Google+ Followers

Sunday, 19 January 2014

Has Cyril cracked it?

Taken from "Tales Of Plunder - Pirates & Privateers" (Italics are quotes from Cyril)

The paperwork (right) appeared through my letter box in August 2013:

Take a close look at this alleged ‘charge sheet’, who is Mr Cyril Vibert? It certainly is not me, I was not christened Mr by my parents, neither did they call me Mr, Mr is a fictional construct, a title, a legal person, It is not a human being.

There is a box for a signature why is it not signed by the Constable or one of his Centeniers?

Why is no one prepared to take responsibility for this document?

Indeed the only thing in this box is the company seal of the Parish of St Helier, are these agents saying that I have a contract with this body corporate? 

I would very much like to see this alleged contract. Oh that’s right, there isn't one.

Why didn't the agent of the court, Mr Mourant, sign instead of write his title and surname? 

 We’ll look at the answers to these questions later. This so called ‘charge sheet’ has about as much lawful significance as a piece of bog roll, albeit not as useful.

At this point it may be worth noting that a) only a Centenier has the power to charge in Jersey, which Centenier is laying the charge? and b) a prosecution may only take place with the consent of the Attorney General. The papers say "For the Constable of St Helier".

Now the Viscount’s letter

Again this is addressed to a legal fiction, now I know we have been schooled into believing that we are Mr, Mrs, Ms, Miss, Esq, Sir, etc etc. But we are none of these things, we are real living beings with a soul and a conscience and as long as we remember this and exercise our inalienable rights as such, then the corporate judiciary and government must also remember this (they won’t because they are a criminal outfit).

Notice how the Viscount wants cash, I have sat through many hours of Magistrate’s Court plunder sessions and can confirm that the Viscount will only accept cash in court, they will even allow you to go to an ATM to get the cash, this amounts to thousands of pounds every session, yet you will not find these figures in the States of Jersey accounts nor where this considerable sum of money is spent, why not? Are there commissioners and the likes to pay?

The above documents came a little while after the usual pro forma invitation to a parish hall inquiry and then a facsimile template summons to appear in the Magistrates Court on the 12th August 2013 issued by the Connetable (Constable) of St. Helier.

Firstly I’ll state for the record that I have not been charged with any of the alleged offences contained in the above ‘charge sheet’. 

So the question is this, is anyone obliged to attend the Magistrate’s Court (other than as a witness) if they have not been charged with an offence?

Answer: Of course not.

At this stage I am going to intervene in Cyril's observations, firstly the letter says "you should have appeared to answer the charges". So there we have confirmation from the viscount that Cyril has not been charged and that he was not requited to appear ("should" not "were ordered")

There is also a certain phrase in the letter, "you should attend IN PERSON". So this tell us two things; firstly that you do not have to ("should" is not an order, "must" would be an order) and secondly that you should attend IN PERSON, why is this capitalised? If the requirement is for you to attend, then the 'in person' is superfluous and lawyers rarely if ever waste words. Perhaps it means that you must attend in the persona of Mr Cyril Vibert, rather than just Cyril the human being.

Now under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (remembering this is a treaty between nation states and thus it applies only to nation states as contracting parties and not to individual humans)
"Article 6. Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law."
We also know from the Interpretation (Jersey) Law 1954 that a person can include a body corporate and thus the term does not refer to a human being exclusively.

Whilst every nation state has to offer to recognise a human being as a person; a human being has the option of whether or not to exercise a right.

By turning up to the Viscount's Department 'in person' you are in effect exercising your right to be recognised as a person. There is no compulsion for you to do so. By turning up you are signalling your consent.

Next the pro forma quasi summons was from the Constable of St. Helier, sorry but I forgot to make a copy of these which I sent back marked “No Contract – Return to Sender”.

Now obviously the Constable of St. Heliers’ jurisdiction and authority is limited to within the Parish of St. Helier. So, does a summons from the Constable of St. Helier create any legal obligation upon someone who lives outside of the Parish of St. Helier? – No it does not, but let us not forget that this is Jersey with it's Alice in Wonderland make it up as you go along ‘justice system’.

You would have thought that the Magistrates with their planet sized legal minds would have picked up on such glaring problems, but no, according to the Viscounts’ dept. the Magistrate (no clue as to which one) issued an arrest order. Strange how these mythical arrest orders never seem to see the light of day, I have yet to see one of these orders signed by a Magistrate, maybe they’re shy.
Or Even the court jesters (sometimes called Magistrates) know better than to sign an unlawful order.

Despite threats of immediate arrest by Viscounts officers (basically bailiffs for our non-Jersey readers) I have carried on living my life. The Viscounts Dept. is infested with lawyers so it is not clear to me what they mean by ‘immediate arrest’ could it have some kind of secret legalese meaning.

Why more than 4 months after the alleged ‘arrest order’ have I not been arrested, I did not pay any bail nor will I. Have they just forgotten? Or do they have so many ‘arrest orders’ outstanding that they have not got around to me yet? Do you dear readers think either is likely? Nor do I. So what is happening here?

One of the essential elements of any court case is jurisdiction, for criminal and quasi criminal matters a court must establish in-personam jurisdiction; a court cannot lawfully proceed against you without establishing jurisdiction over you. And at no time has the court established jurisdiction over me, you see, if you go to court under your own steam for statutory matters, you have, simply by turning up, tacitly consented to in-personam jurisdiction even if you dispute jurisdiction once in court. The courts presumption of tacit consent to jurisdiction will stand no matter what argument or rebuttal you care to use, I know this because I’ve tried most of them.

By not going to court the alleged Magistrate was unable to claim that jurisdiction was established either tacitly or expressly, no jurisdiction, no case to answer. Magistrates and the lawyers from the Viscount’s Department know this full well.

The glaringly obvious truth is that a Magistrate’s Oath of Office does not allow or authorise them to administrate legislation. When Bridget Shaw, or whoever is sitting in court administrating legislation they are acting as a private Commissioner not as a Magistrate and a nice commission it must be considering all that lovely cash coming in through the box office every day. You see why a ‘Magistrate’ might be loathed to confirm their Oath of Office in court and in so doing limit their ability to act in any other capacity at that same hearing.

