on inflation-proof pensions, paid for by millions who can’t afford to retire at all.

It’s why we have hundreds of pointless quangos, costing £70billion a year and run by unaccountable stooges on £200,000 salaries.

Welcome to Labour’s client state, a multi- billion—pound gravy train driven by buck-passing bureaucrats who aren’t fit to look after a baby”.

That’s where all our taxpayer money goes !

 

This is an edited version of an article by TREVOR KAVANAGH Published on 17th Nov 2008 in the Sun newspaper.

WHY DON’T THE MEDIA EXPOSE SOCIAL WORKER’S WICKEDNESS

What I utterly fail to understand about the media being unwilling to take on these stories is that, as far as I understand it,  they can be reported in quite a detailed manner, providing they are anonymised.

I listened very carefully to the judge expounding details of the injunctions relating to a case and it was all about simply not identifying the protagonists. There is no actual ban on telling the story as long as different names are used and there is nothing to directly identify various people.

Now, I know the media are obsessed with producing people’s names. I was taught as a local newspaper reporter the idea was to encourage people to read the paper to look for their names in it. That is what local papers do. While it is also generally important to identify people in any story, when it is impossible to identify them, it doesn’t mean the story is automatically worthless and should be killed.

It is just because of the draconian totalitarian secrecy of the family courts that many of those stories should and could be told in quite significant detail because many are so incredibly shocking.

Until I had my own little brush with the evils of Social Workers and their abuse in the family courts I wouldn’t have been able to believe there was such a widescale abuse of justice going on in this country, the like of which we all normally associate with the worst of totalitarian regimes, like Hitler’s mass extermination programme or Stalin’s Russia, or Romania’s recent dictatorshiop which seemed to particularly specialise in abusing children.

What I learnt from my own experiences of social workers and their representations to the family court is that the half baked opinion of some incredibly ignorant, often inadequate person, most often than not with a psychological problem making them  want to  be a ‘control freak’ and sanctimoniously tell others what to do to the nth degree, is all that removes children from their parents – not the inadequacy of parents.

I experienced exactly that from just about every social worker I dealt with. Take the time to read this thumbnail of my case.

THE EVIL INCOMPETENCE OF SOCIAL WORKERS

My partner is a faultless Mother (apart from the consequences of her mental illness)  and I am a pretty competent type of Father. When my partner started falling ill with schizophrenia and became consequentially wildly erratic, I called social services asking them to fulfill their statutory duty to provide the medical help my partner is legally entitled to and the assistance three very small children were entitled to by virtue of being in danger etc because of psychosis and my partner abducting the children from the family home and living in damaging, very overcrowded circumstances.

Social Services first flatly refuse to do anything at all, then paid a visit with a psychiatrist to where my partner and the children were and tell me they agreed my partner is thoroughly insane but as the children ’seem to be OK at the moment, there is nothing they can do until things get worse and something really bad happens’.

When I take private law action seeking custody my partner immediately tells the court she wishes me to have custody because she recognises the dangers of her illness. This results in an interim order that my baby son resides with me. Bizarrely, the judge makes the first big mistake in the very first hearing by arbitrarily ordering my two step children to reside with their Father, who had expressly said he wanted me to have custody ( and I had agreed) as he would be unable to look after them. This order eventually leads to the breakup of that Father’s family and severe damage to the two step kids of mine over the long period of time the saga goes on for. The Judge was a moron.

So, my baby son was resident with me, and his Mum came too because she always had a good relationship with me and being with me invariably encouraged her to become better from her attacks of psychosis. Social workers now come to my house to make out their report to the court relating to my custody action. They lied in their report, saying ‘I hadn’t bonded with my son and ignored him on their first visit’. My son was asleep during that entire visit so not much bonding was likely to go on. I certainly didn’t ignore him, as I checked him every ten minutes to make sure he hadn’t rolled off the sofa. They also lied in their report saying my house was ‘unsuitable’  and my bedroom, where my son slept with me, was ‘dangerous’. That was incredible nonsense as it was a normal,  recently brand new room in every way.

Their apotheosis of incompetent nastiness came when they told my partner, in front of me, that she should employ a lawyer ‘to fight me for custody of her child, otherwise she may never see him again’. She had only just come out of a period of being sectioned in a secure mental ward. She was better, pretty normal. She instantly had a breakdown as a result of what that idiot social worker said and abducted my son, fleeing to her aged Mother’s one bedroom council pensioner accommodation 200 miles away in North Wales.

The police, sent by me to retrieve my son under the terms of the interim court order he reside with me, were told to get lost by social services and instructed to inform me I would have to go back to court if I wanted to retrieve my son. Their contradiction of the existing court order was an illegal contempt of court as they did not have or even bother to state any reason for this.

