1. If you have enough wind power to power the country on a not very windy day, then you don't need to burn gas that day either. Sure, on a windy day you have redundant wind capacity you can't use but so what?
...but you've then paid an awful lot of money to build out and maintain that enormously over-sized quantity of infrastructure, much of which then sits idle the majority of the time when winds are moderate or stronger. Those costs get passed on and will come out as higher cost of electricity one way or another (or as government subsidy and higher taxation, if you prefer). Unused infrastructure capacity can be good, but it's never free.
Most gas turbines are idle most of the time. That’s why we have gas generation that’s able to jump from about 4gw last night to 18gw currently, and back again.
So we have vast amounts of unused energy infrastructure as a standard feature of the grid.
But don’t worry about it anyway. Wind power generators are making record mega profits, so much so that they’ll probably be hit by a windfall tax, because their cost of generation is so low compared with the price per kWh they receive.
If the windfall tax for wind generators is designed like the one for oil and gas, with an allowance to avoid the tax if there's sufficient new investment instead, then we could soon see an even more rapid growth in cheap and sustainable energy. Win/win.
The Government just needs to GTFO of the way and not block it with planning regulations.
1. If you have enough wind power to power the country on a not very windy day, then you don't need to burn gas that day either. Sure, on a windy day you have redundant wind capacity you can't use but so what?
...but you've then paid an awful lot of money to build out and maintain that enormously over-sized quantity of infrastructure, much of which then sits idle the majority of the time when winds are moderate or stronger. Those costs get passed on and will come out as higher cost of electricity one way or another (or as government subsidy and higher taxation, if you prefer). Unused infrastructure capacity can be good, but it's never free.
The trick will be when you can use surplus wind power to create hydrogen, which you can then store and turn back to electricity when you need it. Or when you find some other way of storing surplus electricity.
The trick will be to make supply of renewable energy large enough that demand for fossil fuel drops off. We are a very very long way from that point, because we can do so much with energy, that at the moment all the renewable energy is adding to the total energy consumption rather than reducing CO2 emissions.
In terms of domestic electricity that’s not the case. UK consumption has declined steadily for years.
Partly deindustrialisation (though France and Germany have also seen declined despite industrial output rising), largely energy efficiency. Offset partially in most rich countries by energy consumption from server farms. But the trend still down.
Renewables have then partially decarbonised the energy mix, hence carbon emissions per $ GDP going down in most countries.
1. If you have enough wind power to power the country on a not very windy day, then you don't need to burn gas that day either. Sure, on a windy day you have redundant wind capacity you can't use but so what?
...but you've then paid an awful lot of money to build out and maintain that enormously over-sized quantity of infrastructure, much of which then sits idle the majority of the time when winds are moderate or stronger. Those costs get passed on and will come out as higher cost of electricity one way or another (or as government subsidy and higher taxation, if you prefer). Unused infrastructure capacity can be good, but it's never free.
The trick will be when you can use surplus wind power to create hydrogen, which you can then store and turn back to electricity when you need it. Or when you find some other way of storing surplus electricity.
The trick will be to make supply of renewable energy large enough that demand for fossil fuel drops off. We are a very very long way from that point, because we can do so much with energy, that at the moment all the renewable energy is adding to the total energy consumption rather than reducing CO2 emissions.
In terms of domestic electricity that’s not the case. UK consumption has declined steadily for years.
Partly deindustrialisation (though France and Germany have also seen declined despite industrial output rising), largely energy efficiency. Offset partially in most rich countries by energy consumption from server farms. But the trend still down.
Renewables have then partially decarbonised the energy mix, hence carbon emissions per $ GDP going down in most countries.
But that is not the global situation and global warming is ... er.. a global problem.
This evening is an interesting case study. 2.3gw of wind power vs 17.4gw of gas, because it’s dark and cold but quite calm.
4x current installed wind capacity and we’d be generating 10gw, a third of our total demand even now in very unfavourable conditions. There is ample room on the seabed for 4x current capacity, and much more besides.
And when it is very windy and we have too much cheap energy?
As if people think that's a problem!
Having too much cheap energy, and having issues wondering what to do with it, is a far better "problem" to solve than having extremely expensive energy. And can also allow a relocation of industry here. Heavy industry that can scale up to take advantage when there is abundant cheap energy, and scale down there is not, can be a productive and efficient export opportunity. Countries with ample hydro etc resources can already have businesses operating this way.
1. If you have enough wind power to power the country on a not very windy day, then you don't need to burn gas that day either. Sure, on a windy day you have redundant wind capacity you can't use but so what?
...but you've then paid an awful lot of money to build out and maintain that enormously over-sized quantity of infrastructure, much of which then sits idle the majority of the time when winds are moderate or stronger. Those costs get passed on and will come out as higher cost of electricity one way or another (or as government subsidy and higher taxation, if you prefer). Unused infrastructure capacity can be good, but it's never free.
The trick will be when you can use surplus wind power to create hydrogen, which you can then store and turn back to electricity when you need it. Or when you find some other way of storing surplus electricity.
The trick will be to make supply of renewable energy large enough that demand for fossil fuel drops off. We are a very very long way from that point, because we can do so much with energy, that at the moment all the renewable energy is adding to the total energy consumption rather than reducing CO2 emissions.
In terms of domestic electricity that’s not the case. UK consumption has declined steadily for years.
Partly deindustrialisation (though France and Germany have also seen declined despite industrial output rising), largely energy efficiency. Offset partially in most rich countries by energy consumption from server farms. But the trend still down.
Renewables have then partially decarbonised the energy mix, hence carbon emissions per $ GDP going down in most countries.
In the UK that's true, the UK has done and is continuing to do a fantastic job when it comes to decarbonising.
