OPINION: LABOUR’S LOVE LOST – how the desperate and the decent got locked out of British politics

There’s an Observer editorial this morning saying that a guaranteed “living wage” is vital morally and economically. It represents the nth example of why I no longer read much from the Guardian Group. What the Guardianistas tend to do is demand something with half the jigsaw still unfinished, having bought the jigsaw with money they can’t afford.

Nobody has a moral right to anything without conditions. Contribute to and work for the general social good, and you have the right to expect the Sovereign State to fulfil its first duty: the protection and development of its citizens. If you don’t have the right to that, then what’s the point of the State? But the money has to come from somewhere. There isn’t any money any more because several key groups in Western society over the last forty years have been either asleep at the wheel, or trying to steal the car. In so doing, they have trumpeted or tolerated an economic model that is a scam, utterly incapable of employing anywhere near enough people, and based on several tenets – all of which have been shown to be baseless piffle. Yet the more this is highlighted, the more loudly the proponents of the scam scream for more of the same.

What we don’t hear from Guardian Group, the Indie or the Mirror is more hard-hitting stuff about the hypocrisy and contradictions of globalist neoliberal mercantilism. The best investigative writing to come out of Big G over the last decade was the Hackgate saga. Three years on, has it made any difference? Yes: it’s slowed down a juggernaut. But the juggernaut is still coming: Murdoch and his son are still free to corrupt and pervert, nobody at Newscorp has gone to jail, and the Conservative MP who facilitated the unholy wedlock between that company and Camerlot has been promoted to Health Secretary…the easier to flog the blood transfusion service to asset-strippers.

As for the ‘economic’ case for a living wage, the Observer piece has to go back to Henry Ford after the First World War to make it. Frankly, it’s a sketchy, lightweight case. The issue here is not the demand for a living wage: it is the need to demand an economic system that can deliver it.

Elsewhere in the paper, Will Hutton veers between the obvious and the illusory. The recovery is hype, he says. Gee thanks Will, I was nowhere on that one until you pointed it out. But how can I take this man seriously given he is the same bloke who, in January 2010 told his readers, “This is the year the world economy gets back on its feet”? Will said this, of course, because Gordon asked him to. Oh dear.

Perhaps this is a bridge too far, but for me the Guardian (much less so the Independent) represents the sort of slightly barmy and fluffy irrelevance that middle class intellectuals first began using to bugger up the Labour Party around 1958. Richard Crosland wrote The Future of Socialism in that year –  a book that has a direct DNA link to Tony Blair, who decided around 1994 that Socialism didn’t have a future (the one thing about which I think he was right) but instead chose the ‘if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em’ strategy to get elected.

What Labour lost after 1997 – a golden opportunity to show a real third way – was the right to credibly claim “We will protect small vulnerable against big powerful”. Sixteen years later, the Ed Miller Band gives us, “Your friend in tough times”. My immediate reaction was to suggest it be changed to “Your fiend in Toff times”. It was, and is, a pathetic attempt to overwhelm reality with spin. Ed Balls is a man of straw, and Ed Miliband a straw man put up by Harman and Dromey. They’re all technocrat middle-class plonkers: none of them has ever done a real hard day’s work – or added value to what Britain’s about – in their adult lives as “professional” politicians.

The gentrification of the Labour Party was followed from the mid 1970s by the stunning defeat of the Wets in the Conservative host. Indeed, the pretty ghastly male crew with which Thatcher surrounded herself after ousting Ted Heath are in turn the direct genetic forefathers of the quite extraordinarily low-grade, ethically bereft men around Camerlot today – except in the latter case, they’re not following Dave so much as surrounding him. Ghastly under Thatcher has moved on to Gangsters behind Cameron. It will only get worse after 2015.

Finally, the other result of Labour losing its way by bending to Union pressure in the 1970s was the SDP, the brief upsurge of the Alliance with the Liberals under David Steel, and the final act of splitting the Left asunder that produced a Michael Foot leadership. The ‘merger’ that followed (producing the Liberal Democrats and, God help us, Nick Clegg) has undermined the ‘reasonable liberal’ position in middle-ground British politics.

To sum up, what I perceive today (actually, I have done for two years) is the at first gradual but now brazenly accelerating progress of the Risible Right (just as dangerously illiberal as the Loony Left, only much more psychotic) to both privatise and then deregulate politics in Britain. If you doubt this, take a look at Michael Gove: as fast as he is destroying democratic educational localism, this strange man is busy intervening to lighten the scanning process and criteria for deciding whether wannabe teachers should be allowed near children.