When I got to court a few weeks later, social services were in court and had brought my partner with them and produced a legal team. Social services had now taken it upon themselves to manipulate my highly suggestible partner, taking over her until now passive by our mutual agreement, case and persuade her to fight me for custody and somehow made my partner believe we were a couple splitting up and living apart. This was not the case and had never been the case. My partner and I had always ‘got on well’, excepting the difficulties psychosis sometimes produced.

Social services then proceeded to advise the court my son would be better off staying with his mum 200 miles from me on the grounds ‘it would be disruptive’ for him to return to his London home with me as he had now been away for about four weeks.

The judge said plainly that it was clearly quite unsafe for mum to look after the two year old child as she had a recent history of severe mental illness and dangerous behaviour and an obvious inability to look after a child or even herself. Social services insisted that was their advice. My lawyers hadn’t thought of the need for me to have an opposing witness. In fairness, were were completely ambushed by social services, but with hindsight I now realise my lawyers should have seen it coming and employed my own social worker witness.

The judge made a huge song and dance about it, and said she was being forced by social services to do something that was not appropriate. The judge then said she would only agree to placing the child with mum if social services visited mum every day and made sure mum attended her doctor on a weekly basis etc, etc. The judge made a point of saying that I was a good father and that I should be able to have completely unrestricted access to my son for two days a week and that social services should pay my expenses travelling 200 miles to see my son two days a week.

Social services did not pay my expenses and restricted my access to my son for two hours on each of the two days I visited him. They insisted I was supervised and I was not allowed to be alone with my son or take him with me overnight as explicitly ordered by the judge. This was on the entirely imaginary grounds that I was somehow ‘violent’ towards social services staff. There had been absolutely no incident of me being anything other than well mannered and polite at all times to social services and there had been no incident of anything remotely resembling violence. Being brought up in an exceptionally well mannered family and attending a private school which was positively obsessed with good manners and politeness, random violence is just not on my agenda.

Predictably, even social services had to eventually agree mum was far too dangerous to look after a two year old and my son was removed from mum after a few months. Instead of returning him to me, they put him in foster care where he was viciously abused, being constantly poked by the foster parents with a walking stick. This produced numerous identical round bruises all over my son’s torso and he still remembers it all now at the age of ten – over seven years later. 

Social services then told me, in front of my solicitor, that they were considering putting my son up for adoption and they explicitly threatened me that ‘if I didn’t co-operative with them my son would be adopted.

At this point I would remind you that at no time had anyone suggested I was an inadequate parent in any way whatever. Social services had not made any suggestion like this themselves. But you will notice a continuum of spiteful, arrogant disregard of law, any shred of competence, human rights or any sense of human decency whatever from social services so far.

I took social services to court and won custody of my son, but still had to suffer their menacing presence for another year of weekly visits as though I had been accused of inadequate parenting of some kind, which I never had been. They even forced me to go to parenting classes !

Their last effort at spiteful destructiveness was to announce  (at one of their care plan meetings) to my partner in front of me that I had had an affair, a relationship, with another woman while my partner had been living away from me. This resided entirely in their imaginations and was completely untrue and they had no meaningful reason to say something like that at all. They’re just plain weird, nasty people.

Unfortunately, the whole debacle had only made my son’s mother even more mentally ill through the stress of social services completely wrecking her family and being the agent for her losing her two older children to a their father who she knew neither wanted them or was capable of looking after them properly. And so it turned out to be the case.

Our previously close knit family had been completely blown apart by the activities of social services and the two elder children lost, becoming severely emotionally damaged by virtue of living with their father. 

Although my partner continued to live with me for quite a long time after our son was returned to me,  she descended into alchoholism and eventually abandoned her son and me as a product of her illness. Despite this we have always maintained a good and very friendly relationship and still do to this day.

Meanwhile all our lives have been comprehensively wrecked in a manner which has been entirely orchestrated by the activities of Social Services.

This sort of behaviour by social services seems to happen time and time again in virtually all cases they deal with. I have heard endless stories of social services being worse than useless, spiteful,  destructive and nasty. The damage they cause children and the  parents of those children is breathtaking.

 

ARE MORTGAGE LENDERS IDIOTS ?

 

I haven’t got a lot of news really. I have been running around like a headless chicken trying to do all the relevant things to deal with the house repossession, but it has all been a monumental waste of time so far. All those people that say they can help – the Citizen’s Advice Bureau and so on, do absolutely nothing of the sort. They simply waste vast amounts of your time. There is a huge army of job creation experts out there who are paid to do absolutely nothing useful at all. I have met loads of them in recent times.

 

Specifically, I went to the CAB to try and get legal representation through them. No solicitor wants to take on any legal aid cases because the government only pays them £25 an hour (so I’ve been told) and expects them to spend no more than four hours on a repossession case. As plumbers earn three times that hourly rate, you can see why solicitors aren’t interested.

