The latest information out of France refers to Francois Hollande and his own officials, and the scandal is far worse than some wealthy old woman who is claimed to have dementia giving a large donation. The latest French scandal involves offshore accounts.
This seems to be a repeat of the rubbish prior to the 2008 U.S. Presidential election when a certain person proclaimed that he would run an Administration that was transparent… and yet he has the most corrupt Administration ever in the USA.
The Socialists cannot help themselves it seems. They like to think that they are “clean” and “ethical” but scratch below the surface and there are lots of corruption hidden in plain sight.
These revelations though, are nothing compared to what has been revealed by the NSW ICAC inquiry relating to the former ALP NSW government… now that is truly entertainment.
Personally, I like the idea of Christine Lagarde getting the post. She has a well rounded career and she would bring a fresh face to the role. She has the respect in Europe as well.
However, there are some countries that seem to have other ideas about who should lead the IMF. As regards to the opinions of the Goose (Wayne Swan) from Australia, he is such a bad Treasurer that his opinions should not matter in the slightest. He is one person who has absolutely no idea about what is required in the top job. Put it this way, I would value the opinion of Paul Keating (a man I detest anyway) over that of the Goose.
If the person is chosen on merits then Christine Lagarde should remain the number one contender. Amongst the other names being mentioned is the failed politician UK Gordon Brown. It is well known that he aspires to this type of role, but, he does not have the support of the present leadership in the UK. On top of that Gordon Brown messed up the economy in the UK in both of his roles.
Socialism and pushing socialism through the IMF is not going to help the world’s woes. At present the IMF has a big problem in Europe. It really does need someone with credibility in Europe to head the group. Gordon Brown does not have that credibility. Christine Lagarde has the credibility. The people being pushed from Singapore and other countries do not have that credibility. There is one other new contender from Brussels.
Some of the issues that I have with the IMF structure includes the heavy socialist emphasis. The challenges of the eurozone has meant that there has been a need to catapult some of the present ideas. Keynesian economics will not work in a time of stagflation. This is the lesson that should have been learned from the 1970s and the 1980s when the stagflation was prolonged. There is a need for a different set of responses to the crises that occur.
For too long Europe has turned to socialism (which is not quite the same as Communism) in order to offer a raft of welfare benefits to their communities. What most of these governments have forgotten is that there is a need to have people working in order to gather taxes, and there is a need for business and industry in order to have people working. Policies such as high taxes on business do not work because in the long term employers make the decision to leave the marketplace. When this happens the consequence is a drop in tax revenue as well as higher unemployment which in turn leads to higher welfare benefits.
Europe also has another problem that desparately needs attention: open borders attracts the wrong kind of immigrants. This can be seen in countries such as Spain, France, England and Germany, as well as in Norway and Denmark. These immigrants see this as an opportunity to place their wives on welfare, and they soak up all of the other welfare state benefits such as free medical, free education etc. etc. If this is not kept under control, inevitably it leads to a break-down in the whole system. At the root of this problem is taxation, or rather taxation receipts.
Under Dominique Strauss-Khan the IMF has steered a number of European countries towards putting in place austerity measures that are supposed to bring about a restructure of their economies. Those governments can only be compliant if the people are compliant and stop their protests that cause disruption, and in the instance of Greece, become extremely costly in terms of property lost, as well as lives lost due to the riots. The Greek attitude has not been conducive to the necessary reform required. Greece is the typical example of a country where the expenditure on welfare outstrips by a long shot the taxation receipts, but the lazy Greeks do not seem to understand the implications of their own bad welfare system.
I am not against some form of welfare buffer for the most vulnerable in the community. There is a need to protect such individuals. I am not against short term unemployment benefits for those who are able-bodied. I do think that government needs to have other structures in place that will help the unemployed find work. What I am really against is the expenditure of government funds on projects such as wind farms that are inefficient and will never deliver according to government expectations. The windfarms do not increase employment, but decreases employment in some sectors.
The watermelon policies and the claims regarding AGW or climate change need to be challenged, and governments everywhere need to stop wasting money on bogus research. This also means that I am against the use of IMF funds going third world countries, where such funds would only be wasted upon dead in the water projects whilst those third world countries continue to purchase arms and kill their own people.