But my main point is that they being allowed to do this because of electorate apathy. And we have electoral apathy because first, the Decent Middle Grounders have become cynical about pols in general…and the sense they have of nobody listening; second, the Labour Party has sold out to the electoral system – and left the desperate downmarket to abstain; and finally, the descendants of the SDP have sold out to the technocrats – thus smoothing the way towards the ConDemned Coalition we have in power now.

This why I – and millions like me – have felt disenfranchised since around 1975. In an act close to desperate pleading, in December 2010 I wrote this piece effectively saying “I don’t like what Labour’s become, but without a proper replacement for it, then decency will die”. I think I managed to alienate Sloggers of both Left and Right by doing so, but reading it now, that post still sounds right to me. It’s what drove me into a rage last Friday about not just the Bain smash and grab raid on the blood transfusion service, but the pathetic reaction of Labour’s leadership – and much of the general public. What is the point in wandering about yelling “Hands off our NHS” if (a) you don’t forward a viable solution and (b) you aren’t there with a damned good point to make as the NHS gets shafted by Bain Capital? We’ve come full circle back to why the Guardian gets on my nerves: all mouth, no spine, no ideas. It’s an equation that sums up 95% of Westminster, Whitehall, and Town Hall politics in 2013.

We are still in too many denialist tribes. I would argue strongly that there is a large majority in the electorate who would be against the fanaticism of the Tory Right if they felt that the alternative was decent people with a practical commercial perspective and a sense of the need to cooperate in the displacement of a Loopy-loo economic model that has bred nothing beyond disparity, divisiveness, greed, bankruptcy and mendacity.

It was this that led me to give a name to a non-political pressure group last week – the Unaligned Front for Decency (UFD) – and write a pretty confrontational tweet to several Labour sects. The only reply was from Tom Watson, who asked me what I was about. I replied to say I was a One Nation Mutualist. He responded with “Count me in”. We need more of this; and I need to apologise to Tom for calling him tribalist in the past.

The bottom line is this: do you want to sit, march, mouth off and generally moan about a tiny minority of hijackers taking over the Establishment for their own grubby ends – or do you want to organise cooperatively? Do you want to slag off a BBC bullied by both Parties for nearly thirty years, or do you want to think a bit harder about a media set dominated by Murdoch and his Ghouls? Do you want a Britain we can be proud of again for non-jingoistic reasons – or do you want these arseholes to grind its values into the dirt? These are the questions the UFD is asking.

Until the advent of Baroness Handbag, by far the biggest colour-range in the UK political spectrum was that occupied by the Tory Wets, the soft Left, and the Liberal Party. For reasons I’ve described in this piece, they are no longer represented at Westminster: our increasingly dysfunctional ‘democracy’ has reverted to Reds v Blues point-scoring, with diabolical lobbyists finding things for relatively idle hands to do. Somebody or something needs to represent the desperate, the destitute, and the disenfranchised in our country. It isn’t going to be the leadership of any of the three Parties in the Commons today, and the man outside knocking to get in, Nigel Farage, is definitely not going to do it.

I want to see the UFD acting as a pressure group and a catalyst at an effective level in the process. But I confess to needing more from you lot. Are you up for it? And how would you like to see it develop?

Thanks for reading.





60 thoughts on “OPINION: LABOUR’S LOVE LOST – how the desperate and the decent got locked out of British politics

  1. Of course there would be more money for the state to spend on its citizenry if corporates like, for example, Guardian Media Group didn’t structure their finances through creative trusts and off-shore conveniences etc.


  2. the best – though most difficult in today’s social-marxist country – way for everyone to receive a ‘living wage’, would be to cut welfare payments.

    if there was no alternative but to fight for enough money to live on, then employers would be forced to pay it. at the moment, welfare is just a subsidy for employers.

    however; immigration may have to be curtailed to prevent ‘cheap’ foreign labour taking all the jobs.


  3. With debts of over nine times the size of our economy and I think a bit of mutuality isn’t going to be much use when the SHTF this autumn. The mutual model wasn’t exactly a success at the Co-Op bank, Cheshire, Derbyshire building societies was it?
    We need true free market economics not crony capitalism or socialism. No business should be allowed to have more than 5% of any market. When you have a least twenty business to choose from you end up with more choice and innovation. As Ken Livingstone pointed out, the privatisation of British Airways worked to a certain degree because if I don’t like BA I can always give plenty of other airlines a try. I don’t like Ryanair so I don’t fly with them but I’m stuck with the NHS. Friedman did get one thing right. We should be “free to choose”. Shame we don’t follow Minsky instead.


