Welcome to East Finchley Rant in London!
We intend to act as a peaceful protest group who try to influence local matters that we consider unfair or unreasonable.
All too often the Administration or big business rides rough-shod over the man(or woman) in the street.
We have no executive powers but we can act as an irritant and maybe bring some change.
Browse through these pages to learn more about us and our projects. Detailed information about our projects.
About us - Each Week we raise local & general items of irritation worthy of consideration. You may not agree with some of the points of view raised but if it only creates discussion then it has achieved its purpose.
The East Finchley Rant
The Rants Budget Predictions
As the date of the budget approaches the Rant gives its take on likely rising tax areas.
In increase in fuel duty will not be popular so he may avoid that come up with some enviro- bullshit to charge higher road fund licences on older vehicles.
He was planning to hit alcohol big time which was why the health minister suddenly came up with an obscure report that drinking any alcohol will give you cancer.
If they had managed to get credence for that report then he could hit alcohol with a punitive tax such as is levied on tobacco.
He will probably check what the peasants drink most of and hit that.
Gambling may get a hit although as most of the gambling organisations are owned by his mates it will be nominal.
He might put VAT on anything that is not already covered.
Remember he might just stick two and a half percent on VAT and say its more fair (joke).
Watch the small print for all the subsidies and money available to large companies for green and sustainable technologies real and imagined.
Pensioners without private health care will be given an annual MOT.
If they are not economically viable they will be shut down.
As Tiny Tim said “ God bless us, one and all”.
Should we stay in the EEC?
Many very clever people are currently telling us that if we left the European Union that the world as we know it would end.
After all Gideon Oliver Osborne has pointed out that another 60,000 people have gone into full time employment.
He did not quote the stats on how many went to British nationals or what the bulk of these fulfilling jobs consisted of.
Given that over 300,000 arrived from Romania alone in that period it is hardly the basis of sustainability.
I am yet to find what benefit the man/women in the street actually receives in terms of advantage by being part of the EEC.
As a native Britain you are going to have to accept lower wages because foreign nationals will accept them.
Unlike them however you will not be able to claim tax for or allowances for family members (real or imagined) living abroad.
We do not even enjoy parity with cigarette and alcohol taxes enjoyed in EEC countries (unless you are a Euro MP).
People old enough to remember the referendum to join the Common Market may recall that the entire affair was rigged to scare the population into giving the Yes vote.
Having worked on polling stations around the country since the 70’s I can attest to the fact that no one had a clue what they were voting for.
At the time things were pretty dire in the UK in 1973 and the future looked bleak. Chancellor George was nearly three years old at this time.
People would have voted for Mickey Mouse and looking at some of the parliamentary candidates at the time, I think a lot did!
Over forty years has now elapsed and I think the jury is still out with most working class folk north of Watford Gap as to how they have benefited.
If you have personal business interests spread around European countries then I am sure it’s a fine idea.
If you are an ordinary PAYE person I really am not convinced.
So I admit I am not nearly knowledgeable or educated enough to be able to weigh up the pros and cons on the basis of raw data.
So why not try considering this on the basis of probability.
To coin a phrase -“ turkeys do not vote for Christmas”.
Why do so many of the current politicians, left, right and lunatic all appear to agree that we should stay in?
This is nothing do with the attraction of being an unelected Euro MP of course.
These honourable members only want what is best for and fair for we peasants.
Looking back historically they only ever seem to agree if there is something in it for all of them or they want float a very big porky.
If the numbers in this country continue to swell it will be completely unsustainable both in resource and governing terms.
Travel at rush hour by any form of transport in London and imagine getting to the point where that is the norm twenty four seven.
We are like that tube or bus, we would love to get more people on but we are full.
Trouble is there will not be another United Kingdom on its way in the next two minutes.
Time will tell if the referendum turns out to be a genuine exercise or an expensive (you and I pay for) pantomime.
Your Pension or Is it?
Medical science is helping mankind live longer but it seems that we should feel guilty for being a drain on society for taking our pension that we've paid for.
Just to cheer you up……how did a pension we all paid into suddenly become a benefit. ?????
Worth some thought - Where did all the money go????
IT MAKES YOU THINK !
PLEASE PASS THIS AROUND, UNTIL EVERY ONE HAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ IT... THIS IS SURELY SOMETHING WE ALL NEED TO THINK ABOUT !!!!
THE ONLY THING WRONG WITH THE GOVERNMENT'S CALCULATION OF AVAILABLE PENSION IS THAT THEY FORGOT TO FIGURE IN ALL THE PEOPLE WHO DIED BEFORE THEY EVER COLLECTED OLD AGE PENSION.
WHERE DID ALL THAT MONEY GO ?
Remember, not only did you and I contribute to our Pension, our employer did, too. It totalled 15% of your income before taxes.
If you averaged only £15,000 over your working life, that's close to £220,500.
Read that again. Did you see anywhere that the Government paid in one single penny ?