I have written before about the welfare cheats in the UK, especially those cheats from a certain theocratic religion. However, I have only hinted at the type of welfare cheating that exists, which I might add also happens in Australia, and not always by that same group.
One story that is being highlighted recently is a case in France where a woman has been fined for wearing the burka when driving a car. The French are becoming very strict about this kind of thing whilst the British have adopted a more dhimmi attitude (how shameful). By adopting this dhimmi attitude the British have become guilty of enabling welfare cheats to flourish. How does this work, and what has this got to do with the burka woman driving a car?
Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs received the following from one of her French readers:
Bonjour Pamela et amis ,en effet cette affaire relance plus fort encore le débat sur la burka chez nous! Nicolas Sarkosy a dit vouloir une loi sur la burka totale et les français approuvent!(nous n’oublions pas que Barak Obama a déclaré à ce sujet chez nous ,que les gens doivent etre libres de s’habiller comme ils veulent)mais ,Nicolas Sarkosy ne sera pas le toutou de Barak 0bama .De plus ,après enquète sur cette femme voilée , il s’est avéré qu’elle fait partie des 4 femmes qui ont 12 enfants de son mari ,algérien naturalisé par mariage, et qui fait parti d’un groupe islamique radical ! Ils ont fraudés en déclarant qu’elles étaient “méres isolées” pour toucher plus d’allocations ! donc le mari va etre poursuivi pour escroqueries ,bigamies, et Mr Hortefeux a demandé qu’il soit déchu de sa nationalité Française,j’espère que cela sera , cela va faire grand bruit ! Ces gens là nous empoisonnent notre vie ,et il ne faut surtout pas faire preuve de faibles se avec eux ! c’est une gangrène qu’il faut vite éradiquer sinon le monde entier sera perdu !
From French reader Kate (google translation):
Hello Pamela and friends, in fact the case even stronger stimulus debate on the burka with us! Nicolas Sarkozy said he wanted a law on the burka and the French Total approve! (We must not forget that Barack Obama has said about it here, that people should be free to dress as they want) but, Nicolas Sarkozy will not be the dog of Barack 0bama. In addition, after investigating the veiled woman, it turned out it was one of four women who have 12 children of her husband, Algerian naturalized by marriage, which is part a radical Islamic group! They have defrauded them by saying they were “single mothers” to reach more benefits! So the husband will be prosecuted for fraud, bigamy, and Mr Hortefeux asked whether stripped of his French nationality, I hope it will, it will make some noise! Those people we poison our lives and it is important not to show low be with them! is a gangrene that must be quickly eradicated if the world will be lost!
Islamization Watch: (hat tip the Winds of Jihad)The incident has now reached ministerial level.
On Friday, the Interior Minister requested the Immigration Minister look into revoking the French nationality of the driver’s husband as information he possessed showed the man was a polygamist married to four women with 12 children.
“Each of these women benefit from single parent benefits and … each one wears the full veil,” Interior Minister Brice Hortefeux said in the letter seen by Reuters, adding he had asked the local authorities to look into possible benefit fraud.
“I would appreciate it, should these factors prove true, if you could study whether this individual could be stripped of the French nationality,” Hortefeux said, addressing Immigration Minister Eric Besson.
According to the woman’s Algerian-born husband acquired French nationality in 1999.
This is a situation that is widespread and is not just confined to France, the UK or even Australia and it is not necessarily confined to the one group of people either. The situation is this: In Islam it is ok to have up to 4 wives (maybe even more than 4). When these people emigrate they become aware of the fact that polygamy is not acceptable. In fact in the USA polygamy amongst Mormons is also not acceptable and generally polygamy has been outlawed. These people know that polygamy is not acceptable and therefore, in order to keep their wives and multitude of children, the women pretend to be single mothers. The man does not live with the 4 women together, but sets them up in separate living arrangements. In this way the women have been collecting welfare for their children. By doing this these families are creating a strain upon the public purse.
No government can continue to sustain this form of welfare cheating. This is the kind of situation that causes governments to have high budget deficits that are not sustainable in the long term. In the particular case that is cited here, the women had an Algerian husband who had been naturalized as a French citizen in 1999.
My question here is: How many in the UK, France and Spain have families in this situation? How many of these families are exploiting the welfare benefits like what was happening in this case.
Powered by ScribeFire.