Which is not a popular opinion it seems as one extreme of lunatics want to act as if we're literally doing nothing other than setting the world on fire, while the other extreme of lunatics wants to act as if climate change isn't a problem and we shouldn't transition to clean energy.
Labour pick up the Lichfield seat 316 to 118 votes, biggish swing low turnout, the outgoing Con was second to Lab in a two seat ward so its a gain from first place as it were but a good swing alongside Tories pretty likely to lose all 3 defences counting tonight, should hold in Croydon tomorrow
Labour pick up the Lichfield seat 316 to 118 votes, biggish swing low turnout, the outgoing Con was second to Lab in a two seat ward so its a gain from first place as it were but a good swing alongside Tories pretty likely to lose all 3 defences counting tonight, should hold in Croydon tomorrow
That will seem like a wizard wheeze until the Home Office gets the bill for the CH-47 hours from the MoD.
A bill later is always worth getting a photo with a cool thing.
I'm not entirely sure where using a £70m helicopter to go to fucking Ramsgate fits into Sunak's "Integrity, Professionalism, Accountability" agenda. It just looks like more stupid Johnson shit.
The only time I went to Ramsgate was behind D9000.
Choppers were more common going to Skegness.
A like from me for the Deltic reference and diesel-related pun. This is the kind of quality product you won't find anywhere else.
Labour pick up the Lichfield seat 316 to 118 votes, biggish swing low turnout, the outgoing Con was second to Lab in a two seat ward so its a gain from first place as it were but a good swing alongside Tories pretty likely to lose all 3 defences counting tonight, should hold in Croydon tomorrow
Salisbury might be interesting - LDs and Labour were not that far apart in second and third last time, with Green no longer standing and of course Labour riding high nationally.
FrankBooth asked: "What about the Fed['s responsibility for inflation]? I'm more sympathetic to the argument that monetary policy is to blame there given the largesse during covid."
I am not an economist, and haven't seen discussions by economists on this subject. That said, I am inclined to agree with the argument that the Fed kept rates too low, too long, and that their decision to do so was bad for the American economy in a number of ways. ("Mainstream" journalists here are, in my opinion, too slow to give Fed decisions the scrutiny they give to the decisions of elected officials.)
Town still kicking despite the upcoming Tory depression. London shrugging off the Conservative clusterfuck… for now.
Cheers!
Yup. Just back from seeing The Mousetrap with the family. Central London as busy as it ever is.
My apartment is literally two minutes from there.
Was it any good? I've been meaning to go for a while.
If you like Agatha Christie then you will love it. The cast steer just the right side of sending it up. It's a very pleasurable and unthreatening night out, the theatrical equivalent of your favourite slippers in front of the fire.
That will seem like a wizard wheeze until the Home Office gets the bill for the CH-47 hours from the MoD.
A bill later is always worth getting a photo with a cool thing.
I'm not entirely sure where using a £70m helicopter to go to fucking Ramsgate fits into Sunak's "Integrity, Professionalism, Accountability" agenda. It just looks like more stupid Johnson shit.
The only time I went to Ramsgate was behind D9000.
Choppers were more common going to Skegness.
On my only visit to Ramsgate I watched a very drunk man try to eat the tablecloth in a curry house.
It’s an uphill struggle for him in Ohio which has become more red over the last few years and even harder when you’ve got an unpopular president and are the party in power .
He deserves to win as Vance is a loathsome creature but it would be a huge shock if he did .
#Belize is not in negotiations with the #UK or any other country to accept #migrants. We will not agree to accept exported migrants. That is inhumane and contrary to #InternationalLaw.
“Boris Johnson had signed up enough MPs to mount a challenge to Rishi Sunak for the Conservative leadership, senior Tory Sir Graham Brady has confirmed.
Mr Johnson dramatically pulled out of the race amid speculation he did not have the 100 nominations needed.
But Sir Graham, who runs Tory leadership contests, said Mr Johnson had just decided not to stand.”
I said at the time, I believed his campaign when they said he had the numbers. He just concluded he didn’t have the numbers to actually govern, which was correct.
I doubt he’d have even become PM.
Quite likely Charles would have forced an immediate election, I recon.
When putting it in the wrong hole, can really ruin your day…
“A British Airways plane suffered 'significant damage' and staff sustained injuries after it tipped forward and its nose hit the ground while preparing for takeoff at Heathrow.
1. If you have enough wind power to power the country on a not very windy day, then you don't need to burn gas that day either. Sure, on a windy day you have redundant wind capacity you can't use but so what?
...but you've then paid an awful lot of money to build out and maintain that enormously over-sized quantity of infrastructure, much of which then sits idle the majority of the time when winds are moderate or stronger. Those costs get passed on and will come out as higher cost of electricity one way or another (or as government subsidy and higher taxation, if you prefer). Unused infrastructure capacity can be good, but it's never free.
The trick will be when you can use surplus wind power to create hydrogen, which you can then store and turn back to electricity when you need it. Or when you find some other way of storing surplus electricity.
The trick will be to make supply of renewable energy large enough that demand for fossil fuel drops off. We are a very very long way from that point, because we can do so much with energy, that at the moment all the renewable energy is adding to the total energy consumption rather than reducing CO2 emissions.
In terms of domestic electricity that’s not the case. UK consumption has declined steadily for years.
Partly deindustrialisation (though France and Germany have also seen declined despite industrial output rising), largely energy efficiency. Offset partially in most rich countries by energy consumption from server farms. But the trend still down.
Renewables have then partially decarbonised the energy mix, hence carbon emissions per $ GDP going down in most countries.
In the UK that's true, the UK has done and is continuing to do a fantastic job when it comes to decarbonising.