From the Bailiffs’ office we have the Magistrates Oath of Office with English translation

Publicly sworn, before God, upholding the rights of the Queen and her subjects, in accordance with the laws and customs of this Island. All of this confirms that this Oath is a common law Oath; the swearer is promising to uphold common law when using its authority. It does not authorise a Magistrate to administer legislation.

However nothing in legislation or law forbids Bridget Shaw, Peter Harris et al from working as a private commissioner after their work as a Magistrate is finished.

Magistrates have no problem giving lawful orders and signing both orders and warrants, private commissioners are far more reluctant as it is them personally, and not the ‘Court’ who is responsible for their actions and orders.

Asking these well paid private commissioners questions they don’t want to answer is not only revealing but laugh out loud mad;

Me to Bridget Shaw “what jurisdiction is the court presuming here?”
BS; “The Magistrates court is a creature of statute”.

A CREATURE, WTF? No doubt this SEA CREATURE has tentacles and big sharp teeth.
A creature or court of statute, statute (act, enactment etc.) is just lawyers fancy way of saying a tribunal administering legislation.

Of course it gets more serious when an important question and the answer vanish from the official court recording. See the rather stunning posting on the link below, a must read.

From the start of my various appearances in ‘court’ for ‘statutory offences’ I would ask the ‘Magistrate’ “Are you operating under your Oath of Office at this time” not once did any so called magistrate give a responsive answer, they would obfuscate by saying things like “I am not prepared to enter into a discussion about that” You what!!! Only a corrupt or disingenuous mind would interpret asking for a simple yes/no answer to a question as calling for a discussion.

Compare this to my later appearances for the common law offence of contempt of court, when asked the same question about their Oath of Office both Richard Falle and Bridget Shaw had no hesitation in answering “yes”. These crooks think we were born yesterday, and that we are not capable of leading them into answers that show how they are abusing their public positions and the law.

I’ve spent a lot of hours at the Magistrates court both appearing and listening to other cases so I’ve noticed a few things, like all the common law proper crime stuff is usually dealt with first and swiftly so the lawyers can get down and dirty making wonga.

Policed by consent and governed by consent means exactly what it says.

I consent to be bound by common law, I do not consent to be bound by legislation created by a de facto corporate government unless I am acting as a government agent or am engaged in commerce.

Jersey has, in effect and fact, a privatised justice system (sic) the private members only BAR Association and its junior affiliate the Law Society control justice on this island. The membership by invitation only BAR Association (an Unincorporated Body Corporate) which is chartered through the Inns of Court, situated within the City of London Corporation and the CROWN whose address is Crown officer, Crown office row, Chancery lane, CITY OF LONDON, are not government bodies, are not public institutions, have no natural authority to determine how our justice system should operate, rather they are a collection of people who have joined together to promote their, and their fellow members standing and earning potential and who are not held accountable by lazy and/or corrupt politicians.

This arrangement is financially beneficial for both government and lawyers they will not give up this scam lightly. But I digress

OK perhaps a little clarification is required here. Magna Carta originally signed at Runnymede in 1215 was given legal authority in 1297 (slightly amended). Clause 8 in the 1215 charter (Clause 9 in the 1297 version) remains extant (from wikipedia)
"9. THE City of London shall have all the old Liberties and Customs which it hath been used to have. Moreover We will and grant, that all other Cities, Boroughs, Towns, and the Barons of the Five Ports, as with all other Ports, shall have all their Liberties and free Customs."
The City of London to this day has its own legislative assembly, whereas all the others have largely lost their liberties.
"The City of London operates through its Lord Mayor, Aldermen and other members of the Court of Common Council (equivalent to councillors and known as 'Common Councilmen'). They are elected by the residents and businesses of the City's 25 wards. Like the Lord Mayor and aldermen they have stood as independents and carry out their work voluntarily. 
The Court of Common Council 
The Court of Common Council is the City of London's primary decision-making assembly, and meets every four weeks. It works through committees, like any other local authority, but it is unique in that it is non-party political. Its main business focuses on the reports of committees and members' questions and motions. 
Common Council is elected by the wards of the City. Elections, when all the seats are up for election or re-election, will next be held in March 2013 and every four years afterward. Each ward returns between two and 10 members (ie councillors, known as 'Common Councilmen') depending on the size of the electorate. Candidates, men or women, must be 21 or over, a British subject (or a citizen of another European Union country) and a Freeman of the City of London. They must also either be registered to vote at any ward election or own freehold or leasehold land in the City or have lived in the City in the 12 months prior to the nomination date and intend to live there until the election date. 
The Court of Aldermen 
The role of the Court of Aldermen has changed considerably over the City of London's long history. Centuries ago it was responsible for the entire administration of the City but this function diminished with the development of the Court of Common Council. Today the full Aldermanic Court, summoned and presided over by the Lord Mayor, meets on about nine Tuesdays each year. 
Aldermen have jurisdiction over their wards and for centuries each ward has elected one alderman. Upon admission to the Court of Aldermen, an alderman automatically becomes a Justice of the Peace for the City of London. They also serve on Common Council committees, act as governors and trustees of a variety of schools, hospitals, charitable foundations and trusts with ancient City connections."
It is thus, in effect, in a very similar position to Jersey being a peculiarity of the Crown and not subject to the Laws of England and Wales to the full extent.

Now back to Cyril.

So what have I been up to since these threats of arrest, well, straight from the 'you couldn’t make this shit up' department, I was employed on a temporary contract with authorisation to access the computer system, keys and card swipe to buildings whilst working for;


A case of the right hand not knowing what the left is doing? If there is one thing lawyers hate more than ordinary people learning their deceptive ways, it is people who make it public. What are the odds of me being arrested after this posting? Answers on the back of a parking ticket please! Watch this space. Cyril

In effect then Cyril by not complying with the wishes of the various 'authorities' has chosen not to exercise his right to be recognised as a person and as such is not subject to the statutes which if you read them always apply to 'a person' and not 'a human being'. The only time a human being is ever mentioned is in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which within its text recognises that there is a difference between 'a human being' and 'a person'.

