Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Just over a week till Truss moves into Number 10 – politicalbetting.com

1235»

Comments

  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 5,752
    edited August 2022
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    ClippP said:

    ClippP said:

    HYUFD said:

    ClippP said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The key for Truss may well be the last RedfieldWilton poll where she was 1% behind Starmer as preferred PM.
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1562845017625939970?s=20&t=CoRLHUTYDh0nwHJ7jfj6Ig

    She needs to then translate that into voteshare in No 10 and sustain it. If she did then even if she still lost the Tory majority she could still win most seats

    She needs the conservative party to get behind her 100% once elected otherwise the party faces extinction in 2024

    Will you come on bord and accept Johnson is over and the party needs to move on
    Well I will come 100% behind her if she is elected leader despite voting for Sunak as I have every other Tory leader since I joined the party in 1998. However if she is trailing well behind in the polls this time next year whether the party will do so is another matter.

    As for extinction the party is still far better placed than in Spring 2019 when it not only trailed Labour but had been overtaken by the Brexit Party as the main party of the right too
    Although not impossible (look what happened to the Liberals) I tend to agree that under FPTP it is extremely unlikely that the Tories will face extinction. At worse they will go into opposition as they did before and come back stronger. As before they may go through a few leaders before reinventing themselves.
    True but then of course the main reason the Liberals were overtaken was the fact that all working class male voters over 21 gained the vote by 1918, joined by all working class women by 1928 and those working class voters mostly voted Labour so Labour overtook the Liberals as the Tories main opponents. Whereas in the 19th century the electorate were mostly middle class and voted Tory or Liberal
    I've not studied any of this. What you say makes senses, but is it as simple as that?
    In large part. It was the widening of the franchise and the growth of trade unions as the economy industrialised and moved to the cities that was pivotal to the growth of Labour and the relative decline of the Liberals.

    If the Tories however were overtaken as the main party off the right it would mainly be on ideological grounds, hence Farage's Brexit Party briefly overtook May's Tories in the polls in Spring 2019 after she failed to deliver Brexit
    I wish it was only 'relative decline'. I fully accept I am in a minority as a Liberal. Even when we are doing well it is important to note our core vote is still very low indeed (4 - 5%) and much of the rest is due to protest against Tory/Labour.
    Indeed although the LD core vote would likely be a bit higher under PR. The LD core vote is economically and socially liberal and anti Brexit now. Davey is more likely to pick up Remain voting Tories at the next general election who dislike Truss than any votes from Labour in my view. Labour voters who liked Corbyn but dislike Starmer are more likely to go Green than LD
    Unduly optimistic, young HY - from a Tory point of view, of course. How many seats do you think the Green Party will win next time? And which ones? They do well only when the Liberal Democrats make way for them - as in the case of Swinson's anti-Brexit strategy in 2019, for example.

    If it is the case that anti-Tory voters (which even now is most of the country) are spontaneously coalescing behind the best-placed challenger, why do you think people would vote for the losing Green Party candidate instead of Labour? Would they really prefer to continue with the incompetent, crooked Conservatives?
    In marginal seats maybe not. In Labour safe seats in inner cities and university towns plenty of Corbyn supporters will cast a protest vote for the Greens next time rather than Starmer Labour
    If they are Labour safe seats, not much hope for your Tories there!
    We said that about Sedgefield once.
    At the last election in 2019, the Green Party vote there was down to 2.3%. Young HY was trying to make the point that Labour voters would be stampeding to the Green Party, thus implicitly allowing the Tories to win. I don't see much sign of that.
    The Greens are polling about 5 to 7% in most polls now compared to the 3% they got at the 2019 general election. Even if most of that gain will be in Labour safe seats now Starmer has replaced Corbyn as Labour leader


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
    I take rather more notice of OGH's pearls of wisdom on this matter than yours. Might be worth you reading this thread.

    https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/10/22/how-those-saying-green-6-months-before-an-election-actually-voted/
    Though as @MikeSmithson has regularly noted the Labour Party is no longer led by Jeremy Corbyn. That plays into their advantage for a lot of groups like potential swing Tory or Lib Dem voters, but the one group that it might harm them with is those indicating Green as their vote - there's a lot of overlap rather than disgust between those who say Green and those who say Corbyn.

    Looking back at the 2015 Parliament most polls at this stage of that Parliament gave the Greens 2-3%, they actually scored 3.8% at the General Election. So there was a swing from Labour to the Greens from the midterm polls in that Parliament, not the other way around.
    The circumstances are the same. A significant part of the current Green polling is made up of those who might be inclined to vote Labour but who dislike the current Labour leader. That was also the case prior to the 2017 and 2019 general elections. The leaders are different but the motivation the same. So the outcome should be the same too.

    What is different between now and then is that the opportunity for the Conservatives to reclaim votes from UKIP or the Brexit Party is largely gone.
    Not really, most Green voters tend to be left of Labour. Hence their numbers have grown since Corbyn left the Labour leadership and was replaced by the more centrist Starmer and they are polling about double where they were at this stage before the 2019 and 2017 elections.

    RefUK is polling about the same as in 2019. However do not forget UKIP too increased its vote in 2010 and significantly in 2015 when it got over 10% when the centrist Cameron was Conservative leader
    The Green vote may well go up a bit at the next GE, but if it does it will make precisely no difference.

    They will hold Brighton Pavilion comfortably, but still have just one MP. They won't significantly damage Labour in any marginals, because the desire to get the Tories out is too great. They may reduce the Labour majority in a few safe Labour, urban seats as pro-Corbyn Greens choose, without risk, not to vote Labour; that's about it.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 2,356

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    ClippP said:

    ClippP said:

    HYUFD said:

    ClippP said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The key for Truss may well be the last RedfieldWilton poll where she was 1% behind Starmer as preferred PM.
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1562845017625939970?s=20&t=CoRLHUTYDh0nwHJ7jfj6Ig

    She needs to then translate that into voteshare in No 10 and sustain it. If she did then even if she still lost the Tory majority she could still win most seats

    She needs the conservative party to get behind her 100% once elected otherwise the party faces extinction in 2024

    Will you come on bord and accept Johnson is over and the party needs to move on
    Well I will come 100% behind her if she is elected leader despite voting for Sunak as I have every other Tory leader since I joined the party in 1998. However if she is trailing well behind in the polls this time next year whether the party will do so is another matter.

    As for extinction the party is still far better placed than in Spring 2019 when it not only trailed Labour but had been overtaken by the Brexit Party as the main party of the right too
    Although not impossible (look what happened to the Liberals) I tend to agree that under FPTP it is extremely unlikely that the Tories will face extinction. At worse they will go into opposition as they did before and come back stronger. As before they may go through a few leaders before reinventing themselves.
    True but then of course the main reason the Liberals were overtaken was the fact that all working class male voters over 21 gained the vote by 1918, joined by all working class women by 1928 and those working class voters mostly voted Labour so Labour overtook the Liberals as the Tories main opponents. Whereas in the 19th century the electorate were mostly middle class and voted Tory or Liberal
    I've not studied any of this. What you say makes senses, but is it as simple as that?
    In large part. It was the widening of the franchise and the growth of trade unions as the economy industrialised and moved to the cities that was pivotal to the growth of Labour and the relative decline of the Liberals.

    If the Tories however were overtaken as the main party off the right it would mainly be on ideological grounds, hence Farage's Brexit Party briefly overtook May's Tories in the polls in Spring 2019 after she failed to deliver Brexit
    I wish it was only 'relative decline'. I fully accept I am in a minority as a Liberal. Even when we are doing well it is important to note our core vote is still very low indeed (4 - 5%) and much of the rest is due to protest against Tory/Labour.
    Indeed although the LD core vote would likely be a bit higher under PR. The LD core vote is economically and socially liberal and anti Brexit now. Davey is more likely to pick up Remain voting Tories at the next general election who dislike Truss than any votes from Labour in my view. Labour voters who liked Corbyn but dislike Starmer are more likely to go Green than LD
    Unduly optimistic, young HY - from a Tory point of view, of course. How many seats do you think the Green Party will win next time? And which ones? They do well only when the Liberal Democrats make way for them - as in the case of Swinson's anti-Brexit strategy in 2019, for example.

    If it is the case that anti-Tory voters (which even now is most of the country) are spontaneously coalescing behind the best-placed challenger, why do you think people would vote for the losing Green Party candidate instead of Labour? Would they really prefer to continue with the incompetent, crooked Conservatives?
    In marginal seats maybe not. In Labour safe seats in inner cities and university towns plenty of Corbyn supporters will cast a protest vote for the Greens next time rather than Starmer Labour
    If they are Labour safe seats, not much hope for your Tories there!
    We said that about Sedgefield once.
    At the last election in 2019, the Green Party vote there was down to 2.3%. Young HY was trying to make the point that Labour voters would be stampeding to the Green Party, thus implicitly allowing the Tories to win. I don't see much sign of that.
    The Greens are polling about 5 to 7% in most polls now compared to the 3% they got at the 2019 general election. Even if most of that gain will be in Labour safe seats now Starmer has replaced Corbyn as Labour leader


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
    I take rather more notice of OGH's pearls of wisdom on this matter than yours. Might be worth you reading this thread.

    https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/10/22/how-those-saying-green-6-months-before-an-election-actually-voted/
    Though as @MikeSmithson has regularly noted the Labour Party is no longer led by Jeremy Corbyn. That plays into their advantage for a lot of groups like potential swing Tory or Lib Dem voters, but the one group that it might harm them with is those indicating Green as their vote - there's a lot of overlap rather than disgust between those who say Green and those who say Corbyn.

    Looking back at the 2015 Parliament most polls at this stage of that Parliament gave the Greens 2-3%, they actually scored 3.8% at the General Election. So there was a swing from Labour to the Greens from the midterm polls in that Parliament, not the other way around.
    The circumstances are the same. A significant part of the current Green polling is made up of those who might be inclined to vote Labour but who dislike the current Labour leader. That was also the case prior to the 2017 and 2019 general elections. The leaders are different but the motivation the same. So the outcome should be the same too.

    What is different between now and then is that the opportunity for the Conservatives to reclaim votes from UKIP or the Brexit Party is largely gone.
    Not really, most Green voters tend to be left of Labour. Hence their numbers have grown since Corbyn left the Labour leadership and was replaced by the more centrist Starmer and they are polling about double where they were at this stage before the 2019 and 2017 elections.