Which is not a popular opinion it seems as one extreme of lunatics want to act as if we're literally doing nothing other than setting the world on fire, while the other extreme of lunatics wants to act as if climate change isn't a problem and we shouldn't transition to clean energy.
As always with these things, the right answer is improving the state of technology. The next such technology needs to be energy storage, which enables further investment in renewables and less dependence on oil and gas. More nuclear too, especially the smaller reactors under development.
Do ministers still have to notify "the Palace" when they go abroad?
Sunak is being made to look like an idiot over COP27.
Of course Sunak wants to go, it’s like an extra annual meeting for all his WEF friends, where a bunch of rich people fly in on private and governmental planes, then tell the rest of us to fly less.
His government should have more important things on the domestic agenda right now, that need to be prioritised.
Do ministers still have to notify "the Palace" when they go abroad?
Sunak is being made to look like an idiot over COP27.
Of course Sunak wants to go, it’s like an extra annual meeting for all his WEF friends, where a bunch of rich people fly in on private and governmental planes, then tell the rest of us to fly less.
His government should have more important things on the domestic agenda right now, that need to be prioritised.
On the contrary. Tax, spending, budgets, inflation, and even non-nuclear war are trivial when compared to the existential threat to the way we live represented by climate change. It is happening, and can plausibly tip into an accelerating positive feedback loop.
You think that we have a migration crisis now? Wait until the Nile and Niger delta flood. Wait until the Himalayen glaciers melt and the great rivers of India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Vietnam and China become seasonal. We will see population movements unimaginable in human history.
If we don't conserve the environment there will be little else for a Conservative government to conserve.
Do ministers still have to notify "the Palace" when they go abroad?
Sunak is being made to look like an idiot over COP27.
Of course Sunak wants to go, it’s like an extra annual meeting for all his WEF friends, where a bunch of rich people fly in on private and governmental planes, then tell the rest of us to fly less.
His government should have more important things on the domestic agenda right now, that need to be prioritised.
On the contrary. Tax, spending, budgets, inflation, and even non-nuclear war are trivial when compared to the existential threat to the way we live represented by climate change. It is happening, and can plausibly tip into an accelerating positive feedback loop.
You think that we have a migration crisis now? Wait until the Nile and Niger delta flood. Wait until the Himalayen glaciers melt and the great rivers of India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Vietnam and China become seasonal. We will see population movements unimaginable in human history.
If we don't conserve the environment there will be little else for a Conservative government to conserve.
I’m not suggesting that we don’t conserve the environment, I’m saying that a week-long shindig of private jets and extravagant food, isn’t the right way to go about convincing the rest of us to change our behaviour.
When those at the top of society take these things seriously enough to change their own behaviour, then they might stand a chance of bringing the rest of us with them.
When putting it in the wrong hole, can really ruin your day…
“A British Airways plane suffered 'significant damage' and staff sustained injuries after it tipped forward and its nose hit the ground while preparing for takeoff at Heathrow.
Do ministers still have to notify "the Palace" when they go abroad?
Sunak is being made to look like an idiot over COP27.
Of course Sunak wants to go, it’s like an extra annual meeting for all his WEF friends, where a bunch of rich people fly in on private and governmental planes, then tell the rest of us to fly less.
His government should have more important things on the domestic agenda right now, that need to be prioritised.
On the contrary. Tax, spending, budgets, inflation, and even non-nuclear war are trivial when compared to the existential threat to the way we live represented by climate change. It is happening, and can plausibly tip into an accelerating positive feedback loop.
You think that we have a migration crisis now? Wait until the Nile and Niger delta flood. Wait until the Himalayen glaciers melt and the great rivers of India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Vietnam and China become seasonal. We will see population movements unimaginable in human history.
If we don't conserve the environment there will be little else for a Conservative government to conserve.
I’m not suggesting that we don’t conserve the environment, I’m saying that a week-long shindig of private jets and extravagant food, isn’t the right way to go about convincing the rest of us to change our behaviour.
When those at the top of society take these things seriously enough to change their own behaviour, then they might stand a chance of bringing the rest of us with them.
The amount of hot air created by virtue signalling politicians and celebrities could probably heat a number of decent sized cities! I'm about to put a dozen solar panels on my roof - without subsidies - which will power the house most of the year, payback a chunk of leccy to the grid and seems to me a more practical gesture. Just for clarity my motives are largely self-interest.
WRT to the spending review what is the actual point of the tightening process when all the PGs and chatterers are clamouring on Sky, the Beeb and Twitter to try and ensure that everyuone is given a government handout to cover their bills. Whe the f*** are they gonna say look we're in the shit and everyone must take a bit of a hit or we 'll never get out of it.! Put a jumper on ffs! And now I can face another sunny day in the mid 20s as I head out beachwards....
When putting it in the wrong hole, can really ruin your day…
“A British Airways plane suffered 'significant damage' and staff sustained injuries after it tipped forward and its nose hit the ground while preparing for takeoff at Heathrow.
I've been told that also happened a few decades ago at Cardiff airport, in front of representatives of the airline.
It’s the sort of thing that happens with every new type, some really obvious opportunity for a SNAFU that didn’t become obvious until someone actually did it.
Someone at Boeing had already had a 787 ‘take a bow’, and this incident happened before the fix (to make the wrong hole too small for the gear pin) had been applied to all in-service aircraft. Combination of a poor design, an inexperienced and badly-supervised mechanic, poor documentation, Covid-related workload changes, time pressure etc etc.
Sometimes all the holes in the landing gear cheese line up, and one mechanic unexpectedly had a few million invested in his training!
The politics of the Ukraine war, in the USA, are very wierd.
