3. Nitty-Gritty
One question that we’ve been debating over at P.L.E.B. (it stands for the People’s Liberation Executive of Britain, by the way) is whether it would be necessary for people to own their homes. My personal view, given that I would want no-one harmed by a transition to this system, is that those who owned their homes would continue to do so until they had no further use for them, at which time they would be absorbed into ownership by the nation.
I would like to see the concept of a “State” to disappear eventually, as the people of the nation are its owners as well as its consumers and without us there would be no State in the first place. The aim of Parliamentarians, from the moment of adoption of this system, should be to legislate themselves out of a job. We have the opportunity in using this system to generate a real democracy in which the people would, via a series of local, then regional and finally national bodies made up of representatives from each local and regional area, vote upon all the matters that affect our daily lives. Again, the internet would make this an extremely easy target to achieve.
I hear you asking about the money that would come in to the CMO from the foreign companies in the form of worker income. That, along with the value of goods made here and exported, would serve to defray the cost of imports at an international level. Goods “sold” within the borders of the UK would be “paid” for using credit points, which the individual would be allocated in return for his/her contribution to the nation in the form of work or, in the case of disabled people, through our contribution in the form of providing employment opportunities.
The beauty of this system, though, is that no matter what the international markets did, the individual would be completely shielded from the raw effects. Consider, please, just one of the benefits of such a shield:
We could re-open our steel works, holding them in national ownership, at zero cost. We might need to import the raw materials, but these would be paid for by whatever we produced for export and, with no wages payable in gold-backed currency, we could be the cheapest supplier of steel in the world. Likewise, we could perhaps restart our national car-building industry, maybe with an emphasis upon the manufacture of purely electric or hydrogen fuel celled vehicles. Bauxite is cheaper than iron, so maybe we should concentrate upon the production of aluminium rather than steel, for use in that car industry.
How much should the annual credit allocation be in total, per head? It’s something that would have to be figured out by far cleverer heads than mine, but I reckon that if we started out with a points allocation equal to the national average wage, which I believe is around £27,000 at the moment, it would be a good way to get started. Those who have been living hand to mouth would welcome this, I think. Those who currently earn in excess of that amount are probably not going to be overly impressed by the idea of taking a drop in buying power. Don’t ignore the fact that it would be EVERYONE who would receive this allocation amount, from the age of majority upwards, including retirees. So, if you live with someone and only one of you currently earns while the other looks after the kids, any drop in the breadwinner’s income would be offset by the allocation of an equal amount of credit points to your partner/spouse. Over the course of the first couple of years, the CMO would be responsible for determining whether or not the allocation should be increased, bearing in mind that such an increase would be given to everyone, no matter what their occupation might be.
Would we see a brain drain to other countries? The way I in which would like to see this avoided would be by means of a secondary award that people could earn by going above and beyond their normal calling. At the moment we see so-called “celebrities” filling the news with their doings, but how many of them are actually worthy of genuine respect? How many of them have even an inkling of what it might be like to have to live in a damp inner-city apartment and, if they do, how many of them care enough to do something about it? Would it not be better to see the reasons for such respect accorded to people who actually deserve it? People like the brain or heart surgeon, who will apply their skills through the course of very long hours in order to save a life; or the street sweeper/loo cleaner who gives up his/her Sunday to take a bus-load of elderly folks to the seaside; or the carer who, because his/her relief falls ill, does a double shift to ensure that a disabled or elderly and infirm person receives ongoing adequate care… You add to the list of people who would deserve to be given public respect.
In order to record this respect, I would like to suggest that we also introduce a system of what I call Social Merits. They would have no financial value, but would, instead, be recorded in publicly available records so that the entire population could read about the person who had earned them. There’s no reason, as you can see from the few examples above, why only those with specialist skills or positions involving high management should earn SM’s and, quite frankly, I’m more inclined to respect someone who’s prepared to stick his whole arm down someone’s lavvie to clear a blockage than I am to respect more than a couple of the current batch of MP’s that we’re saddled with.
All this transition would take would be a government with the courage to make the change and that, sadly, is where I think the idea will meet its greatest stumbling block. Our governments are so tied up with industry through financial contributions, lobbying and seats on the board held by serving MP’s that this simple change that could spare so many people so much misery is likely to be denied to us. This is another reason why P.L.E.B. Has been formed. The name is intended to signify our wish to be removed from the yoke held by the industrialists and bankers who have corrupted our democracy, and we want as many people as possible, who would wish to see this change happen, to join us until we have thousands, if not millions, of members. We will then seek a subscription of just £1 a month from those members in order to fund the contesting of Parliamentary Seats at a future election by the P.L.E.B. Party. We would accept funding from absolutely no other source in order that were would be beholden to no-one except our members. No big business or union donations whatsoever, meaning no pressure to do the bidding of either.
We seek real and nationally beneficial Change. We want fairness. That is ALL we want. Do you? The alternative, I very much fear, will be a bloodbath as those on the rough side of the tracks find ourselves left with less and less, while those who have stashed away the wealth will be targeted within their gated communities and mansions. And, because there is always some out there who will happily punch you on the arm while you’re looking at the guy who’s aiming to brain you with a beer bottle, the likelihood that those who have an aversion to immigrants are likely to use the cover of an uprising to put their own Size Nines in, in order to advance their own agenda as well. I have a horrible feeling that it could become incredibly messy and last for a great number of years. It would be good to nip it in the bud, I think.