    RefUK is polling about the same as in 2019. However do not forget UKIP too increased its vote in 2010 and significantly in 2015 when it got over 10% when the centrist Cameron was Conservative leader
    The Green vote may well go up a bit at the next GE, but if it does it will make precisely no difference.

    They will hold Brighton Pavilion comfortably, but still have just one MP. They won't significantly damage Labour in any marginals, because the desire to get the Tories out is too great. They may reduce the Labour majority in a few safe Labour, urban seats as pro-Corbyn Greens choose, without risk, not to vote Labour; that's about it.
    A significant number of voters are centrist, and will vote for the more centrist party out of the Conservatives and Labour. Normally that’s the Conservative Party. In 1997 it was the Labour Party. Currently, it’s the Labour Party. The Lib Dems tend to do well when neither of the two major parties are seen as centrist.
  • HYUFD said:

    ClippP said:

    ClippP said:

    HYUFD said:

    ClippP said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The key for Truss may well be the last RedfieldWilton poll where she was 1% behind Starmer as preferred PM.
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1562845017625939970?s=20&t=CoRLHUTYDh0nwHJ7jfj6Ig

    She needs to then translate that into voteshare in No 10 and sustain it. If she did then even if she still lost the Tory majority she could still win most seats

    She needs the conservative party to get behind her 100% once elected otherwise the party faces extinction in 2024

    Will you come on bord and accept Johnson is over and the party needs to move on
    Well I will come 100% behind her if she is elected leader despite voting for Sunak as I have every other Tory leader since I joined the party in 1998. However if she is trailing well behind in the polls this time next year whether the party will do so is another matter.

    As for extinction the party is still far better placed than in Spring 2019 when it not only trailed Labour but had been overtaken by the Brexit Party as the main party of the right too
    Although not impossible (look what happened to the Liberals) I tend to agree that under FPTP it is extremely unlikely that the Tories will face extinction. At worse they will go into opposition as they did before and come back stronger. As before they may go through a few leaders before reinventing themselves.
    True but then of course the main reason the Liberals were overtaken was the fact that all working class male voters over 21 gained the vote by 1918, joined by all working class women by 1928 and those working class voters mostly voted Labour so Labour overtook the Liberals as the Tories main opponents. Whereas in the 19th century the electorate were mostly middle class and voted Tory or Liberal
    I've not studied any of this. What you say makes senses, but is it as simple as that?
    In large part. It was the widening of the franchise and the growth of trade unions as the economy industrialised and moved to the cities that was pivotal to the growth of Labour and the relative decline of the Liberals.

    If the Tories however were overtaken as the main party off the right it would mainly be on ideological grounds, hence Farage's Brexit Party briefly overtook May's Tories in the polls in Spring 2019 after she failed to deliver Brexit
    I wish it was only 'relative decline'. I fully accept I am in a minority as a Liberal. Even when we are doing well it is important to note our core vote is still very low indeed (4 - 5%) and much of the rest is due to protest against Tory/Labour.
    Indeed although the LD core vote would likely be a bit higher under PR. The LD core vote is economically and socially liberal and anti Brexit now. Davey is more likely to pick up Remain voting Tories at the next general election who dislike Truss than any votes from Labour in my view. Labour voters who liked Corbyn but dislike Starmer are more likely to go Green than LD
    Unduly optimistic, young HY - from a Tory point of view, of course. How many seats do you think the Green Party will win next time? And which ones? They do well only when the Liberal Democrats make way for them - as in the case of Swinson's anti-Brexit strategy in 2019, for example.

    If it is the case that anti-Tory voters (which even now is most of the country) are spontaneously coalescing behind the best-placed challenger, why do you think people would vote for the losing Green Party candidate instead of Labour? Would they really prefer to continue with the incompetent, crooked Conservatives?
    In marginal seats maybe not. In Labour safe seats in inner cities and university towns plenty of Corbyn supporters will cast a protest vote for the Greens next time rather than Starmer Labour
    If they are Labour safe seats, not much hope for your Tories there!
    We said that about Sedgefield once.
    At the last election in 2019, the Green Party vote there was down to 2.3%. Young HY was trying to make the point that Labour voters would be stampeding to the Green Party, thus implicitly allowing the Tories to win. I don't see much sign of that.
    The Greens are polling about 5 to 7% in most polls now compared to the 3% they got at the 2019 general election. Even if most of that gain will be in Labour safe seats now Starmer has replaced Corbyn as Labour leader


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
    I take rather more notice of OGH's pearls of wisdom on this matter than yours. Might be worth you reading this thread.

    https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/10/22/how-those-saying-green-6-months-before-an-election-actually-voted/
    Though as @MikeSmithson has regularly noted the Labour Party is no longer led by Jeremy Corbyn. That plays into their advantage for a lot of groups like potential swing Tory or Lib Dem voters, but the one group that it might harm them with is those indicating Green as their vote - there's a lot of overlap rather than disgust between those who say Green and those who say Corbyn.

    Looking back at the 2015 Parliament most polls at this stage of that Parliament gave the Greens 2-3%, they actually scored 3.8% at the General Election. So there was a swing from Labour to the Greens from the midterm polls in that Parliament, not the other way around.
    The circumstances are the same. A significant part of the current Green polling is made up of those who might be inclined to vote Labour but who dislike the current Labour leader. That was also the case prior to the 2017 and 2019 general elections. The leaders are different but the motivation the same. So the outcome should be the same too.

    What is different between now and then is that the opportunity for the Conservatives to reclaim votes from UKIP or the Brexit Party is largely gone.
    No, the circumstances are not the same.

    The Greens appeal to voters who find the Labour Party too right wing.

    Under Jeremy Corbyn he was able to absorb that vote, but slipped votes to the Lib Dems and Tories.

    Under Ed Miliband the polling at this stage of the Parliament underestimated the Greens, it didn't overestimate them.

    Is Starmer closer to Corbyn, or to Miliband?
  • FishingFishing Posts: 3,800
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    So the Truss epoch is about to commence. I wonder if there are any Tory politicians, fairly recognizable now, about whom will say in four or five years, 'Oh yes, I remember X. I'd completely forgotten about X. I wonder what X is doing now.' My prediction is Penny Mordaunt.

    Rishi Sunak.
    Not sure about Rishi. After his abject humiliation in the leadership contest he might want to stick around politics and attempt to fashion a 'Wise Old Head' reputation for himself. Just to regain some pride.
    No he will go off to America like David Miliband and Clegg most likely. Truss is unlikely to offer him a senior Cabinet post
    He might surprise me and hang around on the backbenches, do some useful work on a Parliamentary Committee, but like you I expect he'll be in California before you can say, "ex-Chancellor".

    It's one of the things about him that I find instinctively least appealing, the sense that he's not interested in politics as a whole, but only in making it into the top job.

    Edit: But, putting those feelings aside, I'd still be delighted if the 250-1 bets placed by some PBers came in.
    Ideologically David Miliband, Clegg and Sunak are probably closer to each other than their parties. Members of the global technocratic centrist elite, much like Macron too, rather than genuine ideologues
    I would add Starmer in there too, at least since he has abandoned all the promises he made when he was elected Labour leader.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,955

    The Guardian reports a stark race divide in cancer diagnosis times.
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/aug/28/black-asian-people-wait-longer-cancer-diagnosis-england-than-white-people

    Something else for the new Prime Minister to consider.

    Could that be because black and Asian people are more likely to live in crowded cities, where cancer diagnoses times are longer, because services are more stretched?
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,489

    ping said:

    carnforth said:

    carnforth said:

    On Rough gas storage, what is the mechanism by which it saves us money? Wasn’t it run by a private company, which would take the difference between the cheap cost of filling it up, and the high spot prices when it was emptied? Or was just a government program, and the private company was just paid a yearly fee for running it?

    Its not the money, its the security. Gas wells can only operate within certain flow limits. In the winter they cannot flow fast enough to provide the gas we need whilst in the summer they produce more gas than can be used. So having storage means you can keep producing at full rate and the excess gas is stored for times when production cannot match demand.

    However, as mentioned in Energy News only this morning, there are serious doubts in the industry about the feasibility of brining Rough back online. I know I have banged on about this for a while but just throwing money and good wishes at something doesn't overcome certain fundamental issues. Rough is old and both the reservoir and topsides have suffered from wear and tear to the extent that it may not be feasible to bring it back online for any great length of time. I hope this is not he case and there may be some wizards at Centrica who can overcome these problems but I am not hopeful it is going to make much difference.
    Thanks. On security, though, isn’t having a paid-for LNG cargo steaming towards us with a know arrival date also a form of secure storage (unless it sinks)?
    Only if you can get it. There are a limited number of LNG vessels in the world and everyone will be crying out for them. Nor are they necessarily a secure supply in extremis. Certainly not as secure as having your own storage for your own gas.
    I wonder how long it takes to build new LNG vessels?

    A couple of weeks back, when the wholesale/futures prices were lower, someone smart (Javier Blas? Adam Tooze?) said the profit margin on a single cargo shipment from America to Europe was greater than the entire cost of the vessel. With the recent substantial rise in Gas futures stretching to winter 2025, presumably loads more LNG vessels are being built, right now?
    I would only be guessing but I would have thought a couple of years at least. And that needs to have the yard space available. The yards in Singapore and Korea have been pretty full with orders the last few years. As always nothing is necessarily impossible but people do seem to be looking for what should be long term solutions to happen in a few weeks in defiance of practical considerations.
    Articles found using Google from ~2019 suggested about two-and-a-half years to build an LNG carrier, but that there was also something of a boom underway at that time - though presumably the pandemic would have disrupted that.

    What's frustrating is that I have little sense of whether the things that would need to be done to provide a long-term solution were started in February (or even before), or if the last six months have been wasted?

    There's so much discussion about it, but seemingly very little information. Getting through a difficult winter would be easier if we knew it wouldn't be so bad the winter after, and resolved by the winter after that.
    I have heard absolutely nothing on the UK upstream side of things of anything being done to increase production or look at longer term solutions - at least to the hydrocarbon bridge that we need.

    We increased gas production by 26% this year but that was simply pure chance. Three new gas fields have come online since the beginning of the year including one I have been heavily involved with but they have been planned and executed for years and have nothing to do with the current crisis or even planning from the last few years.
    Presumably, (and I don't work in the industry so don't know much) with the price as it is now, there is strong incentive to keep only fields active, even if there is only a trickle of gas still coming out of them. at todays prices it might still be worth operating it, at last years price it should not have been. therefore there should be a bigger net increce than anticipated.