The most unexpected people are for and against the war, for and against arming Ukraine, and a surprising number on all political sides can’t see it as anything but a US domestic spending issue. A surprising number also think the West should bow to nuclear blackmail, rather than stand up to the madman.
Very few commentators understand that most of the billions of dollars in military aid, has come from existing stocks at book values. The actual American money spent this year in Ukraine has been a tiny fraction of the numbers announced by Biden.
Can’t quite see how that would work. The current Supreme Court is quite capable of striking a federal law down on the grounds it’s not in the Constitution and therefore is a state matter.
Another thing that seems set to be axed is the IRP. Although that was always going to have to happen because it was a simple forgery designed to deflect the heat over the cancellation of HS2 and NPR.
Interesting that Shapps is the one effectively making the announcements given he (a) isn’t the Transport Minister any longer and (b) came up with the original fraud and put it to the House. I do find myself wondering exactly what his motivation is for the appalling damage he’s doing to our transport infrastructure.
The politics of the Ukraine war, in the USA, are very wierd.
The most unexpected people are for and against the war, for and against arming Ukraine, and a surprising number on all political sides can’t see it as anything but a US domestic spending issue. A surprising number also think the West should bow to nuclear blackmail, rather than stand up to the madman.
Very few commentators understand that most of the billions of dollars in military aid, has come from existing stocks at book values. The actual American money spent this year in Ukraine has been a tiny fraction of the numbers announced by Biden.
It’s not that strange. The Americans did not act immediately against Hitler’s aggression. It took nimble political footwork on the part of FDR to support us before Pearl Harbor.
Can’t quite see how that would work. The current Supreme Court is quite capable of striking a federal law down on the grounds it’s not in the Constitution and therefore is a state matter.
Would probably help with future elections - blocking the will of the people, etc.
Can’t quite see how that would work. The current Supreme Court is quite capable of striking a federal law down on the grounds it’s not in the Constitution and therefore is a state matter.
If what the court has done already delivers such a majority and the court doubles down, it would be politically *brave* by the Republicans. The Reps can only risk pushing so many minority positions.
Can’t quite see how that would work. The current Supreme Court is quite capable of striking a federal law down on the grounds it’s not in the Constitution and therefore is a state matter.
Would probably help with future elections - blocking the will of the people, etc.
Might also give him the reason to appoint some new faces to the Supreme Court. As I understand it, he can do that.
The politics of the Ukraine war, in the USA, are very wierd.
The most unexpected people are for and against the war, for and against arming Ukraine, and a surprising number on all political sides can’t see it as anything but a US domestic spending issue. A surprising number also think the West should bow to nuclear blackmail, rather than stand up to the madman.
Very few commentators understand that most of the billions of dollars in military aid, has come from existing stocks at book values. The actual American money spent this year in Ukraine has been a tiny fraction of the numbers announced by Biden.
It’s not that strange. The Americans did not act immediately against Hitler’s aggression. It took nimble political footwork on the part of FDR to support us before Pearl Harbor.
Winston Churchill allegedly said the following:
"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else."
Can’t quite see how that would work. The current Supreme Court is quite capable of striking a federal law down on the grounds it’s not in the Constitution and therefore is a state matter.
Would probably help with future elections - blocking the will of the people, etc.
Don’t see it, frankly. If the Republicans frame it as defending the Constitution it might have the opposite effect, the way that in 1860 the Republicans were willing to guarantee the continuance of slavery where it already existed to avoid that charge from the Democrats.
For some unfathomable reason, despite the fact it’s manifestly shit and about 300 years out of date, the Americans love their constitution. I’d say it’s the single biggest problem in America right now, given its disastrous effects.
For as long as Biden is in the White House, it will be fine. It's if he is replaced in January 2025 by Trump or another Republican that everything will change. The implications of that not only for Ukraine, but for NATO as a whole, are huge.
As it is at least a 50% chance, and quite possibly higher, that the GOP takes the presidency next time around, the UK and the rest of Europe really need to start thinking about it now - and working out how they will react. Of course, that will not happen. So, that is when Putin wins.
The fact that the US is no longer an entirely reliable ally - and is unlikely ever to be so again - has huge consequences for the whole of Europe that cannot be solved unless the whole of Europe works closely together. It is, quite frankly, terrifying!
Okay. I’ll engage as thoughtfully I can with the asylum seeker problem, and offer my solutions.
This problem is as bad as it is due entirely to talentless clueless incompetents the Tory’s put in charge of mangling it. There’s no magic bullet, it’s true, though here’s my list of things that will reduce the problem for sure,
1. For starters, The incompetents managing it don’t understand the problem they are dealing with - it’s as simple of that - we know this as fact as they talk about 70% or more are economic migrants, bogus asylum seekers. Back in the real world do you really believe Undocumented economic migrants deliver themselves into the hands of Home Office officials as soon as they reach UK soil? Hence, 4% processing comes from setting up for 70%+ economic migrants, not genuine asylum claims. According the governments own figures, the majority of asylum claims are found to be legitimate Almost two-thirds (64%) of asylum claims end in a grant of protection. Of those rejected that went on to appeal, 48% were successfully overturned. They are clearly tackling the backlog with the wrong mindset and wrong prioritising.
2. Secondly, on basis you now realise how many are genuine asylum claims bogged down in your two year backlog, Set up a Department for International Development (DfID) to strengthen the infrastructures of fragile countries and increase stability there. Where do you want to spend the money, DfID, or 5 star hotels? You do the math.
3. Enable safe, legal routes for resettlement of genuine refugees. Would they even need a long stay in a processing centre on UK soil after dangerous water crossing, if you took safe, legal routes for resettlement more seriously? Take as example the priority given to Ukraine refugees, and how abysmal this home office under this government was at managing Ukrainian processing - sending them here and there, where no one was there to help them. And that’s what we call our gold star fast Lane process. Despite Tories paying lip service to liking safe, legal routes, the number of people resettled under the government’s UK resettlement scheme was 1,171 in the 12 months to September 2021, down by about 45% year on year.