 

Anyway, the CAB sanctimoniously go on about how they are going to help you, and they told me they had a pet solicitor who actually did do legally aided work for them.

 

So I see this solicitor, who makes a swift £100 for a thirty minute interview during which he says he will not represent me in court at all but will only give me ‘legal advice’ which turns out to be a two page letter he obviously sends to everyone telling them just the basics of law a litigant in person might choose to use as they represent themselves in court. What a con !

 

So he effectively ends up getting his standard fee of £100 per hour by billing the State for four hours at £25, but only needs to see me for half an hour and then just sends a standardised letter and  he expects me to be so thick as to believe has been written just to me and the identical letter not sent to several hundred other clients of his too !

 

Anyway, there was nothing in his ‘legal advice’ which I didn’t know already, so the whole exercise – including me having to travel down to Littlehampton to see him (£12 in petrol alone) was an utter waste of time.

 

So, I’m off to court tomorrow to ask for the case to be ‘put aside’ and be re-heard to give me more time and I will write a carefully constructed letter to the lender trying to persuade them to  give  me more time to find an income etc. Unfortunately, that is almost certain to be a waste of time as lenders are completely uninterested in being helpful.

 

They are rather bizarre because they instantly foreclose on gigantic numbers of mortgages which are only a a handful of months in arrears. This then has a very detrimental effect on their own balance sheets for highly complex reasons of economics, which is precisely the reason there is currently a Worldwide money crisis. It is a self generated, self fulfilling prophecy of financial meltdown wholly engineered by mortgage lenders around the globe.

 

This may sound incredible, but it is not my fevered imagination working. It is completely true ! I have taken the trouble to learn a bit about economics and how banks actually function and precisely what mechanisms are currently driving the present financial crisis. It is precisely what I have just outlined.

 

For instance, I only actually owe no more than a couple of thousand pounds at present. But the lender will force me out of the house in a few weeks  because they do have that legal right, and that is their standard practice.

 

However, what will then happen is they will attempt to sell the house. But because of the unusual financial conditions prevailing in this country and all over the rest of the World a the moment, there is no longer any money available for anyone else to obtain a mortgage to buy any property. So they will be unable to sell my house. So the lender has not retrieved his loan to me, I still owe it, the asset covering the loan vanishes and the lender isn’t getting the monthly payment he would be currently getting from me. Everyone loses- particularly the lender.

 

House prices everywhere are plummeting and will continue to drop because no one can borrow money to buy houses any more. There are already whole streets of empty houses rapidly becoming derelict and therefore  completely worthless in America because of just this mechanism.

 

On the other hand, if the mortgage lender was less spiteful, he wouldn’t be completely wrecking the entire mortgage market for everyone as well as the Global economy too.

 

In my case, as with many other re-possession cases, if the lender left me in the house he would be paid at least half the mortgage bill by me at present, and by avoiding forcing houses onto the market which cannot sell and will only become increasingly worthless as they stand empty, the lenders would not collectively be destroying the whole World economy as they are are presently doing.

 

Most householders, like me, would recover their incomes eventually and be able to repay their mortgages and make up the arrears. But no, the banks can’t see further than the ends of their quivering little rodent  like noses.

 

They are greedy, selfish idiots. And now they have been found out, as you will see if you have been reading the newspapers recently.

ROGUE ECONOMICS – ARE BANKS LIARS AND THIEVES ?

ARE THE BANKS DECEIVING EVERYONE – INCLUDING POLITICIANS ?

Probably. But how are they getting away with it ?

We are told that bank or mortgage lenders a or b have posted huge losses of billions here and billions there because of ‘bad’ mortgages that borrowers cannot repay.

As a result World banking has seized up and the World economy is grinding to a halt everywhere with huge inflation and increasing poverty.

The gigantic figures for losses that the mortgage lenders talk about do not seem to make the slightest sense because they appear to be much larger that could ever be conceivably possible.

Mortgage lenders talk of huge losses, particularly on the sub-prime market as people cannot repay housing loans and houses are re-possessed.

But as most houses repossessed are sold and mostly repay the mortgage loans in full, there are absolutely no losses for the mortgage lenders with those housing loans that were completely recovered without loss to the banks.

While there are some repossessed properties that do produce varying degrees of loss for the lender, they are a relatively small number of repossessions and cannot possibly add up to the silly figures of billions that the banks claim.

For example, if an average mortgage loan is £200 000 and there is a total loss of that loan to the bank because the property is repossessed, then the approximate total annual repossessions here in the UK of about 40 0000 properties, assuming that each repossession represented a total loss of the entire value of the average loan, would be 40k x £200 000 = £8 000 million or £8 billion in total ONLY !!!

