Tory tax cuts
Supposedly, George Osbourne, the Shadow Chancellor, has told the Sunday Telegraph that the Conservatives may abolish stamp duty and taxation on pensions.
Of course, the Tories are a big government party, like all of the major British parties. If Cameron won the general election in 2009/10, then we as libertarians shouldn't really expect any drastic or radical reductions in the size and scope of the state. These measures don't really go far enough, at all. As a market anarchist, you'd expect me to advocate the abolition of ALL taxes.
As a libertarian, I have no real attachment or affinity with the Conservatives at all. British Conservatism, in modern times, has always been statist in nature. Thatcher may have attempted to reduce the size of government, but she didn't to any great degree. Fiat money, monetary policies, education, healthcare, the welfare state, etc. all existed under Thatcher.
Terrible state education
If you want to know a reason as to why libertarians don't value state education, then read this.
Air terror threat
Didn't Benjamin Franklin once say that:
"Those who give up freedom for security deserve neither freedom nor security."?
Well such a statement sums up my views in relation to the BAA curbs on hand luggage. Slowly and slowly, we are losing our freedoms for the sake of "extra security". I fear that we are on a slippery slope towards totalitarianism. That may sound alarmist, nonetheless I see no sign that Blair will relent in curbing civil liberties. In the USA, the trend is identical. Free Talk Live (see links) often comment on such flagrant disregard for individual rights.
Of course, Tony Blair and the government believe the Islamists "hate our freedom" and "hate our way of life". I've stated numerous times on this blog that I disagree with such reasoning. If they truly do hate our freedom, why haven't they attacked France or Germany? Aren't they liberal democracies too? It seems strange to be so selective in the liberal democracies you attack, if you claim to despise ALL liberal democracy.
I also see that some Muslim leaders have lobbied the government regarding its foreign policies. I feel that this is prudent because I don't see how one can rationally discount foreign policy in this instance. The UK has possesed an Islamic ethnic minority for nearly five decades now. And yet it's only in the past few years that we've suffered attacks from Islamists. It's not so irrational to assume there is a correlation between Islamist terror in the UK and British military involvement in Islamic countries.
Whilst shopping today, I noticed a billboard from OFCOM stating that UK telephone providers would be free to set their own prices.
As a market anarchist, this seems like incredibly welcome news! Industries should be free to regulate themselves. However there was one drawback. OFCOM would retain a role in the telecommunications industry, be ensuring "fair play" between rival companies.
The free market should be unrestricted in this sense. If, for example, BT charged higher prices than NTL, then BT would be "punished" by the consumer and less amounts of people would purchase their services. BT would have little choice but to reform to stay competitive.
If anything, OFCOM shouldn't exist at all. If a company is mistreating its customers, then it would lose business. Competitor companies would be more than happy to accept these new customers.
One negative aspect is that our overly regulated and burdensome economy would deter new entrants into the market. Of course, in a market anarchy, there would be a far more business friendly environment. Entry into the market would be substanitally easier.
French youth coming to Britain
A story on the BBC News website seemed intriguing.
Supposedly, a number of French twenty-somethings are settling in the UK, because the UK possesses greater job opportunities.
It seems that this is one primary benefit of having a less regulated economy. Granted its not up to the libertarian ideal, nonetheless our economy isn't as regulated as France's (or Germany and Italy) and is clearly more "Anglo-Saxon" in nature.
Because our economy is slightly less regulated, it means more jobs are being created. Imagine if we did live in a market anarchy. Without ANY regulations on business, job opportunities would be far more plentiful than they are today!! We would be a Mecca for people across Europe and the world, who would be seeking opportunity and greater liberty.
Being honest, France probably does have a higher quality of life than the UK. However, this is probably can be attributed to the difference in culture between the two nations, as opposed to any inherent or intrinsic aspect of France. In general I think the French people have to gravely consider whether "dirigisme" is worth it in the long run, if not for the future wellbeing of the French economy. The French economy has grown at a slower average rate than other G8 economies over the past decade. Evidently some reform is needed if this situtation is to be rectified.