4. This is the idea I like best. Process UK humanitarian visas on French soil, and bring them across on ferries. Genuine asylum seekers in northern France hoping to reach the UK to claim asylum, so happy to place themselves into the hands of our home office, could register their claim with UK officials and then be placed on ferries to be brought to the UK while their claim is processed. You want the Rwanda scheme because you are led to believe it hurts the business model of the people smugglers? The simple MoonRabbits Ferry to Freedom Solution utterly smashes through the business model of the people smugglers does it not?
A thoughtful, data-driven analysis. Which the Tories and their supporters will reject out of hand. The sad reality is that too many of their voters believe the "invaders" rhetoric and the number of Afghans, Iranians etc etc they will tolerate is zero. Or better still make the number negative by removing some of the ones who are here?
The politics of the Ukraine war, in the USA, are very wierd.
The most unexpected people are for and against the war, for and against arming Ukraine, and a surprising number on all political sides can’t see it as anything but a US domestic spending issue. A surprising number also think the West should bow to nuclear blackmail, rather than stand up to the madman.
Very few commentators understand that most of the billions of dollars in military aid, has come from existing stocks at book values. The actual American money spent this year in Ukraine has been a tiny fraction of the numbers announced by Biden.
There has always been an isolationist strain to US politics. And it's always been over-represented on the US right. The corresponding tankies on the left are of smaller influence.
Can’t quite see how that would work. The current Supreme Court is quite capable of striking a federal law down on the grounds it’s not in the Constitution and therefore is a state matter.
Would probably help with future elections - blocking the will of the people, etc.
Might also give him the reason to appoint some new faces to the Supreme Court. As I understand it, he can do that.
In theory yes. In practice such attempts have historically not ended well.
I think he’ll also be wary of setting a precedent the Republicans might exploit later (although lack of precedent and indeed breach of precedent hasn’t stopped them in the recent past).
The politics of the Ukraine war, in the USA, are very wierd.
The most unexpected people are for and against the war, for and against arming Ukraine, and a surprising number on all political sides can’t see it as anything but a US domestic spending issue. A surprising number also think the West should bow to nuclear blackmail, rather than stand up to the madman.
Very few commentators understand that most of the billions of dollars in military aid, has come from existing stocks at book values. The actual American money spent this year in Ukraine has been a tiny fraction of the numbers announced by Biden.
It’s not that strange. The Americans did not act immediately against Hitler’s aggression. It took nimble political footwork on the part of FDR to support us before Pearl Harbor.
Winston Churchill allegedly said the following:
"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else."
This is one area where I expect the famous “military industrial complex” will get their way whoever’s in congress.
Can’t quite see how that would work. The current Supreme Court is quite capable of striking a federal law down on the grounds it’s not in the Constitution and therefore is a state matter.
Would probably help with future elections - blocking the will of the people, etc.
Don’t see it, frankly. If the Republicans frame it as defending the Constitution it might have the opposite effect, the way that in 1860 the Republicans were willing to guarantee the continuance of slavery where it already existed to avoid that charge from the Democrats.
For some unfathomable reason, despite the fact it’s manifestly shit and about 300 years out of date, the Americans love their constitution. I’d say it’s the single biggest problem in America right now, given its disastrous effects.
Can’t quite see how that would work. The current Supreme Court is quite capable of striking a federal law down on the grounds it’s not in the Constitution and therefore is a state matter.
Would probably help with future elections - blocking the will of the people, etc.
Don’t see it, frankly. If the Republicans frame it as defending the Constitution it might have the opposite effect, the way that in 1860 the Republicans were willing to guarantee the continuance of slavery where it already existed to avoid that charge from the Democrats.
For some unfathomable reason, despite the fact it’s manifestly shit and about 300 years out of date, the Americans love their constitution. I’d say it’s the single biggest problem in America right now, given its disastrous effects.
For as long as Biden is in the White House, it will be fine. It's if he is replaced in January 2025 by Trump or another Republican that everything will change. The implications of that not only for Ukraine, but for NATO as a whole, are huge.
As it is at least a 50% chance, and quite possibly higher, that the GOP takes the presidency next time around, the UK and the rest of Europe really need to start thinking about it now - and working out how they will react. Of course, that will not happen. So, that is when Putin wins.
The fact that the US is no longer an entirely reliable ally - and is unlikely ever to be so again - has huge consequences for the whole of Europe that cannot be solved unless the whole of Europe works closely together. It is, quite frankly, terrifying!
Another geopolitical benefit chalked up to the master stroke that is Brexit. The weakening of European relations at the time we need them most.
Apparebtly thr new "pay for blue tick" system doesn't actually involved any Identity Verification.
The next few months are going to be scam city. You will need to abandon the instinct of "trusting" tweets by blue check marks fast.
Musk is an absolute moron, he genuinely thinks the purpose of the blue check is as a status symbol. He's genuinely the kind of fucking moron who would massively overpay for a social network.
Had the initial invasion succeeded, this would have been the model for Kyiv.
https://mobile.twitter.com/anneapplebaum/status/1588410574572224512 In Bucha, 'Russians hunted people on lists prepared by their intelligence services and went door to door to identify potential threats. Those who didn’t pass this filtration...were tortured and executed" Exactly what the NKVD did in occupied Europe in 1945
The politics of the Ukraine war, in the USA, are very wierd.