This figure can be approximately multiplied up for the USA’s bigger population by a factor of, say six, to produce a maximum loss figure of £48 billion which is so much smaller than the losses being claimed by the banks it is laughable.

Combine these two total loss figures of both the UK and the USA and it adds up to a total of £56 billion, not the many, many hundreds of millions all the banks are claiming.

It also must be pointed out that the above calculation assumes that every repossession represents a complete and total loss of the entire loan for the lender. Obviously this cannot be the case because most repossessed properties are sold and repay the lender in full. Very few repossessions end up in any loss and even fewer end up with total loss. That figure must be a microscopic one.

This would make the real, actual loss figures for the banks infinitely less than this maximum possible figure of about £56 billion. This makes their claims for hundreds of million in losses incomprehensible.

So, can someone tell me what on earth the banks are talking about when they say they are losing billions ? Can it be they are making up fairy tale figures based perhaps on what incomes and profits they imagined they might earn at some vague point in the future.

In other words the whole thing seems to have been hyped up as a figment of the fevered imagination of bankers utterly obsessed with their own greed.

How are the huge figures for losses posted by banks calculated ? And why would any particular lender suddenly and dramatically ‘go bust’ overnight owing hundreds of millions.

I just don’t get it. The figures don’t add up. They seem to be living in some fantasy land.

Can some kind economist explain this to me – and all the other millions of very puzzled members of the population who really do not understand all this gibberish talked by the banks and politicians ?

Have a look at the book Rogue Economics by  Loretta Napoleoni

LETTER TO SAINSBURY’S SUPERMARKET

 

                                                                                                    

Last night  (24th June) at  about 9 p.m. I visited the Horsham branch of Sainsbury’s to try and speak with Chris LaForte who had telephoned me to deal with my previous complaint concerning an incident on Sunday May 11th 2008.

 

All my previous efforts to telephone the store had failed because the telephone was never answered – day after day. Yesterday I spoke to Mat Rownsly at your Head Office on extension 54356 about this. He had told me the store would telephone me yesterday, which it didn’t. Hence my personal visit in order to progress this complaint issue.

 

Imagine my astonishment  when the Horsham store exhibited yet another example of how to alienate customers and behave seriously badly. This is what happened.

 

I went to the customer service desk, where I politely enquired if Chris LaForte was in. When I was informed he was on annual leave, I commenced explaining why it was I needed to speak to him in the hope someone else could address this matter.

 

In the course of that explanation I mentioned it referred to my complaint about a previous incident at the store where  had been erroneously ‘ banned’. I said to the member of staff I was speaking to, that as I thought she had been present at that previous incident, she would probably remember it. For some curious reason I do not understand she denied being there and said she had no knowledge of me being ‘banned’.

 

Informing her that I would then wait until Chris LaForte was back at work, I went off to buy just one item, some cream. 

As I was peering at the cream shelf, a man dressed in a Sainsburys uniform sidled up to me and said “I’m going to have to ask you to leave the store immediately’.

 

When I attempted to talk to him in a perfectly normal manner he behaved in a similar manner to the previous Store manager – Matt Engell. 

 

He refused to talk to me, he was aggressive and confrontational and behaved in a manner which would wind any person up and instantly make them feel completely abused and very, very angry. 

Every time I opened my mouth to say anything at all, the Store manager  behaved as though I was assaulting him or otherwise being violent or abusive. He was incredibly confrontational, in other words, and quite determined not to engage in conversation of any kind. This kind of behaviour can only be considered thoroughly abusive and an intentional effort to generate conflict. It was stunningly ignorant behaviour.

 

I imagined Sainsbury’s would be training staff on how to avoid and defuse conflict rather than gratuitously generating  it out of thin air.

 

Actually, I was being exceptionally civilised, calm and polite in every sense – and not yet angry, but trying very hard not to become so. And as I saw how he was behaving in a ludicrous manner which would guarantee to be extremely offensive towards anyone, I stopped myself being wound up and sucked into his ridiculous mindset of violent anger and confrontation towards me. It took a great effort on my part to avoid this store manager achieving his obvious intention of being offensive, winding a perfectly civilised person up without good reason, and generally attempting to cause a major confrontation.

 

In his defence, I have to say it subsequently became obvious that  his behaviour is entirely a product of both his training and the apparently aggressive ethos among staff at that particular Sainsbury’s store.

 

Remaining very calm and speaking quietly, I had to repeat myself many times  to ask him if I could speak to him, as he was deliberately preventing any conversation taking place by simply continuing endlessly to angrily  tell me to leave the store, and continually talking over me and telling me he would not speak to me and asking me to be quiet and not to speak to him.

 

Eventually, when he saw I was going to continue to be calm and polite, he deigned to reluctantly allow a conversation to take place. I asked him what on earth he was on about asking me to leave the store without any explanation and without allowing any normal conversation to take place.

