Howdy, Stranger!

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

Johnson was right to announce his departure when he did – politicalbetting.com

124

Comments

  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 2,697
    Scott_xP said:

    The Queen will receive @BorisJohnson at Balmoral next Tuesday, and soon afterwards will hold her first audience with the new incoming Prime Minister, Buckingham Palace has confirmed
    https://twitter.com/RoyaNikkhah/status/1564916524422397957

    London Bridge will start in Scotland.

    The unionist ace in the hole.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 104,484
    edited August 31
    Thread.

    Could Keir Starmer be finding his voice in the current energy crisis? Could this be his 'David Cameron moment'?

    Quite possibly. Will explain. Quick thread:


    https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/1564917302423965696?s=21&t=uP3P3Vu6f7NcHavLGFXbeA
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 15,919

    Nigelb said:

    The Justice Department asserts in a filing that some of the documents seized from Mar-A-Lago were so sensitive and classified that in some instances the FBI agents and DOJ attorneys needed additional security clearances to review them.
    https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1564821787250249729

    If Trump is not jailed over this, then the US has definitely ceased to be a place where the rule of law applies to some people.
    And, yes, I know it already is, but this is way beyond anything already done.
    Call me old fashioned but I consider encouraging a mob to hang your vice president so you can keep power slightly worse than stealing some secret documents.

    And zero chance he goes to jail, unless the prosecutors can somehow get rid of his right to jury trial.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 27,591
    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Pulpstar said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    So why is Boris Johnson set to approve spending £30 billion on a nuclear power plant but will leave how many poor people will freeze to death to Truss?

    Boris Johnson is poised to give approval this week for a nuclear power station costing up to £30 billion as ministers close in on a deal to reopen Britain’s biggest gas storage facility.

    The prime minister is preparing to announce an in-principle agreement to offer funding to the Sizewell C reactor in Suffolk before he leaves office, despite concerns about creating a multibillion-pound spending commitment for Liz Truss, the frontrunner to succeed him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-ready-to-sign-off-on-30bn-sizewell-c-nuclear-power-station-fnnjds2ls

    He's also allowed the civil service to shunt the Cumbria coal mine into the repair yard. What an utterly useless [wordthatgetsyoubanned]
    Oh, I’m starting to warm to him.

    The coal mine was an example of a very small project with an ability to do orders of magnitude greater damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies than it would ever generate either in GDP, energy security or indeed carbon emissions.
    That's a rather odd argument. Do you use it against German soft power and their influence on developing world environmental policies, given Germany's vastly greater use of much
    worse types of coal?
    Yes. Germany is rightly pilloried not only in the developing world but the rest of Europe for that, its reluctance on nuclear and its over dependence on Russian gas. German soft power is badly diminished by its energy policy - a perfect case study.
    And do you realise the Cumbrian coal mine is *tiny* in comparison? A problem with your argument is that it can be used for anything we do that *you* don't like - however necessary it is.

    "We're still allowing diesel cars in 2022?
    Don't you realise the damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies this has?"
    You keep making my points for me. It’s the very tininess of it which makes the negative
    PR and signalling out of all proportion to any economic benefit.
    Placing virtue signalling over energy security ?

    Are you in the civil service ?
    The Cumbrian coal was not intended for power, rather steelmaking.
    How do we supply West Burton A, Ratcliffe & Kilroot ?
    Are they all still being shut down as originally planned so we can willy wave at the next COP ?
    I must admit to being very confused by the coal stats I find online. I went looking after reading your question and it is actually quite hard to find detail of how much coal we produce and import. The only real info I could find was from 2016 and doesn't seem to make any sense.

    It says

    We produce 4.6 million tons a year
    We import 9.3 million tons a year

    But we apparently use 41.5 million tons a year.

    So how do we fill the gap if the numbers for production and importing don't equal the numbers for usage?

    https://www.worldometers.info/coal/uk-coal/#:~:text=The United Kingdom holds 77,1.9 times its annual consumption.

    Something is squirly there.
  • jamesdoylejamesdoyle Posts: 239

    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: After Surrey Heath excitement, five more seats where the Lib Dems are getting ready for potential by-elections.
    — Tamworth
    — Uxbridge
    — NE Somerset
    — Mid Beds
    — Selby & Ainsty https://twitter.com/estwebber/status/1564910332715405313/photo/1

    It'd be really outrageous in these times of quiet progressive cooperation if the LibDems fought a high-p[rofile campaign in an Unxbridge by-election. Results last time:

    Con 52.6
    Lab 37.6
    LD 6.3
    Gr 2.3
    Others 1.1

    I'd asume that 1) it's good practice to make sure your candidate for a high profile by-election will stand up to scrutiny even if you're not aiming to win, and 2) bargaining chips for back channel chats with Labour - looks a bit weak if you don't have a by-election plan
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,723
    Alistair said:

    To paraphrase Amy Winehouse, This is so boring without Leon.
    Apologies for precipitating his (hopefully temporary) exit by, I don't know what exactly, expressing an opinion contrary to his?
    Do you think he might come back if I promise to try harder in future?

    It's a shame because I had another recent W3Ws failure to share

    https://keswickmrt.org.uk/rescue/crow-park-keswick-83/
    Has Sturgeon mentioned Scotland's energy advantage in her recent speeches ? With electricity and gas sky high it probably reverses Barnett and then some for the moment.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,136
    ⚡️ The winter crisis awaiting the new PM "makes COVID look relatively straightforward".

    We can expect near-nationalisation of energy companies, Conservative strategist predicts.

    https://www.politico.eu/newsletter/london-playbook/london-calling-brace-brace-liz-vs-the-libs/ https://twitter.com/estwebber/status/1564919926372065280/photo/1
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Scott_xP said:

    The Queen will receive @BorisJohnson at Balmoral next Tuesday, and soon afterwards will hold her first audience with the new incoming Prime Minister, Buckingham Palace has confirmed
    https://twitter.com/RoyaNikkhah/status/1564916524422397957

    Think of the carbon footprint generated because the Queen won’t come down to London.

    If she’s not up to the job then she needs to abdicate, if not Charles needs to set up a regency.

    I’m quite prepared to serve as regent.

    If boj n liz travel together and queenie would otherwise have travelled to london tis carbon neutral
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 54,699

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Pulpstar said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    So why is Boris Johnson set to approve spending £30 billion on a nuclear power plant but will leave how many poor people will freeze to death to Truss?

    Boris Johnson is poised to give approval this week for a nuclear power station costing up to £30 billion as ministers close in on a deal to reopen Britain’s biggest gas storage facility.

    The prime minister is preparing to announce an in-principle agreement to offer funding to the Sizewell C reactor in Suffolk before he leaves office, despite concerns about creating a multibillion-pound spending commitment for Liz Truss, the frontrunner to succeed him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-ready-to-sign-off-on-30bn-sizewell-c-nuclear-power-station-fnnjds2ls

    He's also allowed the civil service to shunt the Cumbria coal mine into the repair yard. What an utterly useless [wordthatgetsyoubanned]
    Oh, I’m starting to warm to him.

    The coal mine was an example of a very small project with an ability to do orders of magnitude greater damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies than it would ever generate either in GDP, energy security or indeed carbon emissions.
    That's a rather odd argument. Do you use it against German soft power and their influence on developing world environmental policies, given Germany's vastly greater use of much
    worse types of coal?
    Yes. Germany is rightly pilloried not only in the developing world but the rest of Europe for that, its reluctance on nuclear and its over dependence on Russian gas. German soft power is badly diminished by its energy policy - a perfect case study.
    And do you realise the Cumbrian coal mine is *tiny* in comparison? A problem with your argument is that it can be used for anything we do that *you* don't like - however necessary it is.

    "We're still allowing diesel cars in 2022?
    Don't you realise the damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies this has?"
    You keep making my points for me. It’s the very tininess of it which makes the negative
    PR and signalling out of all proportion to any economic benefit.
    Placing virtue signalling over energy security ?

    Are you in the civil service ?
    The Cumbrian coal was not intended for power, rather steelmaking.
    How do we supply West Burton A, Ratcliffe & Kilroot ?
    Are they all still being shut down as originally planned so we can willy wave at the next COP ?
    I must admit to being very confused by the coal stats I find online. I went looking after reading your question and it is actually quite hard to find detail of how much coal we produce and import. The only real info I could find was from 2016 and doesn't seem to make any sense.

    It says

    We produce 4.6 million tons a year
    We import 9.3 million tons a year

    But we apparently use 41.5 million tons a year.

    So how do we fill the gap if the numbers for production and importing don't equal the numbers for usage?

    https://www.worldometers.info/coal/uk-coal/#:~:text=The United Kingdom holds 77,1.9 times its annual consumption.

    Something is squirly there.
    In 2016 they were running down the coal stocks at several coal plants prior to decommissioning. The stocks were very large and all had to be burned up. THree were shut that year and two more the following year.

    That may explain the gap, although it does seem on the large side.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 32,121

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I just ate in the same restaurant as Marjorie Taylor Greene. What she was doing in the hotbed of liberalism that is West LA, I'm not clear...

    Is the Marg Greene Alex Jones thing much like the hard metal head banging stars who take all that face paint off in the dressing room after gigs, travel back to terrace home in north of England where they sit in armchair in cardigan and slippers reading the Guardian whilst their mum brings them a mug of tea with their favourite jammy dodgers?
    Do you take sugar ?
    Alex Jones did say in court, you can’t use that video of me doing that infowar clothes ripping, that’s not me. That’s not the real me.
    So the real him is a fake and a liar as well?
    It’s about money making. It’s entertainment face paint not unlike my heavy metal star analogy.

    Why presume Greene or even Trump actually believe something so clearly stupid to people with more than three active brain cells?
    I don't think Greene's is an act. She actually IS that stupid herself.
    I'd say there's 3 main things in the Magamix: Madness Badness & Idiocy. With varying degrees of overlap in each individual.

    Eg Donald Trump himself I assess as more Bad than Idiot and more Idiot than Mad. Or to put it another way - Trump is a madman but his idiocy is greater still, and greater even than his idiocy is his malice.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,723

    Nigelb said:

    The Justice Department asserts in a filing that some of the documents seized from Mar-A-Lago were so sensitive and classified that in some instances the FBI agents and DOJ attorneys needed additional security clearances to review them.
    https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1564821787250249729

    If Trump is not jailed over this, then the US has definitely ceased to be a place where the rule of law applies to some people.
    And, yes, I know it already is, but this is way beyond anything already done.
    Call me old fashioned but I consider encouraging a mob to hang your vice president so you can keep power slightly worse than stealing some secret documents.

    And zero chance he goes to jail, unless the prosecutors can somehow get rid of his right to jury trial.
    I think he'll be beaten by Biden in the general now. Previously I thought he'd win, but Biden has
    i. Filed
    ii. Is creeping back up in popularity as the USA's cost for the Ukraine war is extremely cheap compared to continental europe.
    iii. Probably now holds the senate.
    iv. Got his deal through.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 27,591

    Sandpit said:

    "The economy is about to go to hell in a handcart, with hundreds of thousands of households reduced to penury and aggregate demand hammered by soaring energy bills, yet neither of the candidates has anything worthwhile to say about it."


    "The casualties are going to be off the scale if nothing is done."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/08/30/tories-have-forgotten-how-do-serious-economics/

    Yet another hack totally ignoring the £37,000,000,000 in support, that’s already been announced by the government.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/energy-bills-support-scheme-explainer

    It’s fair to argue that it’s not enough, or that there’s no support yet for small businesses - but to ignore it completelty it totally disengenuous. We wonder why there’s so little trust in the media.
    The £37bn has unfortunately had a huge whiff of knee-jerkism about it. "Something must be done, shit! Let's bung a few £100 here and a few £100 there."