The most unexpected people are for and against the war, for and against arming Ukraine, and a surprising number on all political sides can’t see it as anything but a US domestic spending issue. A surprising number also think the West should bow to nuclear blackmail, rather than stand up to the madman.
Very few commentators understand that most of the billions of dollars in military aid, has come from existing stocks at book values. The actual American money spent this year in Ukraine has been a tiny fraction of the numbers announced by Biden.
It’s not that strange. The Americans did not act immediately against Hitler’s aggression. It took nimble political footwork on the part of FDR to support us before Pearl Harbor.
In this case I do fear it’s the opposite. The Americans have been very good up until now, but don’t seem to have the appetite for a long war, and in the medium term want to look towards China as being their biggest enemy, turning away from so much involvement in NATO.
Most Americans think that this war isn’t existential for the US - unless it goes nuclear - which it probably isn’t, so domestic politics takes over. Biden keeps announcing billions in aid, and those opposed to him are opposed to this spending at a time of domestic financial turmoil. Even though the billions aren’t really being spent.
That said, and as noted by @TimS upthread, there’s still plenty of lobbying power in the defence industry, for whom war is good.
Apparebtly thr new "pay for blue tick" system doesn't actually involved any Identity Verification.
The next few months are going to be scam city. You will need to abandon the instinct of "trusting" tweets by blue check marks fast.
Musk is an absolute moron, he genuinely thinks the purpose of the blue check is as a status symbol. He's genuinely the kind of fucking moron who would massively overpay for a social network.
I keep coming back to, ‘he can’t be as stupid as he appears, because he’s found a way to make billions selling a few cars that are overpriced crap.’
Then I start to wonder if the problem is his customers are even stupider than he is…
Can’t quite see how that would work. The current Supreme Court is quite capable of striking a federal law down on the grounds it’s not in the Constitution and therefore is a state matter.
Would probably help with future elections - blocking the will of the people, etc.
Don’t see it, frankly. If the Republicans frame it as defending the Constitution it might have the opposite effect, the way that in 1860 the Republicans were willing to guarantee the continuance of slavery where it already existed to avoid that charge from the Democrats.
For some unfathomable reason, despite the fact it’s manifestly shit and about 300 years out of date, the Americans love their constitution. I’d say it’s the single biggest problem in America right now, given its disastrous effects.
It's the way the hostoriy of the writing of the Consitituion is presented to school kids as "Great Minds Sat Down and Synthesised Perfection from Nought but Enlightenment Ideals"
The actual process, the violent disagreements, the almost entire writing out of the most stridently anti-slavery founders and that contemporary writing of the Founders actually describe the process as "It was Late and we were Tired"
For as long as Biden is in the White House, it will be fine. It's if he is replaced in January 2025 by Trump or another Republican that everything will change. The implications of that not only for Ukraine, but for NATO as a whole, are huge.
As it is at least a 50% chance, and quite possibly higher, that the GOP takes the presidency next time around, the UK and the rest of Europe really need to start thinking about it now - and working out how they will react. Of course, that will not happen. So, that is when Putin wins.
The fact that the US is no longer an entirely reliable ally - and is unlikely ever to be so again - has huge consequences for the whole of Europe that cannot be solved unless the whole of Europe works closely together. It is, quite frankly, terrifying!
Another geopolitical benefit chalked up to the master stroke that is Brexit. The weakening of European relations at the time we need them most.
Yes because France and Germany are closer than ever.....
Can’t quite see how that would work. The current Supreme Court is quite capable of striking a federal law down on the grounds it’s not in the Constitution and therefore is a state matter.
It's more complicated than that, though, as federal law still has effects irrespective of how the Supreme Court rules on 'state rights'. It would be much harder for the SC to uphold state bans on travel to obtain abortion treatment, for example. And simpler to set up facilities on land subject to federal jurisdiction within states.
Can’t quite see how that would work. The current Supreme Court is quite capable of striking a federal law down on the grounds it’s not in the Constitution and therefore is a state matter.
Would probably help with future elections - blocking the will of the people, etc.
Might also give him the reason to appoint some new faces to the Supreme Court. As I understand it, he can do that.
In theory yes. In practice such attempts have historically not ended well.
I think he’ll also be wary of setting a precedent the Republicans might exploit later (although lack of precedent and indeed breach of precedent hasn’t stopped them in the recent past).
Stuffing courts, is one of those superficially-attractive short-term political wins, but opens Pandora’s Box in the medium to long term. A situation where every new President re-aligns the court, rather than these changes happening slowly over time, is very bad for continuity and politics.
Introducing a mandatory retirement age or a term limit, on the other hand, is a little more reasonable - even coming from an 80-year-old, who sat in the Senate for half a century before entering the WH!
BREAK: Following discussions with NI party leaders, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the Rt Hon Chris Heaton-Harris MP, confirms an election will not take place in December.
BREAK: Following discussions with NI party leaders, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the Rt Hon Chris Heaton-Harris MP, confirms an election will not take place in December.
For as long as Biden is in the White House, it will be fine. It's if he is replaced in January 2025 by Trump or another Republican that everything will change. The implications of that not only for Ukraine, but for NATO as a whole, are huge.
As it is at least a 50% chance, and quite possibly higher, that the GOP takes the presidency next time around, the UK and the rest of Europe really need to start thinking about it now - and working out how they will react. Of course, that will not happen. So, that is when Putin wins.
The fact that the US is no longer an entirely reliable ally - and is unlikely ever to be so again - has huge consequences for the whole of Europe that cannot be solved unless the whole of Europe works closely together. It is, quite frankly, terrifying!
Another geopolitical benefit chalked up to the master stroke that is Brexit. The weakening of European relations at the time we need them most.