 

He then told me the customer service woman had spoken to him over the internal communications system.  He informed me I had just told her about my spurious banning and the complaint I had made to Head Office etc which is why I had come to the store to speak with Chris LaForte.

 

That is why he had come over to me to tell me to leave – on the instructions of this service counter woman who had told me she knew nothing about me being banned when I had asked her, and had only been told about the matter by myself a few moments earlier.

 

This duty store manager then told me he had been present at the previous event concerning Mr Engell, and because he had been told by the unbelievable security woman who caused the problem in the first place that I was ‘violent’, he had assumed  I was going to be violent when he spoke to me and asked me to leave the store.

 

As the situation at that moment began to calm down as, with great difficulty, I persuaded him to allow me to speak to him as you might normally expect, he then sheepishly apologized to me for being so confrontational and clearly indicated he was acting on the basis of instructions relating entirely to the previous incident and the erroneous idea that I was somehow a ‘troublemaker’ of some kind. 

 

He then explained that now, as  we were having a polite and civil conversation ( which he said he ‘had not expected’) he no longer felt it necessary to be confrontational in the manner I have previously described. 

It then became utterly clear to me that I might equally be speaking to Mr Engell who had behaved in an identical manner the previous occasion. Then,  on the instructions of the slightly lunatic security woman who had shrieked at me that I was (previously) banned and had pressed a panic button.

 

The point here is that both Mr Engell and this second store manger (a Mr Serotas, I think) both behaved towards me as though they automatically assumed and expected me to be violent and abusive when in fact I had never been so on either of the two occasions.

 

In fact, both these store managers were effectively acting on the instructions of the security woman who had accused me of being banned and pressed a panic button.

 

At the time of the first incident, when I was trying, but failing, to speak to Mr Engell ( he was refusing to allow me to say anything at all to him and was just repeating his instruction to me to ’get out of the store because I was banned’). The lunatic security woman had shouted at me and Mr Engells she had banned me ‘for being rude to her’.

 

I distinctly recall the security woman aggressively shouting at me the precise words – the very first words she uttered – “you’ve been banned from the store, I think, haven’t you ?”

 

Bearing in mind that some huge percentage, 60%, I think, of communication is non verbal, I can tell you this woman’s non verbal communication to me with this hesitant question was exhibiting her extreme uncertainty as to who I was, or whether she recognised me or, indeed, whether I was actually banned. 

 

She was clearly asking me for corroboration of the information that I had been banned, because she was not at that time in possession of it. She actually clearly indicated she had absolutely no idea of whether I had been banned and was expressing obvious doubt in her mind as to whether it was merely a figment of her imagination or not.

 

It is not entirely clear to me what she is talking about and it seems monstrous to me that your customers can be treated in this disgraceful manner by some demented security woman with a personal grudge of some kind.

 

That all the Sainsbury’s staff fall into line behind one demented woman with some personal grudge about ‘me being rude to her’, and fantasizing that I had been banned from the store,  is quite beyond my comprehension.

 

That the Customer Service  woman sees fit to inform the store manager of her conversation with me in order for him to throw me out on the second occasion, essentially on my own say so, because I had mentioned the banned word to her, is utterly unbelievable.

 

I had, in fact, been shopping in the store after the first incident several times, as the Sainsbury’s head office Mr Rownsley had told me quite clearly there was no record of me being banned anyway. It was clearly confirmed by Mr Rownsley that it was a complete fairy-tale, as I already knew.

 

The fact is, I am a normal civilised , sixty year old, well educated ‘middle class type’ person who frequently goes to your store with his nine year old son to shop for domestic items – not to engage in abusive incidents. And I certainly do not go there to be abused by manic security shrews obsessed with their inflated egos and Television Cop and car chase films.

 

In the course of my conversation with Mr Serotas on that second occasion, he also told me he thought I had pushed my shopping trolley at Mr Engell on the occasion of the first incident, leaving my shopping in the trolley, and that ‘I had stormed out of the supermarket’. 

 

I was completely astonished when I heard this because I have never done anything of the kind or engaged in any form of physical aggression at Sainsburys – ever.

 

What precisely happened is that while I was  being thoroughly abused by Mr Engells, and reduced to a state of extreme shock and sheer humiliation by all this extraordinary behaviour, I picked up my one carrier bag containing just £5 worth of purchases, and walked to my car with it, rather than take an entire trolley with just one small bag in it.

 

I did, indeed, leave the trolley where it was as I was in no state to be concerned about finding a home for it as Mr Engells and the security guard were shoving me around and ‘elbowing’ me out of the store. It was quite clear I had no option to park this trolley anywhere under such circumstances.