  4. Another great post.I suspect the Labour Party are maneuvering to get into an inevitable coalition when the system collapses further.


  5. For God’s sake, not another effing political party.

    Just put your money where your mouth is, stop effing around, and become an Independent.

    Your constant wise prattling is the urinal equivalent of ‘pissing against the wall’.

    Walk your talk – that is the ‘third way’.


  6. John,

    By a strange coincidence you picked out the same Guardian articles as I picked to comment on as I currently have a login that isn’t banned. Needless to say bill40 is banned forever, one of my crimes was linking to this blog.

    I believe a minimum income is a right and that all economics breaks down without full employment. (FE). All the great economists and political thinkers took this as a given and it was simply unthinkable that this wouldn’t be the number one priority for all parties forever.

    So if the UFD backs FE I’m in. It was when FE was abandoned that ordinary people lost all control and representation.


  7. ‘No business should be allowed more than 5% of the market.’

    I bags the Apple iPhone, and you can have the Lava Xolo A700.


  8. R37
    It’s not a political Party; what good would one independent be; and you can’t talk through your feet – although you seem to manage it perfectly well: you’d make an excellent MP.

    Oh, and be assured – any more abuse aimed at me or anyone else here, and you’re out.


  9. “Tony Blair, who decided around 1994 that Socialism didn’t have a future (the one thing about which I think he was right)” ~ John Ward

    Yeah John, 1994, just after another John, John Smith, died – just after writing “Reclaiming The Ground”


  10. Again, please define your new deal (UFD) by way of a new Constitution to which we can subscribe an allegiance.


  11. I am totally ‘up for it’ – I think the most important issue however is to actually define what action is required.
    The first and most important step is to stop feeding the monsters that have imprisoned society behind a wall of spin, social and economic division and dishonesty.

    First – stop paying to be lied to – if you have a sky subscription cancel it, write to Sky and tell them you are cancelling because you object to Murdoch’s behaviour. Cancel your TV licence and watch catchup services only (totally legal despite the BBC’s tv licence psyop machine) and write to the BBC telling them that they need to stop wasting millions on gibberish and actually report something that challenges the populace to think for themselves, then you might think about contributing again.

    Pull every last penny out of the banking system (there’s no interest available anyway).

    Shop in a forensic manner only buying discounted lines and pay no allegiance to any one grocer.

    Write to your MP at least once a month and demand answers on topics like lobbying, cronyism and nepotism.

    Foster your community links, swap, trade and barter for goods and services where you can. Cancel your “don’t worry be happy” service contracts with people who promise to fix your life if it breaks. Learn to take life on the chin as our grandparents did.

    Get by on less, do you really need the newest Iphone?

    The ‘system’ is there because we inhabit it, we feed it and nurture it. We exist inside a bubble of our own creation because we ultimately crave comfort and security above all else.This concept is sold back to us in a million different brightly coloured packets by snake oil salesmen who promise much and deliver little but demand we all go to work and pay them the lion’s share of what we earn.

    If you really want change, then take a deep breath, accept that life is finite and sometimes hard, cast off the trinkets and the accoutrements that you hold so dear and move on.


  12. Full employment will require less new technology, methinks, and perhaps a greater ‘self-sufficiency’ of food production. But that won’t be allowed, sadly.


  13. “Oh, and be assured – any more abuse aimed at me or anyone else here, and you’re out”

    “Abuse”??!! For someone self-elected to be an expert on that subject, I’m astonished you could accuse me of that!

    You appear to be able to dish abuse out to ‘all & sundry’, but when you self-righteously think someone is ‘abusing’ (aka criticising) you, a threat results.

    Come on John – all I’m saying is that there is a “third way” politically – stand as an Independent.

    “What good would one Independent be?”

    For you to say that shows a level of political ignorance which surprises me.


  14. Can you kindly give those of us perhaps less capable of imaginative thinking than you an example of a country or society, past or present, that you regard as a role model?


  15. Pingback: John Ward – Opinion : Labour’s Love Lost – How The Desperate And The Decent Got Locked Out Of British Politics – 21 July 2013 | Lucas 2012 Infos

  16. @ Rod,

    No. There are no role models because the neo liberals are all pervasive everywhere. They are the people currently f**king things up and blaming everyone but themselves for said f**k ups. The argument for me is about economics and zip all to do with politics.