    I dread to think how much has been wasted in bureaucracy, with some being paid by DWP, some by councils and some via the energy companies... some as shopping vouchers ffs!

    Right at the start HMG should have just forced the price cap to remain at a level they decided was affordable, with similar support for those not covered by the price cap. Paid for by taxes on the wealthy to keep it progressive.

    Would have had the massive benefit of keeping inflation down.

    The other major failing of course has been failing to secure our energy security over many years (not just the Tories - Labour too). All this is the consequence of the neoliberal pursuit of 'the market rules' over every other consideration.
    Keeping the price cap down is a terrible, terrible idea.

    Do that and its "nice" politics, but it means that nobody cuts their fuel usage (as why bother) and so we have an energy shortage but no reduction in energy demand, so we have blackouts instead.

    I'm no fan of government support in general, but having the price rise but government support available as required is the lesser of two evils. It means people can be helped to afford the energy, but they will still be looking at the price and cutting their usage as much as possible, which is what is required.
    Yes but remember this is not a simple free market. The price of electricity is not determined by the scarcity of electricity but (now) by the cost of gas, which is artificially high owing to events elsewhere. As things stand, although of course they may change, there is no reason to cut electricity usage apart from to save money; there will not be rolling power cuts this week or next if you run the air conditioning and central heating simultaneously because we do not have a shortage of electricity; the price signal you rely on is (eta already) quite misleading.
    Eh? A shortage of gas means a shortage of electricity, since we are generating our electricity from gas.

    If we run out of gas, we run out of electricity, and we will run out of gas as a continent if we don't cut our usage, which means cutting electricity.
    Britain can't store gas and can't store electricity (or wind or sunshine) so cutting down now might save money but will not affect shortfalls during January's blizzards. Your price signal is misleading (at least for now).
    This is not true. Britain does not operate in a vacuum. We absolutely can and are storing gas, in Germany and elsewhere. The UK is exporting gas as fast as is possible to fill German and other storage facilities, so that during January's blizzards the storage is full and so less gas imports are required across the continent.

    Cutting down on your air conditioning today, means less gas consumed today, meaning more gas can be exported to Germany etc, which means more gets stored, which means more gas available for January.

    Its all connected. Which is why that's showing in the price signal.
    You think that in the midst of a particularly cold winter with Russian gas cut off the Germans are going to consider for one second re-exporting any of that gas to us? If their storage is full they have 10 weeks of supply with no Russian imports. Not sure we can assume they will want to reduce that by sending any to us, particularly if winter comes early.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,038

    kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    The Justice Department asserts in a filing that some of the documents seized from Mar-A-Lago were so sensitive and classified that in some instances the FBI agents and DOJ attorneys needed additional security clearances to review them.
    https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1564821787250249729

    If Trump is not jailed over this, then the US has definitely ceased to be a place where the rule of law applies to some people.
    And, yes, I know it already is, but this is way beyond anything already done.
    He ought to see jail, having broken countless laws with impunity for so long, but my sense is he won't. However I do think the prospect of him being President again is receding. I rate this a less than 10% chance now.
    You are kidding right? 10%?

    He'll be the nominee and he'll probably win.
    He probably won't, and probably wouldn't, IMO.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,038

    Scott_xP said:

    The Queen will receive @BorisJohnson at Balmoral next Tuesday, and soon afterwards will hold her first audience with the new incoming Prime Minister, Buckingham Palace has confirmed
    https://twitter.com/RoyaNikkhah/status/1564916524422397957

    Think of the carbon footprint generated because the Queen won’t come down to London.

    If she’s not up to the job then she needs to abdicate, if not Charles needs to set up a regency.

    I’m quite prepared to serve as regent.

    HMQ is merely establishing who is the sub.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,293
    Bloody propaganda no doubt from that notorious nat mouthpiece the BBC.




  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,038

    Nigelb said:

    The Justice Department asserts in a filing that some of the documents seized from Mar-A-Lago were so sensitive and classified that in some instances the FBI agents and DOJ attorneys needed additional security clearances to review them.
    https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1564821787250249729

    If Trump is not jailed over this, then the US has definitely ceased to be a place where the rule of law applies to some people.
    And, yes, I know it already is, but this is way beyond anything already done.
    Call me old fashioned but I consider encouraging a mob to hang your vice president so you can keep power slightly worse than stealing some secret documents....
    Difference is the burden of proof.
    In the latter case there is no need to demonstrate intent. Which means the decision to prosecute is a much simpler matter of upholding the law.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,723
    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Pulpstar said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    So why is Boris Johnson set to approve spending £30 billion on a nuclear power plant but will leave how many poor people will freeze to death to Truss?

    Boris Johnson is poised to give approval this week for a nuclear power station costing up to £30 billion as ministers close in on a deal to reopen Britain’s biggest gas storage facility.

    The prime minister is preparing to announce an in-principle agreement to offer funding to the Sizewell C reactor in Suffolk before he leaves office, despite concerns about creating a multibillion-pound spending commitment for Liz Truss, the frontrunner to succeed him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-ready-to-sign-off-on-30bn-sizewell-c-nuclear-power-station-fnnjds2ls

    He's also allowed the civil service to shunt the Cumbria coal mine into the repair yard. What an utterly useless [wordthatgetsyoubanned]
    Oh, I’m starting to warm to him.

    The coal mine was an example of a very small project with an ability to do orders of magnitude greater damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies than it would ever generate either in GDP, energy security or indeed carbon emissions.
    That's a rather odd argument. Do you use it against German soft power and their influence on developing world environmental policies, given Germany's vastly greater use of much
    worse types of coal?
    Yes. Germany is rightly pilloried not only in the developing world but the rest of Europe for that, its reluctance on nuclear and its over dependence on Russian gas. German soft power is badly diminished by its energy policy - a perfect case study.
    And do you realise the Cumbrian coal mine is *tiny* in comparison? A problem with your argument is that it can be used for anything we do that *you* don't like - however necessary it is.

    "We're still allowing diesel cars in 2022?
    Don't you realise the damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies this has?"
    You keep making my points for me. It’s the very tininess of it which makes the negative
    PR and signalling out of all proportion to any economic benefit.
    Placing virtue signalling over energy security ?

    Are you in the civil service ?
    The Cumbrian coal was not intended for power, rather steelmaking.
    How do we supply West Burton A, Ratcliffe & Kilroot ?
    Are they all still being shut down as originally planned so we can willy wave at the next COP ?
    I must admit to being very confused by the coal stats I find online. I went looking after reading your question and it is actually quite hard to find detail of how much coal we produce and import. The only real info I could find was from 2016 and doesn't seem to make any sense.

    It says

    We produce 4.6 million tons a year
    We import 9.3 million tons a year

    But we apparently use 41.5 million tons a year.

    So how do we fill the gap if the numbers for production and importing don't equal the numbers for usage?

    https://www.worldometers.info/coal/uk-coal/#:~:text=The United Kingdom holds 77,1.9 times its annual consumption.

    Something is squirly there.
    In 2016 they were running down the coal stocks at several coal plants prior to decommissioning. The stocks were very large and all had to be burned up. THree were shut that year and two more the following year.

    That may explain the gap, although it does seem on the large side.
    Have we blown all those coal plants up yet ? Can we recommission any of them ?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,474
    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    The Justice Department asserts in a filing that some of the documents seized from Mar-A-Lago were so sensitive and classified that in some instances the FBI agents and DOJ attorneys needed additional security clearances to review them.
    https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1564821787250249729

    If Trump is not jailed over this, then the US has definitely ceased to be a place where the rule of law applies to some people.
    And, yes, I know it already is, but this is way beyond anything already done.
    Call me old fashioned but I consider encouraging a mob to hang your vice president so you can keep power slightly worse than stealing some secret documents.

    And zero chance he goes to jail, unless the prosecutors can somehow get rid of his right to jury trial.
    I think he'll be beaten by Biden in the general now. Previously I thought he'd win, but Biden has
    i. Filed
    ii. Is creeping back up in popularity as the USA's cost for the Ukraine war is extremely cheap compared to continental europe.
    iii. Probably now holds the senate.
    iv. Got his deal through.
    I think Biden's prospects are largely tied to Ukraine's. If Ukraine is victorious by 2024, then that's a great foreign policy success for Biden and he's a winner.

    If the Russo-Ukraine War is an expensive stalemate, then Afghanistan comes to define Biden's presidency, and he looks like Carter, an embarrassment.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,723

    Nigelb said:

    The Justice Department asserts in a filing that some of the documents seized from Mar-A-Lago were so sensitive and classified that in some instances the FBI agents and DOJ attorneys needed additional security clearances to review them.
    https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1564821787250249729

    If Trump is not jailed over this, then the US has definitely ceased to be a place where the rule of law applies to some people.
    And, yes, I know it already is, but this is way beyond anything already done.
    Call me old fashioned but I consider encouraging a mob to hang your vice president so you can keep power slightly worse than stealing some secret documents.

    And zero chance he goes to jail, unless the prosecutors can somehow get rid of his right to jury trial.
    They might be able to find a jury in DC that will prosecute Trump. Nowhere else though.
  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 1,519
    Alistair said:

    Alistair said:

    WATCH: Our Chair, Professor Graeme Roy, discusses the key messages from our paper on trends in Scotland’s population and their effects on the economy and income tax, published this morning alongside our Fiscal Sustainability Report consultation paper.

    https://twitter.com/scotfisccomm/status/1564540062146101248

    In 50 years:

    Scotland:
    Population, -900,000 (-16%)
    Working age population from 64%>56%, as a result
    GDP -0.5% / year vs UK on average.

    https://webarchive.nrscotland.gov.uk/web/20210314004034/https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/statistics-and-data/statistics/statistics-by-theme/population/population-projections/population-projections-scotland/2001-based

    2001 population projection for Scotland

    Population in 2001 - 5,064,000
    Projected Population in 2021 - 4,895,000

    Actual population in 2020 - 5,470,000

    Interesting - did NRS ever explain what factors changed to affect the outcomes?

    Don't know if there was an official annoucenment but from squinting at graphs it looks like births rose from a 2001 nadir.


    England winning the World Cup in 1966 had a devastating impact on births in Scotland.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,723

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    The Justice Department asserts in a filing that some of the documents seized from Mar-A-Lago were so sensitive and classified that in some instances the FBI agents and DOJ attorneys needed additional security clearances to review them.
    https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1564821787250249729

    If Trump is not jailed over this, then the US has definitely ceased to be a place where the rule of law applies to some people.
    And, yes, I know it already is, but this is way beyond anything already done.
    Call me old fashioned but I consider encouraging a mob to hang your vice president so you can keep power slightly worse than stealing some secret documents.

    And zero chance he goes to jail, unless the prosecutors can somehow get rid of his right to jury trial.
    I think he'll be beaten by Biden in the general now. Previously I thought he'd win, but Biden has
    i. Filed
    ii. Is creeping back up in popularity as the USA's cost for the Ukraine war is extremely cheap compared to continental europe.
    iii. Probably now holds the senate.
    iv. Got his deal through.
    I think Biden's prospects are largely tied to Ukraine's. If Ukraine is victorious by 2024, then that's a great foreign policy success for Biden and he's a winner.

