Patently makes some good points, as usual, but most striking is this question;
Let's rephrase this, shall we:
- No-one in the UK managed to set up a Starbucks, a Google, or an Amazon
- The UK has an attitude which is distinctly unfriendly towards entrepreneurs, reflected in high corporation tax rates and an angry mob who descend on anyone who isn't paying a "fair"** share
Could these two possibly be connected?
To me, it's obvious they are, but the British public seems to think otherwise.
Please follow the link for an excellent history of British television. I confess that I did not know until I read it that all British TV is state controlled, not just the BBC. Amid all the fuss about regulation of the dying press, how can no-one be concerned that the electorally far more influential TV stations are all at the beck and call of the most vicious organisation in any of our lives?
This appalling story gives the lie to those who claim the British state is not funded by force - that there is, in effect, some "social contract" by which we all agree to be taxed. As regular readers will know, I regard any word prefixed by the word "social" with suspicion. "Social" usually means nothing more than "I wish to restrain your actions or steal the proceeds of your life's work in the name of a group I purport to represent." Especially when if features in the word "Socialist" or in that most dishonest expression in the English language, "Social Justice."
The initiation of force against your fellow man is wicked. That it is done by the state makes no difference at all. In the wake of Leveson, as I watch my fellow-citizens talk naively of the most vicious, violent, vengeful organisation in their midst as if it were their trusty defender, I despair for this country.