    That sead we should be doing what we can to incres gas production in the UK, and from what I understand that is best achieved on a large scales by getting out of the way of those who what to frack.
  • BigRich said:

    ping said:

    carnforth said:

    carnforth said:

    On Rough gas storage, what is the mechanism by which it saves us money? Wasn’t it run by a private company, which would take the difference between the cheap cost of filling it up, and the high spot prices when it was emptied? Or was just a government program, and the private company was just paid a yearly fee for running it?

    Its not the money, its the security. Gas wells can only operate within certain flow limits. In the winter they cannot flow fast enough to provide the gas we need whilst in the summer they produce more gas than can be used. So having storage means you can keep producing at full rate and the excess gas is stored for times when production cannot match demand.

    However, as mentioned in Energy News only this morning, there are serious doubts in the industry about the feasibility of brining Rough back online. I know I have banged on about this for a while but just throwing money and good wishes at something doesn't overcome certain fundamental issues. Rough is old and both the reservoir and topsides have suffered from wear and tear to the extent that it may not be feasible to bring it back online for any great length of time. I hope this is not he case and there may be some wizards at Centrica who can overcome these problems but I am not hopeful it is going to make much difference.
    Thanks. On security, though, isn’t having a paid-for LNG cargo steaming towards us with a know arrival date also a form of secure storage (unless it sinks)?
    Only if you can get it. There are a limited number of LNG vessels in the world and everyone will be crying out for them. Nor are they necessarily a secure supply in extremis. Certainly not as secure as having your own storage for your own gas.
    I wonder how long it takes to build new LNG vessels?

    A couple of weeks back, when the wholesale/futures prices were lower, someone smart (Javier Blas? Adam Tooze?) said the profit margin on a single cargo shipment from America to Europe was greater than the entire cost of the vessel. With the recent substantial rise in Gas futures stretching to winter 2025, presumably loads more LNG vessels are being built, right now?
    I would only be guessing but I would have thought a couple of years at least. And that needs to have the yard space available. The yards in Singapore and Korea have been pretty full with orders the last few years. As always nothing is necessarily impossible but people do seem to be looking for what should be long term solutions to happen in a few weeks in defiance of practical considerations.
    Articles found using Google from ~2019 suggested about two-and-a-half years to build an LNG carrier, but that there was also something of a boom underway at that time - though presumably the pandemic would have disrupted that.

    What's frustrating is that I have little sense of whether the things that would need to be done to provide a long-term solution were started in February (or even before), or if the last six months have been wasted?

    There's so much discussion about it, but seemingly very little information. Getting through a difficult winter would be easier if we knew it wouldn't be so bad the winter after, and resolved by the winter after that.
    I have heard absolutely nothing on the UK upstream side of things of anything being done to increase production or look at longer term solutions - at least to the hydrocarbon bridge that we need.

    We increased gas production by 26% this year but that was simply pure chance. Three new gas fields have come online since the beginning of the year including one I have been heavily involved with but they have been planned and executed for years and have nothing to do with the current crisis or even planning from the last few years.
    Presumably, (and I don't work in the industry so don't know much) with the price as it is now, there is strong incentive to keep only fields active, even if there is only a trickle of gas still coming out of them. at todays prices it might still be worth operating it, at last years price it should not have been. therefore there should be a bigger net increce than anticipated.

    That sead we should be doing what we can to incres gas production in the UK, and from what I understand that is best achieved on a large scales by getting out of the way of those who what to frack.
    Sadly not. We already had this discussion yesterday evening and fracking really isn't the answer to this problem - at least as it stands. Look to Underground Coal Gasification instead.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,489
    Fishing said:

    Wonder if this new Ukranian offensive marks the beginning of the end, or at least the end of the beginning:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/08/29/ukraine-launches-counter-offensive-retake-kherson-russia/

    I hope so.

    Slava Ukraina.

    Very hard to say at this point, Churchill was ether very perceptive, or lucky with his timing of that speech,

    just watched this video, it could be good day for the Ukrainians, or we might be getting cared away.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxSpIDnIpwU
  • Just saw this was tweeted half an hour ago..


    Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸
    @JackPosobiec
    BREAKING: Images show US Embassy officials evacuating from the roof via helo in Baghdad
    https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1564250359635537920
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433
    rcs1000 said:

    The Guardian reports a stark race divide in cancer diagnosis times.
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/aug/28/black-asian-people-wait-longer-cancer-diagnosis-england-than-white-people

    Something else for the new Prime Minister to consider.

    Could that be because black and Asian people are more likely to live in crowded cities, where cancer diagnoses times are longer, because services are more stretched?
    But how do facts further the Guardian’s narrative of the Tory NHS being racist?

    It’s like the fact that black men are no more likely to be killed by police in the US than white men - if you account for social class and income factors.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 18,992
    edited August 2022

    Just saw this was tweeted half an hour ago..


    Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸
    @JackPosobiec
    BREAKING: Images show US Embassy officials evacuating from the roof via helo in Baghdad
    https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1564250359635537920

    40 minites in and this pro- Trumper is the only source. Are we sure?
  • DynamoDynamo Posts: 651
    edited August 2022

    HYUFD said:

    ClippP said:

    ClippP said:

    HYUFD said:

    ClippP said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The key for Truss may well be the last RedfieldWilton poll where she was 1% behind Starmer as preferred PM.
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1562845017625939970?s=20&t=CoRLHUTYDh0nwHJ7jfj6Ig

    She needs to then translate that into voteshare in No 10 and sustain it. If she did then even if she still lost the Tory majority she could still win most seats

    She needs the conservative party to get behind her 100% once elected otherwise the party faces extinction in 2024

    Will you come on bord and accept Johnson is over and the party needs to move on
    Well I will come 100% behind her if she is elected leader despite voting for Sunak as I have every other Tory leader since I joined the party in 1998. However if she is trailing well behind in the polls this time next year whether the party will do so is another matter.

    As for extinction the party is still far better placed than in Spring 2019 when it not only trailed Labour but had been overtaken by the Brexit Party as the main party of the right too
    Although not impossible (look what happened to the Liberals) I tend to agree that under FPTP it is extremely unlikely that the Tories will face extinction. At worse they will go into opposition as they did before and come back stronger. As before they may go through a few leaders before reinventing themselves.
    True but then of course the main reason the Liberals were overtaken was the fact that all working class male voters over 21 gained the vote by 1918, joined by all working class women by 1928 and those working class voters mostly voted Labour so Labour overtook the Liberals as the Tories main opponents. Whereas in the 19th century the electorate were mostly middle class and voted Tory or Liberal
    I've not studied any of this. What you say makes senses, but is it as simple as that?
    In large part. It was the widening of the franchise and the growth of trade unions as the economy industrialised and moved to the cities that was pivotal to the growth of Labour and the relative decline of the Liberals.

    If the Tories however were overtaken as the main party off the right it would mainly be on ideological grounds, hence Farage's Brexit Party briefly overtook May's Tories in the polls in Spring 2019 after she failed to deliver Brexit
    I wish it was only 'relative decline'. I fully accept I am in a minority as a Liberal. Even when we are doing well it is important to note our core vote is still very low indeed (4 - 5%) and much of the rest is due to protest against Tory/Labour.
    Indeed although the LD core vote would likely be a bit higher under PR. The LD core vote is economically and socially liberal and anti Brexit now. Davey is more likely to pick up Remain voting Tories at the next general election who dislike Truss than any votes from Labour in my view. Labour voters who liked Corbyn but dislike Starmer are more likely to go Green than LD
    Unduly optimistic, young HY - from a Tory point of view, of course. How many seats do you think the Green Party will win next time? And which ones? They do well only when the Liberal Democrats make way for them - as in the case of Swinson's anti-Brexit strategy in 2019, for example.

    If it is the case that anti-Tory voters (which even now is most of the country) are spontaneously coalescing behind the best-placed challenger, why do you think people would vote for the losing Green Party candidate instead of Labour? Would they really prefer to continue with the incompetent, crooked Conservatives?
    In marginal seats maybe not. In Labour safe seats in inner cities and university towns plenty of Corbyn supporters will cast a protest vote for the Greens next time rather than Starmer Labour
    If they are Labour safe seats, not much hope for your Tories there!
    We said that about Sedgefield once.
    At the last election in 2019, the Green Party vote there was down to 2.3%. Young HY was trying to make the point that Labour voters would be stampeding to the Green Party, thus implicitly allowing the Tories to win. I don't see much sign of that.
    The Greens are polling about 5 to 7% in most polls now compared to the 3% they got at the 2019 general election. Even if most of that gain will be in Labour safe seats now Starmer has replaced Corbyn as Labour leader


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
    I take rather more notice of OGH's pearls of wisdom on this matter than yours. Might be worth you reading this thread.

    https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/10/22/how-those-saying-green-6-months-before-an-election-actually-voted/
    Though as @MikeSmithson has regularly noted the Labour Party is no longer led by Jeremy Corbyn. That plays into their advantage for a lot of groups like potential swing Tory or Lib Dem voters, but the one group that it might harm them with is those indicating Green as their vote - there's a lot of overlap rather than disgust between those who say Green and those who say Corbyn.

    Looking back at the 2015 Parliament most polls at this stage of that Parliament gave the Greens 2-3%, they actually scored 3.8% at the General Election. So there was a swing from Labour to the Greens from the midterm polls in that Parliament, not the other way around.
    The circumstances are the same. A significant part of the current Green polling is made up of those who might be inclined to vote Labour but who dislike the current Labour leader. That was also the case prior to the 2017 and 2019 general elections. The leaders are different but the motivation the same. So the outcome should be the same too.

    What is different between now and then is that the opportunity for the Conservatives to reclaim votes from UKIP or the Brexit Party is largely gone.
    No, the circumstances are not the same.

    The Greens appeal to voters who find the Labour Party too right wing.

    Under Jeremy Corbyn he was able to absorb that vote, but slipped votes to the Lib Dems and Tories.
    A concrete fact: the 2019 Labour manifesto promised to create 1 million climate emergency jobs.

    That would mean

    • an average of 1600 climate emergency workers in each parliamentary constituency;
    • 7 climate emergency workers for each police officer;
    • 2 climate emergency workers for each nurse.

    Whether that would have cost more or less than the lockdowns that began the following year, I don't know.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 3,800
    edited August 2022
    BigRich said:

    Fishing said:

    Wonder if this new Ukranian offensive marks the beginning of the end, or at least the end of the beginning:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/08/29/ukraine-launches-counter-offensive-retake-kherson-russia/

    I hope so.

    Slava Ukraina.