    To achieve victory we must overcome big business interests, central bank cartels, shadow banking, lobbyists, Sir Humphrey, bought and paid for politicians and everything else that protects the vested interests of the sociopaths that have taken over.

    Tricky isn’t it?


  17. In 2009, The Guardian/Observer put together, “A convention on Modern Liberty” (the web site still exists). It was a grouping (a UFD forerunner if you will) of just about everyone who had ever said that Britain needs reform – and quick. When I read their blurb I thought that our troubles were about to end. The Convention happened, and then…………………nil. Were they warned by the elite? And BTW John, arrange a 30 minute meeting with Tom Watson and I’ll readjust your opinions of him.


  18. @ GQ,

    Full employment will thrive with new technology and most certainly will require greater self sufficiency in food production. What currently isn’t allowed must change.


  19. The newspapers no longer support the citizen on the street. They have become lobbying mouthpieces for assorted political bents. It’s a real shame. Real news and truth is ever harder to find which is why I love the slog.


  20. Pingback: THE PAEDOFILE: More distraction over the Elm House case | The Slog. 3-D bollocks deconstruction

  21. Hi John, I formed a new ‘party’ several years in frustration at the then prevailing macho useless political approaches.

    The Neo-Athenians is inspired by reading The Company of Citizens by Brook Manville and Josias Ober (see http://futureconsiderations.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/HBR_CompanyOfCitizens.pdf and their book) and Josiah’s works on building communities of knowledge (again using Athenian models).

    My ‘party’ would be updated from the original Athenian governance model to include women and slaves.

    My Tory friends weren’t interested and my New Labour friends were too star-struck with Bambi Blair.

    Latterly, I’ve been contemplating resurrecting it, having be re-inspired by the Positive Money movement http://www.positivemoney.org/ and, especially, complementary currencies – eloquently described by Bernard Lietaer and others. http://www.lietaer.com/

    I have a couple of people at Camden Council who have shown some interest in a Camden ‘currency’ and I am talking to a couple of people about an NHS/social care currency.

    John, come and join my party and bring decency with you!


  22. Starve the beast. In the final analysis, it’s the only, and most effective, voice we have. Until we rediscover the value(s) of self reliance, we will forever be at the mercy of the State and its corporate nostrums. Political ideas and ideals come and go but self reliance, coupled with the understanding that by helping others to help themselves you help yourself, lasts forever.


  23. Bill, then based on all of the above there will sooner or later be an Animal Farm moment, ie, déjà vu all over again. “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” (attributed to George Santayana [me neither]). Added to which, if you don’t have a clear vision of the desired outcome you can hardly develop, let alone execute, a coherent plan of how to get there.

    I’m as ready as the next person to sign up for a better future, but I wouldn’t want this to develop into the typical reality-free, navel-gazing, eat-the-rich type of discussion often seen on CiF.


  24. Fair play to you, John. I admire your energy and dedication.

    With regard to your many comments about globalism gone mad, I wonder how do we unpick it all given the power of the WTO?


  25. Count me in also – with conditions.

    I did my bit for a while by being an elected voluntary director of a credit union, being at various times Compliance (to FSA rules & thereby hangs a tale) Officer, Vice-Chairman, finally Company Secretary & thus the board member considered legally responsible. Ironically a relatively tiny fund was micro-controlled by the FSA while they allowed the big beasts to do what they did.

    The rules were beyond beyond comprehension to a voluntary board filled with people doing it out of altruism. The manipulative paid manager knew and understood far more than any board member could. The board was too afraid of losing that skill so management of the manager was virtually non-existent. My own warnings were ignored by the board or even effectively confrontationally challenged directly by the manager. Powerless, yet responsible, I refused to restand for election. Some of my worst fears were realised later.

    Mutuality without a human scale in size, simplicity and understandability is not a panacea at all. The examples of large, struggling mutuals help confirm that they have long outgrown the ability of their members to have an effective say.


  26. I don’t suppose my reply will be published on here. I don’t bother commenting on this site anymore, it’s a home for statist apologism in my opinion. But whilst removing my comment, consider this…

    Any line that deviates from your own or implies criticism of your point of view is met with -usually rude- aggressive replies, or threats to censor said opinion. You say you don’t tolerate certain behaviours, but it seems like they’re only intolerable opinions when they differ from yours!!!

