Over at EU Referendum, they are spending a lot of time recently writing about something they have dubbed Referism, as far as I can tell, this means they want the annual budget refered to The People, who will then confirm or reject the annual tax increases and spending.

I know it is an idea that has just been suggested and has yet to take on a life of its own, but there are a few points I’m not sure of, would the annual referendum be a vote on the whole budget? Or would each part of it be subject to vote?

What I mean is, there will be people who could vote down the tax increase, but vote for a spending increase, if that was so, would it mean more borrowing? Or would there be a cap on borrowing, or could it be outlawed altogether, as I think would be wise?

If each part of the budget is open to being voted down, what happens after the referendum, with a third of the budget voted down, another third voted for and a third down the middle? Who chooses what questions to put and in what format?

It sounds to me like a mess in the offing.

I’m not opposed to the idea of referenda, it works well in parts of Switzerland as part of its own old traditions, it could become a handy tool with which to restrain the globalist elites who love raping us and taking our hard-earned cash, but it should not be seen as some panacea for the grave ills that are killing our societies in the West.

The main problem, is that all of our governments are too big, they are too powerful and involved in too many parts of our economies, societies and private lives, if and when we can realise that government is not the answer, then perhaps a system involving referenda could be part of the post big government era, but untill then, there does not seem a way of reforming the monster that is the Western system of governance.

I think in reference to the idea of a budget, it could be that referenda are only required for any new spending and any new tax, so giving the politicos a very good reason to restrain themselves year on year, not going over the limited amount they had, and if they really thought they could get people behind a tax increase they could then campaign for it. But in this scenario borrowing would have to be banned, otherwise they would plunge the country into unpayable debt, a bit like now!

But I do like the idea of government being kept within some fiscal bounds, prevented from borrowing, terrified of going to the people for a tax increase, they would just have to get along with what little they had, and my hope would be, that it is little, lets leave them ten percent! And it could give them an incentive not to degrade the currency, as all they would do is degrade what little spending powers they have.

Lets see where this will go

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s