Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Lionator

The I cant believe it’s not politics thread.

By Lionator, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

Fazzer 7

Fazzer 7

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

 

Well I dare say you're probably not going to get it. Some people don't think the UK going neutral will save the world when most of the big players, and the smaller but important players like Brazil, seem to be doing little. 

 

Maybe you need to make a better argument as to how the UK, who we've been repeatedly told has little sway on the world stage, can save us all. :dunno:

This is my point. Whatever we do as a Country in terms of emissions is going to have next to zero impact globally. But we’re going to pay a very heavy price and those at the bottom will suffer most. There’s no reason why this country can’t still play our part and even lead the world in green more sustainable technologies but we don’t have to ruin ourselves in the process. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Innovindil

Innovindil

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Fair enough.

 

My argument is reasonably simple then... the UK, along with everyone else, has to aim for and meet these targets. There's no room for free riders along the established world nations - even ones that contribute so little to the global figure as the UK. This is for two reasons: firstly, even the "small" amount the UK could cont to emit could have a significant effect on global temperatures (unlikely, but possible) and secondly (more importantly) the more one country balks at the idea the more other countries may do so too, with the resultant bad effects.

 

Therefore,  if the UK doesn't do its part, it is highly likely that big trouble will follow.

 

Of course, it may be that the UK does the best it can, other countries don't follow, and the world burns anyway. But if they choose not to take this path, that outcome is much, much more likely.

 

Just as a matter of deductive logic and I dislike the pseudo nihilism being displayed by the argument "well,  what can we do?"

You couldn't make it past 1 sentence without saying the UK.... Oh yeah AND EVERYONE ELSE. 

 

If that's okay thinking, how can it be wrong to think it should be EVERYONE ELSE... And the iddly piddly little UK. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Daggers

Daggers

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Innovindil said:

Labour will table a no confidence motion in Boris Johnson's government later today, seeking to hold the vote on Wednesday, party sources say.

 

Surely too late? Needed to be done at peak drama when there was a chance to win it. 

If a Tory doesn’t vote to support Johnson they’ll be vilified by the party. If they became PM it would further fracture the party. 
 

If a Tory does vote to support him, they will be damned up to and at the general election for any claim of being a new broom making a clean sweep. 
 

It’s win-win for Starmer. 
 

Obviously, the vote will be lost. They know full well that an early GE will result in a load of them losing their seats.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Innovindil

Innovindil

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Daggers said:

If a Tory doesn’t vote to support Johnson they’ll be vilified by the party. If they became PM it would further fracture the party. 
 

If a Tory does vote to support him, they will be damned up to and at the general election for any claim of being a new broom making a clean sweep. 
 

It’s win-win for Starmer. 
 

Obviously, the vote will be lost. They know full well that an early GE will result in a load of them losing their seats.

Apart from they've now got the easy out of saying we're removing Boris and a timetable has already been posted for when the new leader will be in. 

 

Zero damage done. If they'd have called it the day sunak resigned, they wouldn't have that out. 

 

It seems pointless imo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foxdiamond

Foxdiamond

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Fazzer 7 said:

This is my point. Whatever we do as a Country in terms of emissions is going to have next to zero impact globally. But we’re going to pay a very heavy price and those at the bottom will suffer most. There’s no reason why this country can’t still play our part and even lead the world in green more sustainable technologies but we don’t have to ruin ourselves in the process. 

Even if our air quality is better as a result of cleaner fuels and the rest that is good for the health of the nation let alone the bigger picture

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Daggers

Daggers

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Apart from they've now got the easy out of saying we're removing Boris and a timetable has already been posted for when the new leader will be in. 

 

Zero damage done. If they'd have called it the day sunak resigned, they wouldn't have that out. 

 

It seems pointless imo. 

They’d literally be voting confidence in him while having hypocritically moved to remove him. That’s the point. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, Fazzer 7 said:

This is my point. Whatever we do as a Country in terms of emissions is going to have next to zero impact globally. But we’re going to pay a very heavy price and those at the bottom will suffer most. There’s no reason why this country can’t still play our part and even lead the world in green more sustainable technologies but we don’t have to ruin ourselves in the process. 

If there's a way to do this without committing to the pathway agreed upon, I'm all ears.

 

I'm also entirely unconvinced that the current pathway would "ruin us", I think a proper citation is likely needed there.

 

37 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

You couldn't make it past 1 sentence without saying the UK.... Oh yeah AND EVERYONE ELSE. 

 

If that's okay thinking, how can it be wrong to think it should be EVERYONE ELSE... And the iddly piddly little UK. 

 

 

... because people aren't thinking that. They're thinking EVERYONE ELSE... and the UK doesn't have to bother because their effort wouldn't actually mean much. At least, that is the impression being implied.

 

I've said all along this is a global issue that requires a global solution with as many parties buying in however they can. The more that buy in, even "little" nations, the better chance of averting what would come.

 

And with respect to cost, as per above I don't think the cost of this will cripple the UK, or even close (certainly not compared to the cost that climate change will inflict, anyway). However, if we're going down that road...eighty years ago the UK pretty much ran itself and its empire into the ground for the sake of defeating Nazi Germany. A noble goal with a great cost, and everyone would argue it was worth it.