In short the best way to deal with any creature of statute is to ignore them.

Golden Jackass: Popular Manifesto: Demand for Solutions

Jim Willie, is one of the primary sources for this blog, all his previous forecasts are readable by clicking on the link to the left.

Back in late 2004, my father had a conversation with me on his front porch. He was concerned about a negative streak in my perspective and a critical slant in my analytic work. 

He actually helped me in writing style, not content, like to correct errors in sentence construction. He pointed out lack of parallels, dangling modifiers, vague antecedents, and competing imagery. Many smaller discussions had taken place about a broken economy, absent industry from offshore efforts, debt buildup, enormous imbalances, the war machine emphasis, banker corruption, and unsound money itself. He always was concerned about the federal debt, citing it many times, and was alarmed later in 2006 when informed that foreigners held more than half our debt.

He challenged me to produce solutions to the current difficult situation in the United States, an invitation to embark upon a positive streak. He was warned to be discouraged by the task. My response was direct and immediate, as a list would be produced, along with reasons why not a single suggestion would ever come to pass. The following comments between us were focused on the naive nature of the entire exercise, since a vile criminal element had overtaken the nation at its highest levels. 

He disagreed and scoffed at any fascist reference, despite the recital of fascist evidence on my diligent student-like part. 

After the list was offered to my father, which contained most of the items listed below, he never pursued the negative streak criticism again. He was overwhelmed at the details, and the linked reasons for the continued broken features, each tied to corrupt elements and their extreme profiteering. 

My oft-used line was that where multi-$billions in profiteering and exploitation were involved, even if countless citizen lives were affected, the crime would continue. He was silent at the end, pensive, discouraged, impressed, but silent, exactly as warned. He admitted not to understand much of the factors.

In the following years, his subtle insults about a crystal ball and boasts of correct forecasts tossed the gauntlet once more before the Jackass feet. My response was to list almost 20 correct forecasts, against possibly two in error. There is always a desire for a son to please and impress his father, like a cat dropping a captured bird before the master's feet. The phenomenon is only human and reaches into the deepest part of our origins in family. 

Our relationship remains strained, but he has noted the impressive newsletter parade in general terms. He realizes that a solution is not coming internally to the nation, as it will be imposed from foreign entities and forces. He realizes the King Dollar is in trouble, without benefit of any perception of the Petro-Dollar defacto standard or the many devices relied upon to hold the system in place. He realizes that many forecasts have been correct, although the details and rationale are not fully comprehended. 

Every veiled insult of a crystal ball, or misinterpreted past analytic point (called wrong forecast) has been met with a friendly offering of the correct forecast list. He once asked to hear a few in specific terms, asked and delivered with a synopsis of reasoning behind the call and statement of its advanced call. Finally he gets it.

The sad state of affairs has as much to do with inadequate education in economics, finance, and science, as it does with apathy, everyday pressures, and ample distractions. It is always difficult to achieve approval from the general audience when operating within the alternative media, where rebels roam and the lunatic fringe is tolerated. My frequent reminder to clients is that 80% of the mainstream media news stories are lies, or contain deep deceptions to support the power structure, while 80% of the alternative media is truth, with its fair share of exaggerations and lesser journalist quality.


Permit the Jackass a diversion into the ideal realm. It will pass. Many identifiable solutions can be cited if the people are determined to work toward a solution for the United States of America, for its return to health and strength, for its restoration as a cradle of capitalism and a beacon of freedom. Obviously it is too late, but from an idealist point of view, many solutions do exist and could have been pursued following the 2000 market bust and tech telecom chapter. They also could have been pursued following the 2008 market bust and Lehman chapter. They could have been pursued following the Black Money 1987 event, which was the original quintessential signal of dire conditions. The 1987 event in the Jackass view was a seminal signal in response to a decade of moving US industry offshore to the Pacific Rim. The event was a financial tremor in response. Each breakdown has resulted in deeper commitment in the wrong direction, deeper devotion to the financial sector, deeper involvement in criminal behavior. Each breakdown resulted in an even greater dependence upon asset bubbles for wealth creation, instead of work. Each bust leads to deep corruption, not a pursuit of solutions.

The climax error was the Most Favored Nation status granted to China, which led to the departure of a significant core of US industry, along with its legitimate core income. National treason, both political and corporate, became touted as expedient, with veiled cries of patriotism heard. The dependence grew acutely in the last 2000 decade, where the great asset bubble was the housing market and mortgage finance twin bubble. The current greatest asset bubble is the USTreasury Bonds complex, the final chapter before financial ruin and systemic breakdown. The hidden official objective is to preserve power, not to reinstate conditions for a viable future. Evidence is seen in the QE to Infinity for monetized bond purchase (heretic to the core), and the Zero Interest Rate Policy forever (heretic to the core). Both monetary policies are blessed as necessary, prudent, even urgent today, in a grotesque display of disastrous leadership which presides over catastrophe. The bitter fruit of the Fascist Business Model is being witnessed today. It began twelve years ago with a Fascist Manifesto. Let this list serve as Popular Manifesto that addresses the broken parts, the criminal elements, and the deep rot, with cries for effective process, equitable function, and justice.

Consider the following solutions. The first has been regularly recited by the Jackass as demonstrated proof that the political and banking leadership are not pursuing a solution at all, and never have been. They avoid the big bank liquidation as a start. They instead have promoted the Too Big to Fail mantra, which has morphed into the Too Big to Manage mantra, and later into the Too Big to Jail jabber. The objective in the policy making circles has been since 2007 to preserve the power structure and to retain the privilege to print wealthy to their own camp in the banking sector. The objective has not been to pursue solutions, to order reform, or to work in reconstruction. The result has been degradation and continued collapse, while every major financial market is controlled, and the entire housing market is charred wreckage. The people used to enjoy protection from the managed inflation by home ownership. No longer. They used to have a backup pension fund, but it is at great risk. They used to have a vote, but the entire voting process has been subverted by direct fraud and Diebold software controls, even bussed aliens lined up at the voting centers. The list of 2004 solutions offered by the Jackass should be revisited. In review, notice how each element of the proposed manifesto of solutions has no chance whatsoever of being installed as policy. They go against the heart of the power structure and controlled markets. They outline what the officials would deem sedition, if not revolt. Recall that the Occupy Wall Street movement was dealt with like a terrorist organization. Nevertheless, consider the list and chew over their themes, while reviewing the many policy directives in the last ten years that have remained in a dedicated and committed manner off the trajectory toward solution, while maintaining the primary official objective of retaining power. The policy answers of free money, ample controls, lost rights, and fresh socialist programs are the bitter fruit of failure. A failed state lies before us.