    If the Russo-Ukraine War is an expensive stalemate, then Afghanistan comes to define Biden's presidency, and he looks like Carter, an embarrassment.
    There's no US boots on the ground though, and the cost to them is a rounding error presently. I don't think Americans will care particularly either way who wins as long as they can get cheap gas & cheap gas.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 19,968
    edited August 31
    Interesting that Vance is favourite to win Ohio according to nearly all the prediction websites.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 54,699
    Pulpstar said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Pulpstar said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    So why is Boris Johnson set to approve spending £30 billion on a nuclear power plant but will leave how many poor people will freeze to death to Truss?

    Boris Johnson is poised to give approval this week for a nuclear power station costing up to £30 billion as ministers close in on a deal to reopen Britain’s biggest gas storage facility.

    The prime minister is preparing to announce an in-principle agreement to offer funding to the Sizewell C reactor in Suffolk before he leaves office, despite concerns about creating a multibillion-pound spending commitment for Liz Truss, the frontrunner to succeed him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-ready-to-sign-off-on-30bn-sizewell-c-nuclear-power-station-fnnjds2ls

    He's also allowed the civil service to shunt the Cumbria coal mine into the repair yard. What an utterly useless [wordthatgetsyoubanned]
    Oh, I’m starting to warm to him.

    The coal mine was an example of a very small project with an ability to do orders of magnitude greater damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies than it would ever generate either in GDP, energy security or indeed carbon emissions.
    That's a rather odd argument. Do you use it against German soft power and their influence on developing world environmental policies, given Germany's vastly greater use of much
    worse types of coal?
    Yes. Germany is rightly pilloried not only in the developing world but the rest of Europe for that, its reluctance on nuclear and its over dependence on Russian gas. German soft power is badly diminished by its energy policy - a perfect case study.
    And do you realise the Cumbrian coal mine is *tiny* in comparison? A problem with your argument is that it can be used for anything we do that *you* don't like - however necessary it is.

    "We're still allowing diesel cars in 2022?
    Don't you realise the damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies this has?"
    You keep making my points for me. It’s the very tininess of it which makes the negative
    PR and signalling out of all proportion to any economic benefit.
    Placing virtue signalling over energy security ?

    Are you in the civil service ?
    The Cumbrian coal was not intended for power, rather steelmaking.
    How do we supply West Burton A, Ratcliffe & Kilroot ?
    Are they all still being shut down as originally planned so we can willy wave at the next COP ?
    I must admit to being very confused by the coal stats I find online. I went looking after reading your question and it is actually quite hard to find detail of how much coal we produce and import. The only real info I could find was from 2016 and doesn't seem to make any sense.

    It says

    We produce 4.6 million tons a year
    We import 9.3 million tons a year

    But we apparently use 41.5 million tons a year.

    So how do we fill the gap if the numbers for production and importing don't equal the numbers for usage?

    https://www.worldometers.info/coal/uk-coal/#:~:text=The United Kingdom holds 77,1.9 times its annual consumption.

    Something is squirly there.
    In 2016 they were running down the coal stocks at several coal plants prior to decommissioning. The stocks were very large and all had to be burned up. THree were shut that year and two more the following year.

    That may explain the gap, although it does seem on the large side.
    Have we blown all those coal plants up yet ? Can we recommission any of them ?
    No and no.

    Some of them have been converted to burn other fuels. I don't know whether it would be possible to recommission them to burn coal (albeit as they don't burn gas it would seem a bit pointless to switch them back). But it's hardly as simple as flicking a switch.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,038

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    The Justice Department asserts in a filing that some of the documents seized from Mar-A-Lago were so sensitive and classified that in some instances the FBI agents and DOJ attorneys needed additional security clearances to review them.
    https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1564821787250249729

    If Trump is not jailed over this, then the US has definitely ceased to be a place where the rule of law applies to some people.
    And, yes, I know it already is, but this is way beyond anything already done.
    Call me old fashioned but I consider encouraging a mob to hang your vice president so you can keep power slightly worse than stealing some secret documents.

    And zero chance he goes to jail, unless the prosecutors can somehow get rid of his right to jury trial.
    I think he'll be beaten by Biden in the general now. Previously I thought he'd win, but Biden has
    i. Filed
    ii. Is creeping back up in popularity as the USA's cost for the Ukraine war is extremely cheap compared to continental europe.
    iii. Probably now holds the senate.
    iv. Got his deal through.
    I think Biden's prospects are largely tied to Ukraine's. If Ukraine is victorious by 2024, then that's a great foreign policy success for Biden and he's a winner.

    If the Russo-Ukraine War is an expensive stalemate, then Afghanistan comes to define Biden's presidency, and he looks like Carter, an embarrassment.
    Everyone will have forgotten about Afghanistan by 2024, either way.
  • DavidL said:

    WATCH: Our Chair, Professor Graeme Roy, discusses the key messages from our paper on trends in Scotland’s population and their effects on the economy and income tax, published this morning alongside our Fiscal Sustainability Report consultation paper.

    https://twitter.com/scotfisccomm/status/1564540062146101248

    In 50 years:

    Scotland:
    Population, -900,000 (-16%)
    Working age population from 64%>56%, as a result
    GDP -0.5% / year vs UK on average.

    We are going to need a lot of immigration to offset that. A working population down to 56% would be beyond disastrous without a productivity miracle which has not shown any signs of existing yet. But how do we persuade any newcomers to stay here when the bright, shiny lights of London beckon?

    Two and a half billion climate refugees globally by 2050 and none choose Scotland?

    doubtful predictions abound



  • And London will probably be a bit hot and damp by 2100.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,038
    An amazing likeness.

    https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1564898438893944835
    Ukraine's news outlet Ukrinform launched an auction to sell a goose Johnsoniuk (Ukrainized version of Jonson)

    The money will be transferred to buy thermal imaging for Yulia Ovsianniakova, a photojournalist who will be deployed to the south.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 27,591
    Pulpstar said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Pulpstar said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    So why is Boris Johnson set to approve spending £30 billion on a nuclear power plant but will leave how many poor people will freeze to death to Truss?

    Boris Johnson is poised to give approval this week for a nuclear power station costing up to £30 billion as ministers close in on a deal to reopen Britain’s biggest gas storage facility.

    The prime minister is preparing to announce an in-principle agreement to offer funding to the Sizewell C reactor in Suffolk before he leaves office, despite concerns about creating a multibillion-pound spending commitment for Liz Truss, the frontrunner to succeed him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-ready-to-sign-off-on-30bn-sizewell-c-nuclear-power-station-fnnjds2ls

    He's also allowed the civil service to shunt the Cumbria coal mine into the repair yard. What an utterly useless [wordthatgetsyoubanned]
    Oh, I’m starting to warm to him.

    The coal mine was an example of a very small project with an ability to do orders of magnitude greater damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies than it would ever generate either in GDP, energy security or indeed carbon emissions.
    That's a rather odd argument. Do you use it against German soft power and their influence on developing world environmental policies, given Germany's vastly greater use of much
    worse types of coal?
    Yes. Germany is rightly pilloried not only in the developing world but the rest of Europe for that, its reluctance on nuclear and its over dependence on Russian gas. German soft power is badly diminished by its energy policy - a perfect case study.
    And do you realise the Cumbrian coal mine is *tiny* in comparison? A problem with your argument is that it can be used for anything we do that *you* don't like - however necessary it is.

    "We're still allowing diesel cars in 2022?
    Don't you realise the damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies this has?"
    You keep making my points for me. It’s the very tininess of it which makes the negative
    PR and signalling out of all proportion to any economic benefit.
    Placing virtue signalling over energy security ?

    Are you in the civil service ?
    The Cumbrian coal was not intended for power, rather steelmaking.
    How do we supply West Burton A, Ratcliffe & Kilroot ?
    Are they all still being shut down as originally planned so we can willy wave at the next COP ?
    I must admit to being very confused by the coal stats I find online. I went looking after reading your question and it is actually quite hard to find detail of how much coal we produce and import. The only real info I could find was from 2016 and doesn't seem to make any sense.

    It says

    We produce 4.6 million tons a year
    We import 9.3 million tons a year

    But we apparently use 41.5 million tons a year.

    So how do we fill the gap if the numbers for production and importing don't equal the numbers for usage?

    https://www.worldometers.info/coal/uk-coal/#:~:text=The United Kingdom holds 77,1.9 times its annual consumption.

    Something is squirly there.
    In 2016 they were running down the coal stocks at several coal plants prior to decommissioning. The stocks were very large and all had to be burned up. THree were shut that year and two more the following year.

    That may explain the gap, although it does seem on the large side.
    Have we blown all those coal plants up yet ? Can we recommission any of them ?
    Kwarteng has agreed a deal with the owners of the three still operating to keep them open until further notice. They were supposed to start shutting down at the end of this month.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 54,699
    Eabhal said:

    Scott_xP said:

    The Queen will receive @BorisJohnson at Balmoral next Tuesday, and soon afterwards will hold her first audience with the new incoming Prime Minister, Buckingham Palace has confirmed
    https://twitter.com/RoyaNikkhah/status/1564916524422397957

    London Bridge will start in Scotland.

    The unionist ace in the hole.
    Makes a change from the Irish Sea Tunnel.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,038
    Trending on Twitter - #TrumpIsGoingToJail

    I am utterly amused that at the end of the day it’s the National Archives who may bring down the criminal Donald Trump

    The National Freaking Archive
    Librarians saving democracy

    https://twitter.com/KimerikalOne/status/1564844654335381504
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 54,699
    edited August 31
    Nigelb said:

    Trending on Twitter - #TrumpIsGoingToJail

    I am utterly amused that at the end of the day it’s the National Archives who may bring down the criminal Donald Trump

    The National Freaking Archive
    Librarians saving democracy

    https://twitter.com/KimerikalOne/status/1564844654335381504

    Not nearly as funny as the fact that he's being pursued under the laws he passed to get at Hilary Clinton.

    Edit - and anyway, they missed an awesome pun. It's the librarians that have booked him.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,254
    edited August 31
    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Pulpstar said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    So why is Boris Johnson set to approve spending £30 billion on a nuclear power plant but will leave how many poor people will freeze to death to Truss?

    Boris Johnson is poised to give approval this week for a nuclear power station costing up to £30 billion as ministers close in on a deal to reopen Britain’s biggest gas storage facility.

    The prime minister is preparing to announce an in-principle agreement to offer funding to the Sizewell C reactor in Suffolk before he leaves office, despite concerns about creating a multibillion-pound spending commitment for Liz Truss, the frontrunner to succeed him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-ready-to-sign-off-on-30bn-sizewell-c-nuclear-power-station-fnnjds2ls

    He's also allowed the civil service to shunt the Cumbria coal mine into the repair yard. What an utterly useless [wordthatgetsyoubanned]
    Oh, I’m starting to warm to him.

    The coal mine was an example of a very small project with an ability to do orders of magnitude greater damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies than it would ever generate either in GDP, energy security or indeed carbon emissions.
    That's a rather odd argument. Do you use it against German soft power and their influence on developing world environmental policies, given Germany's vastly greater use of much
    worse types of coal?
    Yes. Germany is rightly pilloried not only in the developing world but the rest of Europe for that, its reluctance on nuclear and its over dependence on Russian gas. German soft power is badly diminished by its energy policy - a perfect case study.
    And do you realise the Cumbrian coal mine is *tiny* in comparison? A problem with your argument is that it can be used for anything we do that *you* don't like - however necessary it is.