    Regarding rights, no-one has to earn rights! We are born with inalienable rights. As usual, you apply conditions to the awarding of rights like a good statist, communist or fascist.

    On all of those grounds you’d probably make a good politician John. Sand in your ears, swatting away at the naysayers while you advocate more statist rubbish. Sidling up to other political apologists like Watson (Iraq War and ID Card supporter) is the icing on the cake!


  27. Any ‘movement’ that is unwilling to respond genuinely and graciously to criticism will be doomed to failure, as it will just be an extension of today’s westminster bubble.

    Though I probably disagree with at least half of your opinions, I wish you well on your endeavour. If the prerequisite requirements of ‘movements’ is that each participant shared the same viewpoints, then they wouldn’t get very far!

    We have been divided by the state to suit their ends. In order to move forward we will ALL have to be more accomodating of others. I’m trying to rise to that level of Zen, it’s not easy, but it’s entirely neccessary.


  28. Roderick
    Hence why the first item on the agenda should be our philosophy & goals
    my first contribution is a constitution
    Of which my suggestion is that it be split up into categorises ie Freedom of the citizen,freedoms of the state,freedoms of power other than those already mentioned(commerce) and how these work both to oppose & complement the others freedoms


  29. John, don’t you think the Harrogate Agenda, which has been developed by Richard North, WitteringsfromWitney and others, has much to commend it. It has taken the analysis you have also summarised and produced a document that enables practical measures to reform our nation. The idea of Referism is also a practical idea that needs to be promoted. Practical solutions to our current problems.


  30. “I don’t suppose my reply will be published on here”

    Cornelius Townedge (@seti2342) – If you are using a wireless connection get yourself wired.


  31. @ Rod,

    I love rich people they’re fine by me as long as they’re useful. All the problems are caused when we serve their exclusive interest which is what we are doing now. Note the one size fits all and that their interests coincide with ours, when they patently do not.

    At the moment we put the system before outcome, we need to reverse this. The desired outcome ie FE and a living wage should be put first. How much you pay yourself for achieving this is none of my business. Stuffing trillions in tax havens is.


  32. “Regarding rights, no-one has to earn rights! We are born with inalienable rights.”
    Indeed we are Corney, the rights to cherish and be cherished. If I cherish work, I expect to be cherished by my employers in return, for a fair pay. If I cherish my hubby, he returns it ten-fold. I cherish my children, and they are well-balanced and pro-active……daughter has just discovered she believes she is receiving higher pay than she should be…and is going to ask for clarification – because it is not fair on the others who work with her for less. I hope her new bosses cherish her too.
    BUT I believe John is saying that no-one has rights to an ‘income’ if they have not contributed back. I understand it as common sense, and fair play.
    I am one of the unwashed 1 in 5 who ‘does nothing’ to contribute to the economy…….as JW spoke about last week. If anyone saw my garden and store cupboard, I think ‘doing nothing’ would be furthest from their minds; I am healthy, the family are healthy, and the elderly neighbours are healthy too.
    My Mother lives with us, and Hubby has a small income – no pay rise for 6 years and counting- and we claim nothing from anyone.
    I sleep very well, but would sleep better if I knew everyone in our land had the same satisfaction of having ‘earned’ at the end of every day.

    I welcome debate about all things , however I hope you can see that a recently single man such as JW may occasionally be short tempered, for all manner of reasons….support is better than a whip. Perhaps that is why behind every good man is a good woman!


  33. UFD acting as a pressure group and a catalyst at an effective level in the process.

    Mr Ward, basically we need an effective voice of opposition as a balance that is honest and decent. Break either of those morals and you just end up with the same. I have seen some that I perceived as good politicians in my time but they just got less and less effectively pushed out by those that were corrupt and dishonest or alternatively they shook hands with the corrupt and then were corrupted.

    That is the abysmal state of UK politics.


  34. It would be nice to think there was another (practical, rather than wishful) answer, but I think you’re right there. Self-reliance as far as possible, reduce anything that pays taxes, barter rather than purchase, purchase second-hand rather than new (no VAT), adopt anything that is money (doesn’t have to be Gold, maybe bitcoin, maybe just the currency of a new mutual Bank) that others will accept as Good Delivery, hire local traders and avoid any company with foreign call-centres, the list is endless; AND TOTALLY LEGAL.