 

Well... the opponent now is a force of nature, and it can - and will - extract a death toll that would make Nazi Germany look very small indeed (especially if the gun and bomb over matters of dwindling resources continue what increased temperatures started).

 

Unless it is addressed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fightforever

Fightforever

Posted
Posted (edited)

I think a bigger issue when it comes to benefit fraud is the amount of people claiming to work part time and then getting full time pay cash in hand. I have seen instances of this personally too many times to bother counting.

 

I guess when people see MPs get involved in stealing public money the feel justified in doing it themselves. 

Edited by Fightforever
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Innovindil

Innovindil

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Daggers said:

They’d literally be voting confidence in him while having hypocritically moved to remove him. That’s the point. 

Which means nothing since he's already on the way out. It will only mean something to the people who want it to mean something. Tory mp's will pass it off as a vote for the next leader. Simple. Having votes you know you are going to lose when you actually had the ability to put pressure on for a general election is idiotic. :dunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BenTheFox

BenTheFox

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Daggers said:

They’d literally be voting confidence in him while having hypocritically moved to remove him. That’s the point. 

I would liken it to a criminal trial where the prosecution have a witness and the defence team have evidence that the witness is not telling the truth. The more the prosecution protect that witness, the more damaging they are to their case. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Innovindil

Innovindil

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

If there's a way to do this without committing to the pathway agreed upon, I'm all ears.

 

I'm also entirely unconvinced that the current pathway would "ruin us", I think a proper citation is likely needed there.

 

... because people aren't thinking that. They're thinking EVERYONE ELSE... and the UK doesn't have to bother because their effort wouldn't actually mean much. At least, that is the impression being implied.

 

I've said all along this is a global issue that requires a global solution with as many parties buying in however they can. The more that buy in, even "little" nations, the better chance of averting what would come.

 

And with respect to cost, as per above I don't think the cost of this will cripple the UK, or even close (certainly not compared to the cost that climate change will inflict, anyway). However, if we're going down that road...eighty years ago the UK pretty much ran itself and its empire into the ground for the sake of defeating Nazi Germany. A noble goal with a great cost, and everyone would argue it was worth it.

 

Well... the opponent now is a force of nature, and it can - and will - extract a death toll that would make Nazi Germany look very small indeed (especially if the gun and bomb over matters of dwindling resources continue what increased temperatures started).

 

Unless it is addressed.

Well it's not is it. You're projecting your own feelings onto people's arguments. He's not saying let everyone else deal with it is he, he's saying what's the point in us going all out trying to fix something we have little effect on, when big players are seemingly all talk no action. Hell, even when elections went right in America and the country was saved from the evil trumpet, over a year and a half of president Biden and even his biggest fans are saying he's not done enough. Never mind the collasal issues with bigger, poorer countries who will most likely need paying off to get on board with it. 

 

It's funny you should use the nazis as your analogy since I'm pretty sure not everyone was on board with stopping them to begin with. Hell, some weren't even on board with stopping them at the end, some of them even ended up better off staying, somewhat ironically, neutral. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Well it's not is it. You're projecting your own feelings onto people's arguments. He's not saying let everyone else deal with it is he, he's saying what's the point in us going all out trying to fix something we have little effect on, when big players are seemingly all talk no action. Hell, even when elections went right in America and the country was saved from the evil trumpet, over a year and a half of president Biden and even his biggest fans are saying he's not done enough. Never mind the collasal issues with bigger, poorer countries who will most likely need paying off to get on board with it. 

 

The inference is obvious.

 

If that is thought an uncharitable way of looking at the viewpoint then so be it, but I've no time for such smokescreens either.

 

The big players dragging their feet (and they are) is not an excuse for the UK to do likewise in a communal race to the bottom. I can't see why that isn't obvious either tbh, given the scientific data that we have and what it implies about the future.

 

5 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

It's funny you should use the nazis as your analogy since I'm pretty sure not everyone was on board with stopping them to begin with. Hell, some weren't even on board with stopping them at the end, some of them even ended up better off staying, somewhat ironically, neutral. 

Fair point, the analogy doesn't line up in all regards. However it is an example of the UK engaging in a great material cost for the sake of a greater good.

 

And neutrality won't help those "neutral" powers if that's what they choose this time. This opposition doesn't discriminate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fazzer 7

Fazzer 7

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, bovril said:

I see Badenoch is ranting about Ben and Jerrys, twitter, and toilets. Can see why people like her - refreshingly new solutions to the big problems of our time. 

Ranting. I thought she was remarkably composed, not to mention impressive.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bovril

bovril

Posted
Posted
Just now, Fazzer 7 said:

Ranting. I thought she was remarkably composed, not to mention impressive.

Fair enough, I exaggerated. I admit she speaks very eloquently about stuff of little importance. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dunge

Dunge

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, bovril said:

I see Badenoch is ranting about Ben and Jerrys, twitter, and toilets. Can see why people like her - refreshingly new solutions to the big problems of our time. 

Ah, the Big Three.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...