    "We're still allowing diesel cars in 2022?
    Don't you realise the damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies this has?"
    You keep making my points for me. It’s the very tininess of it which makes the negative
    PR and signalling out of all proportion to any economic benefit.
    Placing virtue signalling over energy security ?

    Are you in the civil service ?
    The Cumbrian coal was not intended for power, rather steelmaking.
    How do we supply West Burton A, Ratcliffe & Kilroot ?
    Are they all still being shut down as originally planned so we can willy wave at the next COP ?
    I must admit to being very confused by the coal stats I find online. I went looking after reading your question and it is actually quite hard to find detail of how much coal we produce and import. The only real info I could find was from 2016 and doesn't seem to make any sense.

    It says

    We produce 4.6 million tons a year
    We import 9.3 million tons a year

    But we apparently use 41.5 million tons a year.

    So how do we fill the gap if the numbers for production and importing don't equal the numbers for usage?

    https://www.worldometers.info/coal/uk-coal/#:~:text=The United Kingdom holds 77,1.9 times its annual consumption.

    Something is squirly there.
    In 2016 they were running down the coal stocks at several coal plants prior to decommissioning. The stocks were very large and all had to be burned up. THree were shut that year and two more the following year.

    That may explain the gap, although it does seem on the large side.
    Have we blown all those coal plants up yet ? Can we recommission any of them ?
    No and no.

    Some of them have been converted to burn other fuels. I don't know whether it would be possible to recommission them to burn coal (albeit as they don't burn gas it would seem a bit pointless to switch them back). But it's hardly as simple as flicking a switch.
    I have noticed in my sad obsession with gridwatch recently that we have been burning small amounts of coal, roughly 1% of our output, so we clearly still have some working plants although whether they have the ability to significantly increase production may be another question.

    Edit, coal is at 2.38% today.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 12,141
    Leon said:

    I’d like to make a formal apology to myself, for wasting my own rapidly diminishing time

    I need to get off this site. Perhaps for good

    Anon

    Oh please don't. Your views are often quite ridiculous, but you do offer an entertainment value that I, for one, would miss on my occasional visits.
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,335

    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: After Surrey Heath excitement, five more seats where the Lib Dems are getting ready for potential by-elections.
    — Tamworth
    — Uxbridge
    — NE Somerset
    — Mid Beds
    — Selby & Ainsty https://twitter.com/estwebber/status/1564910332715405313/photo/1

    It'd be really outrageous in these times of quiet progressive cooperation if the LibDems fought a high-p[rofile campaign in an Unxbridge by-election. Results last time:

    Con 52.6
    Lab 37.6
    LD 6.3
    Gr 2.3
    Others 1.1
    I'd assume that 1) it's good practice to make sure your candidate for a high profile by-election will stand up to scrutiny even if you're not aiming to win, and 2) bargaining chips for back channel chats with Labour - looks a bit weak if you don't have a by-election plan
    I think the Lib Dems have their strategy worked out, and I suspect they have not shared it with Mr Palmer. That is indeed outrageous behaviour on their part.

    If Labour were fully briefed on the Lib Dem secret strategy, the Labour Party could stab them in the back more effectively, as they have often done in the past. As indeed have the Conservatives.

    Much better for the Lib Dems to keep them both guessing.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 17,647
    IshmaelZ said:

    Scott_xP said:

    The Queen will receive @BorisJohnson at Balmoral next Tuesday, and soon afterwards will hold her first audience with the new incoming Prime Minister, Buckingham Palace has confirmed
    https://twitter.com/RoyaNikkhah/status/1564916524422397957

    Think of the carbon footprint generated because the Queen won’t come down to London.

    If she’s not up to the job then she needs to abdicate, if not Charles needs to set up a regency.

    I’m quite prepared to serve as regent.

    If boj n liz travel together and queenie would otherwise have travelled to london tis carbon neutral
    Better still if they travel on the sleeper.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 54,699
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Pulpstar said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    So why is Boris Johnson set to approve spending £30 billion on a nuclear power plant but will leave how many poor people will freeze to death to Truss?

    Boris Johnson is poised to give approval this week for a nuclear power station costing up to £30 billion as ministers close in on a deal to reopen Britain’s biggest gas storage facility.

    The prime minister is preparing to announce an in-principle agreement to offer funding to the Sizewell C reactor in Suffolk before he leaves office, despite concerns about creating a multibillion-pound spending commitment for Liz Truss, the frontrunner to succeed him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-ready-to-sign-off-on-30bn-sizewell-c-nuclear-power-station-fnnjds2ls

    He's also allowed the civil service to shunt the Cumbria coal mine into the repair yard. What an utterly useless [wordthatgetsyoubanned]
    Oh, I’m starting to warm to him.

    The coal mine was an example of a very small project with an ability to do orders of magnitude greater damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies than it would ever generate either in GDP, energy security or indeed carbon emissions.
    That's a rather odd argument. Do you use it against German soft power and their influence on developing world environmental policies, given Germany's vastly greater use of much
    worse types of coal?
    Yes. Germany is rightly pilloried not only in the developing world but the rest of Europe for that, its reluctance on nuclear and its over dependence on Russian gas. German soft power is badly diminished by its energy policy - a perfect case study.
    And do you realise the Cumbrian coal mine is *tiny* in comparison? A problem with your argument is that it can be used for anything we do that *you* don't like - however necessary it is.

    "We're still allowing diesel cars in 2022?
    Don't you realise the damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies this has?"
    You keep making my points for me. It’s the very tininess of it which makes the negative
    PR and signalling out of all proportion to any economic benefit.
    Placing virtue signalling over energy security ?

    Are you in the civil service ?
    The Cumbrian coal was not intended for power, rather steelmaking.
    How do we supply West Burton A, Ratcliffe & Kilroot ?
    Are they all still being shut down as originally planned so we can willy wave at the next COP ?
    I must admit to being very confused by the coal stats I find online. I went looking after reading your question and it is actually quite hard to find detail of how much coal we produce and import. The only real info I could find was from 2016 and doesn't seem to make any sense.

    It says

    We produce 4.6 million tons a year
    We import 9.3 million tons a year

    But we apparently use 41.5 million tons a year.

    So how do we fill the gap if the numbers for production and importing don't equal the numbers for usage?

    https://www.worldometers.info/coal/uk-coal/#:~:text=The United Kingdom holds 77,1.9 times its annual consumption.

    Something is squirly there.
    In 2016 they were running down the coal stocks at several coal plants prior to decommissioning. The stocks were very large and all had to be burned up. THree were shut that year and two more the following year.

    That may explain the gap, although it does seem on the large side.
    Have we blown all those coal plants up yet ? Can we recommission any of them ?
    No and no.

    Some of them have been converted to burn other fuels. I don't know whether it would be possible to recommission them to burn coal (albeit as they don't burn gas it would seem a bit pointless to switch them back). But it's hardly as simple as flicking a switch.
    I have noticed in my sad obsession with gridwatch recently that we have been burning small amounts of coal, roughly 1% of our output, so we clearly still have some working plants although whether they have the ability to significantly increase production may be another question.

    Edit, coal is at 2.38% today.
    What would they burn? I note Richard's post above about the plants being kept open a little longer. But where does the coal come from?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,723
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Pulpstar said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    So why is Boris Johnson set to approve spending £30 billion on a nuclear power plant but will leave how many poor people will freeze to death to Truss?

    Boris Johnson is poised to give approval this week for a nuclear power station costing up to £30 billion as ministers close in on a deal to reopen Britain’s biggest gas storage facility.

    The prime minister is preparing to announce an in-principle agreement to offer funding to the Sizewell C reactor in Suffolk before he leaves office, despite concerns about creating a multibillion-pound spending commitment for Liz Truss, the frontrunner to succeed him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-ready-to-sign-off-on-30bn-sizewell-c-nuclear-power-station-fnnjds2ls

    He's also allowed the civil service to shunt the Cumbria coal mine into the repair yard. What an utterly useless [wordthatgetsyoubanned]
    Oh, I’m starting to warm to him.

    The coal mine was an example of a very small project with an ability to do orders of magnitude greater damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies than it would ever generate either in GDP, energy security or indeed carbon emissions.
    That's a rather odd argument. Do you use it against German soft power and their influence on developing world environmental policies, given Germany's vastly greater use of much
    worse types of coal?
    Yes. Germany is rightly pilloried not only in the developing world but the rest of Europe for that, its reluctance on nuclear and its over dependence on Russian gas. German soft power is badly diminished by its energy policy - a perfect case study.
    And do you realise the Cumbrian coal mine is *tiny* in comparison? A problem with your argument is that it can be used for anything we do that *you* don't like - however necessary it is.

    "We're still allowing diesel cars in 2022?
    Don't you realise the damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies this has?"
    You keep making my points for me. It’s the very tininess of it which makes the negative
    PR and signalling out of all proportion to any economic benefit.
    Placing virtue signalling over energy security ?

    Are you in the civil service ?
    The Cumbrian coal was not intended for power, rather steelmaking.
    How do we supply West Burton A, Ratcliffe & Kilroot ?
    Are they all still being shut down as originally planned so we can willy wave at the next COP ?
    I must admit to being very confused by the coal stats I find online. I went looking after reading your question and it is actually quite hard to find detail of how much coal we produce and import. The only real info I could find was from 2016 and doesn't seem to make any sense.

    It says

    We produce 4.6 million tons a year
    We import 9.3 million tons a year

    But we apparently use 41.5 million tons a year.

    So how do we fill the gap if the numbers for production and importing don't equal the numbers for usage?

    https://www.worldometers.info/coal/uk-coal/#:~:text=The United Kingdom holds 77,1.9 times its annual consumption.

    Something is squirly there.
    In 2016 they were running down the coal stocks at several coal plants prior to decommissioning. The stocks were very large and all had to be burned up. THree were shut that year and two more the following year.

    That may explain the gap, although it does seem on the large side.
    Have we blown all those coal plants up yet ? Can we recommission any of them ?
    No and no.

    Some of them have been converted to burn other fuels. I don't know whether it would be possible to recommission them to burn coal (albeit as they don't burn gas it would seem a bit pointless to switch them back). But it's hardly as simple as flicking a switch.
    I have noticed in my sad obsession with gridwatch recently that we have been burning small amounts of coal, roughly 1% of our output, so we clearly still have some working plants although whether they have the ability to significantly increase production may be another question.

    Edit, coal is at 2.38% today.
    0.85 GW out of a possible 4.5 GW.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,254
    AlistairM said:

    Alistair said:

    Alistair said:

    WATCH: Our Chair, Professor Graeme Roy, discusses the key messages from our paper on trends in Scotland’s population and their effects on the economy and income tax, published this morning alongside our Fiscal Sustainability Report consultation paper.

    https://twitter.com/scotfisccomm/status/1564540062146101248

    In 50 years:

    Scotland:
    Population, -900,000 (-16%)
    Working age population from 64%>56%, as a result
    GDP -0.5% / year vs UK on average.

    https://webarchive.nrscotland.gov.uk/web/20210314004034/https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/statistics-and-data/statistics/statistics-by-theme/population/population-projections/population-projections-scotland/2001-based

    2001 population projection for Scotland

    Population in 2001 - 5,064,000
    Projected Population in 2021 - 4,895,000

    Actual population in 2020 - 5,470,000

    Interesting - did NRS ever explain what factors changed to affect the outcomes?

    Don't know if there was an official annoucenment but from squinting at graphs it looks like births rose from a 2001 nadir.