 

It is quite ludicrous of the second store manager, Mr Serotas, to  describe this as me ‘abandoning my shopping and pushing the trolley at Mr Engells, which is precisely what Mr Serotas did say to me. This is pure fiction.

 

All this seems to indicate quite unequivocally that your staff at the Horsham store are unpleasant and aggressive and contrive to conjure up incidents of confrontation where none exist in the first place. I am really shocked at this experience. 

 

As I have seen other members of the public  being treated with unmitigated aggression by security and car park staff in particular, I know my experience is not an isolated event, but just one of many others concerning other people.

 

On one famous occasion I was in my car in a long queue of cars unable to get out of the car park because the car parking staff refused to raise the barrier to a woman who was refusing to pay £10 as she had bought less than £10 worth of goods. 

 

So while the parking staff were obtuse and bullying, deliberately humiliating this woman,  every other customer trying to get home  was kept prisoner for a long time. 

This is disgusting.

SAINSBURY’S AND OTHER BIG BUSINESS CONNIVE IN DESTROYING SLEEPY MARKET TOWN

July 1, 2008 by strugglingsingledad

 

 

 

When, many years ago, my Father was a Councillor in this town and as Chairman of the Council was intimately involved in trying to prevent Sainsburys’ and other megalomaniac big businesses from wrecking the then pretty country market town with massively destructive ‘redevelopment’, he would have had absolutely no idea how nasty these big businesses like Sainsbury’s would become.

Since I knew the town as a boy, the Sun Life Insurance company and Sainsbury’s have  together been instrumental in conniving to persuade the Town Council to raze down vast amounts of the then attractive centre of the town and browbeat the Local Council into agreeing to close off most roads into the centre of town and build an ugly motorway-like ‘inner ring road ‘bypass’ around the centre of sleepy little town, preventing any normal access to it.

 

Both  these business organisations built monumental and modernistic ugly buildings over the centuries old town centre roads, killing of the historic town at a stroke. No doubt Sainsbury’ and Sun Life persuaded the Council it would be a good thing as they would be bringing lots of local jobs into the town.

 

But it has had  the effect of preventing any of the local residents from getting at the town centre to do any shopping and empty shops now  lie abandoned and boarded up forlornly as a result. 

 

Shops and other traders still struggling to make ends meet as the Council extorts gigantic parking charges, hugely exceeding the costs of paying an average monthly mortgage for a house, never mind a bloody car parking space, can only watch grimly as turnover falls and they go out of business one by one.

 

Fewer and fewer residents bother to overcome the sheer trauma and hassle of being milked by unreasonable parking charges and endless threats of £90 parking tickets followed by bailiffs at the door adding hundred and hundreds of pounds to just one parking ticket, then threatening householders with the legalised theft of their house contents if they don’t pay up immediately.

 

Pedestrians are artfully provided with their own obstacle course to get into the town centre too. Nearly the entire local population has to brave an artificially contrived and utterly inappropriate and unnecessary urban motorway, carefully conceived by dimwitted ‘planners’ to make getting into the town centre on foot as unpleasant as possible for virtually everyone.

 

Hence, the town is dying on its feet; a slow strangulation that has already turned a really busy, attractive mediaeval market town into a nasty little empty urban desert in the middle of of what used to be some of the most stunningly beautiful landscape in the World.

It is now a noisy sprawl of ring roads and Orwellian building development designed to look as revolting as possible.

 

But Sun Life has fallen on hard times as more and more people realised the life insurer plundered their pockets and business has slumped. So the predatory business has now gone, having done its job of sucking the life out of the two like the parasite it is.

 

Sainsbury’s too is no longer in the centre of town, bringing the extra shoppers and vibrancy it had solemnly promised all those years ago. 

 

It’s old low rise utilitarian shed like architecture is now a shoddy enclosed shopping centre, identical to any down at heel shopping mall anywhere. Completely without character and wildy unpleasant to visit, most shops offering standardised high street cloned tat.

 

Sainsbury’s supermarket itself, even more sophisticated in manipulating and dictating to local town councils all over the country, has purloined most of the one time garden of a fantastically elegant classic manor house in the one small remaining bit of the original town by the ancient Church that still remains. 

The Manor House is no longer fantastically elegant as it was bought by the RSPCA for it’s headquarters, and then sold at a massive profit to developers who built bits on everywhere and turned it into a warren of poky little ‘town houses’ and awkward apartments in the once elegant original building.

 

The town is is now ugly and bereft of the soul it had. The centuries of hustle and bustle of a busy English country market town have gone. The old coaching inn, once the focal point,  is boarded up and decaying listlessly. In the evenings and on the weekends, the town is dead and empty, except for a few loitering youths, often mindlessly drunk.

 

It is not the pleasant, friendly place it once was. Instead it is a place to hurry away from before a black cloud of depression descends about what modern life is like .