    Very hard to say at this point, Churchill was ether very perceptive, or lucky with his timing of that speech,

    just watched this video, it could be good day for the Ukrainians, or we might be getting cared away.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxSpIDnIpwU
    I am no Winston Churchill, much though I would like to be.

    I trust to my luck.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 18,992

    Just saw this was tweeted half an hour ago..


    Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸
    @JackPosobiec
    BREAKING: Images show US Embassy officials evacuating from the roof via helo in Baghdad
    https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1564250359635537920

    De Santis is on with it now so it must be true. CNN, BBC, Reuters AP, where are you?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,563
    Fishing said:

    BigRich said:

    Fishing said:

    Wonder if this new Ukranian offensive marks the beginning of the end, or at least the end of the beginning:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/08/29/ukraine-launches-counter-offensive-retake-kherson-russia/

    I hope so.

    Slava Ukraina.

    Very hard to say at this point, Churchill was ether very perceptive, or lucky with his timing of that speech,

    just watched this video, it could be good day for the Ukrainians, or we might be getting cared away.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxSpIDnIpwU
    I am no Winston Churchill, much though I would like to be.

    I trust to my luck.
    And do you march to your front?
  • Some people aren't gardening because we call it gardening. And "gardening" has "cultural baggage"

    And don't you dare call it "proper" "gardening", you exclusive bastards

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/aug/28/james-wong-on-gardening-is-it-time-we-ditched-the-word-gardening-

    Really, does anyone not do gardening because of its name?
  • Just saw this was tweeted half an hour ago..


    Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸
    @JackPosobiec
    BREAKING: Images show US Embassy officials evacuating from the roof via helo in Baghdad
    https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1564250359635537920

    De Santis is on with it now so it must be true. CNN, BBC, Reuters AP, where are you?
    Royal Intel 👑
    @RoyalIntel_
    ·
    54s
    #Breaking #Urgent #Baghdad

    - BREAKING: Iraq declares nationwide curfew starting in 90 minutes

    Heavy gunfire can be heard throughout Baghdad as clashes between Sadr supporters and law enforcement continues.
    https://twitter.com/RoyalIntel_/status/1564267740281569282
  • DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 220
    rcs1000 said:

    The Guardian reports a stark race divide in cancer diagnosis times.
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/aug/28/black-asian-people-wait-longer-cancer-diagnosis-england-than-white-people

    Something else for the new Prime Minister to consider.

    Could that be because black and Asian people are more likely to live in crowded cities, where cancer diagnoses times are longer, because services are more stretched?
    I'm not sure that there is any data to back up that big city providers are more stretched than smaller district general hospitals. In June's provisional data, the best five providers at meeting the 14 day target are Calderdale and Huddersfield (98%), East Kent (97%), Bradford, King's College and Northumbria (all 96%). the bottom five are North Bristol (39%), Lancashire (40%), Whittington (43%), North Midlands (44%) and Lincolnshire (49%). Even the worst performing providers aren't letting patients languish, North Bristol still saw 94% of patients within 28 days.

    I suspect but cannot prove that the major cause of variation is on getting that initial appointment with a GP. I've recently moved from a London GP to one outside and my experience of being able to get an appointment has plummeted from almost always getting an appointment the same day to having a struggle to get someone to answer a phone call.

  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,489

    Just saw this was tweeted half an hour ago..


    Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸
    @JackPosobiec
    BREAKING: Images show US Embassy officials evacuating from the roof via helo in Baghdad
    https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1564250359635537920

    De Santis is on with it now so it must be true. CNN, BBC, Reuters AP, where are you?
    Royal Intel 👑
    @RoyalIntel_
    ·
    54s
    #Breaking #Urgent #Baghdad

    - BREAKING: Iraq declares nationwide curfew starting in 90 minutes

    Heavy gunfire can be heard throughout Baghdad as clashes between Sadr supporters and law enforcement continues.
    https://twitter.com/RoyalIntel_/status/1564267740281569282
    I have not been following who/what is Sadr?
  • BigRich said:

    Just saw this was tweeted half an hour ago..


    Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸
    @JackPosobiec
    BREAKING: Images show US Embassy officials evacuating from the roof via helo in Baghdad
    https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1564250359635537920

    De Santis is on with it now so it must be true. CNN, BBC, Reuters AP, where are you?
    Royal Intel 👑
    @RoyalIntel_
    ·
    54s
    #Breaking #Urgent #Baghdad

    - BREAKING: Iraq declares nationwide curfew starting in 90 minutes

    Heavy gunfire can be heard throughout Baghdad as clashes between Sadr supporters and law enforcement continues.
    https://twitter.com/RoyalIntel_/status/1564267740281569282
    I have not been following who/what is Sadr?
    It's Shi'ite Muslim cleric Moqtada al-Sadr

    https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iraqi-cleric-sadr-announces-full-withdrawal-political-life-twitter-2022-08-29/
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,025

    HYUFD said:

    ClippP said:

    ClippP said:

    HYUFD said:

    ClippP said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The key for Truss may well be the last RedfieldWilton poll where she was 1% behind Starmer as preferred PM.
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1562845017625939970?s=20&t=CoRLHUTYDh0nwHJ7jfj6Ig

    She needs to then translate that into voteshare in No 10 and sustain it. If she did then even if she still lost the Tory majority she could still win most seats

    She needs the conservative party to get behind her 100% once elected otherwise the party faces extinction in 2024

    Will you come on bord and accept Johnson is over and the party needs to move on
    Well I will come 100% behind her if she is elected leader despite voting for Sunak as I have every other Tory leader since I joined the party in 1998. However if she is trailing well behind in the polls this time next year whether the party will do so is another matter.

    As for extinction the party is still far better placed than in Spring 2019 when it not only trailed Labour but had been overtaken by the Brexit Party as the main party of the right too
    Although not impossible (look what happened to the Liberals) I tend to agree that under FPTP it is extremely unlikely that the Tories will face extinction. At worse they will go into opposition as they did before and come back stronger. As before they may go through a few leaders before reinventing themselves.
    True but then of course the main reason the Liberals were overtaken was the fact that all working class male voters over 21 gained the vote by 1918, joined by all working class women by 1928 and those working class voters mostly voted Labour so Labour overtook the Liberals as the Tories main opponents. Whereas in the 19th century the electorate were mostly middle class and voted Tory or Liberal
    I've not studied any of this. What you say makes senses, but is it as simple as that?
    In large part. It was the widening of the franchise and the growth of trade unions as the economy industrialised and moved to the cities that was pivotal to the growth of Labour and the relative decline of the Liberals.

    If the Tories however were overtaken as the main party off the right it would mainly be on ideological grounds, hence Farage's Brexit Party briefly overtook May's Tories in the polls in Spring 2019 after she failed to deliver Brexit
    I wish it was only 'relative decline'. I fully accept I am in a minority as a Liberal. Even when we are doing well it is important to note our core vote is still very low indeed (4 - 5%) and much of the rest is due to protest against Tory/Labour.
    Indeed although the LD core vote would likely be a bit higher under PR. The LD core vote is economically and socially liberal and anti Brexit now. Davey is more likely to pick up Remain voting Tories at the next general election who dislike Truss than any votes from Labour in my view. Labour voters who liked Corbyn but dislike Starmer are more likely to go Green than LD
    Unduly optimistic, young HY - from a Tory point of view, of course. How many seats do you think the Green Party will win next time? And which ones? They do well only when the Liberal Democrats make way for them - as in the case of Swinson's anti-Brexit strategy in 2019, for example.

    If it is the case that anti-Tory voters (which even now is most of the country) are spontaneously coalescing behind the best-placed challenger, why do you think people would vote for the losing Green Party candidate instead of Labour? Would they really prefer to continue with the incompetent, crooked Conservatives?
    In marginal seats maybe not. In Labour safe seats in inner cities and university towns plenty of Corbyn supporters will cast a protest vote for the Greens next time rather than Starmer Labour
    If they are Labour safe seats, not much hope for your Tories there!
    We said that about Sedgefield once.
    At the last election in 2019, the Green Party vote there was down to 2.3%. Young HY was trying to make the point that Labour voters would be stampeding to the Green Party, thus implicitly allowing the Tories to win. I don't see much sign of that.
    The Greens are polling about 5 to 7% in most polls now compared to the 3% they got at the 2019 general election. Even if most of that gain will be in Labour safe seats now Starmer has replaced Corbyn as Labour leader


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
    I take rather more notice of OGH's pearls of wisdom on this matter than yours. Might be worth you reading this thread.

    https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/10/22/how-those-saying-green-6-months-before-an-election-actually-voted/
    Though as @MikeSmithson has regularly noted the Labour Party is no longer led by Jeremy Corbyn. That plays into their advantage for a lot of groups like potential swing Tory or Lib Dem voters, but the one group that it might harm them with is those indicating Green as their vote - there's a lot of overlap rather than disgust between those who say Green and those who say Corbyn.

    Looking back at the 2015 Parliament most polls at this stage of that Parliament gave the Greens 2-3%, they actually scored 3.8% at the General Election. So there was a swing from Labour to the Greens from the midterm polls in that Parliament, not the other way around.
    The circumstances are the same. A significant part of the current Green polling is made up of those who might be inclined to vote Labour but who dislike the current Labour leader. That was also the case prior to the 2017 and 2019 general elections. The leaders are different but the motivation the same. So the outcome should be the same too.

    What is different between now and then is that the opportunity for the Conservatives to reclaim votes from UKIP or the Brexit Party is largely gone.
    No, the circumstances are not the same.

    The Greens appeal to voters who find the Labour Party too right wing.

    Under Jeremy Corbyn he was able to absorb that vote, but slipped votes to the Lib Dems and Tories.

    Under Ed Miliband the polling at this stage of the Parliament underestimated the Greens, it didn't overestimate them.

    Is Starmer closer to Corbyn, or to Miliband?
    See my response to HYUFD. It applies to you too.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,563

    Some people aren't gardening because we call it gardening. And "gardening" has "cultural baggage"

    And don't you dare call it "proper" "gardening", you exclusive bastards

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/aug/28/james-wong-on-gardening-is-it-time-we-ditched-the-word-gardening-

    Really, does anyone not do gardening because of its name?

    It’s horticultural Marxism.
    Nah, it's just a lot of flowery platitudes.
  • rcs1000 said:

    The Guardian reports a stark race divide in cancer diagnosis times.
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/aug/28/black-asian-people-wait-longer-cancer-diagnosis-england-than-white-people

    Something else for the new Prime Minister to consider.

