The I cant believe it’s not politics thread.

[urban.spaceman]

1 hour ago, Fazzer 7 said:

Conservatives clawing their way back in latest polling. 

Bound to get a bit of a boost now that they've got rid of (as Bill Bailey put it when I saw him) that toxic hybrid of Joffrey and Shrek.

 

Once people realise how unrelentingly awful Truss is as a politician, and the utterly disgusting human beings she's put in important posts, their standings will start to plummet even further.

[urban.spaceman]

 

 

[Fazzer 7]

1 hour ago, urban.spaceman said:

Bound to get a bit of a boost now that they've got rid of (as Bill Bailey put it when I saw him) that toxic hybrid of Joffrey and Shrek.

 

Once people realise how unrelentingly awful Truss is as a politician, and the utterly disgusting human beings she's put in important posts, their standings will start to plummet even further.

I think you’ll be in for a shock tomorrow when huge package of help for everyone is announced. But no doubt you’ll have something to gripe about. 

[Lionator]

1 minute ago, Fazzer 7 said:

I think you’ll be in for a shock tomorrow when huge package of help for everyone is announced. But no doubt you’ll have something to gripe about. 

I’ll gripe that we’ll be footing the bill rather than the CEO’s of the big oil and energy companies. Taxing the richest corporations and individuals more is such an easy thing to do yet it’s you and me who’ll be paying for it for years to come out of our measly pay packets. 

[Zear0]

49 minutes ago, Fazzer 7 said:

I think you’ll be in for a shock tomorrow when huge package of help for everyone is announced. But no doubt you’ll have something to gripe about. 

Presume you won't if it's a hideously "socialist" measure of borrowing hundreds of billions to hand out to people? 

 

*Edit*.  Just to add, imagine the front page of the right-wing rags if Corbyn borrowed £100bn+ to pay people's utilities.  I support it, but just food for thought.

Edited 7 September 2022 by Zear0

[Daggers]

3 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

 

When folks waffle on about MSM, here’s an example of how much briefing goes on 

Unfortunately, that clear blue water is now full of sewage.

[urban.spaceman]

44 minutes ago, Fazzer 7 said:

I think you’ll be in for a shock tomorrow when huge package of help for everyone is announced. But no doubt you’ll have something to gripe about. 

The only way she can shock me is by providing a policy that will actually help people and properly tax the profiteering extremists who are actually causing the problem. 

 

And you can be damn sure I'll gripe about it anyway 

[Sampson]

3 hours ago, Fazzer 7 said:

Conservatives clawing their way back in latest polling. 

Where did you see that one? The latest I could see on Britain Elects has Labour with a 12 point lead and enough seats to form a majority and also has Blue Wall seats turning Red

 

 

Edited 7 September 2022 by Sampson

[urban.spaceman]

 

 

[urban.spaceman]

^ That's a 2019 manifesto pledge she's breaking BTW

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, urban.spaceman said:

^ That's a 2019 manifesto pledge she's breaking BTW

Gosh! Something significant must have happened to the energy supply in the meantime!

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

Gosh! Something significant must have happened to the energy supply in the meantime!

....the global average temperature has been found to increase even faster than we expected and the consequences thereof are manifesting themselves even sooner?

 

This is another example of a person or people in strife, panicking, looking for an easy solution and making a mistake that will hurt them and everyone else further down the line.

[urban.spaceman]

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

Gosh! Something significant must have happened to the energy supply in the meantime!

Yeah, they also broke this pledge:

 

 

It was more of a "she doesn't have a mandate" post anyway.

[leicsmac]

Continual or new reliance on oil, coal and gas for energy generation - including fracking - is a mistake, for a vast array of reasons.

 

That's not really a matter that requires much discussion.

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62822941

 

On the above topic, it seems to be needless and pandering to the short-term self-interested part of their base anyway. And I can't quite believe I agree with JRM on anything, but "raising living standards through efficient use of technology" rather than regression and neo-Luddism is exactly right.