1)Liquidate the big broken insolvent banks, since they are crime centers, then follow through with RICO asset seizures with a team of special prosecutors answering to the states, not the federal government.

2)Halt all USGovt security agency narcotics business, including DEA drug seizures going into inventory, and Coast Guard escorts of incoming shipments, even usage of the presidential yacht through the Panama Canal, and eliminate the usage of NATO airbases for narcotics distribution, finally investigating Wall Street banks for money laundering of narcotics funds.

3)End a foreign war after the first six months, after which the cost & benefit is openly analyzed in a public forum, along with defense contractor gains, while giving full debate to the War Powers Act in returning them to the Congress, and instead engaging in peace talks.

4)Eliminate all former Wall Street bankers from participating in any federal financial regulatory body, using instead regional bankers from the many states and corporate heads.

5)Eliminate all financial contributions to Congressional members, and all private contributions to legislation, with prosecution and disclosure of all large past donations and their effects, using a portion of IRS tax receipts instead for political campaigns.

6)Force divestiture of all conglomerate corporations in the news media organizations, including television, newspaper, magazine, radio, and online sites with encouragement by the FCC for small private media businesses alongside regional and village voices.

7)Limit the advertisement and financial support for financial media by the banking sector and managed fund centers, due to conflict of interest.

8)Conduct full audits with powerful prosecution on Pentagon procurements and appropriations for the last 30 years, including the $2.2 trillion USArmy Accounting report that was discussed the day before 911. Recall that over 80% of Pentagon victims from the 911 attack were accountants working in or near that office.

9)Return the majority of off-shore manufacturing to the US, by means of tax credits and regulatory waivers, even industrial parks, with further credits on worker training programs, in order to restore idle plants, rather than to permit China to do the same on US soil.

10)Eliminate all financial sector computer generated buy programs, the so-called High Frequency Trading, with private sector investigations into insider trading from private state prosecutors.

11)Force total complete full disclosure of the extensive financial derivatives that support the vaporous financial foundation, including foreign financial subsidiaries, which extend to LIBOR, FOREX, and Gold markets.

12)Halt all further home foreclosures, rescind all foreclosures in process, conduct full national investigations into the mortgage bond fraud, the mortgage bond fraud by Fannie Mae et al, the mortgage contract fraud by Wall Street banks, the MERS title database fraud, and work a national program to enable dispossessed citizens to win back their homes, during restitution lawsuits of the big banks and financial firms responsible.

13)Force total complete full disclosure of the USDept Treasury's Exchange Stabilization Fund, and all its tentacles, including to foreign financial markets.

14)End taxation on ex-patriots who leave the United States after a three-year period, following a submission of a financial statement, with a suggestion box on how to improve life in our once great nation.

15)Install tougher math and science requirements for graduation from US high schools, and designate poor high school districts for property tax sharing from some wealthy districts in order to fund the poor ones.

16)Shut down the COMEX for contract fraud, which has extended to a stack of naked shorts in precious metals, evergreen gold contracts, and lately refusal to deliver on PM contracts, even forced cash settlement.

17)Enforce the Freedom of Information Act, and shut down the Utah NSA center, otherwise called the Big Brother Fortress, then grant high priority to protection to all whistle blowers at the corporate and national level, followed by elimination of all coordinated projects with Intel, Microsoft, Google, FaceBook, and other processor designers and social media firms.

18)Rescind the Patriot Act and restore the Constitution with Bill of Rights, while conducting an investigation of all Supreme Court justices for bribery, coercion, and conflict of interest.

19)Remove illegal aliens from the United States after a 90-day warning, unless they pursue a newly designed fast track citizenship program for integration.

20)Return to the Gold standard for a new Global Dollar, and encourage barter systems that reduce the payment streams, while encouraging other nations to construct regional currencies backed by their own ample resources, then tying them to the Global Dollar flagship in a tributary development system.

Dream on, folks! Idealism has its place in the town halls, college dorms, bar rooms, and man caves. In the meantime invest in Gold & Silver bars and coins, and store your booty outside the US borders. The threats to personal wealth have never been so great. This entire article should be regarded as a warning and wake-up call that bonafide solutions are not on the table and are actually considered unpatriotic if not laden with sedition. No solutions are coming, only a slam of non-linear adjustments and painful resets. The only response to unsound money, hidden wealth confiscation, and obstacles to secure true savings should be urgent investment in Gold & Silver and defiance of spouted propaganda.


The solution is coming, but it comes from the East like a sledge hammer. The centers for global financial reform are the BRICS nations, the G-20 Forum, the Shanghai Coop Organization, and GATA. If and when the solution is imposed from entities outside the nation, then the result will be a rapid decline, a sudden shock, and a vast elimination of paper wealth inside the United States. 

The Jackass has been clear for several years, that the USA is heading for a slide into the De-Industrialized Third World (DI3W) for refusal to pursue proper just solutions. The slide will occur when the USDollar is no longer widely accepted for trade payments. The slide will occur when the USTreasury Bond is no longer widely used for banking system reserves. The global financial hegemony, whereby the USDollar in recent years has openly been supported by the USMilitary with flank support by numerous agencies, is coming to an end.

The people can join the Gold Train with Silver cars, or they can watch their home equity, pension funds, life savings, and income sources go down the drain as the global reset occurs. The reset is code word for the Return to Gold Standard, but the USGovt authorities do not wish to forewarn its population of a grand resurrection in the gold price. The Elite are furiously buying and stealing gold, sometimes under cover of war. The United States is the obstacle for the final implementation of the global reset.