    Could that be because black and Asian people are more likely to live in crowded cities, where cancer diagnoses times are longer, because services are more stretched?
    That was my first thought. The (new) Health Secretary should urgently check that, and if so, add capacity where needed. Whether capacity can be added at the drop of a hat probably depends on what precisely is needed and whether it is people or equipment.

    There might be class factors hidden by race, or it could be cultural. Does it matter if you say to your GP on the first visit, "I've got this lump" or "I've got this lump; could it be cancer?". Or might it even be a paradoxical effect of Black and Asian people going to the doctor earlier, when symptoms are less developed?

    The possibilities are endless but the effect is real and, literally, vital, and might even present some low hanging fruit for the incoming Health Secretary and Prime Minister.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,955

    Some people aren't gardening because we call it gardening. And "gardening" has "cultural baggage"

    And don't you dare call it "proper" "gardening", you exclusive bastards

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/aug/28/james-wong-on-gardening-is-it-time-we-ditched-the-word-gardening-

    Really, does anyone not do gardening because of its name?

    You know, I haven't heard the phrase "uphill gardening" in about twenty years.

    I presume that is the root of Mr Wong's concerns.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 32,717
    Can I just say: although he has (had?) fans on here, Peter Hitchens is an utter [email protected] ?
  • Can I just say: although he has (had?) fans on here, Peter Hitchens is an utter [email protected] ?

    I much preferred his brother, who I doubt would be peddling Putin's points like Peter if he were alive today.
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 550


    It’s horticultural Marxism.

    Let a hundred flowers bloom!
  • BigRich said:

    Fishing said:

    Wonder if this new Ukranian offensive marks the beginning of the end, or at least the end of the beginning:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/08/29/ukraine-launches-counter-offensive-retake-kherson-russia/

    I hope so.

    Slava Ukraina.

    Very hard to say at this point, Churchill was ether very perceptive, or lucky with his timing of that speech,

    just watched this video, it could be good day for the Ukrainians, or we might be getting cared away.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxSpIDnIpwU
    Churchill had inside information. He did, of course, know that after El Alamein, "the end of the beginning", the fighting would move from North Africa to Europe, with the next stage would be the invasion of Europe via Sicily and up through Italy, "the soft underbelly of the axis".
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,484
    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶
  • rcs1000 said:

    Some people aren't gardening because we call it gardening. And "gardening" has "cultural baggage"

    And don't you dare call it "proper" "gardening", you exclusive bastards

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/aug/28/james-wong-on-gardening-is-it-time-we-ditched-the-word-gardening-

    Really, does anyone not do gardening because of its name?

    You know, I haven't heard the phrase "uphill gardening" in about twenty years.

    I presume that is the root of Mr Wong's concerns.
    You think he's concerned that nobody calls him an uphill gardener these days? Or he wants to be called an uphill flower daddy?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,103
    Leon said:

    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶

    Negative growth in every quarter for ten years?

    Hmmm...

    It might be a lost decade with zero, negative or very low growth, but it will bump about a bit.
  • MISTYMISTY Posts: 1,594

    Leon said:

    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶

    Negative growth in every quarter for ten years?

    Hmmm...

    It might be a lost decade with zero, negative or very low growth, but it will bump about a bit.
    'So.....er.....let's rejoin!......'

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,103
    MISTY said:

    Leon said:

    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶

    Negative growth in every quarter for ten years?

    Hmmm...

    It might be a lost decade with zero, negative or very low growth, but it will bump about a bit.
    'So.....er.....let's rejoin!......'

    Sounds like they will need us.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 2,782
    edited August 2022
    Leon said:

    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶

    That would mean 40 consecutive quarters of contracting GDP, if we are talking about a "technical recession".

    For reference, 2007-08 was 5 quarters. COVID only 2.

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 31,942

    BigRich said:

    ping said:

    carnforth said:

    carnforth said:

    On Rough gas storage, what is the mechanism by which it saves us money? Wasn’t it run by a private company, which would take the difference between the cheap cost of filling it up, and the high spot prices when it was emptied? Or was just a government program, and the private company was just paid a yearly fee for running it?

    Its not the money, its the security. Gas wells can only operate within certain flow limits. In the winter they cannot flow fast enough to provide the gas we need whilst in the summer they produce more gas than can be used. So having storage means you can keep producing at full rate and the excess gas is stored for times when production cannot match demand.

    However, as mentioned in Energy News only this morning, there are serious doubts in the industry about the feasibility of brining Rough back online. I know I have banged on about this for a while but just throwing money and good wishes at something doesn't overcome certain fundamental issues. Rough is old and both the reservoir and topsides have suffered from wear and tear to the extent that it may not be feasible to bring it back online for any great length of time. I hope this is not he case and there may be some wizards at Centrica who can overcome these problems but I am not hopeful it is going to make much difference.
    Thanks. On security, though, isn’t having a paid-for LNG cargo steaming towards us with a know arrival date also a form of secure storage (unless it sinks)?
    Only if you can get it. There are a limited number of LNG vessels in the world and everyone will be crying out for them. Nor are they necessarily a secure supply in extremis. Certainly not as secure as having your own storage for your own gas.
    I wonder how long it takes to build new LNG vessels?

    A couple of weeks back, when the wholesale/futures prices were lower, someone smart (Javier Blas? Adam Tooze?) said the profit margin on a single cargo shipment from America to Europe was greater than the entire cost of the vessel. With the recent substantial rise in Gas futures stretching to winter 2025, presumably loads more LNG vessels are being built, right now?
    I would only be guessing but I would have thought a couple of years at least. And that needs to have the yard space available. The yards in Singapore and Korea have been pretty full with orders the last few years. As always nothing is necessarily impossible but people do seem to be looking for what should be long term solutions to happen in a few weeks in defiance of practical considerations.
    Articles found using Google from ~2019 suggested about two-and-a-half years to build an LNG carrier, but that there was also something of a boom underway at that time - though presumably the pandemic would have disrupted that.

    What's frustrating is that I have little sense of whether the things that would need to be done to provide a long-term solution were started in February (or even before), or if the last six months have been wasted?

    There's so much discussion about it, but seemingly very little information. Getting through a difficult winter would be easier if we knew it wouldn't be so bad the winter after, and resolved by the winter after that.
    I have heard absolutely nothing on the UK upstream side of things of anything being done to increase production or look at longer term solutions - at least to the hydrocarbon bridge that we need.

    We increased gas production by 26% this year but that was simply pure chance. Three new gas fields have come online since the beginning of the year including one I have been heavily involved with but they have been planned and executed for years and have nothing to do with the current crisis or even planning from the last few years.
    Presumably, (and I don't work in the industry so don't know much) with the price as it is now, there is strong incentive to keep only fields active, even if there is only a trickle of gas still coming out of them. at todays prices it might still be worth operating it, at last years price it should not have been. therefore there should be a bigger net increce than anticipated.

    That sead we should be doing what we can to incres gas production in the UK, and from what I understand that is best achieved on a large scales by getting out of the way of those who what to frack.
    Sadly not. We already had this discussion yesterday evening and fracking really isn't the answer to this problem - at least as it stands. Look to Underground Coal Gasification instead.
    Starting an underground coal fire? Nothing could possibly go wrong….
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 43,306
    Olaf Scholz is calling for an end to national vetoes in the EU.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 55,345
    edited August 2022
    No change

    Redfield & Wilton Strategies

    Labour leads by 9%.

    Westminster Voting Intention (28 August):

    Labour 42% (–)
    Conservative 33% (–)
    Liberal Democrat 13% (+1)
    Green 4% (-1)
    Scottish National Party 3% (-1)
    Reform UK 4% (+2)
    Other 1% (-1)

    Changes +/- 24 August

    Nor much in it between Starmer and Truss

    Keir Starmer (37%, +2) leads Liz Truss (35%, +1) by 2 points on who would be the better Prime Minister at this moment.
  • Olaf Scholz is calling for an end to national vetoes in the EU.

    He is in a whole lot of trouble at home let alone in the EU
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 43,306
    According to a Russian source:

    @yarotrof
    The most prominent collaborator assassinated since the Russian invasion : Aleksey Kovalyov, a Ukrainian lawmaker from Zelensky’s party who switched sides to become deputy head of the Russian administration in Kherson, overseeing grain theft, has been gunned down in his home.


    https://twitter.com/yarotrof/status/1564261285243432960
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,955

    carnforth said:

    carnforth said:

    On Rough gas storage, what is the mechanism by which it saves us money? Wasn’t it run by a private company, which would take the difference between the cheap cost of filling it up, and the high spot prices when it was emptied? Or was just a government program, and the private company was just paid a yearly fee for running it?

    Its not the money, its the security. Gas wells can only operate within certain flow limits. In the winter they cannot flow fast enough to provide the gas we need whilst in the summer they produce more gas than can be used. So having storage means you can keep producing at full rate and the excess gas is stored for times when production cannot match demand.

    However, as mentioned in Energy News only this morning, there are serious doubts in the industry about the feasibility of brining Rough back online. I know I have banged on about this for a while but just throwing money and good wishes at something doesn't overcome certain fundamental issues. Rough is old and both the reservoir and topsides have suffered from wear and tear to the extent that it may not be feasible to bring it back online for any great length of time. I hope this is not he case and there may be some wizards at Centrica who can overcome these problems but I am not hopeful it is going to make much difference.
    Thanks. On security, though, isn’t having a paid-for LNG cargo steaming towards us with a know arrival date also a form of secure storage (unless it sinks)?
    Only if you can get it. There are a limited number of LNG vessels in the world and everyone will be crying out for them. Nor are they necessarily a secure supply in extremis. Certainly not as secure as having your own storage for your own gas.
    I am not in the business of giving financial advice, but I would note that there is a French company called Gaztransport & Technigaz, which produces the membrane containment systems used in LNG vessels. I think the medium term outlook for the size of the world LNG fleet is extremely rosy, and GTT is a near monopoly provider.

    I bought a few shares back in March and have just bought a few more.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,955
    Leon said:

    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶

    I would be happy to offer him good odds on that.
  • Tory leadership: Liz Truss cancels BBC interview with Nick Robinson
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62715983

    1.01 landed.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 18,992
    ...

    Just saw this was tweeted half an hour ago..


    Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸
    @JackPosobiec
    BREAKING: Images show US Embassy officials evacuating from the roof via helo in Baghdad
    https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1564250359635537920

    De Santis is on with it now so it must be true. CNN, BBC, Reuters AP, where are you?
    Royal Intel 👑
    @RoyalIntel_
    ·
    54s
    #Breaking #Urgent #Baghdad

    - BREAKING: Iraq declares nationwide curfew starting in 90 minutes

    Heavy gunfire can be heard throughout Baghdad as clashes between Sadr supporters and law enforcement continues.
    https://twitter.com/RoyalIntel_/status/1564267740281569282
    There was a breach of the Green Zone last week by Sadr. My confusion was the Baghdad airlift seemed only to be going on in the minds of anti- Biden activists.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,103

    Tory leadership: Liz Truss cancels BBC interview with Nick Robinson
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62715983

    1.01 landed.

    Continuity Johnson.

    She'll be hiding in fridges by GE 2025, if she makes it past next summer.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,103
    NPR Politics
    @nprpolitics
    Biden's goal to end hunger by 2030 and his new food conference, explained

    https://twitter.com/nprpolitics/status/1564225363445960704
  • Tory leadership: Liz Truss cancels BBC interview with Nick Robinson
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62715983

    1.01 landed.

    Continuity Johnson.

    She'll be hiding in fridges by GE 2025, if she makes it past next summer.
    To be fair she has a rather lot on at present
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 7,280
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶

    I would be happy to offer him good odds on that.
    To be fair what he probably means is the likelihood of output being lower in 10 years than it is now is 40-50%. Not that output will keep falling for 10 years. Still strikes me as very unlikely though.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,484
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶

    I would be happy to offer him good odds on that.
    Yes, he needs to define what he means

    If he means "ten years when western economies will barely grow, if at all", then I'd say he's quite possibly right. Maybe a bit pessimistic, but it's not outrageously gloomy. Unfortunately

    If he means ten years of relentless back to back quarters of negative growth, then this is vanishingly unlikely, simply because of the way stats work

    My guess is that he means the former. He's a bright bloke. I give him a lot of respect simply because he's an avowed Remainer who nonetheless saw the dangerous immorality of a 2nd vote, and rejected it

    The interview is here

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/aug/29/rory-stewart-politics-privilege-podcast-stardom



    Note his skeptical views on Starmer:


    'The Rest Is Politics recently hosted Starmer. “I was disappointed,” says Stewart. “There’s so much that I admired from a distance about him. I like the idea of him. What disappointed me was that he didn’t seem radical enough. I didn’t get what the big picture was. I got the impression of a likable, thoughtful, moderate guy, but I didn’t feel the radical ambition.” In general, he thinks that politicians, even former politicians, are too guarded to be interesting interviewees.'
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,484
    We really need Xi Jinping to get all Prester John on Putin

    A massive, extended global recession is just what the doctor did not order for China, nor for the man who aspires to lead it for a third term. The one way to guarantee it is for this awful war to continue, or even worsen

    Come on China, whack the Vlad
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 18,992
    edited August 2022

    Tory leadership: Liz Truss cancels BBC interview with Nick Robinson
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62715983

    1.01 landed.

    Continuity Johnson.

    She'll be hiding in fridges by GE 2025, if she makes it past next summer.
    To be fair she has a rather lot on at present
    Prioritising the 5 point plan for Liz next week.
    1. Throw a big party.
    2. Change the wallpaper.
    3. Stay at Chequers
    4. Visit Ukraine
    5. Cut corporation tax, NI and VAT.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 43,306
    Leon said:

    We really need Xi Jinping to get all Prester John on Putin

    A massive, extended global recession is just what the doctor did not order for China, nor for the man who aspires to lead it for a third term. The one way to guarantee it is for this awful war to continue, or even worsen

    Come on China, whack the Vlad

    He could decide that it's time to reverse Russia's 19th century land grab. It might be an easier win than trying to take Taiwan.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 10,172
    edited August 2022

    HYUFD said:

    ClippP said:

    ClippP said:

    HYUFD said:

    ClippP said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The key for Truss may well be the last RedfieldWilton poll where she was 1% behind Starmer as preferred PM.
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1562845017625939970?s=20&t=CoRLHUTYDh0nwHJ7jfj6Ig

    She needs to then translate that into voteshare in No 10 and sustain it. If she did then even if she still lost the Tory majority she could still win most seats

    She needs the conservative party to get behind her 100% once elected otherwise the party faces extinction in 2024

    Will you come on bord and accept Johnson is over and the party needs to move on
    Well I will come 100% behind her if she is elected leader despite voting for Sunak as I have every other Tory leader since I joined the party in 1998. However if she is trailing well behind in the polls this time next year whether the party will do so is another matter.

    As for extinction the party is still far better placed than in Spring 2019 when it not only trailed Labour but had been overtaken by the Brexit Party as the main party of the right too
    Although not impossible (look what happened to the Liberals) I tend to agree that under FPTP it is extremely unlikely that the Tories will face extinction. At worse they will go into opposition as they did before and come back stronger. As before they may go through a few leaders before reinventing themselves.
    True but then of course the main reason the Liberals were overtaken was the fact that all working class male voters over 21 gained the vote by 1918, joined by all working class women by 1928 and those working class voters mostly voted Labour so Labour overtook the Liberals as the Tories main opponents. Whereas in the 19th century the electorate were mostly middle class and voted Tory or Liberal
    I've not studied any of this. What you say makes senses, but is it as simple as that?
    In large part. It was the widening of the franchise and the growth of trade unions as the economy industrialised and moved to the cities that was pivotal to the growth of Labour and the relative decline of the Liberals.

    If the Tories however were overtaken as the main party off the right it would mainly be on ideological grounds, hence Farage's Brexit Party briefly overtook May's Tories in the polls in Spring 2019 after she failed to deliver Brexit
    I wish it was only 'relative decline'. I fully accept I am in a minority as a Liberal. Even when we are doing well it is important to note our core vote is still very low indeed (4 - 5%) and much of the rest is due to protest against Tory/Labour.
    Indeed although the LD core vote would likely be a bit higher under PR. The LD core vote is economically and socially liberal and anti Brexit now. Davey is more likely to pick up Remain voting Tories at the next general election who dislike Truss than any votes from Labour in my view. Labour voters who liked Corbyn but dislike Starmer are more likely to go Green than LD
    Unduly optimistic, young HY - from a Tory point of view, of course. How many seats do you think the Green Party will win next time? And which ones? They do well only when the Liberal Democrats make way for them - as in the case of Swinson's anti-Brexit strategy in 2019, for example.

    If it is the case that anti-Tory voters (which even now is most of the country) are spontaneously coalescing behind the best-placed challenger, why do you think people would vote for the losing Green Party candidate instead of Labour? Would they really prefer to continue with the incompetent, crooked Conservatives?
    In marginal seats maybe not. In Labour safe seats in inner cities and university towns plenty of Corbyn supporters will cast a protest vote for the Greens next time rather than Starmer Labour
    If they are Labour safe seats, not much hope for your Tories there!
    We said that about Sedgefield once.
    At the last election in 2019, the Green Party vote there was down to 2.3%. Young HY was trying to make the point that Labour voters would be stampeding to the Green Party, thus implicitly allowing the Tories to win. I don't see much sign of that.
    The Greens are polling about 5 to 7% in most polls now compared to the 3% they got at the 2019 general election. Even if most of that gain will be in Labour safe seats now Starmer has replaced Corbyn as Labour leader


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
    I take rather more notice of OGH's pearls of wisdom on this matter than yours. Might be worth you reading this thread.

    https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/10/22/how-those-saying-green-6-months-before-an-election-actually-voted/
    Though as @MikeSmithson has regularly noted the Labour Party is no longer led by Jeremy Corbyn. That plays into their advantage for a lot of groups like potential swing Tory or Lib Dem voters, but the one group that it might harm them with is those indicating Green as their vote - there's a lot of overlap rather than disgust between those who say Green and those who say Corbyn.

    Looking back at the 2015 Parliament most polls at this stage of that Parliament gave the Greens 2-3%, they actually scored 3.8% at the General Election. So there was a swing from Labour to the Greens from the midterm polls in that Parliament, not the other way around.
    The circumstances are the same. A significant part of the current Green polling is made up of those who might be inclined to vote Labour but who dislike the current Labour leader. That was also the case prior to the 2017 and 2019 general elections. The leaders are different but the motivation the same. So the outcome should be the same too.

    What is different between now and then is that the opportunity for the Conservatives to reclaim votes from UKIP or the Brexit Party is largely gone.
    No, the circumstances are not the same.

    The Greens appeal to voters who find the Labour Party too right wing.

    Under Jeremy Corbyn he was able to absorb that vote, but slipped votes to the Lib Dems and Tories.

    Under Ed Miliband the polling at this stage of the Parliament underestimated the Greens, it didn't overestimate them.

    Is Starmer closer to Corbyn, or to Miliband?
    See my response to HYUFD. It applies to you too.
    You mean the comment about never admitting to be anything less than 100% right in things? No it doesn't apply to me. I regularly put my hands up and acknowledge when I'm wrong. Far better to do that than die on a hill when you're wrong.

    So are you willing to do the same? I made a rather simple factual remark, at this stage or the last Parliament where Labour weren't run by Corbyn, the Greens were polling LESS than what they ultimately scored, not more than it.

    Suggesting a "rule" that the midterm Green voters always return to Labour from a sample of one (when led by Corbyn) is really not a detailed analysis. Especially when the exact opposite happened last time Labour weren't led by Corbyn.

    It's certainly possible that Starmer could appeal to Green voters, as Corbyn did. Or it's certainly possible that Starmer could lose left wing voters to the Greens, as Ed Miliband did. Either is possible. I for one am not hubristic enough to say either is 100% going to happen.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    Here's where the New York Times stands vis-a-vis the big liar:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/26/opinion/trump-documents-jan-6-prosecute.html
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,393
    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶

    I would be happy to offer him good odds on that.
    Yes, he needs to define what he means

    If he means "ten years when western economies will barely grow, if at all", then I'd say he's quite possibly right. Maybe a bit pessimistic, but it's not outrageously gloomy. Unfortunately

    If he means ten years of relentless back to back quarters of negative growth, then this is vanishingly unlikely, simply because of the way stats work

    My guess is that he means the former. He's a bright bloke. I give him a lot of respect simply because he's an avowed Remainer who nonetheless saw the dangerous immorality of a 2nd vote, and rejected it

    The interview is here

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/aug/29/rory-stewart-politics-privilege-podcast-stardom



    Note his skeptical views on Starmer:


    'The Rest Is Politics recently hosted Starmer. “I was disappointed,” says Stewart. “There’s so much that I admired from a distance about him. I like the idea of him. What disappointed me was that he didn’t seem radical enough. I didn’t get what the big picture was. I got the impression of a likable, thoughtful, moderate guy, but I didn’t feel the radical ambition.” In general, he thinks that politicians, even former politicians, are too guarded to be interesting interviewees.'
    Italy has hardly had any economic growth for about 15 years. But when you visit the country life seems to be carrying on as normal.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 5,752

    Tory leadership: Liz Truss cancels BBC interview with Nick Robinson
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62715983

    1.01 landed.