    England winning the World Cup in 1966 had a devastating impact on births in Scotland.
    In fairness condemning your children to listening to 70 years or more of the English going on about it is a reason to reflect.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,254
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Pulpstar said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    So why is Boris Johnson set to approve spending £30 billion on a nuclear power plant but will leave how many poor people will freeze to death to Truss?

    Boris Johnson is poised to give approval this week for a nuclear power station costing up to £30 billion as ministers close in on a deal to reopen Britain’s biggest gas storage facility.

    The prime minister is preparing to announce an in-principle agreement to offer funding to the Sizewell C reactor in Suffolk before he leaves office, despite concerns about creating a multibillion-pound spending commitment for Liz Truss, the frontrunner to succeed him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-ready-to-sign-off-on-30bn-sizewell-c-nuclear-power-station-fnnjds2ls

    He's also allowed the civil service to shunt the Cumbria coal mine into the repair yard. What an utterly useless [wordthatgetsyoubanned]
    Oh, I’m starting to warm to him.

    The coal mine was an example of a very small project with an ability to do orders of magnitude greater damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies than it would ever generate either in GDP, energy security or indeed carbon emissions.
    That's a rather odd argument. Do you use it against German soft power and their influence on developing world environmental policies, given Germany's vastly greater use of much
    worse types of coal?
    Yes. Germany is rightly pilloried not only in the developing world but the rest of Europe for that, its reluctance on nuclear and its over dependence on Russian gas. German soft power is badly diminished by its energy policy - a perfect case study.
    And do you realise the Cumbrian coal mine is *tiny* in comparison? A problem with your argument is that it can be used for anything we do that *you* don't like - however necessary it is.

    "We're still allowing diesel cars in 2022?
    Don't you realise the damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies this has?"
    You keep making my points for me. It’s the very tininess of it which makes the negative
    PR and signalling out of all proportion to any economic benefit.
    Placing virtue signalling over energy security ?

    Are you in the civil service ?
    The Cumbrian coal was not intended for power, rather steelmaking.
    How do we supply West Burton A, Ratcliffe & Kilroot ?
    Are they all still being shut down as originally planned so we can willy wave at the next COP ?
    I must admit to being very confused by the coal stats I find online. I went looking after reading your question and it is actually quite hard to find detail of how much coal we produce and import. The only real info I could find was from 2016 and doesn't seem to make any sense.

    It says

    We produce 4.6 million tons a year
    We import 9.3 million tons a year

    But we apparently use 41.5 million tons a year.

    So how do we fill the gap if the numbers for production and importing don't equal the numbers for usage?

    https://www.worldometers.info/coal/uk-coal/#:~:text=The United Kingdom holds 77,1.9 times its annual consumption.

    Something is squirly there.
    In 2016 they were running down the coal stocks at several coal plants prior to decommissioning. The stocks were very large and all had to be burned up. THree were shut that year and two more the following year.

    That may explain the gap, although it does seem on the large side.
    Have we blown all those coal plants up yet ? Can we recommission any of them ?
    No and no.

    Some of them have been converted to burn other fuels. I don't know whether it would be possible to recommission them to burn coal (albeit as they don't burn gas it would seem a bit pointless to switch them back). But it's hardly as simple as flicking a switch.
    I have noticed in my sad obsession with gridwatch recently that we have been burning small amounts of coal, roughly 1% of our output, so we clearly still have some working plants although whether they have the ability to significantly increase production may be another question.

    Edit, coal is at 2.38% today.
    What would they burn? I note Richard's post above about the plants being kept open a little longer. But where does the coal come from?
    It must be imported.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,880

    IshmaelZ said:

    Scott_xP said:

    The Queen will receive @BorisJohnson at Balmoral next Tuesday, and soon afterwards will hold her first audience with the new incoming Prime Minister, Buckingham Palace has confirmed
    https://twitter.com/RoyaNikkhah/status/1564916524422397957

    Think of the carbon footprint generated because the Queen won’t come down to London.

    If she’s not up to the job then she needs to abdicate, if not Charles needs to set up a regency.

    I’m quite prepared to serve as regent.

    If boj n liz travel together and queenie would otherwise have travelled to london tis carbon neutral
    Better still if they travel on the sleeper.
    They might well do that, but it won’t be publicised in advance for security reasons.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,254
    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Pulpstar said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    So why is Boris Johnson set to approve spending £30 billion on a nuclear power plant but will leave how many poor people will freeze to death to Truss?

    Boris Johnson is poised to give approval this week for a nuclear power station costing up to £30 billion as ministers close in on a deal to reopen Britain’s biggest gas storage facility.

    The prime minister is preparing to announce an in-principle agreement to offer funding to the Sizewell C reactor in Suffolk before he leaves office, despite concerns about creating a multibillion-pound spending commitment for Liz Truss, the frontrunner to succeed him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-ready-to-sign-off-on-30bn-sizewell-c-nuclear-power-station-fnnjds2ls

    He's also allowed the civil service to shunt the Cumbria coal mine into the repair yard. What an utterly useless [wordthatgetsyoubanned]
    Oh, I’m starting to warm to him.

    The coal mine was an example of a very small project with an ability to do orders of magnitude greater damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies than it would ever generate either in GDP, energy security or indeed carbon emissions.
    That's a rather odd argument. Do you use it against German soft power and their influence on developing world environmental policies, given Germany's vastly greater use of much
    worse types of coal?
    Yes. Germany is rightly pilloried not only in the developing world but the rest of Europe for that, its reluctance on nuclear and its over dependence on Russian gas. German soft power is badly diminished by its energy policy - a perfect case study.
    And do you realise the Cumbrian coal mine is *tiny* in comparison? A problem with your argument is that it can be used for anything we do that *you* don't like - however necessary it is.

    "We're still allowing diesel cars in 2022?
    Don't you realise the damage to British soft power or influence on developing world environmental policies this has?"
    You keep making my points for me. It’s the very tininess of it which makes the negative
    PR and signalling out of all proportion to any economic benefit.
    Placing virtue signalling over energy security ?

    Are you in the civil service ?
    The Cumbrian coal was not intended for power, rather steelmaking.
    How do we supply West Burton A, Ratcliffe & Kilroot ?
    Are they all still being shut down as originally planned so we can willy wave at the next COP ?
    I must admit to being very confused by the coal stats I find online. I went looking after reading your question and it is actually quite hard to find detail of how much coal we produce and import. The only real info I could find was from 2016 and doesn't seem to make any sense.

    It says

    We produce 4.6 million tons a year
    We import 9.3 million tons a year

    But we apparently use 41.5 million tons a year.

    So how do we fill the gap if the numbers for production and importing don't equal the numbers for usage?

    https://www.worldometers.info/coal/uk-coal/#:~:text=The United Kingdom holds 77,1.9 times its annual consumption.

    Something is squirly there.
    In 2016 they were running down the coal stocks at several coal plants prior to decommissioning. The stocks were very large and all had to be burned up. THree were shut that year and two more the following year.

    That may explain the gap, although it does seem on the large side.
    Have we blown all those coal plants up yet ? Can we recommission any of them ?
    No and no.

    Some of them have been converted to burn other fuels. I don't know whether it would be possible to recommission them to burn coal (albeit as they don't burn gas it would seem a bit pointless to switch them back). But it's hardly as simple as flicking a switch.
    I have noticed in my sad obsession with gridwatch recently that we have been burning small amounts of coal, roughly 1% of our output, so we clearly still have some working plants although whether they have the ability to significantly increase production may be another question.

    Edit, coal is at 2.38% today.
    0.85 GW out of a possible 4.5 GW.
    I would be a little cautious about taking the scales on gridwatch as gospal, much though I love the site. I very much doubt that they are updated particularly regularly in respect of capacity. What is disappointing is how little, despite an unending Tory leadership campaign, wind has been bringing to the mix of late.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,947
    edited August 31
    Sandpit said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Scott_xP said:

    The Queen will receive @BorisJohnson at Balmoral next Tuesday, and soon afterwards will hold her first audience with the new incoming Prime Minister, Buckingham Palace has confirmed
    https://twitter.com/RoyaNikkhah/status/1564916524422397957

    Think of the carbon footprint generated because the Queen won’t come down to London.

    If she’s not up to the job then she needs to abdicate, if not Charles needs to set up a regency.

    I’m quite prepared to serve as regent.

    If boj n liz travel together and queenie would otherwise have travelled to london tis carbon neutral
    Better still if they travel on the sleeper.
    They might well do that, but it won’t be publicised in advance for security reasons.
    Quite, who would want to travel on it then? Though it doesn't take a G. Freeman Allen to consider the only possible trains. Much more likely to take the Raff Shagmobile*.


    *Referring solely to the colour scheme, obvs.
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 1,447
    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    The Justice Department asserts in a filing that some of the documents seized from Mar-A-Lago were so sensitive and classified that in some instances the FBI agents and DOJ attorneys needed additional security clearances to review them.
    https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1564821787250249729

    If Trump is not jailed over this, then the US has definitely ceased to be a place where the rule of law applies to some people.
    And, yes, I know it already is, but this is way beyond anything already done.
    Call me old fashioned but I consider encouraging a mob to hang your vice president so you can keep power slightly worse than stealing some secret documents.

    And zero chance he goes to jail, unless the prosecutors can somehow get rid of his right to jury trial.
    I think he'll be beaten by Biden in the general now. Previously I thought he'd win, but Biden has
    i. Filed
    ii. Is creeping back up in popularity as the USA's cost for the Ukraine war is extremely cheap compared to continental europe.
    iii. Probably now holds the senate.
    iv. Got his deal through.
    I think Biden's prospects are largely tied to Ukraine's. If Ukraine is victorious by 2024, then that's a great foreign policy success for Biden and he's a winner.

    If the Russo-Ukraine War is an expensive stalemate, then Afghanistan comes to define Biden's presidency, and he looks like Carter, an embarrassment.
    Everyone will have forgotten about Afghanistan by 2024, either way.
    Americans also very rarely vote for POTUS due to foreign policy.

    Current outlook is gas (petrol for us) prices have stabilised and even reduced, and the Dobbs decision has been more harm for GOP in electoral terms. Outlook for November is a GOP House and Dem Senate, which will mean no legislation is passed for 2 years. If the Dems hold the Senate and a right wing SCOTUS judge dies, say Alito or Thomas, that would likely be the most impactful thing Biden could do.

    I think there are still some big questions about whether Biden gets to 2024 - yes he has filed, but his age and its impact are not really liked by the voters, even within the Democratic party. There is no obvious replacement, Harris was a dud and has been a nobody as VP, Buttigieg is much more of a technocrat than Biden and would likely not want to be seen as his successor, and the likes of Warren and Bernie still have the age issue to contend with.

    I also think that Trump may decide to bow out of the GOP race instead of being humiliated by a loss, and try to play king maker instead. Not that he would definitely lose, but I think it is close enough and he is insecure enough not to risk it. I think De Santis will likely be the GOP nominee, and he is arguably worse than Trump in many ways - more openly anti vax, more rabidly anti LGBT+, and also isn't really tied to the GOP establishment, so would be another cult of personality. He is just as willing to gerrymander and call foul elections as Trump, he just does it more subtly and through legislation rather than Twitter. The main question is would De Santis run against Trump if Trump does run - current evidence suggests he would.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,094
    It's a broad church at the Telegraph this morning. Two columns:

    Pearson: Boris can never be forgiven for sacrificing Britain to his net zero fantasy

    Warner: Blaming net zero for today’s energy crisis is culture war nonsense
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,254

    Bloody propaganda no doubt from that notorious nat mouthpiece the BBC.