Invest in Gold & Silver, if you can find any at these artificial intervened phony prices. Find an Asian source, hire an Asian agent, and use an Asian vault. All has been turned upside down, as formerly communist has converted to capitalist, and formerly capitalist has converted to fascist. Go Gold!!

Thursday, 16 January 2014

Aid or Enslaved? Part Two: Jersey

In Part One we looked at how aid can be used to support corrupt governments rather than provide a better life for the people of Africa. How bi-lateral Aid from Western countries may be used primarily to secure resource rights or to ensure that 'enemies' do not secure those same rights. At how poor governance in these countries leads to the financial benefits being restricted to an elite government whilst the poor souls are left in the same level of poverty as they ever were.

Today we are going to consider Jersey.

In terms of governance the system of aid provision is instead replaced with taxation and services, whereby public monies are collected by the agents of their elected representatives and these monies are used to provide public services. It is intra rather than inter area Aid.

The recipients of this 'aid' are twofold: 1) The people who work for the public to provide the services and 2) The people who receive the 'aid' in the form of old age pensions, income support and other 'entitlements'.

Corruption, if any, would occur: 1) where public servants carry out activities other than as directed by the representatives of the public, 2) in the over-payment of rewards to the public servants, 3) in the awarding of public service contracts on a basis other than that which would lead to the greatest value for money for the public, 4) in the use of these funds with the primary purpose of securing re-election.

Jersey's Civil Service 1973 or
Is this not a really cheap way
to show off my yoga toned body?
Resources in Jersey are limited largely to; 'land', a resource which can be used in two basic ways either repeatedly to produce crops or once only to be developed into housing or commerical developments, and 'sea'.

As far back as 1936 when the National Trust for Jersey was founded there were concerns about the level of development in Jersey's unspoilt natural beauty, these concerns have been growing ever since.

Until 1974 Jersey also had a lean, mean, low tax, low regulation jurisidiction, this environment encouraged the finance industry to come to Jersey when they instituted the Social Security Law. In human terms it was as pictured right - fit and healthy.

The 'aid' that Jersey received was in the form of taxation receipts from 'the finance industry' which were far in excess of that which a normal community might receive. Like those African nations, our governance was not sufficiently good. We did not make the same provisions that Norway did as it collected its North Sea Oil resource revenues.

There was a good start, but by 1980, the carpet baggers and asset strippers had moved in. Bribed the electorate with 'free stuff' and then proceeded to make off with everything of real value. This process continues today and we are on the verge of starting to sell Public Assets so that a few may profit from the proceeds with the first £250 million loan from the bankers.

A representation of Jersey's modern day Civil Service
In order to try to meet the impossibility of fulfilling the obligations of the Public that their representatives had placed upon them, the policy of expanding the population continues to this day, with the latest estimates calling for a further doubling of the population over the next 80 years.

However there are not sufficient jobs in Jersey for these people to do and so ever more public sector jobs have had to be created, requiring ever more regulation just to give these people something to do and ever higher taxation to pay for it.

Jersey's civil service now resembles and entirely, altogether, different human being again pictured above.

Aid or Enslaved? Part One - Africa

Ok, for people with a really short attention span, my quick answer is “Enslaved” at least most of the time. That’s what I’ve come to after six months and three books on the subject.

When thinking about international development aid, I think there are two separate but related questions. 

The first is whether the aid money actually works to promote development. 

The second is whether citizens of the recipient country really want us to help them develop or would prefer we all go home.

On the first question, it’s clearly not an unequivocal “yes” and some would argue that aid retards rather than promotes development. 

This is the argument in Dead Aid: Why Aid is Not Working and How There is a Better Way for Africa by Dambisa Moyo, a Zambian born economist who has worked at Goldman Sachs and consulted to the World Bank. 

Her thesis is that aid is almost always a bad thing and she spends most of the book suggesting alternative and healthier ways that poor countries can finance their own development. Given that she worked for Goldman, it’s difficult for me to see beyond the self serving ways of American financiers but she makes some good points about why aid actually hurts recipient countries and makes it less likely they will build the economic and governance systems that are needed for successful development.

The best book I’ve read that includes a discussion of aid is Paul Collier’s The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can Be Done About It. Collier’s book describes the four traps that the countries encompassing the billion poorest people in the world, almost all of them in Africa, have gotten caught in. 

He is not against aid in all cases and believes it has resulted in increased growth of about 1% a year among African aid recipients but he also points out how it can be detrimental when given incorrectly, as it frequently is. 

He suggests that changing trade policies might be at least as important to help poor countries but notes that it is, unfortunately, politically more difficult than just throwing money at the problem.

Finally, Beyond Good Intentions by Tori Hogan reviews her own experiences and observations of the ineffectiveness, poor management, and arrogance of many aid projects.

Both Collier and Moyo point out that aid money acts similar to money earned from natural resources (in Collier’s book “the resource trap”) such as oil, gold, or diamonds, including the promotion of corruption among government officials since it is so easy to steal

Aid or resource revenues also promote Dutch disease, the economic phenomenon of large influxes of money to a country inflating its currency thereby destroying its export market, taking along with it the industries that could have brought foreign currency in and employed domestic workers. 

Both aid and extraction income can be helpful to countries that already have good governance systems (like Norway which already had the governance before the big resource revenues rolled in) as the money is then used effectively. 

Unfortunately, good governance is hard to come by in the bottom billion countries and this is why so many resource-rich and heavily aided countries are in such bad shape as the money just gets stolen or wasted and meanwhile hurts both the economy and governance. These arguments convinced me that aid to governments is almost always a bad thing. 

But what about smaller aid projects in which the money goes directly to a project instead of to a government?

Certainly, some folks find it hard to watch or hear about suffering and not do something about it (this includes Polly, the founder of Sega) and of course there is suffering here: the poorest, the women and girls, the disabled, the orphans, etc. While I applaud this instinct, I wonder about the creation of the aid or handout mentality, a culture of taking. Africans never hesitate to ask for money, to charge white people more, to expect employers and co-workers to take care of their every need, and to mooch off friends and family for all manner of things.

