Yes, certain animals are indeed more equal …

 

It is always satisfactory to observe that the Westminster MSM can fall back to their ‘political’ attitude, expressed in the headlines of their print editions. The Guardian leads with ‘windfall taxes on energy giants’, the broadsheets with ‘pound falls’ and ‘pensions threat’ and the red tops are going on about the coronation (link). 

Before I delve into the depths of misery as described by the various correspondents and editors here’s a ‘spoiler alert’: we find ourselves taking part in a new production of ‘Animal Farm’.

Now let’s look at those reports on the ‘fall of the ££’. For example, the DT and The Times both link the announcement of the BoE, that the ‘support’ for pension schemes will stop on Friday, to said fall of the ££. As usual, the DM’s headline is a summary of what happened:

“Markets brace for MORE turmoil after Bank Of England boss sent pound plunging by telling pension funds they have until Friday to balance books because current bailout will NOT continue past then” (link)

So does this mean that ‘Teh Markets’ are relying on apparently inexhaustible ‘government funding’ to keep their machinery going? What about this then (my emphasis):

“Sterling dropped 1.3pc to below $1.10 as the Bank Governor insisted that a £65bn bond-buying programme that has protected retirement schemes from collapse will be withdrawn at the end of the week. Mr Bailey warned that time is running out for fund bosses to get their finances in order. He said: “You’ve got three days to get this done.” (paywalled link)

So does this mean that those pension fund ‘bosses’ have sat on their hands, happy with those bail-outs, having done eff all to ‘get their finances in order’? Interesting … Next, here’s a whiff of reality:

“This month the Bank pledged to buy up to £65 billion of government debt, known as gilts, over a 13-day period after pension funds warned they were facing collapse. However, it has only bought about £9 billion in bonds in daily auctions, a relatively modest amount. By buying bonds, the Bank is hoping to help keep their price stable and stop investors selling them amid anxiety over the tax-cutting plans.” (link, paywalled)

So does this mean the BoE and those pension funds were reacting to ‘investors’ anxiety’ rather than cold calculations? Does this mean that yon ‘anxiety’, created by the concerted howls of our MSM about that mini-budget, trumps the anxiety of us tax-paying plebs?

There’s more: “The Bank yesterday expanded the emergency scheme for a second time, […]” (link, paywalled). This means that the first ‘emergency scheme’ must have had an end-date already, else why declare an ‘expansion’ of this scheme? And what about this:

“There are concerns that by buying up government debt in a bid to stabilise the markets, the Bank is further fuelling inflation. Bailey singled out pension funds for criticism, suggesting that there were “structural flaws” in their investment strategies.” (link, paywalled)

So does this mean that all would be well if only the pension funds had addressed those ‘structural flaws’? We’re not told, but we are told that “investors worried about inflation and the costs of borrowing have been withdrawing record amounts of their money from investment funds.” (link, paywalled), as if to make us accept that ‘investors’ anxiety’ must be alleviated.

So does this mean that “we”, i.e. government and the BoE must dance to the tunes of ‘Teh Markets’ which prefer profiting from hand-outs and the ‘security’ created by the BoE printing money, regardless of inflation, but lowering taxes are of the devil, creating inflation? 

Here’s another piece of news, spun according to the viewpoints of the various editors: a ‘windfall tax’ on ‘green energy firms’. The Grauniad bemoans this as just another Truss U-Turn because she’d

“[…] repeatedly resisted calls to cap huge profits being generated by power companies, after Boris Johnson’s government imposed a £5bn windfall tax on oil and gas companies in May, taking a slice of their profits.” (link).

So does this mean that the guardian agrees with windfall taxes even on ‘green renewables’ because being anti-capitalist trumps being green? The DT writes (my emphasis):

“Wind farms will be blocked from boosting their profits on the back of the energy crisis as part of emergency measures to bring down household bills. Ministers plan to introduce a cap on the amount of revenue wind farms and other renewable power projects can keep from electricity sales, as part of a string of measures to try and keep costs down. The Government insists the temporary move, due to start in 2023, is not a “windfall tax” as it will be applied to “excess revenues” as opposed to profits.” (paywalled link)

Note that this is yet another ‘jam tomorrow’ proposal, another ‘temporary move’, just as the BoE buy-in of pension fund gilts is temporary. The interpretation by government, that they’re not taxing profits but ‘excess revenue’, is truly delightful! 

Meanwhile, The Times quotes said ‘energy firms’ which obviously reject this novel interpretation (my emphasis):

“Energy companies said the measure was an “effective windfall tax”. They fear it could be even more punitive than that imposed on North Sea oil and gas producers by Rishi Sunak in May, which raised the effective tax rate from 40 per cent to 65 per cent of profits. Energy firms said the new plan also risked deterring investment in renewables and could even increase the threat of blackouts this winter.” (link, paywalled)

Please, someone explain to me how this windfall tax which will apparently start in 2023, not tomorrow, will lead to blackouts this year? Please, somebody explain to me why ‘excess revenue’ must be capped but  a price cap which would help us now is impossible? Wouldn’t such price cap even save government money because the ‘financial support’ from our tax money would be unnecessary?

Clearly, I’m just one of those stupid peasants who cannot possibly understand the finesses and particulars of money market operations or energy firm investment strategies. I do understand however that our praiseworthy MSM are accepting on the one hand that ‘markets trump government policies’ while on the other they lambast government for U-turning or not U-turning.

None of them seem to notice that ‘Teh Markets’ and those energy firms are having cushy rides, using our money, spent liberally by government to pacify said markets or ‘green energy firms’ which cannot possibly be expected to suffer ‘anxiety’ or hardships from having their excessive revenues capped. 

None of them mention, never mind ask about the ongoing impoverishment of the middle and working classes, squeezed by excessive taxation on the one hand and excessive price rises, e.g. in energy prices, on the other. 

I regret having to conclude with the observation that the Westminster cabal are applying not just ‘1984’ to their policies but are recreating ‘Animal Farm’. None of them are concerned for our welfare – provided we continue to pay. Across the Channel and across the Big Pond more and more productive workers are quitting their jobs, silently.

Perhaps it’s time people here did this as well. After all, ‘Teh Markets’ and energy firms look after their own, with the support of government. So why shouldn’t we look after our own instead of dancing to government’s and the MSM’s tunes?



Print Friendly, PDF & Email