[Jon the Hat]

51 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Continual or new reliance on oil, coal and gas for energy generation - including fracking - is a mistake, for a vast array of reasons.

 

That's not really a matter that requires much discussion.

This is more switching supply from unstable and somewhat crazy regimes to domestic supply, which is imo a good thing.  Similar issue in AU, where supporting the mining of high grade thermal and metallurgical coal is a better short term option that switching it off and seeing China burn its low grade coal which produces more CO2.  It is not as simple as switching it off.

[leicsmac]

11 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

This is more switching supply from unstable and somewhat crazy regimes to domestic supply, which is imo a good thing.  Similar issue in AU, where supporting the mining of high grade thermal and metallurgical coal is a better short term option that switching it off and seeing China burn its low grade coal which produces more CO2.  It is not as simple as switching it off.

Transitioning to independent energy supply is good.

 

Doing it using carbon emitting sources is not. Regardless of what other places may or may not be doing.

 

That's reasonably simple.

[Jon the Hat]

18 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Transitioning to independent energy supply is good.

 

Doing it using carbon emitting sources is not. Regardless of what other places may or may not be doing.

 

That's reasonably simple.

I agree in the long term (which at the moment feels like 10-20 years at most), but in the short term stupid decisions over the past decades have put us in a tight spot which renewables will not be able to meet.  Also the increased demand for minerals & metals to supply the transition requires a lot of power in the short term - trying to do everything at once risks slowing transition.

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

I agree in the long term (which at the moment feels like 10-20 years at most), but in the short term stupid decisions over the past decades have put us in a tight spot which renewables will not be able to meet.  Also the increased demand for minerals & metals to supply the transition requires a lot of power in the short term - trying to do everything at once risks slowing transition.

If this is true, then I think we may well be screwed no matter which pathway is taken.

 

I sincerely hope that it is not, but I can't actually offer much evidence to the contrary.

 

We need to work on more renewable output and Gen III and IV fission power now, and pretty much fold our hands and pray we're not too late to avoid the very worst of the consequences ahead. And unless the idea of vastly reduced circumstances in the future appeals, most everyone else has to follow suit.

[Fazzer 7]

9 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

The only way she can shock me is by providing a policy that will actually help people and properly tax the profiteering extremists who are actually causing the problem. 

 

And you can be damn sure I'll gripe about it anyway 

Well yes that’s a given 🙄 The oil and gas companies pay corporation tax at 40% twice that of small companies. They’re taxed on profits already and there is an existing windfall tax in place. We need to be self sufficient in gas production not taxed to extinction. 

[Fazzer 7]

8 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

^ That's a 2019 manifesto pledge she's breaking BTW

Needs must. 

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Fazzer 7 said:

Well yes that’s a given 🙄 The oil and gas companies pay corporation tax at 40% twice that of small companies. They’re taxed on profits already and there is an existing windfall tax in place. We need to be self sufficient in gas production not taxed to extinction. 

.... as opposed to the other kind of extinction?

 

(Not that that will happen, the most dire predictions are for something approximating Mad Max, not extinction per se, but the point stands.)

 

3 minutes ago, Fazzer 7 said:

Needs must. 

See above.

[Zear0]

16 minutes ago, Fazzer 7 said:

Well yes that’s a given 🙄 The oil and gas companies pay corporation tax at 40% twice that of small companies. They’re taxed on profits already and there is an existing windfall tax in place. We need to be self sufficient in gas production not taxed to extinction. 

Just as a reminder "BP and Shell both received more money back from the UK government than they paid every year from 2015 to 2020 (except 2017, when Shell paid more than it received)."

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60295177

 

[StanSP]

 

 

[Facecloth]

26 minutes ago, StanSP said:

 

 

That seems to be a tactic the Tories have used in the last few years, just pretend they didn't hear the question or the video link was playing up. Usually the have enough about them to say they didn't hear the question, obviously not this guy. You could tell he'd heard it though from the look on his face.