Collier argues that we should be promoting development, not mainly through aid, in poor countries for our own good because a billion very poor people in an increasingly rich world (Asia and most other places outside of Africa are rapidly developing), will provide an unhealthy cauldron for extremism and terrorism that will then have negatives for all of us.

He may be right. And then there’s the likelihood that rich countries give aid strategically, in order to get resources or keep countries from allying with their enemies, rather than to promote development, so we shouldn’t be surprised that aid money often doesn’t help those countries’ citizens since that’s not its purpose.

But I think that most folks I know, really do want to do some good for the poor of the world so would not be happy to realize that our strategic interests are being dressed up as doing good but are frequently doing the opposite. There are projects, however, that I am confident are actually moving things in the right direction. 

There are many reasons why handouts do not work, and why the current pattern of aid should be inverted.

Wednesday, 15 January 2014

Retail Sales Survey Q4 2013

So the time has come around again to report Q4 for 2013 to the States Statistics Unit and the results we shall we say interesting.

So let's start simply with the good news 2013 represents the best year to date.

As a quarterly comparison the takings in the shop were down by about 34% this is largely due to not making two £5,000 sales in October this year which we made in 2012. Both November and December saw gains on a monthly basis.

But the real growth came largely on the internet and largely as a result of translating our web offerings into French, German, Italian and Spanish with phenomenol sales to Germany in particular.

What conclusions can we draw?

Locally whilst we had more actual customers, the amount that each customer spent was reduced. This is hardly surprising given the continuing escalation - not only in the rate of taxation but in the differential between the growth in wages and the growth in the cost of goods. With real inflation running at around 9% each year and wages rising 1% to 2%. Jersey people are simply getting poorer as each year passes.

We did well on the internet largely due to the number of our competitors who have gone under in the preceding twelve months; it is a hostile and competitive environment in which to operate but we did gain from opening up new markets, markets in which we are able to effectively compete against existing participants. The people in the UK are faring no better than those in Jersey. There was a marked increase in fraud and attempted fraud, particularly on Amazon, and as such we have re-focussed on Ebay as the main platform for selling.


Can't we all just get along?

"What upsets me is that I am now being labelled 'a victim'. My pride rankles at not continuing to fight to the bitter end, but my reason says I did the right thing."

I enjoy being part of the Politics Jersey group on Facebook recently the group has been troubled by one or two mavericks who have been disrupting the group leading one of the admins to make a blog post "Don't be a Blockhead". 

What is Cyber-Bullying?

Examples of what constitutes cyber-bullying include communications that seek to intimidate, control, manipulate, put down, falsely discredit, or humiliate the recipient. The actions are deliberate, repeated, and hostile behaviour intended to harm another. Cyber-bullying has been defined by The National Crime Prevention Council:
“When the Internet, cell phones or other devices are used to send or post text or images intended to hurt or embarrass another person."
A cyber-bully may be a person whom the target knows or an online stranger. A cyber-bully may be anonymous and may solicit involvement of other people online who do not even know the target. This is known as a 'digital pile-on'.

It was recently suggested that I had been 'the victim' of an attempted cyber-bullying. Much against my natural inclination once twelve of my peers had indicated that I should place a block on someone on Facebook, 'a jury of my peers' if you will, I reluctantly did just that.

So in trying to demonstrate 'Actus Rea' I have been looking back through the threads including some which have been deleted by the mods but I have "right click>save web page"ed.


First let us establish a purpose for Facebook groups. A Facebook group is a place where many individuals may choose to share their views. As one member so accurately pointed out "Opinions are like a*holes, everyone has one". It is implicit in joining a group that you will encounter people of differing opinions.

Secondly let us establish the difference between stating an opinion which is not supported by 'the facts' (such as 'the States of Jersey are competent') and deliberately stating something which you know to be false (more commonly referred to as 'lying').


The 'Actus Rea' begins many months earlier, when out of the blue Peter Zambon, a person with an BMMB (the degree you take as the first step to being a doctor) but currently a lecturer with BPP, jumped into the group to point out that I had said something by mistake which was not true. Seventy or so posts back and forth and it transpired that Peter had read something but not read it in the context of the progression of the discussion. At no point had he actually ventured his own opinion, his contribution was restricted to trying to prove me wrong.

From that day on Peter's contribution to the group was virtually restricted to popping his head in now and again to demand I either correct a mis-statement or to provide proof of my opinion. He rarely shared his personal opinion other than to self-aggrandise (as will be discussed later on).

I cannot be required to 'prove' my opinion, an opinion being the position the individual takes on the basis of all knowledge and understanding that is available to the individual at the time. How does one prove what their opinion is? It is what it is, and it is what they say it is.

Occasionally in the course of discussions the odd error would creep into the narrative so I would thank Peter for his assistance and say the exact same thing with different wording and move on with the discussion.

So were these "communications that seek to intimidate, control, manipulate, put down, falsely discredit, or humiliate the recipient. The actions are deliberate, repeated, and hostile behaviour intended to harm another."


Cyber-bullying deals with "communications that seek to", in other words it is not the end result which is important it is the intention of the person who makes the communications which is the 'crime'. So just because the bully does not succeed in his intention to "to intimidate, control, manipulate, put down, falsely discredit, or humiliate" does not mean that cyber-bullying has not occurred.

We must look at the general behaviour of 'the cyber-bully' - the pattern was targeted at a single individual, was hostile, made no contribution to the group discussion, were negative.

We can then look to what the 'cyber-bully' did state. For example in a discussion about social class he referred to the Office of National Statistics and stated that he was in the 'highest' group. He referred to his 'professional standing' and 'protecting his reputation'. And even when demonstrated to be incorrect would respond with increased hostility rather than the more reasonable acceptance of his human imperfection.

To the best of my knowledge and understanding, the 'cyber-bully' was displaying a classic superiority complex.


A superiority complex is a psychological defence mechanism in which a person's feelings of superiority counter or conceal his or her feelings of inferiority. The term was coined by Alfred Adler (February 7, 1870 – May 28, 1937), as part of his School of Individual psychology. It was introduced in his series of books, including "Understanding Human Nature" and "Social Interest".