THE WEASILY TWINS

July 1, 2008 by strugglingsingledad

Or how Blair and Brown destroy Britain

 

 

A tetchy day today. The nine year old Ninja Wrecker decided to get up early. He told me later in the day it was because the motorbike  the next door neighbour mistakes for his own masculinity was standing around idling with it’s throaty roar at the crack of dawn.

A common occurrence as the inadequate idiot with the bike likes the whole neighbourhood to notice how masculine he must be making such a pathetically irritating noise. Sometimes the bike is grumbling on and off at intervals all day. What a moron !

The nine year old Ninja  turned the central heating on (it’s mid-summer) and the ancient piping is so noisy it hisses and grumbles  loudly until you wake up in exasperation. So I did. It was really annoying as I had only gone to bed at 2.30 a.m. owing to my desperate need to blot my brain out by watching mindless television.

It’s virtually the only escape I ever get from the Ninja, watching TV in the middle of the night while the little blighter is in bed and isn’t constantly wittering at me. More effective than Prozac, my mind gradually sinks into a semi-conscious state where I am entirely unsure of what I am actually watching. It could be anything really.

Then the Postwoman knocks on the door with a recorded delivery letter. It’s always irritating to be summoned to open the front door in your dressing gown, announcing to all the neighbours how decadent you are being in your dressing gown so late in the morning with the boy lurking behind you in his pyjamas. “what an idle pair of slobs’, they will be thinking self righteously.

 

Then, to really irritate me, the Postwoman spent ages and ages fumbling with letters while I just stood there like an embarrassed lemon. Eventually she plucked one from a bundle and thrust it angrily into my face, holding it strangely between her thumb and forefinger at the very edge of one corner, saying  sharply ‘Is this you ?’, as she wobbled it backwards and forwards, making it impossible to read.

 

Without my glasses I couldn’t see anything except a blur. So I reached out to take  the envelope from her so I could hold it still enough to read. Then  I would be able to see the address.

That’s when this politically correct twit really wound me up by snatching the envelope back from me as I tried to take it and a brief tussle ensued. Fortunately, I won the tussle and was able to read my name on the envelope. Slightly embarrassed at the fight over the envelope I muttered weakly that I was as blind as a bat and couldn’t see a thing without my glasses. – a statement of the obvious.

After I had signed for it, and she had gone, it dawned on me the reason for her possessiveness over the envelope was the indoctrination every government employee gets about dealing with any member of the public.

All public employees these days seem to be brainwashed by their masters  – the Government – to become naturally aggressive and inhuman. It never used to be like that.

 

They are all trained to believe everyone they deal with is completely dishonest, almost certainly inclined towards criminality at every opportunity, and with latent violence lurking it must always be potentially dangerous dealing with anyone. Just like all Government emplyees are really !

 

I suppose that is the natural result when you have an evil, self serving, corrupt Government that sets about systematically taking away everyone’s freedom and milks them dry right left and centre with fraudulent scams to steal as much money as possible. 

 

After all, as the Government knows it is grasping, dictatorial, controlling, and just plain dishonest in every way as it goes about blatantly stealing our freedom and our money, I suppose it must assume the rest of us are as criminally dishonest and nasty as they are.

 

Therefore the Postwoman is trained to assume that householders might snatch letters not belonging to them, presumably so they can disappear inside their houses to frantically rip them open in search of valuables. 

A fairly crackpot assumption on the part of the Postwoman and the people who no doubt specially train Postmen and women to hang on the letters like grim death as a cunning population of householders take every opportunity of snatching them from all the Postmen.

 

But that’s how they behave, so they assume everyone else behaves as badly as they do. After all they are all agents of the Government, and that’s how the whole Government behaves; totally dishonestly !

This atmosphere of paranoid distrust you now find absolutely everywhere is spread throughout every part of our society as a result of the poisonous Government we have had for the last decade.

 

It has employed a huge army of civil service bureaucrats to carry out a manifestly crazy and dishonest campaign of systematic persecution on the entire population of the country.

 

It is positively Orwellian. What this Government has done to this  Country is breathtakingly nasty.

Why have we allowed it to happen ? We used to pride ourselves in our civilised way of life. We were the envy of the World for our integrity and gentle ways. 

Now we have seen that we too can be prey to the evils of dictatorship and corruption along the lines of Hitler, Mussolini, Mugabe etc. Blair and Brown and their cronies have just been less extreme and a little more weasily.

But in the end they are all exactly the same.

BLOGGING MADE DIFFICULT

 

Why is the Internet so unbelievably and unnecessarily aggravating – not to mention monumentally time wasting ?

 

I find using computers and the internet extraordinary; everything seems to be made deliberately difficult.

It seems finding out how to blog is rather like trying to unlock a combination lock with guesswork. Everything is guesswork to a greater or lesser degree. So, although it is intrinsically simple, it is made immensely complicated – and therefore horribly time consuming.