  35. Green Queen – on rights.

    I see rights rather differently now “you should repay rights you receive”
    or “expect only those rights you give”. The blinding question … does either side TRUST the other on rights now and reckon that is a NO!


  36. There seems to me two problems here overvalued/undervaluation of labour
    This can be rectified & putting up the lower end isn’t the answer,if cost have risen because of the differential then the top end needs cutting this aids exports & economic stimulus more than raising the lower end
    the second problem is that the overvalued have used their extra spare money to widen the gap even more,so having gained, they then use some of that gain to get political influence which stifles the real economy,it is no different if labour is overvalued it also has the same effect,when it should be going back into the real economy & new commerce,so i suggest £65m per year or £1 pppy split by votes cast for all candidates.No vote cast no money distributed, No other monies paid for political canvassing.
    This means that whilst someone who gains from transactions,they can not use it to influence policies but look for other commercial enterprise to invest in
    And get rid of the £500 fee to stand


  37. @Mark D.
    If you take away the word ‘Rights’ for need, it might make a change.
    When you talk about side…who are you talking about? People, or the government?


  38. Is that age related? Can’t see a 21 yr old with HUGE principles being able to live in London/Westminster vicinity on £12.38/hr…….


  39. @Roderick
    How about José Mujica, president of Uruguay, as a role model for future presidents? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20243493). When I first read about him, my initial reaction was ‘this man seems too good to be true’ but however he turns out as a president, his real ‘man of the people’ stance must surely be having a positive effect as a role model on at least the youngsters in his country? You simply couldn’t imagine the equivalent in Britain, could you?

    from the BBC archives:-
    “It’s a common grumble that politicians’ lifestyles are far removed from those of their electorate. Not so in Uruguay. Meet the president – who lives on a ramshackle farm and gives away most of his pay.
    Laundry is strung outside the house. The water comes from a well in a yard, overgrown with weeds. Only two police officers and Manuela, a three-legged dog, keep watch outside.
    This is the residence of the president of Uruguay, Jose Mujica, whose lifestyle clearly differs sharply from that of most other world leaders.
    President Mujica has shunned the luxurious house that the Uruguayan state provides for its leaders and opted to stay at his wife’s farmhouse, off a dirt road outside the capital, Montevideo.
    The president and his wife work the land themselves, growing flowers.
    This austere lifestyle – and the fact that Mujica donates about 90% of his monthly salary, equivalent to $12,000 (£7,500), to charity – has led him to be labelled the poorest president in the world.”


  40. ” …the fact that Mujica donates about 90% of his monthly salary, equivalent to $12,000 (£7,500), to charity – has led him to be labelled the poorest president in the world.” ”

    Seems to me that he is the richest president in the world.


  41. Well then, maybe the MP’s should tackle the too high housing/renting costs. I’ll be more realistic and say 4x minimum wage, so if they want more they will have to work towards upping the minimum wage.


  42. Yes, it seems odd to me that John has never mentioned the Harrogate Agenda. He must have heard of it, surely?


  43. “But I confess to needing more from you lot.”

    That’s strange. I have posted comments with questions, ideas and offers and have never received a reply.

    The “debate” seems limited to a thread at a time and changes page every time JW posts again. Not the best way to create or follow a conversation.
    Maybe I’m reading things wrongly.


  44. @ alexei
    You mentioned Uruguay. This is the first country adopt a countrywide C3-initiative. (Commercial Credit Circuit).

    From the Social Trade Organisation site:
    “The main reason to start activities in Uruguay was the lingering effect that the Argentinian peso crisis still had in this country that had been rather prosperous in earlier decades.

    The C3 Uruguay harbors a double accounting system in which both pesos as well as dollars can be administrated. This reflects the reality of the Uruguayan financial system where the use of dollar has a agreed place. Consequently members have an account in which the units have the same value as the national currency – the Peso – and another where the units are nominated in dollars.

    Important members in the C3U are the tax office the national pension fund and several important companies offering electricity, gas, housing, telephone and internet-services. The wide acceptance of the unit assures potential members that there are sufficient opportunities to spend within the C3 and is an important pillar in the growth strategy of the system.”
    Read more here

    Greece could do this easily. It could bring back the drachma.

    Here’s a video that goes in more depth:


  45. Salialioli, your page is being blocked for some reason, I will repost this on the latest thread so you can see for yourself, yes something weird is going on


  46. Something needs to change, we are all screwed if things don’t, so the idea is interesting, I will look forward to where this goes..


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s