    Continuity Johnson.

    She'll be hiding in fridges by GE 2025, if she makes it past next summer.
    To be fair she has a rather lot on at present
    To be fair she agreed to do the interview and has now decided not to. Not a promising start for Truss if you're looking for a new PM who keeps their word.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,955
    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶

    I would be happy to offer him good odds on that.
    Yes, he needs to define what he means

    If he means "ten years when western economies will barely grow, if at all", then I'd say he's quite possibly right. Maybe a bit pessimistic, but it's not outrageously gloomy. Unfortunately

    If he means ten years of relentless back to back quarters of negative growth, then this is vanishingly unlikely, simply because of the way stats work

    My guess is that he means the former. He's a bright bloke. I give him a lot of respect simply because he's an avowed Remainer who nonetheless saw the dangerous immorality of a 2nd vote, and rejected it

    The interview is here

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/aug/29/rory-stewart-politics-privilege-podcast-stardom



    Note his skeptical views on Starmer:


    'The Rest Is Politics recently hosted Starmer. “I was disappointed,” says Stewart. “There’s so much that I admired from a distance about him. I like the idea of him. What disappointed me was that he didn’t seem radical enough. I didn’t get what the big picture was. I got the impression of a likable, thoughtful, moderate guy, but I didn’t feel the radical ambition.” In general, he thinks that politicians, even former politicians, are too guarded to be interesting interviewees.'
    Italy has hardly had any economic growth for about 15 years. But when you visit the country life seems to be carrying on as normal.
    Ditto Japan.
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 2,066

    Tory leadership: Liz Truss cancels BBC interview with Nick Robinson
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62715983

    1.01 landed.

    Continuity Johnson.

    She'll be hiding in fridges by GE 2025, if she makes it past next summer.
    To be fair she has a rather lot on at present
    Prioritising the 5 point plan for Liz next week.
    1. Throw a big party.
    2. Change the wallpaper.
    3. Stay at Chequers
    4. Visit Ukraine
    5. Cut corporation tax, NI and VAT.
    In at number 213 on the chart: sort out the CPI/energy 👿
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,489

    According to a Russian source:

    @yarotrof
    The most prominent collaborator assassinated since the Russian invasion : Aleksey Kovalyov, a Ukrainian lawmaker from Zelensky’s party who switched sides to become deputy head of the Russian administration in Kherson, overseeing grain theft, has been gunned down in his home.


    https://twitter.com/yarotrof/status/1564261285243432960

    Not sad to here that, but I don't know exactly how legal theses assassinations are.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,484
    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶

    I would be happy to offer him good odds on that.
    Yes, he needs to define what he means

    If he means "ten years when western economies will barely grow, if at all", then I'd say he's quite possibly right. Maybe a bit pessimistic, but it's not outrageously gloomy. Unfortunately

    If he means ten years of relentless back to back quarters of negative growth, then this is vanishingly unlikely, simply because of the way stats work

    My guess is that he means the former. He's a bright bloke. I give him a lot of respect simply because he's an avowed Remainer who nonetheless saw the dangerous immorality of a 2nd vote, and rejected it

    The interview is here

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/aug/29/rory-stewart-politics-privilege-podcast-stardom



    Note his skeptical views on Starmer:


    'The Rest Is Politics recently hosted Starmer. “I was disappointed,” says Stewart. “There’s so much that I admired from a distance about him. I like the idea of him. What disappointed me was that he didn’t seem radical enough. I didn’t get what the big picture was. I got the impression of a likable, thoughtful, moderate guy, but I didn’t feel the radical ambition.” In general, he thinks that politicians, even former politicians, are too guarded to be interesting interviewees.'
    Italy has hardly had any economic growth for about 15 years. But when you visit the country life seems to be carrying on as normal.
    On my recent trip to Florence and Rome I decided Italy is, in parts, looking decidedly ragged. You can see there has been zero growth for yonks. And this is in the political capital, and the cultural capital. Not Calabria

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 47,042
    Some interesting grassroots stuff from Florida.
    https://billytownsend.substack.com/p/the-night-the-gop-ate-itself-in-polk

    The state will be competitive this November, I think.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,484
    Anyway, not to worry



  • Tory leadership: Liz Truss cancels BBC interview with Nick Robinson
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62715983

    1.01 landed.

    Continuity Johnson.

    She'll be hiding in fridges by GE 2025, if she makes it past next summer.
    To be fair she has a rather lot on at present
    To be fair she agreed to do the interview and has now decided not to. Not a promising start for Truss if you're looking for a new PM who keeps their word.
    Circumstances change as do priorities and to be honest she is condemned by so many even before she becomes PM which is simply politics

    It is interesting she is only 2% behind Starmer in tonight's poll as best PM

    I really do not know Truss and am reserving judgement until she (her COE) has announced the emergency budget in the HOC
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 47,042
    Interesting map.

    The NASA FIRMS data on the fires in the area https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/map/#d:2022-08-28..2022-08-29,2022-08-28;@32.9,47.1,9z… overlaid on the frontline's map (yesterday's data) https://deepstatemap.live/en#9.25/47.0200/32.8092… suggests three major sectors of action (northeast, center, southwest) on the Russian-occupied part of the Dnipro's right bank.
    https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1564277251050455040
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,955
    Leon said:

    We really need Xi Jinping to get all Prester John on Putin

    A massive, extended global recession is just what the doctor did not order for China, nor for the man who aspires to lead it for a third term. The one way to guarantee it is for this awful war to continue, or even worsen

    Come on China, whack the Vlad

    The problem is that Xi Jinping is a bit shit.

    He got Covid all wrong. He didn't see the dangers in the Chinese housing boom.

    Worse, he hasn't learned from his mistakes. He should look around the world and realise - you know what - the rest of the world has managed to live with Covid, and we need to too.

    He's also managed to mess up with Taiwan. Under previous Chinese leaderships, Taiwan was being brought into the Chinese orbit. Direct flights had started. Opinion polls in Taiwan pointed increasingly towards reconciliation and eventual reunification. It was entirely possible to imagine - at the end of his rule - that Taiwan entered into an economic partnership that meant the two countries were embarking on ever closer union.

    Instead, Taiwanese support for independence is now at an all time high, they have spent a fortune on Western arms, and the country is building a fleet of nuclear powered submarines that would make a seaborne invasion close to impossible.
  • UnpopularUnpopular Posts: 576
    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶

    I would be happy to offer him good odds on that.
    Yes, he needs to define what he means

    If he means "ten years when western economies will barely grow, if at all", then I'd say he's quite possibly right. Maybe a bit pessimistic, but it's not outrageously gloomy. Unfortunately

    If he means ten years of relentless back to back quarters of negative growth, then this is vanishingly unlikely, simply because of the way stats work

    My guess is that he means the former. He's a bright bloke. I give him a lot of respect simply because he's an avowed Remainer who nonetheless saw the dangerous immorality of a 2nd vote, and rejected it

    The interview is here

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/aug/29/rory-stewart-politics-privilege-podcast-stardom



    Note his skeptical views on Starmer:


    'The Rest Is Politics recently hosted Starmer. “I was disappointed,” says Stewart. “There’s so much that I admired from a distance about him. I like the idea of him. What disappointed me was that he didn’t seem radical enough. I didn’t get what the big picture was. I got the impression of a likable, thoughtful, moderate guy, but I didn’t feel the radical ambition.” In general, he thinks that politicians, even former politicians, are too guarded to be interesting interviewees.'
    Italy has hardly had any economic growth for about 15 years. But when you visit the country life seems to be carrying on as normal.
    Ditto Japan.
    I do wonder what a post-growth economy looks like and if it has to be bad. I like the idea of economies being able to find a steady state, where you can have a high-quality of life but without the need for constant economic growth. Of course, such steady states would be temporary in the long run as new technologies develop, or companies innovate and growth is driven, to be followed later by managed periods of steady-state (or stagnation, I guess).

    As can be seen from the above, I'm not an economist, but there is something in the idea that tugs at my brain. As in low/no growth economies but without the downsides of stagnation.

    Unfortunately, having a quick Google about this, all I can find is hippie shit about putting the needs of people above profit etc, which is not what I'm after. What I want is a bunch of hard headed ideas about how an economy can be managed successfully through long periods of economic low growth without the low growth being a problem. Maybe it doesn't exist, maybe that's why I keep finding nonsense?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 32,717
    edited August 2022
    BigRich said:

    According to a Russian source:

    @yarotrof
    The most prominent collaborator assassinated since the Russian invasion : Aleksey Kovalyov, a Ukrainian lawmaker from Zelensky’s party who switched sides to become deputy head of the Russian administration in Kherson, overseeing grain theft, has been gunned down in his home.


    https://twitter.com/yarotrof/status/1564261285243432960

    Not sad to here that, but I don't know exactly how legal theses assassinations are.
    That's a really interesting question. I doubt many people would argue that Reinhard Heydrich was not worthy of assassination (leaving aside Germany's hideous reprisals), but are quislings making themselves parties to the war, and therefore combatants? That's a really thorny issue IMO, especially when the definition of 'quisling' is expanded.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,484
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    We really need Xi Jinping to get all Prester John on Putin

    A massive, extended global recession is just what the doctor did not order for China, nor for the man who aspires to lead it for a third term. The one way to guarantee it is for this awful war to continue, or even worsen

    Come on China, whack the Vlad

    The problem is that Xi Jinping is a bit shit.

    He got Covid all wrong. He didn't see the dangers in the Chinese housing boom.

    Worse, he hasn't learned from his mistakes. He should look around the world and realise - you know what - the rest of the world has managed to live with Covid, and we need to too.

    He's also managed to mess up with Taiwan. Under previous Chinese leaderships, Taiwan was being brought into the Chinese orbit. Direct flights had started. Opinion polls in Taiwan pointed increasingly towards reconciliation and eventual reunification. It was entirely possible to imagine - at the end of his rule - that Taiwan entered into an economic partnership that meant the two countries were embarking on ever closer union.