This is too serious for Brexit knockabout. Unless European countries work together on defence in a way that does not depend on the Americans, we are always going to be at the mercy of the whims of whoever is in charge in the Kremlin - and Ukraine is likely to pay the consequences as soon as the GOP takes control of the White House.
The UK, France and Germany have to find a way to work together - and to convince the countries of central and eastern Europe that we are serious about doing so. Anything else is a total failure of leadership. Throwing blame around, as I am sure will happen on here and elsewhere, is entirely pointless. It will not solve the problem.
'Nothing to do with me, guv': policing minister Chris Philp is asked on @BBCBreakfast if he'd apologise for his role in the mini budget when he was a Treasury minister under Liz Truss. He says the decisions were taken by the then PM and to a lesser extent her Chancellor https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1588437909778087937/photo/1
The politics of the Ukraine war, in the USA, are very wierd.
The most unexpected people are for and against the war, for and against arming Ukraine, and a surprising number on all political sides can’t see it as anything but a US domestic spending issue. A surprising number also think the West should bow to nuclear blackmail, rather than stand up to the madman.
Very few commentators understand that most of the billions of dollars in military aid, has come from existing stocks at book values. The actual American money spent this year in Ukraine has been a tiny fraction of the numbers announced by Biden.
There has always been an isolationist strain to US politics. And it's always been over-represented on the US right. The corresponding tankies on the left are of smaller influence.
Speaking of tankies, the Rt Hon Member for Islington North is turning up at a Russian propoganda event Ukranian peace conference in the States later this month.
Can’t quite see how that would work. The current Supreme Court is quite capable of striking a federal law down on the grounds it’s not in the Constitution and therefore is a state matter.
Would probably help with future elections - blocking the will of the people, etc.
Don’t see it, frankly. If the Republicans frame it as defending the Constitution it might have the opposite effect, the way that in 1860 the Republicans were willing to guarantee the continuance of slavery where it already existed to avoid that charge from the Democrats.
For some unfathomable reason, despite the fact it’s manifestly shit and about 300 years out of date, the Americans love their constitution. I’d say it’s the single biggest problem in America right now, given its disastrous effects.
There's actually not that much wrong with the thing, other than the difficulty of amending it.
And I think it's foolish to think that the current incarnation of the US right wouldn't find ways to subvert a more rationally designed system.
'Nothing to do with me, guv': policing minister Chris Philp is asked on @BBCBreakfast if he'd apologise for his role in the mini budget when he was a Treasury minister under Liz Truss. He says the decisions were taken by the then PM and to a lesser extent her Chancellor https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1588437909778087937/photo/1
Asked to apologise for the mini-budget, Chris Philp says: "The decisions around the mini-budget were taken by the then prime minister and the then chancellor."
Funny, then, that Philp was privately claiming credit for the decision to abolish the 45p tax rate.
BREAK: Following discussions with NI party leaders, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the Rt Hon Chris Heaton-Harris MP, confirms an election will not take place in December.
For as long as Biden is in the White House, it will be fine. It's if he is replaced in January 2025 by Trump or another Republican that everything will change. The implications of that not only for Ukraine, but for NATO as a whole, are huge.
As it is at least a 50% chance, and quite possibly higher, that the GOP takes the presidency next time around, the UK and the rest of Europe really need to start thinking about it now - and working out how they will react. Of course, that will not happen. So, that is when Putin wins.
The fact that the US is no longer an entirely reliable ally - and is unlikely ever to be so again - has huge consequences for the whole of Europe that cannot be solved unless the whole of Europe works closely together. It is, quite frankly, terrifying!
Another geopolitical benefit chalked up to the master stroke that is Brexit. The weakening of European relations at the time we need them most.
Yes because France and Germany are closer than ever.....
Apparebtly thr new "pay for blue tick" system doesn't actually involved any Identity Verification.
The next few months are going to be scam city. You will need to abandon the instinct of "trusting" tweets by blue check marks fast.
Musk is an absolute moron, he genuinely thinks the purpose of the blue check is as a status symbol. He's genuinely the kind of fucking moron who would massively overpay for a social network.
I keep coming back to, ‘he can’t be as stupid as he appears, because he’s found a way to make billions selling a few cars that are overpriced crap.’
Then I start to wonder if the problem is his customers are even stupider than he is…
Not necessarily stupid, just vain and loudmouthed.
From the point of view of those posting stuff, blue tick is status and the usual suspects making out they're more important than the plebs.
If you are listening, blue tick is a service for the audience, confirming who is really who.
But does Elon Musk strike anyone as the sort of person who was taught that he have one mouth but to ears?
'Nothing to do with me, guv': policing minister Chris Philp is asked on @BBCBreakfast if he'd apologise for his role in the mini budget when he was a Treasury minister under Liz Truss. He says the decisions were taken by the then PM and to a lesser extent her Chancellor https://twitter.com/iainjwatson/status/1588437909778087937/photo/1
He said the same on BBCQT last night.
I wasn't aware he existed before the "special fiscal operation" but he really is the prick's prick
For as long as Biden is in the White House, it will be fine. It's if he is replaced in January 2025 by Trump or another Republican that everything will change. The implications of that not only for Ukraine, but for NATO as a whole, are huge.
As it is at least a 50% chance, and quite possibly higher, that the GOP takes the presidency next time around, the UK and the rest of Europe really need to start thinking about it now - and working out how they will react. Of course, that will not happen. So, that is when Putin wins.
The fact that the US is no longer an entirely reliable ally - and is unlikely ever to be so again - has huge consequences for the whole of Europe that cannot be solved unless the whole of Europe works closely together. It is, quite frankly, terrifying!
Another geopolitical benefit chalked up to the master stroke that is Brexit. The weakening of European relations at the time we need them most.