The reality is an experienced person could stand over the shoulder of a new beginner and say “do this, this and this because……”

It would take a very short time – an hour or two at most – to learn how to do all the relevant things, instead of spending half a lifetime trying to guess.

This tutorial could be converted into a written form which could be quite brief. It would be a godsend to people ! I have yet to see anything remotely like it.

That is why I have only the foggiest idea of how to get the readers in to my blog.

I have absorbed (over a vast period of time on the internet) the fact that:

a)  You have to post frequently
b)  link to other sites/blogs

Posting frequently I can understand. Linking, no. First of all what exactly is linking ? Is it the contents of your blogroll – the thing of adding other blogs to your sidebar ? If so there is a bit of a limit to how many you can add. Also it is rather random – just hoping that particular blog will be interested in you. It may or may not be.

Or does linking really mean picking on every available word in your blog text and turning it into a highlighted hyperlink to some random site ? If so, I cannot understand the validity of that.

When I first came across this as a reader, I thought the fact a word in the text you were reading was highlighted as a hyperlink meant it had some particular relevance to what I was reading.

I became increasingly irritated as these links led me randomly around the internet to read things that simply held no interest and unfocussed my mind until it became a bit like fermenting porridge and about as useful. The time wasting has been of epic proportions. I have had enough of it. life’s too short to waste on computer nerdiness.

The other thing I fail to understand is how blogs which are unremarkable have attracted large numbers of readers and in some cases have over-excited book publishers into wanting to publish books ?

I still remain mystified ?

 

Single Parent’s Treadmill

Persecuted by Bureaucrats

 

 

At present, I am not making ends meet at all. I am completely tied up in knots which prevent me from finding enough time to work. Obviously, I hope to change that. But so far I have been fighting a losing battle.

 

So much so that I have just received notice from the mortgage lender’s solicitor telling me they are starting repossession proceedings.

 

For example; today is a typical example of not being able to find time to work.

 

It is 1400 (2pm.) , office workers have just returned from lunch to do slightly more than 50% of their normal daily work load before going home for the weekend. I have already been busy since 8.a.m, by the way.

 

I, on the other hand, cannot do one solitary item of income generating work right now.  The ordinary workers mentioned above will do 50% of their days work, I will do zero percent. Why ?

 

Because I have just one and a half hours before my nine year old son returns from School. After which time he will require feeding and watering, and when feeding and watering is dealt with he will be wittering non-stop at me about something or other.

 

I cannot stop him – ever. All attempts have proved fruitless. Only by being seriously unpleasant with him can I shut him up and that means ruining what is a reasonably good relationship. It would be pointless to do that. It would mean becoming one of those disinterested and distant parents who couldn’t really give a hoot about the existence of their children, viewing them as nothing more than a severe inconvenience to get rid of at every  opportunity. Anyway, previous experience tells me even being unpleasant only shuts him up for a few moments.

 

Meanwhile, the immediate priorities for me are to attend a brief hospital appointment at 3.30, and deal with a monstrous  mountain of garbage paperwork all generated by insane bureaucrats. I would barely make a dent in it if I spent a full forty hour working week at it, so fitting it all into the hour and a half before 3.30 is slightly difficult.

 

We have lunatic claims for ten years of council tax (over ten thousand pounds worth – a joke, isn’t it ?) for the house I moved out of seven years ago, combined with bailiffs threats to seize everything I possess to pay for it, we have the mysteries of tax credits to occupy a few hours with, we have the State milking me for speed camera fines, where I have to fight the case in court, taking many hours, and many, many other things, all with screaming deadlines and all wanting to take priority and all to be done right now, before the end of today. It is impossible. And there is no possibility of doing what I really want to do which is proper income generating work.

 

Instead I have to devote all my time to fending off the persecution by bureaucrats. If I don’t, they will take their revenge and impose nastinesses on me. The speeding fine will cost money and I will be arrested for not paying as well as having my license taken away. All because  drove at 38 miles per hour on a completely empty main road in the middle of the night, actually obeying all speed limits. Like about three million other people, I have been well and truly conned by a thieving Government which is milking thousands of motorists every day.

 

And, although I will persevere at my desk after dealing with the nine year old and persuading him to go out and play cricket with the local cricket club, past experience tells me I will get very little done at all. Even when I put off preparing the evening meal for him and me until the last minute, its still doesn’t buy much time. It also means we usually eat at 11 pm which is far too later for both of us and drives me completely bonkers.

 

This is just a little cameo of everyday life as a single parent. Variations of the same theme occur every single day. Each day I think tomorrow will be different. But it never is. All my time is taken up by the combination of mad bureaucrats poisoning my life and looking after the nine year old Ninja Destroyer.