    Instead, Taiwanese support for independence is now at an all time high, they have spent a fortune on Western arms, and the country is building a fleet of nuclear powered submarines that would make a seaborne invasion close to impossible.
    Yeah, he's quite good at the despotism, but quite shit at the running-the-country stuff. As is often the case with despots
  • Tory leadership: Liz Truss cancels BBC interview with Nick Robinson
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62715983

    1.01 landed.

    Continuity Johnson.

    She'll be hiding in fridges by GE 2025, if she makes it past next summer.
    To be fair she has a rather lot on at present
    If she's smart she'd be spending any time available cloistered away with someone she trusts to be CoE and to keep quiet and they'd be planning the emergency budget.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,563
    Unpopular said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶

    I would be happy to offer him good odds on that.
    Yes, he needs to define what he means

    If he means "ten years when western economies will barely grow, if at all", then I'd say he's quite possibly right. Maybe a bit pessimistic, but it's not outrageously gloomy. Unfortunately

    If he means ten years of relentless back to back quarters of negative growth, then this is vanishingly unlikely, simply because of the way stats work

    My guess is that he means the former. He's a bright bloke. I give him a lot of respect simply because he's an avowed Remainer who nonetheless saw the dangerous immorality of a 2nd vote, and rejected it

    The interview is here

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/aug/29/rory-stewart-politics-privilege-podcast-stardom



    Note his skeptical views on Starmer:


    'The Rest Is Politics recently hosted Starmer. “I was disappointed,” says Stewart. “There’s so much that I admired from a distance about him. I like the idea of him. What disappointed me was that he didn’t seem radical enough. I didn’t get what the big picture was. I got the impression of a likable, thoughtful, moderate guy, but I didn’t feel the radical ambition.” In general, he thinks that politicians, even former politicians, are too guarded to be interesting interviewees.'
    Italy has hardly had any economic growth for about 15 years. But when you visit the country life seems to be carrying on as normal.
    Ditto Japan.
    I do wonder what a post-growth economy looks like and if it has to be bad. I like the idea of economies being able to find a steady state, where you can have a high-quality of life but without the need for constant economic growth. Of course, such steady states would be temporary in the long run as new technologies develop, or companies innovate and growth is driven, to be followed later by managed periods of steady-state (or stagnation, I guess).

    As can be seen from the above, I'm not an economist, but there is something in the idea that tugs at my brain. As in low/no growth economies but without the downsides of stagnation.

    Unfortunately, having a quick Google about this, all I can find is hippie shit about putting the needs of people above profit etc, which is not what I'm after. What I want is a bunch of hard headed ideas about how an economy can be managed successfully through long periods of economic low growth without the low growth being a problem. Maybe it doesn't exist, maybe that's why I keep finding nonsense?
    If the population is stable or declining and everyone has a decent standard of living to begin with, that's when it would work.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,563

    Tory leadership: Liz Truss cancels BBC interview with Nick Robinson
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62715983

    1.01 landed.

    Continuity Johnson.

    She'll be hiding in fridges by GE 2025, if she makes it past next summer.
    To be fair she has a rather lot on at present
    If she's smart she'd be spending any time available cloistered away with someone she trusts to be CoE and to keep quiet and they'd be planning the emergency budget.
    So she's probably having a boozy party right now?
  • TazTaz Posts: 6,568
    Leon said:

    Anyway, not to worry



    WTF is that ?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶

    I would be happy to offer him good odds on that.
    Yes, he needs to define what he means

    If he means "ten years when western economies will barely grow, if at all", then I'd say he's quite possibly right. Maybe a bit pessimistic, but it's not outrageously gloomy. Unfortunately

    If he means ten years of relentless back to back quarters of negative growth, then this is vanishingly unlikely, simply because of the way stats work

    My guess is that he means the former. He's a bright bloke. I give him a lot of respect simply because he's an avowed Remainer who nonetheless saw the dangerous immorality of a 2nd vote, and rejected it

    The interview is here

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/aug/29/rory-stewart-politics-privilege-podcast-stardom



    Note his skeptical views on Starmer:


    'The Rest Is Politics recently hosted Starmer. “I was disappointed,” says Stewart. “There’s so much that I admired from a distance about him. I like the idea of him. What disappointed me was that he didn’t seem radical enough. I didn’t get what the big picture was. I got the impression of a likable, thoughtful, moderate guy, but I didn’t feel the radical ambition.” In general, he thinks that politicians, even former politicians, are too guarded to be interesting interviewees.'
    Italy has hardly had any economic growth for about 15 years. But when you visit the country life seems to be carrying on as normal.
    On my recent trip to Florence and Rome I decided Italy is, in parts, looking decidedly ragged. You can see there has been zero growth for yonks. And this is in the political capital, and the cultural capital. Not Calabria

    This is how shit Calabria is

    https://www.breakinglatest.news/business/cuban-doctors-in-the-hub-of-the-mafia-the-times-infuriates-calabria/

    importing 500 doctors from bloody Cuba because all the hospitals are controlled by Ndrangheta for the usual fraud and extortion purposes, and Italian docs won't go near them.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,484
    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶

    I would be happy to offer him good odds on that.
    Yes, he needs to define what he means

    If he means "ten years when western economies will barely grow, if at all", then I'd say he's quite possibly right. Maybe a bit pessimistic, but it's not outrageously gloomy. Unfortunately

    If he means ten years of relentless back to back quarters of negative growth, then this is vanishingly unlikely, simply because of the way stats work

    My guess is that he means the former. He's a bright bloke. I give him a lot of respect simply because he's an avowed Remainer who nonetheless saw the dangerous immorality of a 2nd vote, and rejected it

    The interview is here

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/aug/29/rory-stewart-politics-privilege-podcast-stardom



    Note his skeptical views on Starmer:


    'The Rest Is Politics recently hosted Starmer. “I was disappointed,” says Stewart. “There’s so much that I admired from a distance about him. I like the idea of him. What disappointed me was that he didn’t seem radical enough. I didn’t get what the big picture was. I got the impression of a likable, thoughtful, moderate guy, but I didn’t feel the radical ambition.” In general, he thinks that politicians, even former politicians, are too guarded to be interesting interviewees.'
    Italy has hardly had any economic growth for about 15 years. But when you visit the country life seems to be carrying on as normal.
    On my recent trip to Florence and Rome I decided Italy is, in parts, looking decidedly ragged. You can see there has been zero growth for yonks. And this is in the political capital, and the cultural capital. Not Calabria

    This is how shit Calabria is

    https://www.breakinglatest.news/business/cuban-doctors-in-the-hub-of-the-mafia-the-times-infuriates-calabria/

    importing 500 doctors from bloody Cuba because all the hospitals are controlled by Ndrangheta for the usual fraud and extortion purposes, and Italian docs won't go near them.
    Calabria is a failed state within a state
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,563
    This thread has

    failed to secure an LNG cargo.

  • TazTaz Posts: 6,568
    Leon said:

    Anyway, not to worry



    WTF is that ?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 17,547
    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Rory Stewart in the Groaniad: “I think there’s a 40-50% chance of a ten year recession in Europe”

    😶

    I would be happy to offer him good odds on that.
    Yes, he needs to define what he means

    If he means "ten years when western economies will barely grow, if at all", then I'd say he's quite possibly right. Maybe a bit pessimistic, but it's not outrageously gloomy. Unfortunately

    If he means ten years of relentless back to back quarters of negative growth, then this is vanishingly unlikely, simply because of the way stats work

    My guess is that he means the former. He's a bright bloke. I give him a lot of respect simply because he's an avowed Remainer who nonetheless saw the dangerous immorality of a 2nd vote, and rejected it

    The interview is here

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/aug/29/rory-stewart-politics-privilege-podcast-stardom



    Note his skeptical views on Starmer:


    'The Rest Is Politics recently hosted Starmer. “I was disappointed,” says Stewart. “There’s so much that I admired from a distance about him. I like the idea of him. What disappointed me was that he didn’t seem radical enough. I didn’t get what the big picture was. I got the impression of a likable, thoughtful, moderate guy, but I didn’t feel the radical ambition.” In general, he thinks that politicians, even former politicians, are too guarded to be interesting interviewees.'
    Italy has hardly had any economic growth for about 15 years. But when you visit the country life seems to be carrying on as normal.
    On my recent trip to Florence and Rome I decided Italy is, in parts, looking decidedly ragged. You can see there has been zero growth for yonks. And this is in the political capital, and the cultural capital. Not Calabria

    This is how shit Calabria is

    https://www.breakinglatest.news/business/cuban-doctors-in-the-hub-of-the-mafia-the-times-infuriates-calabria/

    importing 500 doctors from bloody Cuba because all the hospitals are controlled by Ndrangheta for the usual fraud and extortion purposes, and Italian docs won't go near them.
    Calabria is a failed state within a state
    A bit like Wales, then.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 47,042

    BigRich said:

    According to a Russian source:

    @yarotrof
    The most prominent collaborator assassinated since the Russian invasion : Aleksey Kovalyov, a Ukrainian lawmaker from Zelensky’s party who switched sides to become deputy head of the Russian administration in Kherson, overseeing grain theft, has been gunned down in his home.


    https://twitter.com/yarotrof/status/1564261285243432960

    Not sad to here that, but I don't know exactly how legal theses assassinations are.
    That's a really interesting question. I doubt many people would argue that Reinhard Heydrich was not worthy of assassination (leaving aside Germany's hideous reprisals), but are quislings making themselves parties to the war, and therefore combatants? That's a really thorny issue IMO, especially when the definition of 'quisling' is expanded.
    There’s some not very useful discussion here:
    https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/other/law9_final.pdf

    And some more, here:
    http://opiniojuris.org/2015/11/09/guest-post-is-the-execution-of-collaborators-a-war-crime-under-the-rome-statute-part-i/

    This is also relevant:
    https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule6

    None of this is really of use in considering the current situation, though.
    The Russian invasion is illegal; as occupiers, they have not followed the international laws (such as they are) covering the conduct of occupying armies.
    And I think there are very few, if any cases of members if resistances being prosecuted after their countries have been liberated.
    Should the Russians capture them in the meantime, it is almost certain that the conventions regarding the trial and punishment of civilian resistors will not be followed.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 20,376

    Andy_JS said:

    "Statins are not to blame for most muscle pain, scientists conclude
    Landmark study ‘ends bitter debate on side effects’" (£)

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/statins-muscle-pain-side-effect-study-r9fsf3w9l

    That's timely. Tomorrow I'll be picking up my first statin prescription.
    Think carefully.
This discussion has been closed.