    Good news. Do you know when that was released? I would guess that we have seen some serious new money coming into the North Sea again in light of the significant increase in prices making marginal production more profitable.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 6,550

    Thread.

    Could Keir Starmer be finding his voice in the current energy crisis? Could this be his 'David Cameron moment'?

    Quite possibly. Will explain. Quick thread:


    https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/1564917302423965696?s=21&t=uP3P3Vu6f7NcHavLGFXbeA

    One stage of this is missing: an analysis of whether the figures stack up. It is not news that people support free money. As government has created about £2 trillion of free money in the last few years (ie for our grandchildren to pay) voters are no longer asking of Labour: 'How do you propose to pay for it' except in hand wavey generalisations.

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 42,947
    Gazprom has completely turned off Nord Stream 1 until September 3rd.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,723

    Gazprom has completely turned off Nord Stream 1 until September 3rd.

    Like a gypsy's warning to Germany lol.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,880

    Gazprom has completely turned off Nord Stream 1 until September 3rd.

    Three days of ‘maintenance’. What chance it ends up being 300 days?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,038

    It's a broad church at the Telegraph this morning. Two columns:

    Pearson: Boris can never be forgiven for sacrificing Britain to his net zero fantasy

    Warner: Blaming net zero for today’s energy crisis is culture war nonsense

    Does the bulk of their readership have sufficient short term memory to note the editorial contradiction ?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,254
    edited August 31



    DavidL said:

    WATCH: Our Chair, Professor Graeme Roy, discusses the key messages from our paper on trends in Scotland’s population and their effects on the economy and income tax, published this morning alongside our Fiscal Sustainability Report consultation paper.

    https://twitter.com/scotfisccomm/status/1564540062146101248

    In 50 years:

    Scotland:
    Population, -900,000 (-16%)
    Working age population from 64%>56%, as a result
    GDP -0.5% / year vs UK on average.

    We are going to need a lot of immigration to offset that. A working population down to 56% would be beyond disastrous without a productivity miracle which has not shown any signs of existing yet. But how do we persuade any newcomers to stay here when the bright, shiny lights of London beckon?

    Two and a half billion climate refugees globally by 2050 and none choose Scotland?

    doubtful predictions abound



    The forecasts do claim to be taking immigration into account but whether they have allowed for the mass migration you are referring to I don't know. I suspect not.
    Edit, and a slightly belated welcome by the way. Are you another Scottish contributor?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 42,947
    edited August 31
    Pulpstar said:

    Gazprom has completely turned off Nord Stream 1 until September 3rd.

    Like a gypsy's warning to Germany lol.
    Incidentally Scholz's government still hasn't announced the details of a relief package for rising prices.

    https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/energiepreise-olaf-scholz-verspricht-praezise-massgeschneidetes-entlastungspaket-a-c291620a-e642-4908-91f4-c4d15aae1779
  • pingping Posts: 3,177
    Interesting…

    Even with Russias announcement, today, that gas via Nordstrom’s 1 is halting completely, uk wholesale prices are down further;

    https://www.theice.com/products/910/UK-Natural-Gas-Futures/data?marketId=5351153

    As I predicted a couple of days ago, this energy crisis may well have already peaked.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,947
    o/t but nice fish - makes a change:

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/31/barreleye-incredible-fish-with-a-transparent-head

    'Seeing a barreleye alive in the deep, Robison saw something else that scientists had previously missed. “It had this canopy over its eyes like on a jet fighter,” he says, referring to the transparent front part of the barreleye’s body, which had been torn off all the specimens he had previously brought to the surface.

    He thinks this canopy probably helps protect their eyes as they steal food from among the stinging tentacles of siphonophores – animals that float through the deep sea in long, deadly strings, like drift nets.'
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 19,968
    Anyone going to the London hustings tonight?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,038
    edited August 31
    Lib Dems get ready for possible byelection if Michael Gove quits
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/aug/30/lib-dems-get-ready-for-possible-byelection-if-michael-gove-quits

    I didn't see this yesterday - it seems unlikely ?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 57,080
    DavidL said:

    Bloody propaganda no doubt from that notorious nat mouthpiece the BBC.




    Good news. Do you know when that was released? I would guess that we have seen some serious new money coming into the North Sea again in light of the significant increase in prices making marginal production more profitable.
    May:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-61595697.amp

    Looks like it was ahead of North Sea investment - mainly digital.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 104,484

    Bloody propaganda no doubt from that notorious nat mouthpiece the BBC.




    Another Union dividend.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 7,778
    Nigelb said:

    It's a broad church at the Telegraph this morning. Two columns:

    Pearson: Boris can never be forgiven for sacrificing Britain to his net zero fantasy

    Warner: Blaming net zero for today’s energy crisis is culture war nonsense

    Does the bulk of their readership have sufficient short term memory to note the editorial contradiction ?
    Hard not to. The two columns are one on top of the other.
    Personally I welcome this sort of thing. A newspaper starts to become irrelevant if you know what every article on it will say about any issue before you read it.
    And both are readable writers. You could do worse than read both articles and come to your own colclusions.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 2,876
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    Trending on Twitter - #TrumpIsGoingToJail

    I am utterly amused that at the end of the day it’s the National Archives who may bring down the criminal Donald Trump

    The National Freaking Archive
    Librarians saving democracy

    https://twitter.com/KimerikalOne/status/1564844654335381504

    Not nearly as funny as the fact that he's being pursued under the laws he passed to get at Hilary Clinton.

    Edit - and anyway, they missed an awesome pun. It's the librarians that have booked him.
    That would be an abuse of Dewey Process.
    Sounds a lot of Huwey to me.

    :)
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,947
    edited August 31
    DavidL said:

    Bloody propaganda no doubt from that notorious nat mouthpiece the BBC.




    Good news. Do you know when that was released? I would guess that we have seen some serious new money coming into the North Sea again in light of the significant increase in prices making marginal production more profitable.
    Hmm, quite new it seems. Even mentions Juteburgh:

    'Scotland's share of all UK foreign direct investment (FDI) projects rose to its highest level in the past decade, securing 12.3% of projects - up from 11% in 2020.

    The survey also found that Edinburgh, Glasgow and Aberdeen remained in the top 10 locations outside of London for attracting projects.

    Edinburgh ranked equal first with Manchester, with Dundee and Livingston also making the top 20.'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-61595697
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,038

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    Trending on Twitter - #TrumpIsGoingToJail

    I am utterly amused that at the end of the day it’s the National Archives who may bring down the criminal Donald Trump

    The National Freaking Archive
    Librarians saving democracy

    https://twitter.com/KimerikalOne/status/1564844654335381504

    Not nearly as funny as the fact that he's being pursued under the laws he passed to get at Hilary Clinton.

    Edit - and anyway, they missed an awesome pun. It's the librarians that have booked him.
    That would be an abuse of Dewey Process.
    Sounds a lot of Huwey to me.

    :)
    No, the librarians have stacks of evidence.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,880
    Nigelb said:

    Lib Dems get ready for possible byelection if Michael Gove quits
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/aug/30/lib-dems-get-ready-for-possible-byelection-if-michael-gove-quits

    I didn't see this yesterday - it seems unlikely ?

    So, the Lib Dems selected a candidate to fight Surrey Heath, less than two months ago.

    https://www.markpack.org.uk/169542/alasdair-pinkerton-selected-by-lib-dems-in-michael-goves-constituency/

    But now they are re-opening nominations in case of a by-election. What happened to the candidate, Mr Pinkerton?
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,451
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    The Justice Department asserts in a filing that some of the documents seized from Mar-A-Lago were so sensitive and classified that in some instances the FBI agents and DOJ attorneys needed additional security clearances to review them.
    https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1564821787250249729

    If Trump is not jailed over this, then the US has definitely ceased to be a place where the rule of law applies to some people.
    And, yes, I know it already is, but this is way beyond anything already done.
    Call me old fashioned but I consider encouraging a mob to hang your vice president so you can keep power slightly worse than stealing some secret documents....
    Difference is the burden of proof.
    In the latter case there is no need to demonstrate intent. Which means the decision to prosecute is a much simpler matter of upholding the law.
    ^^^ This.
    No need for he said/she said. No need for intent.
    Did he have documents at TS, SAP, SI, and SCI (including Nuclear) illegaly? If so, criminal, with compulsory jail sentence.
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    Trending on Twitter - #TrumpIsGoingToJail

    I am utterly amused that at the end of the day it’s the National Archives who may bring down the criminal Donald Trump

    The National Freaking Archive
    Librarians saving democracy

    https://twitter.com/KimerikalOne/status/1564844654335381504

    Not nearly as funny as the fact that he's being pursued under the laws he passed to get at Hilary Clinton.

    Edit - and anyway, they missed an awesome pun. It's the librarians that have booked him.
    That law does help, but only in putting in the boot.
    At the end of the day, someone with secret, top secret, secure compartmented information, and special access program documents would always end up with a 5-10 year stretch, anyway.
    With fifteen boxes full...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 54,699
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    Trending on Twitter - #TrumpIsGoingToJail

    I am utterly amused that at the end of the day it’s the National Archives who may bring down the criminal Donald Trump

    The National Freaking Archive
    Librarians saving democracy

    https://twitter.com/KimerikalOne/status/1564844654335381504

    Not nearly as funny as the fact that he's being pursued under the laws he passed to get at Hilary Clinton.

    Edit - and anyway, they missed an awesome pun. It's the librarians that have booked him.
    That would be an abuse of Dewey Process.
    It wouldn't be needed for a True Man.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,038
    Cookie said:

    Nigelb said:

    It's a broad church at the Telegraph this morning. Two columns:

    Pearson: Boris can never be forgiven for sacrificing Britain to his net zero fantasy

    Warner: Blaming net zero for today’s energy crisis is culture war nonsense

    Does the bulk of their readership have sufficient short term memory to note the editorial contradiction ?
    Hard not to. The two columns are one on top of the other.
    Personally I welcome this sort of thing. A newspaper starts to become irrelevant if you know what every article on it will say about any issue before you read it.
    And both are readable writers. You could do worse than read both articles and come to your own colclusions.
    Life's too short.
    And yes, it was a poor joke.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,947
    edited August 31

    DavidL said:

    Bloody propaganda no doubt from that notorious nat mouthpiece the BBC.




    Good news. Do you know when that was released? I would guess that we have seen some serious new money coming into the North Sea again in light of the significant increase in prices making marginal production more profitable.
    May:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-61595697.amp

    Looks like it was ahead of North Sea investment - mainly digital.
    But the tewet was today.

    https://twitter.com/rosscolquhoun/status/1564892411679096832?cxt=HHwWgICy3e7WzrcrAAAA

    Edsit: not sure why. What else is happening to dig it out now? It's pretty recent anyway.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 2,644

    Scott_xP said:

    The Queen will receive @BorisJohnson at Balmoral next Tuesday, and soon afterwards will hold her first audience with the new incoming Prime Minister, Buckingham Palace has confirmed
    https://twitter.com/RoyaNikkhah/status/1564916524422397957

    Think of the carbon footprint generated because the Queen won’t come down to London.

    If she’s not up to the job then she needs to abdicate, if not Charles needs to set up a regency.

    I’m quite prepared to serve as regent.

    But the Queen travelling would have a carbon footprint, and she’s probably got a larger entourage than Johnson or Truss who would travel with her. Ergo, minimising monarch travel may be the best way to minimise the carbon footprint.

    Although I don’t see what’s wrong with a Teams meeting.