We are talking about the money you and your employer put in a Government bank to ensure that you and I would have a retirement pension from the money we put in, it was not money that the Government had any right to spend elsewhere.
Now they've started to call the money we paid in an 'entitlement' when we reach the age to take it back.
If you calculate the future invested value of £2500 per year (yours & your employer's contribution) at a simple 5% interest (that's less
than what the govt. pays on the money that it borrows from overseas), after 49 years of working you'd have £892,919.98.
If you took out only 3% per year, you'd receive £26,787.60 per year and it would last better than 30 years (that means until you're 95 if you retire at age 65) and that's with no interest paid on that final amount on deposit !
If you bought an annuity with the money and it paid 4% per year, you'd have a lifetime income of £1976.40 per month.
THE CROOKS IN GOVERNMENT HAVE PULLED OFF A BIGGER ROBBERY THAN THE GREAT TRAIN ROBBERS EVER DID.
My foot !! IT'S MY MONEY !! I paid IN cash for my pension.
Just because they borrowed the money to spend on other things, that doesn't make my pension some kind of charity or handout!!
Remember MP's benefits ? --- free healthcare, outrageous retirement packages, 67 days paid holidays, three weeks paid vacation, unlimited paid sick days. Now that really should be called welfare entitlements, yet they have the nerve to call my O A P retirement payments entitlements ?
We're "broke" and the government can't help our own OAPs, our ex-service personnel, our orphans or our homeless.
Yet in the past few years we have provided aid to Haiti, Chile, Turkey, India, Pakistan, etc., etc., etc. Literally, BILLIONS of Pounds !!!
And they can't help our own citizens !
Our retired seniors living on a 'fixed old age pension have to beg social services to receive additional aid, while our government and religious organisations pour hundreds of billions of £££ tons of food to foreign countries !
They call the old age pension an entitlement even though most of us have been paying for it all our working lives, and now, when it's time
for us to collect, the government is running out of money. Why did the government borrow from it in the first place ? It was supposed to be in a securely locked box, not to be used as part of the Government's general funds.
Sad, isn't it, that 99% of people won't have the guts to forward this.
I'm in the 1% with guts enough to do it - - - and I just did. I hope some of you will do the same.
Solving the Energy Crisis – Part 1
Much is discussed about the energy crisis but not all the mainstream policies hold up to closer scrutiny.
Let’s start with transport and look at the options.
At present oil is here to stay as it is the basis of exchange in the international money markets.
Therefore if an alternative to oil was found tomorrow that cost nothing to produce it would not be used or allowed by governments.
Internal combustion engines are now more efficient than they have ever been and their emissions are minimal.
Most of the nasty by-products are a result of chemicals in the oil that formed when it did so in the ground millions of years ago.
The production of fuel is itself uses vast amounts of energy and waste heat into the atmosphere.
We are all being urged to buy hybrid or even all electric cars as if they are a new concept that will save the planet.
They aren’t and they won’t!
Their concept is well over 100 years old and is about as 21st century as a horse and cart.
However with some quick legislation the government can make a lot of revenue from you and me by forcing us to scrap existing vehicles.
The hybrid and all electric vehicles have to carry large quantities of batteries made from very poisonous high energy materials.
The typical rechargeable battery set up on an all electrical vehicle lasts for about 5 years before it needs replacing and the toxic old one disposed of.
Conventional engines are primarily steel and aluminium and can be quickly recycled.
So could we keep and improve the existing vehicle engines and avoid use of a lot of high energy poisonous metals?
The answer is almost certainly yes.
A conventional petrol engine will run very nicely and very efficiently on basic alcohols (methanol or ethanol).
Alcohol is produced daily in the brewing industry by processes that are entirely sustainable which is more than you can say for the oil industry.
Alcohol’s energy yield is considerable higher than petrol and the combustion products are only carbon dioxide and water.
For this reason a smaller amount of fuel for the same energy would be possible.
There are no harmful nitrates or other pollution associated with petroleum products.
Similarly, a diesel engine will run quite happily on vegetable based oil and produce less pollution than with oil based diesel.
Again the processes for producing a suitable and sustainable vegetable oil are already in place.
To produce alcohol virtually any vegetable or fruit material can be made to foment and produce it.
Similarly oil from Rape-seed or similar is an easy product to make.
The raw materials could be grown in land areas where other crops were not viable throughout the world.
This in itself could be a help to third world countries seeking to establish their own industries.
None of this will happen of course whilst we have over 70% of the money we pay for fuel going to the government.
It is interesting to note that the previous government was sounding out the feasibility of taxing us by the mile.
Perhaps not surprisingly because as engines were becoming more efficient they were using less fuel and the revenue per capita was falling.
No politician gives the slightest damn about being green except when seen in public or posturing in Brussels.
Their collective carbon footprints make ordinary motorists like you or me look like tree huggers.
In conclusion while the banks speculate with oil and the countries that extract it use it as a power base, we are unlikely to see any real changes.
To be continued……..