An individual with a superiority complex will find satisfaction in proving himself superior to another person in order to counter the inner feeling that he is inferior. A 'reasonable man' who knows that all humans are equal so instead obtains satisfaction from 'mastering a task'.


When several people with a superiority complex, unite with the common purpose of proving their superiority over an individual. It has long been understood that 'a mob' will be far less restrained than an individual.

When Peter was joined by his sidekicks Tristan Gray who actually went so far as to openly stating I was deliberately misleading people, (which whilst the admins of the group deleted, I saw fit to preserve for posterity) and Sandra Bisson the 'bullying' turned up a notch or two.

In response to demands that I 'prove my opinion' and bring an end to the negativity I completed the previous two blog posts, but demonstrating that my opinion was indeed correct to the best of the whole group's knowledge and understanding (including the 'bully's') only resulted in ever increasingly hostile attention.

It was at this stage in my particular case that things got out of control and I was advised by several people to prevent any further communication. It was having a negative effect on other members of the group who were gradually getting more vociferous in their complaints about what was happening and so I felt after several people had suggested the course of action that there was no other option but to be 'a blockhead' for the sanity of the group as a whole.

There comes a time when even the most reasonable of people must simply walk away.


Sadly it is a fact of Jersey life that people who work in the finance industry particularly at the lower echelons have a ridiculous superiority complex. I recall whilst working as a barman that the phrase 'I am an accountant' was often touted as a good reason to allow a person thoroughly intoxicated to imbibe more alcohol in contravention of the Law.

Having worked in the finance industry I can only tacit that it is because it is such a thoroughly horrible experience to work in such places; undertaking work which has no real meaning or purpose other than to allow the wealthy to avoid contributing their fare share to the community in which they live and which they profit from; working with a group of people who either have given up and are only there for the money but really do not want to be there at all, or who are so young and naive that they think they are on their way to great things.

The 'superiority' arises simply for earning 'high wages' or so they are told, whilst the 'inferiority' arises from the knowledge that they are at the beck and call of the whim of their clients and bosses, little more than slaves.

Being free to live life as one wishes, to buck the system, to wander where the fancy takes you; as I choose to live my life may just be the reason that I was the preferred target. I stand as proof that everything you were ever led to believe was a lie. I'm glad I was, someone else may well have been upset by it.

What has upset me most is that I am now being labelled 'a victim' my pride rankles at not continuing to fight to the bitter end. My reason tells me that I did the right thing.

I shall, however, take more seriously the occasional complaints of my step-daughters when they argue with their friends; these matters can run out of control very quickly.

Monday, 13 January 2014

Effective Rate of Taxation - Alternate Methodology

We have had a fantastic response to the previous blog posting and I am most grateful for the suggestion of a far easier method of calculating the effective rate of taxation suggested.

For this calculation we use different source material the budget for 2014, draft budget statement for 2013 and the 2012 Financial Reports.

Budgeted Taxation
Income Tax      £474,965,000
Impots -             £55,191,000
GST -                £81,955,000
Stamp Duty -     £27,402,000
Island Rate -      £12,032,000
Other Income -  £21,926,000

Total Income    £673,471,000


The 2014 Draft Budget shows there were 39,740 households in Jersey paying tax on 2011 earnings and in 2012 Income tax from individuals was collected in the sum of £354 million pounds and that £80 million pounds was paid in Company tax in the same period.

If we apply this same split to the 2014 figures then individual income tax can be calculated to be approximately £387,500,000.

So an average household is paying £9,750 in income tax.


Applying the same method to all the other taxes

IMPOTS - An 'average' household is paying £1,389
GST - An 'average' household is paying £2,062
STAMP DUTY - An  'average' household is paying £690
ISLAND RATE - An 'average' household is paying £303

So an average household is paying £4,334 in other taxes

Other income we shall consider later on but the equivalent contribution that each household makes (largely in either profits for the States owned utilities (a form of taxation I had not considered in the last post) or in the retention by the States of the public's money in the form of interest and bank accounts which the taxpayer might otherwise have generated for themselves is £552


One anomaly thrown up was that I had not considered whether a person on 'average earnings' would be on the marginal rate. It transpires they would be. A person earning £34,320 would with the single person's allowance of £13,780 be subject to tax at 27% on £20,540, £5,546 or an applicable rate of just over 16%.

Therefore the net income (after ITIS and SS deductions) of the individual would be £26,770. If we apply the same methodology to calculate the number of persons per household then we derive a figure of 1.4 individuals per household.

However it has been pointed out that the weekly household expenditure figure excludes the Other Expenditure line from the survey and that it should include it. This raises the annual household expenditure to £39,740 which would lead to a figure of 1.48 individuals per household.

Which means that each individual is paying £9,516.21 in the above five taxes each year at an effective rate of 27.8%


I have not changed the method of calculating the rate of taxation I apply the full 12.5%, if you do not agree with this methodology, it is easy enough to adjust to just include the 6%.


Therefore we can see that the effective rate of taxation using this methodology is slightly lower at 40.3%


What we have not included is parish rates (other than the all island rate) and any tax which is collected by a department other than the Treasury department in other words the 'user pays charges'; planning fees, parking charges, licenses etc. I have not been able to track down any figures for the amount of money that individual departments collect and retain within their own department.


We know that by 2018 the effective rate will increase with the introduction of a new tax at 1% limited to the social security cap (so a full 1% at 'average' earnings). Do you trust the government not to raise the rate of GST in the next session?

Compare to 1980 the effective rate of taxation has increased out of all recognition. A government which is managing the public's money need never increase the rate as the amount of money collected will still increase as wages and prices increase.

Sunday, 12 January 2014

What is the effective rate of taxation in Jersey?

Despite repeated request to the members of the States of Jersey and the States Statistics unit they profess
that it is beyond them to work out what the effective rate of taxation is. So I have decided to calculate it for them.

I am going to walk through the calculation of what percentage of your earnings goes to the government of Jersey. At the last election I estimated it to be around 40% but many have been incredulous at this amount and so I am going to walk through the calculation with you now.

Definition of tax: Anything which the government collects from the 'members of the public' it serves. As a member of the public for example you are joint owner of the public roads. Paycards for example make a charge on you for using your own property and therefore are a tax.