  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,136
    Things you say when your time has definitely gone really well https://twitter.com/benphillips76/status/1564911159991537664/photo/1
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,038
    148grss said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    The Justice Department asserts in a filing that some of the documents seized from Mar-A-Lago were so sensitive and classified that in some instances the FBI agents and DOJ attorneys needed additional security clearances to review them.
    https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1564821787250249729

    If Trump is not jailed over this, then the US has definitely ceased to be a place where the rule of law applies to some people.
    And, yes, I know it already is, but this is way beyond anything already done.
    Call me old fashioned but I consider encouraging a mob to hang your vice president so you can keep power slightly worse than stealing some secret documents.

    And zero chance he goes to jail, unless the prosecutors can somehow get rid of his right to jury trial.
    I think he'll be beaten by Biden in the general now. Previously I thought he'd win, but Biden has
    i. Filed
    ii. Is creeping back up in popularity as the USA's cost for the Ukraine war is extremely cheap compared to continental europe.
    iii. Probably now holds the senate.
    iv. Got his deal through.
    I think Biden's prospects are largely tied to Ukraine's. If Ukraine is victorious by 2024, then that's a great foreign policy success for Biden and he's a winner.

    If the Russo-Ukraine War is an expensive stalemate, then Afghanistan comes to define Biden's presidency, and he looks like Carter, an embarrassment.
    Everyone will have forgotten about Afghanistan by 2024, either way.
    Americans also very rarely vote for POTUS due to foreign policy.

    Current outlook is gas (petrol for us) prices have stabilised and even reduced, and the Dobbs decision has been more harm for GOP in electoral terms. Outlook for November is a GOP House and Dem Senate, which will mean no legislation is passed for 2 years. If the Dems hold the Senate and a right wing SCOTUS judge dies, say Alito or Thomas, that would likely be the most impactful thing Biden could do.

    I think there are still some big questions about whether Biden gets to 2024 - yes he has filed, but his age and its impact are not really liked by the voters, even within the Democratic party. There is no obvious replacement, Harris was a dud and has been a nobody as VP, Buttigieg is much more of a technocrat than Biden and would likely not want to be seen as his successor, and the likes of Warren and Bernie still have the age issue to contend with.

    I also think that Trump may decide to bow out of the GOP race instead of being humiliated by a loss, and try to play king maker instead. Not that he would definitely lose, but I think it is close enough and he is insecure enough not to risk it. I think De Santis will likely be the GOP nominee, and he is arguably worse than Trump in many ways - more openly anti vax, more rabidly anti LGBT+, and also isn't really tied to the GOP establishment, so would be another cult of personality. He is just as willing to gerrymander and call foul elections as Trump, he just does it more subtly and through legislation rather than Twitter. The main question is would De Santis run against Trump if Trump does run - current evidence suggests he would.
    All unknowables at this point (though I have the Dems as favourites, just, in 2024).

    And don't assume the conventional wisdom is definitely right. The odds on the Republicans taking the House have lengthened from 1.15 to around 1.4, for example.
    And I think Crist might just be in with a chance in Florida.

    I wouldn't be betting much on 2024 until the midterms are done.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,947

    Scott_xP said:

    The Queen will receive @BorisJohnson at Balmoral next Tuesday, and soon afterwards will hold her first audience with the new incoming Prime Minister, Buckingham Palace has confirmed
    https://twitter.com/RoyaNikkhah/status/1564916524422397957

    Think of the carbon footprint generated because the Queen won’t come down to London.

    If she’s not up to the job then she needs to abdicate, if not Charles needs to set up a regency.

    I’m quite prepared to serve as regent.

    But the Queen travelling would have a carbon footprint, and she’s probably got a larger entourage than Johnson or Truss who would travel with her. Ergo, minimising monarch travel may be the best way to minimise the carbon footprint.

    Although I don’t see what’s wrong with a Teams meeting.

    Didn't have Mr Bell's invention, never mind Teams, the last time they actually thought about how to do things constituionally [sic] in a sane manner.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 7,778
    Sandpit said:

    Gazprom has completely turned off Nord Stream 1 until September 3rd.

    Three days of ‘maintenance’. What chance it ends up being 300 days?
    Can Russia afford not to be selling gas?
    Obviously lack of cheap gas hits the German economy hard. But the German economy has many strings to its bow. The Russian economy doesn't have much more than selling oil and gas.
    Now my impression is that Russia thinks it can tough this out. "Decadent westerners will crack as soon as they cannot afford champagne while we Russians can endure any privations." By which what I think they actually mean is that unimportant, little Russians can endure any privations. But soon this will start to impact the decision making class in Moscow and St. P. Who may turn oit to be less forgiving of drops in living standards than the Kremlin assumes.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,038
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Lib Dems get ready for possible byelection if Michael Gove quits
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/aug/30/lib-dems-get-ready-for-possible-byelection-if-michael-gove-quits

    I didn't see this yesterday - it seems unlikely ?

    So, the Lib Dems selected a candidate to fight Surrey Heath, less than two months ago.

    https://www.markpack.org.uk/169542/alasdair-pinkerton-selected-by-lib-dems-in-michael-goves-constituency/

    But now they are re-opening nominations in case of a by-election. What happened to the candidate, Mr Pinkerton?
    No longer detectable.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 29,177
    Carnyx said:

    Scott_xP said:

    The Queen will receive @BorisJohnson at Balmoral next Tuesday, and soon afterwards will hold her first audience with the new incoming Prime Minister, Buckingham Palace has confirmed
    https://twitter.com/RoyaNikkhah/status/1564916524422397957

    Think of the carbon footprint generated because the Queen won’t come down to London.

    If she’s not up to the job then she needs to abdicate, if not Charles needs to set up a regency.

    I’m quite prepared to serve as regent.

    But the Queen travelling would have a carbon footprint, and she’s probably got a larger entourage than Johnson or Truss who would travel with her. Ergo, minimising monarch travel may be the best way to minimise the carbon footprint.

    Although I don’t see what’s wrong with a Teams meeting.

    Didn't have Mr Bell's invention, never mind Teams, the last time they actually thought about how to do things constituionally [sic] in a sane manner.
    Which is more secure, Teams or Zoom?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 54,699
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Lib Dems get ready for possible byelection if Michael Gove quits
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/aug/30/lib-dems-get-ready-for-possible-byelection-if-michael-gove-quits

    I didn't see this yesterday - it seems unlikely ?

    So, the Lib Dems selected a candidate to fight Surrey Heath, less than two months ago.

    https://www.markpack.org.uk/169542/alasdair-pinkerton-selected-by-lib-dems-in-michael-goves-constituency/

    But now they are re-opening nominations in case of a by-election. What happened to the candidate, Mr Pinkerton?
    No longer detectable.
    A sense of in security?
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 2,876
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    Trending on Twitter - #TrumpIsGoingToJail

    I am utterly amused that at the end of the day it’s the National Archives who may bring down the criminal Donald Trump

    The National Freaking Archive
    Librarians saving democracy

    https://twitter.com/KimerikalOne/status/1564844654335381504

    Not nearly as funny as the fact that he's being pursued under the laws he passed to get at Hilary Clinton.

    Edit - and anyway, they missed an awesome pun. It's the librarians that have booked him.
    That would be an abuse of Dewey Process.
    Sounds a lot of Huwey to me.

    :)
    No, the librarians have stacks of evidence.
    Have they got books on shelving?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 15,919
    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    The Justice Department asserts in a filing that some of the documents seized from Mar-A-Lago were so sensitive and classified that in some instances the FBI agents and DOJ attorneys needed additional security clearances to review them.
    https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1564821787250249729

    If Trump is not jailed over this, then the US has definitely ceased to be a place where the rule of law applies to some people.
    And, yes, I know it already is, but this is way beyond anything already done.
    Call me old fashioned but I consider encouraging a mob to hang your vice president so you can keep power slightly worse than stealing some secret documents.

    And zero chance he goes to jail, unless the prosecutors can somehow get rid of his right to jury trial.
    I think he'll be beaten by Biden in the general now. Previously I thought he'd win, but Biden has
    i. Filed
    ii. Is creeping back up in popularity as the USA's cost for the Ukraine war is extremely cheap compared to continental europe.
    iii. Probably now holds the senate.
    iv. Got his deal through.
    Agree, I think its a very similar re-run to last time. Fairly close Biden v Trump, Biden wins if votes counted accurately, court cases and riots galore. Watch this years elections to find out who the referees are.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 6,550
    Nigelb said:

    It's a broad church at the Telegraph this morning. Two columns:

    Pearson: Boris can never be forgiven for sacrificing Britain to his net zero fantasy

    Warner: Blaming net zero for today’s energy crisis is culture war nonsense

    Does the bulk of their readership have sufficient short term memory to note the editorial contradiction ?
    Traditionally the 'editorial' line of a paper is what it says in unsigned editorials. Proper papers also publish all sorts of diverse lines of opinion. These contradict each other, as opinion does.

    Is the Telegraph a proper paper? No idea. As Matt is available free online I have had no need to see one for years.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 45,038
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    Trending on Twitter - #TrumpIsGoingToJail

    I am utterly amused that at the end of the day it’s the National Archives who may bring down the criminal Donald Trump

    The National Freaking Archive
    Librarians saving democracy

    https://twitter.com/KimerikalOne/status/1564844654335381504

    Not nearly as funny as the fact that he's being pursued under the laws he passed to get at Hilary Clinton.

    Edit - and anyway, they missed an awesome pun. It's the librarians that have booked him.
    That would be an abuse of Dewey Process.
    It wouldn't be needed for a True Man.
    I think we're overdue a fine pun.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 57,080
    Two leading officials in #Germany's Economy Ministry are under suspicion of working for #Moscow, both in key positions for German energy security. They apparently had a very pro-Russian stance and even obstructed Habeck's policies in the last months.

    There is no hard evidence at this point for espionage or corruption. So it is possible that they were acting out of conviction or personal sympathies for Moscow. Which is also not great.


    https://twitter.com/jakluge/status/1564921288870825984
  • MISTYMISTY Posts: 1,594
    Looking at the markets, a big fat sterling crisis could add to the new PM's colossal in-tray.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,880
    Cookie said:

    Sandpit said:

    Gazprom has completely turned off Nord Stream 1 until September 3rd.

    Three days of ‘maintenance’. What chance it ends up being 300 days?
    Can Russia afford not to be selling gas?
    Obviously lack of cheap gas hits the German economy hard. But the German economy has many strings to its bow. The Russian economy doesn't have much more than selling oil and gas.
    Now my impression is that Russia thinks it can tough this out. "Decadent westerners will crack as soon as they cannot afford champagne while we Russians can endure any privations." By which what I think they actually mean is that unimportant, little Russians can endure any privations. But soon this will start to impact the decision making class in Moscow and St. P. Who may turn oit to be less forgiving of drops in living standards than the Kremlin assumes.
    I’ve been doing some thinking (yes, I know) on the Kremlinology of the Russian gas situation.

    They’ve done pretty well so far this year, selling lower volumes at higher prices, as well as expanding markets in Asia, so they may have a financial buffer for a few months. They are calculating that making a show to Europe in general, and Germany in particular, that they can cut off the gas at will, and that they will do it because it’s fun to watch Europe freeze, might affect European support for Ukraine.

    In Russia itself, the economy under sanctions is slowly eating itself from the inside out. The middle class of Moscow are definitely noticing the lack of imported luxury goods, and key manufacturing sectors (including O&G) are starting to squeeze from a lack of capital equipment and spare parts. There’s already a $300m Airbus A350, delivered in February this year, grounded and cannibalised for spares to keep the rest of the fleet running, and in the next few months more factories will be forced to close, as spare parts and supply of raw materials run out.

