<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>IndHome's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>http://www.intensedebate.com/users/511047</link>
		<description>Comments by IndHome</description>
<item>
<title>Independence Home : There's no irony Mr Duff</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/12/irony-duff/#IDComment116386565</link>
<description>Yes fair point, you are right that it is the Monarch who is sovereign technically. Though I am no Monarchist and believe absolutely that the people are individually sovereign, embodied by the Monarch. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 17 Dec 2010 09:22:44 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/12/irony-duff/#IDComment116386565</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : Should UKIP be a libertarian party</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/11/should-ukip-be-a-libertarian-party/#IDComment111897803</link>
<description>Well I also use the term &amp;quot;liberal&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;classical liberal&amp;quot; in teh article alongside libertarianism. As i have said the two are interchangable nowadays due to &amp;quot;liberal&amp;quot; having other connotations. I use both ensure people are clear what i mean. </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 25 Nov 2010 14:31:51 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/11/should-ukip-be-a-libertarian-party/#IDComment111897803</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : Should UKIP be a libertarian party</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/11/should-ukip-be-a-libertarian-party/#IDComment111716377</link>
<description>Byron, you will no doubt have noted in the article I was using the libertarian label to mean classical liberal. Many people now use the word libertarian due to the corruption of the term liberal in modern politics. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 24 Nov 2010 16:49:37 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/11/should-ukip-be-a-libertarian-party/#IDComment111716377</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : UKIP Leader: decriminalise prostitution, drugs, hunting and smoking in pubs.</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/11/ukip-leader-decriminalise-prostitution-drugs-hunting-smoking-pubs/#IDComment110468709</link>
<description>Lewis. Not sure how moving from a ban to controlled availability is extending the powers of the state.  As far as responsibility goes, libertarians believe people are responsible for their actions, not that they always act responsibly. Taking drugs is not really responsible, nor is getting drunk. However if people choose to screw up their lives then it is no role of the state to protect people from themselves. This is, of course, complicated by the current funding model for the NHS which socialises costs such as drug abuse, but that is another debate.  What makes you think Telegraph readers aren&amp;#039;t liberal? Ok, you can generalise to a certain degree. But the interview was about finding out who Nigel is. Being honest and truthful is a good thing; saying what you think the audience want to hear is hypocritical. </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 18 Nov 2010 20:16:21 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/11/ukip-leader-decriminalise-prostitution-drugs-hunting-smoking-pubs/#IDComment110468709</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : I though I had heard it all, but this really does take the cake</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/11/heard-all-cake/#IDComment109906546</link>
<description>There will be a new video page up and running in due course. Hopefully bigger and better. </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:44:18 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/11/heard-all-cake/#IDComment109906546</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : Centralising a failed system.</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/11/centralising-a-failed-system/#IDComment109627048</link>
<description>Sorry to hear that Peter. I hope you get used ot it. All other comments i&amp;#039;ve had have been positive so maybe it takes a bit of adjusting?  Any specific comments or suggestion please let us know - editor@indhome.com </description>
<pubDate>Sat, 13 Nov 2010 21:02:01 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/11/centralising-a-failed-system/#IDComment109627048</guid>
</item><item>
<title>John Redwood MP : The issue of sovereignty</title>
<link>http%3a%2f%2fwww.johnredwoodsdiary.com%2f%3fp%3d6746#IDComment90178044</link>
<description>Well said John. So what are YOU going to do about it? So far you have simply compromised your views to prop up a government which, while more Eurosceptic than the previous, is still a pro EU government, with no plans to push the EU out of our lives.</description>
<pubDate>Sun, 1 Aug 2010 17:44:21 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http%3a%2f%2fwww.johnredwoodsdiary.com%2f%3fp%3d6746#IDComment90178044</guid>
</item><item>
<title>The Conservative Blog : School in 1950 Compared to School in 2010; 7 Scenarios Compared</title>
<link>http://theconservativeblog.co.uk/?p=2650#IDComment56785212</link>
<description>Lol. Genius post. </description>
<pubDate>Sun, 14 Feb 2010 12:09:47 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://theconservativeblog.co.uk/?p=2650#IDComment56785212</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : Robin Hood Tax?...Ugh!</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/02/robin-hood-tax-ugh/#IDComment56340681</link>
<description>Greg, economics is essentially logic in academic form. Yes, economies are complex and so following throught e consequeces of various actions are hard, and ultimately it is mroe of an art than a science. I certainly don&amp;#039;t profess to understand economics wholly and fully, but I do have a decent grasp of key concepts.  The problem we are in globally is fundamentally about credit being too cheap for too long. Why? Well I would say because we were getting the &amp;#039;one-off&amp;#039; and sudden benefit of China - i.e. globalisation. This freed up &amp;pound;s and $s to be spent on other things. Inflation in consuer goods was kept low by offshoring, thus keeping central bank rates low and reducing the cost of debt. Money supply growth shot through the roof and decoupled from nominal GDP. There was too much money chasing too few goods, and ultimately it showe ditself in asset prices rather than consumer prices which were being kept artificially low.    The Tobin tax would reduce volatility in markets which is a good thing, but it also reduces liquidity which is a abd thing. It is a trade-off. That is all economics is. One has to make a choice about whether the trade off is worth it. I don&amp;#039;t think so. A tobin tax would effect market interest rates, and thus business expansion, etc. To what extent I cannot say, but there is empirical evidence for it.    As for Caroline Lucas not understanding economics I stand by my statement. She has been saying we should have a &amp;quot;green new deal&amp;quot; and switch to green energy because it &amp;quot;will create 1m green-collar jobs&amp;quot;. What she doesn&amp;#039;t also relaise is taxing the private sector to pay for these jobs will cost jobs elsewhere. And also that jobs are a cost of delivering a service, and habing job intensive energy is not great. Having energy prioduced with zero jobs would be great - then we could all have free energy, and people could be employed elsewhere in the economy, business would have lower operatings costs, wages and investment returns would be higher, etc, etc.    </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:55:35 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/02/robin-hood-tax-ugh/#IDComment56340681</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : An Iron Fist Has Come Down On Europe</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/02/an-iron-fist-has-come-down-on-europe/#IDComment56156669</link>
