The Negative Outcome of Economics is at  http://www.iww.org/en/node/2583 , written 1991 contains ".... Inflation will have to be stopped by a tax on all wealth. Wealth tax will have to be backed by salary reductions. But this time we have to get it right. In 1931 they caused the Invergordon Mutiny by cutting the able seaman's pay by 25%, and the pay of a Lt. Commander by 3.7%. This time we need to cut social security benefits by say 3.7%, and top salaries by 25% or more."

 http://www.iww.org/en/node/3855 was written the year before. It contains "The response to the stock market shake out of 1987 by the British Chancellor, and the American Secretary to the Treasury was a flood of liquidity. In effect they fled the field of battle and armed their enemy as soon as the big guns on their own side opened up. They deserve the Order of Lenin." (They were pretending to be Monetarists).

I had a request from an email list I subscribe to, that I send you this letter below. Note I have not signed it. But I suggest that you do look at The global Commons Institute  http://www.gci.org.uk/ stuff that has been around for about ten years, In particualr their ideas about Contraction and Convergence. I think a fifth of the time to the catastrophe they predicted since I first saw their warning has been wasted.

If Gordon Brown was aware of The GCI proposal and clearly did the opposite, then he is unfit for purpose. Managed Contraction need have had no Economic collapse that threatens the foundations of Capitalism, so perhaps Gordon is a Leninist following "If you want to destroy a country, first debauch it's currency". It is a great joke that George Bush is also in that category. Who can award them The Order of Lenin?

Put it another way, not that GCI is talking of such things, the last hope of avoiding Mass Extinction is an Economic collapse back to the level of 1932 - with no recovery until the world human population is down to no more than one and a half billion.

So you see where Gordon is u/s. As is a Thatcherite Labour Party that does not havve the guts to purge itself.

The real threat may be Methane from thawing bogs. Methane MUST be burnt to produce CO2 as it it ten times worse than CO2 as a greenhouse gas, or it is Mass Extinction time again. - the end of People.

Regards

Ilyan

What I did not sign and send:

"Dear ....... MP,

Supporting a strong climate change bill

As a supporter of the World Development Movement I see climate change not just as an environmental issue, but one of justice too.

Climate change is the single biggest threat to the world’s poor. It is already responsible for hundreds of thousands of premature deaths in developing countries. These countries have not caused the problem, but are being hit first, and hardest, and have the least resources to cope.

To prevent this tragedy turning into a catastrophe for hundreds of millions of people, rich countries like our own must do their fair share to reduce greenhouse gas emissions so global temperatures rise by no more than 2°C above pre-industrial levels. We must do this both because it is the right thing to do, and because other countries will not listen to our arguments on the international stage unless we lead by example.

Unfortunately, not only are UK emissions rising, but the government’s flagship climate change bill will not deliver the cuts needed. In fact, far from helping to limit warming to 2°C, scientists say the bill as currently drafted is consistent with a 4°C rise. Hundreds of millions will be affected by flooding, food and water shortages, and disease.

I am writing to ask you as my MP to:
support specific changes to the bill when it comes before parliament
write to Hilary Benn, secretary of state for environment, demanding that he incorporates the following three changes into the bill:

1.A carbon dioxide (CO2) reduction target of at least 80 per cent by 2050. The bill should set targets in line with the latest science, and that means at least 80 per cent cuts in UK greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, not just 60 per cent.

2.Include international aviation and shipping emissions in the reduction targets. To be meaningful the bill targets must include the UK’s share of international aviation, our fastest growing source of greenhouse gas emissions. On current plans the emissions from aviation growth will virtually wipe out the predicted cuts from every other sector of the economy combined by 2050. Our share could be calculated with the method currently used by the Department for Transport when reporting on UK carbon emissions, pending international agreement.

3.Annual targets for reduction in CO2 emissions. The bill should have annual targets to ensure governments do not pass the buck, and to ensure any slippage in progress is spotted and rectified quickly.

I look forward to your response and hearing what action you have taken.

Yours sincerely,"