    Surprisingly, China doesn’t seem to be particularly interested in helping Russia with getting capital equipment in through the back door, which is very good news for the rest of us. It means the economic squeeze on Russia will continue. Putin thinks the West will blink first under pressure, and ease the sanctions this winter in return for more gas.

    I think, and hope, that Sholz gets talked out of it by the Eastern European countries, for whom this war is existential.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 1,310
    Nigelb said:

    Lib Dems get ready for possible byelection if Michael Gove quits
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/aug/30/lib-dems-get-ready-for-possible-byelection-if-michael-gove-quits

    I didn't see this yesterday - it seems unlikely ?

    There is a rumour, for which I don’t have a source, that he will be editing the Times.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,947

    Carnyx said:

    Scott_xP said:

    The Queen will receive @BorisJohnson at Balmoral next Tuesday, and soon afterwards will hold her first audience with the new incoming Prime Minister, Buckingham Palace has confirmed
    https://twitter.com/RoyaNikkhah/status/1564916524422397957

    Think of the carbon footprint generated because the Queen won’t come down to London.

    If she’s not up to the job then she needs to abdicate, if not Charles needs to set up a regency.

    I’m quite prepared to serve as regent.

    But the Queen travelling would have a carbon footprint, and she’s probably got a larger entourage than Johnson or Truss who would travel with her. Ergo, minimising monarch travel may be the best way to minimise the carbon footprint.

    Although I don’t see what’s wrong with a Teams meeting.

    Didn't have Mr Bell's invention, never mind Teams, the last time they actually thought about how to do things constituionally [sic] in a sane manner.
    Which is more secure, Teams or Zoom?
    I think when they were thinking of packet messaging and routing, it was more a matter of a discreet gent with a briefcase chained to his wrist and seeing whether to buy his ticket on the LNWR/Caledonian or NE/NB Railways.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,880

    Carnyx said:

    Scott_xP said:

    The Queen will receive @BorisJohnson at Balmoral next Tuesday, and soon afterwards will hold her first audience with the new incoming Prime Minister, Buckingham Palace has confirmed
    https://twitter.com/RoyaNikkhah/status/1564916524422397957

    Think of the carbon footprint generated because the Queen won’t come down to London.

    If she’s not up to the job then she needs to abdicate, if not Charles needs to set up a regency.

    I’m quite prepared to serve as regent.

    But the Queen travelling would have a carbon footprint, and she’s probably got a larger entourage than Johnson or Truss who would travel with her. Ergo, minimising monarch travel may be the best way to minimise the carbon footprint.

    Although I don’t see what’s wrong with a Teams meeting.

    Didn't have Mr Bell's invention, never mind Teams, the last time they actually thought about how to do things constituionally [sic] in a sane manner.
    Which is more secure, Teams or Zoom?
    Anything is more secure than Zoom.

    I’d use, in order:
    Webex
    Teams
    Signal
    FaceTime
    WhatsApp/Facebook
    Phone call
    Zoom
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,723
    Just €41.6B in profit for Gazprom in the first half of the year then.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 57,080
    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    Bloody propaganda no doubt from that notorious nat mouthpiece the BBC.




    Good news. Do you know when that was released? I would guess that we have seen some serious new money coming into the North Sea again in light of the significant increase in prices making marginal production more profitable.
    May:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-61595697.amp

    Looks like it was ahead of North Sea investment - mainly digital.
    But the tewet was today.

    https://twitter.com/rosscolquhoun/status/1564892411679096832?cxt=HHwWgICy3e7WzrcrAAAA

    Edsit: not sure why. What else is happening to dig it out now? It's pretty recent anyway.
    The story is from the end of May. There may be clues as to why it was tweeted today in the Tweeter’s biography. At a guess it’s a response to Sturgeon’s “embassies’, Denmark trip and Fringe appearance criticism.

  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 5,491

    Thread.

    Could Keir Starmer be finding his voice in the current energy crisis? Could this be his 'David Cameron moment'?

    Quite possibly. Will explain. Quick thread:


    https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/1564917302423965696?s=21&t=uP3P3Vu6f7NcHavLGFXbeA

    I just watched that clip, and that's the 'coolest' I've ever seen Starmer look. The dark jacket and shirt, no tie, suits him.

    Superficial, I know. But image counts, and Starmer isn't known for his 'coolness'. Worth continuing with, I reckon.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 54,699
    Sandpit said:

    Cookie said:

    Sandpit said:

    Gazprom has completely turned off Nord Stream 1 until September 3rd.

    Three days of ‘maintenance’. What chance it ends up being 300 days?
    Can Russia afford not to be selling gas?
    Obviously lack of cheap gas hits the German economy hard. But the German economy has many strings to its bow. The Russian economy doesn't have much more than selling oil and gas.
    Now my impression is that Russia thinks it can tough this out. "Decadent westerners will crack as soon as they cannot afford champagne while we Russians can endure any privations." By which what I think they actually mean is that unimportant, little Russians can endure any privations. But soon this will start to impact the decision making class in Moscow and St. P. Who may turn oit to be less forgiving of drops in living standards than the Kremlin assumes.
    I’ve been doing some thinking (yes, I know) on the Kremlinology of the Russian gas situation.

    They’ve done pretty well so far this year, selling lower volumes at higher prices, as well as expanding markets in Asia, so they may have a financial buffer for a few months. They are calculating that making a show to Europe in general, and Germany in particular, that they can cut off the gas at will, and that they will do it because it’s fun to watch Europe freeze, might affect European support for Ukraine.

    In Russia itself, the economy under sanctions is slowly eating itself from the inside out. The middle class of Moscow are definitely noticing the lack of imported luxury goods, and key manufacturing sectors (including O&G) are starting to squeeze from a lack of capital equipment and spare parts. There’s already a $300m Airbus A350, delivered in February this year, grounded and cannibalised for spares to keep the rest of the fleet running, and in the next few months more factories will be forced to close, as spare parts and supply of raw materials run out.

    Surprisingly, China doesn’t seem to be particularly interested in helping Russia with getting capital equipment in through the back door, which is very good news for the rest of us. It means the economic squeeze on Russia will continue. Putin thinks the West will blink first under pressure, and ease the sanctions this winter in return for more gas.

    I think, and hope, that Sholz gets talked out of it by the Eastern European countries, for whom this war is existential.
    I would have thought it's just as likely to see support for Ukraine increase on the grounds the sooner Russia is defeated and Putin toppled the better for energy security.
  • MustaphaMondeoMustaphaMondeo Posts: 26
    edited August 31
    DavidL
    DavidL Posts: 43,934
    12:02PM edited 12:04PM


    The forecasts do claim to be taking immigration into account but whether they have allowed for the mass migration you are referring to I don't know. I suspect not.
    Edit, and a slightly belated welcome by the way. Are you another Scottish contributor?

    Thanks.

    live in the Peak District

    I think I’ve mucked up my edit. Sorry.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 7,802
    MISTY said:

    Looking at the markets, a big fat sterling crisis could add to the new PM's colossal in-tray.

    Isn't that just what happens when a government spends money it doesn't have?
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 8,513
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    Trending on Twitter - #TrumpIsGoingToJail

    I am utterly amused that at the end of the day it’s the National Archives who may bring down the criminal Donald Trump

    The National Freaking Archive
    Librarians saving democracy

    https://twitter.com/KimerikalOne/status/1564844654335381504

    Not nearly as funny as the fact that he's being pursued under the laws he passed to get at Hilary Clinton.

    Edit - and anyway, they missed an awesome pun. It's the librarians that have booked him.
    That would be an abuse of Dewey Process.
    It wouldn't be needed for a True Man.
    Proof indeed Trump is an alien. He came from the Dewey Decimal System 🙂
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 19,968
    edited August 31

    It's a broad church at the Telegraph this morning. Two columns:

    Pearson: Boris can never be forgiven for sacrificing Britain to his net zero fantasy

    Warner: Blaming net zero for today’s energy crisis is culture war nonsense

    I don't see what the contradiction is. Net Zero is the problem in both cases.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 54,699

    DavidL
    DavidL Posts: 43,934
    12:02PM edited 12:04PM


    The forecasts do claim to be taking immigration into account but whether they have allowed for the mass migration you are referring to I don't know. I suspect not.
    Edit, and a slightly belated welcome by the way. Are you another Scottish contributor?

    Thanks.

    live in the Peak District

    I think I’ve mucked up my edit. Sorry.

    The difference between losing your virginity and mucking up a PB edit is that one is something everyone does and the other is something to do with sex.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 54,699
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    Trending on Twitter - #TrumpIsGoingToJail

    I am utterly amused that at the end of the day it’s the National Archives who may bring down the criminal Donald Trump

    The National Freaking Archive
    Librarians saving democracy

    https://twitter.com/KimerikalOne/status/1564844654335381504

    Not nearly as funny as the fact that he's being pursued under the laws he passed to get at Hilary Clinton.

    Edit - and anyway, they missed an awesome pun. It's the librarians that have booked him.
    That would be an abuse of Dewey Process.
    It wouldn't be needed for a True Man.
    I think we're overdue a fine pun.
    We need to stamp this out, fast.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,723
    edited August 31

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    The Justice Department asserts in a filing that some of the documents seized from Mar-A-Lago were so sensitive and classified that in some instances the FBI agents and DOJ attorneys needed additional security clearances to review them.
    https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1564821787250249729

    If Trump is not jailed over this, then the US has definitely ceased to be a place where the rule of law applies to some people.
    And, yes, I know it already is, but this is way beyond anything already done.
    Call me old fashioned but I consider encouraging a mob to hang your vice president so you can keep power slightly worse than stealing some secret documents.

    And zero chance he goes to jail, unless the prosecutors can somehow get rid of his right to jury trial.
    I think he'll be beaten by Biden in the general now. Previously I thought he'd win, but Biden has
    i. Filed
    ii. Is creeping back up in popularity as the USA's cost for the Ukraine war is extremely cheap compared to continental europe.
    iii. Probably now holds the senate.
    iv. Got his deal through.
    Agree, I think its a very similar re-run to last time. Fairly close Biden v Trump, Biden wins if votes counted accurately, court cases and riots galore. Watch this years elections to find out who the referees are.
    One thing Biden has this year though is Kamala Harris as VP, who will count Georgia's votes as the electors have decided not the GA legislature. I think that'll be the centre of the hoo haa in 2024.
    OTOH he probably won't have the speaker of the house, who actually has a huge amount of power in extremis along with SCOTUS and key legislatures (Georgia, perhaps Wisconsin) and various federal/state courts up the chain.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 57,985
    Andy_JS said:

    It's a broad church at the Telegraph this morning. Two columns:

    Pearson: Boris can never be forgiven for sacrificing Britain to his net zero fantasy

    Warner: Blaming net zero for today’s energy crisis is culture war nonsense

    I don't see what the contradiction is. Net Zero is the problem in both cases.
    Is it? Given the current price of gas you wonder how anyone can be opposed to this aspiration.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,136
    Politics 🧵...

    For the first time since our market opened, Labour are considered more likely than the Tories to win an overall majority at the next General Election.

    Labour are at an all-time market high of 29% with the Tories at a new low of 24% ➡️ https://smrkts.co/3eulAIU https://twitter.com/smarkets/status/1564931498129637378/photo/1
This discussion has been closed.