<description>Bryan, just use this link and email it to your friends - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyNnlyIVjhU&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyNnlyIVjhU&lt;/a&gt;&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyNnlyIVjhU&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/a&gt;  </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 09:34:13 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/02/an-iron-fist-has-come-down-on-europe/#IDComment56156669</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : Socialism is Selfishness</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/socialism-is-selfishness/#IDComment55162276</link>
<description>Can you email me the comment and I will post it on your behalf.  </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 3 Feb 2010 09:35:22 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/socialism-is-selfishness/#IDComment55162276</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : Socialism is Selfishness</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/socialism-is-selfishness/#IDComment54917350</link>
<description>Bryan, not sure i understand what you are saying. I cant find your &amp;#039;lost&amp;#039; comment anywhere. I dont censor the site other than spam or libelous stuff.  </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 1 Feb 2010 23:42:21 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/socialism-is-selfishness/#IDComment54917350</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : Socialism is Selfishness</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/socialism-is-selfishness/#IDComment54712116</link>
<description>yep  </description>
<pubDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 21:38:31 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/socialism-is-selfishness/#IDComment54712116</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : Socialism is Selfishness</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/socialism-is-selfishness/#IDComment54550070</link>
<description>I haven&amp;#039;t seen any other comments from you. Not sure why its not working, but I haven&amp;#039;t deleted it.  </description>
<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 18:02:15 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/socialism-is-selfishness/#IDComment54550070</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : Socialism is Selfishness</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/socialism-is-selfishness/#IDComment54195710</link>
<description>On which post? It&amp;#039;s possible i accidentally deleted a handful by accident the other day but i&amp;#039;m not entirely sure.  </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 12:26:52 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/socialism-is-selfishness/#IDComment54195710</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : Quitters Arcade</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/quitters-arcade/#IDComment54183796</link>
<description>Well Pfizer developed it i gather, so it is probably part of their &amp;#039;social responsibility&amp;#039; which they no doubt pledged to avoid costly legislation?!  </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 09:32:33 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/quitters-arcade/#IDComment54183796</guid>
</item><item>
<title>The Conservative Blog : Yet another UKIP member resigns..</title>
<link>http://theconservativeblog.co.uk/?p=2224#IDComment53199940</link>
<description>Come on Yasin, this bit is nonsense - &amp;quot;It seems the only people sticking by are those who would stay regardless for want of a career with UKIP or those who agree with their new BNP policy love affair.&amp;quot;  The reason libertarians like me are staying is because we believe the party is bigger than one person, even the leader, and that the membership is still largely anti-statist and broadly does not have hang-ups on the Islam issue.  It is not a requirement to agree with all the policies of a party, as the existence of Hannan and Carswell on the eurosceptic libertarian wing, Ken Clarke on the liberal europhile wing, and Edward Leigh on the social conservative Christian wing, in the Conservative party demonstrate.  UKIP has lost a few good people of late over various issues, true. However a lot of good people remain. And while the Conservative party continues to equivocate on the EU, and pursues a statist agenda, and while LPUK continues to pursue a purist libertarian agenda incapable of gaining sufficient electoral support to even begin to bring about libertarian changes, I and others will stick with UKIP as the best vehicle for doing so. </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2010 19:02:08 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://theconservativeblog.co.uk/?p=2224#IDComment53199940</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : Brace for impact!</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/brace-for-impact/#IDComment51707077</link>
<description>You might say that, but I couldn&amp;#039;t possibly comment!  </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2010 17:41:19 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/brace-for-impact/#IDComment51707077</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : It's time we had a sensible debate about Islam</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/its-time-we-had-a-sensible-debate-about-islam/#IDComment51354582</link>
<description>Why should children be taught only one religion, or that one is superior to others? This is simply religious indoctrination.  </description>
<pubDate>Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:27:31 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2010/01/its-time-we-had-a-sensible-debate-about-islam/#IDComment51354582</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Independence Home : Should UKIP not stand against anti-EU MPs?</title>
<link>http://www.indhome.com/2009/11/should-ukip-not-stand-against-anti-eu-mps/#IDComment48424648</link>
<description>Because UKIP is a non-racist party who do not want to &amp;quot;repatriate non-ethnic Brits&amp;quot;, who do not support socialist economic policies, and who do not want to be associated or work with a party leader (and members) who deny the holocaust, hang around with the KKK, and rub shoulders with fascists.  </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 19:09:48 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.indhome.com/2009/11/should-ukip-not-stand-against-anti-eu-mps/#IDComment48424648</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>