At the last election I limited consideration to income tax, social security, GST and Impots/Duties.

We are using the States of Jersey's own figures:
The most recent income and expenditure survey
The most recent earnings

First we need to reconcile the difference between individual earnings and household expenditure.

Average earnings are stated at £34,320.  Deduct from this the 6.5% social security and 20% income tax and we are left with a net income of £25,473.07. This compares to an average household expenditure of £37,658.00. Dividing one by the other we can calculate that the average household consists of 1.47 persons both earning average wage.

The figures in the household survey relate to weekly expenditure and so are multiplied by 52 and then divided by 1.47 to calculate each individual's expenditure which results in a figure of £25,473. The figures show an amount for expenditure outside of Jersey but I have also discounted a proportion of the expenditure on 'household and clothing' and 'recreation and leisure' to account for internet purchases. This leaves the effective rate of GST at 3.39%.

Impots vary but a percentage of the cost of 'Alcohol and Tobacco' and 'Transport Costs' (in the sum of £5,400 (or £5,673/1.05) per annum) will include the impots, VRD, driving license fees etc. Based upon the last budget we have assigned 65% of these costs to taxation (the actual taxation is higher on tobacco and lower on alcohol but we have had to use a 'best guess'). Which leaves us with a figure for impots (and related taxes) of 7%.

Thus before any user pays charges....
Income Tax 18.7% (income tax at average earnings is currently payable on the first £1 earnt but is not payable on the 6.5% employer SS contribution)
Social Security 12.5% (see note below)
GST 3.39%
Impots 7%

Effective rate of taxation - 41.6%


Other taxes which are not included in this percentage include Parish Rates, Harbours and Airports Landing fees, Planning Applications, Gun and Dog License fees, Parking Fines, Court Fines, public parking, sports memberships of public facilities. Nor does it consider the duty on property transactions, nor the 4% duty on probate (inheritance tax by another name).

Whilst you personally may not be subject to these forms of taxation, 'the average person' will be. 1% is £363.80 and it seems reasonable to assume that spread across every person the cost of these will be in the region of 3% or just over £1,000 per year.

We also need to consider that most of these charges used to be paid for out of the sums collected in income tax or have been increased far ahead of 'inflation' or the devaluation of money would indicate. For this reason they are called 'stealth taxes' as they raise money for the government without the government having to admit to their financial mismanagement and excessive spending.

For that reason it is also fair to consider the effective rate of taxation to be as high as 45%

Surely it can go no higher?

By 2016 a further tax will be introduced which whilst neither income tax nor social security resembles both in that it will be collected like income tax, but will have a cap like social security. For average earners the full 1% will be payable.

It seems likely that GST will also rise soon after the next election by a further 2% or 3% given the historical pattern of spending in election year and then taxing in the next two years ready to bribe the electorate in the election year and the poor health of the local economy.

By the election in 2018 it is likely that the effective rate of taxation will be nearing 50%.

So what were taxes in 1980 prior to the Walker regime?

Under Walker's tenure taxes rose at a much faster rate than inflation, a government which is managing itself properly should not need to ever change the rate of taxation as the amount of tax received will increase as money devalues (i.e. as wages rise, as prices rise)

Social Security was 10%
Income Tax was still 20% but there were generous allowances almost all of which have been removed with '20 means 20' such that an average person might expect to pay 5% income tax
GST was not in force
Impots are difficult to calculate as no figures were produced and cannot be worked back as there were so many more people visiting Jersey then and purchasing cigarettes and alcohol in local stores and paying local duty that it was not even viable to have a duty free shop at the Airport.

In 1980 a person could expect to pay around 15% in taxation, or 16% if one includes Parish rates.

The rate of taxation has nearly tripled, is that what you voted for?

Points which may be contentious:
Social Security - you personally may only pay 6% social security but your employer will pay 6.5% on top. As an employer let me assure you that when assessing your wages I look at the 'whole cost' of employing you and your expected productivity. That 6.5% comes out of your wages whether it says that on your payslip or not. Self employed people will pay the whole 12.5% if they are earning average earnings. For that reason I include the full rate of social security in the calculation.

Government Figures - lies, damned lies and statistics but these figures represent a common ground from which to work.

Wednesday, 1 January 2014

Our economy is trickle up, not trickle down.

Last year I took the most unexpected decision and blocked international sales to none other than the United States of America. The business case for blocking this jurisdiction was clear an unassailable; increasing fraud, issues to with customs due to government shut-downs and a general downturn in trade with the United States meant that internet trading was simply not worth undertaking. In spite of what the American government will publicly tell you; it is a place in severe economic decline. Yes the stock market is surging, but then the pattern nearly matches that of 1929 immediately prior to the big crash. But a surging stock market does practically nothing for the 'real' economy... especially when the consumer is increasingly tapped out?! The rich own stocks and the poor own debt.

Working on the assumption that a major crash in share prices will occur sometime between 23rd December and the 21st January led also to another decision - don't sell any gold. Not only do I buy and sell gold bullion but I also buy and sell scrap precious metals and my silver and gold scrap has been building up for a few months in expectation of a sharp rise in 2014.

But let's look at that chart...

If the stock market bubble does burst, the wealthy will also have less money to spend into the economy in 2014. For the moment, the stock market has been rallying. This is typical for the month of December. You see, the truth is that investors generally don't want to sell stocks in December because they want to put off paying taxes on the profits.

If stocks are sold before the end of the year, the profits go on the 2013 tax return. If stocks are sold a few days from now, the profits go on the 2014 tax return. It is only human nature to want to delay pain for as long as possible.
It is the poor who are more likely to consume. And logically with their purchasing power being funnelled to the rich in regular debt monetization, they purchase less and less. As the slow but steady contraction in the economy over the past five years has proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Austerity of the time employed by the UK (i.e. cutting benefits and raising taxes) is never going to help stimulate economic growth. The best form of economic stimulation is not to support zombie banks but to raise income tax thresholds and lower the rates of taxes for the less well off. To repeal laws and cut government expenditure. In other words the exact opposite of how most western governments have reacted.