This is too serious for Brexit knockabout. Unless European countries work together on defence in a way that does not depend on the Americans, we are always going to be at the mercy of the whims of whoever is in charge in the Kremlin - and Ukraine is likely to pay the consequences as soon as the GOP takes control of the White House.
The UK, France and Germany have to find a way to work together - and to convince the countries of central and eastern Europe that we are serious about doing so. Anything else is a total failure of leadership. Throwing blame around, as I am sure will happen on here and elsewhere, is entirely pointless. It will not solve the problem.
I am less than optimistic.
Yup. You’re right to be pessimistic. The idea of Western Europe collaborating sufficiently to be greater than the sum of its parts seems further away than ever.
I think some were asking how to beat 10% inflation with their savings the other day.
One answer: back a Republican Majority in the House of Representatives at 1.1 on Betfair. You get a 10% return on your cash (less a bit of commission) in just a few working days.
They only need six gains to take the House over the 2020 elections (they even advanced when all the Dems turned out for Biden in the presidential) and all the polls are pointing to a clear win, and maybe even a blowout. It's probably a 90%+ chance (not 100%, so DYOR) but nothing is really a 100% chance - not even an cash ISA.
I've stuck a grand on because the profit will pay for a nice family meal out we'd otherwise not have. Obviously, don't put your whole life savings in it. Be sensible. But this is as clear as it gets.
Can’t quite see how that would work. The current Supreme Court is quite capable of striking a federal law down on the grounds it’s not in the Constitution and therefore is a state matter.
Would probably help with future elections - blocking the will of the people, etc.
Might also give him the reason to appoint some new faces to the Supreme Court. As I understand it, he can do that.
In theory yes. In practice such attempts have historically not ended well.
I think he’ll also be wary of setting a precedent the Republicans might exploit later (although lack of precedent and indeed breach of precedent hasn’t stopped them in the recent past).
Stuffing courts, is one of those superficially-attractive short-term political wins, but opens Pandora’s Box in the medium to long term. A situation where every new President re-aligns the court, rather than these changes happening slowly over time, is very bad for continuity and politics.
Introducing a mandatory retirement age or a term limit, on the other hand, is a little more reasonable - even coming from an 80-year-old, who sat in the Senate for half a century before entering the WH!
Except that lifetime tenure for SC justices is written into the constitution.
There are actually decent reasons for increasing the size of both the Supreme Court and the federal courts in the tier below it, other than that it's constitutionally much easier, as they have failed to grow in line with either the US population or the amount of cases which come before them.
For as long as Biden is in the White House, it will be fine. It's if he is replaced in January 2025 by Trump or another Republican that everything will change. The implications of that not only for Ukraine, but for NATO as a whole, are huge.
As it is at least a 50% chance, and quite possibly higher, that the GOP takes the presidency next time around, the UK and the rest of Europe really need to start thinking about it now - and working out how they will react. Of course, that will not happen. So, that is when Putin wins.
The fact that the US is no longer an entirely reliable ally - and is unlikely ever to be so again - has huge consequences for the whole of Europe that cannot be solved unless the whole of Europe works closely together. It is, quite frankly, terrifying!
Another geopolitical benefit chalked up to the master stroke that is Brexit. The weakening of European relations at the time we need them most.
This is too serious for Brexit knockabout. Unless European countries work together on defence in a way that does not depend on the Americans, we are always going to be at the mercy of the whims of whoever is in charge in the Kremlin - and Ukraine is likely to pay the consequences as soon as the GOP takes control of the White House.
The UK, France and Germany have to find a way to work together - and to convince the countries of central and eastern Europe that we are serious about doing so. Anything else is a total failure of leadership. Throwing blame around, as I am sure will happen on here and elsewhere, is entirely pointless. It will not solve the problem.
I am less than optimistic.
Yup. You’re right to be pessimistic. The idea of Western Europe collaborating sufficiently to be greater than the sum of its parts seems further away than ever.
The solution is a European defensive alliance that isn't part of the EU's silly CFSP and the Brussels machinery in its quest to become a superstate.
Set up a new European NATO and govern it through the EPU at intergovernmental level.
For as long as Biden is in the White House, it will be fine. It's if he is replaced in January 2025 by Trump or another Republican that everything will change. The implications of that not only for Ukraine, but for NATO as a whole, are huge.
As it is at least a 50% chance, and quite possibly higher, that the GOP takes the presidency next time around, the UK and the rest of Europe really need to start thinking about it now - and working out how they will react. Of course, that will not happen. So, that is when Putin wins.
The fact that the US is no longer an entirely reliable ally - and is unlikely ever to be so again - has huge consequences for the whole of Europe that cannot be solved unless the whole of Europe works closely together. It is, quite frankly, terrifying!
Another geopolitical benefit chalked up to the master stroke that is Brexit. The weakening of European relations at the time we need them most.
This is too serious for Brexit knockabout. Unless European countries work together on defence in a way that does not depend on the Americans, we are always going to be at the mercy of the whims of whoever is in charge in the Kremlin - and Ukraine is likely to pay the consequences as soon as the GOP takes control of the White House.
The UK, France and Germany have to find a way to work together - and to convince the countries of central and eastern Europe that we are serious about doing so. Anything else is a total failure of leadership. Throwing blame around, as I am sure will happen on here and elsewhere, is entirely pointless. It will not solve the problem.
I am less than optimistic.
Yup. You’re right to be pessimistic. The idea of Western Europe collaborating sufficiently to be greater than the sum of its parts seems further away than ever.
I wonder if we might not first see *eastern* Europe (in the EU) collaborating sufficiently to be far greater than the sum of its parts. Russia is a significant motivator in that regard.
For as long as Biden is in the White House, it will be fine. It's if he is replaced in January 2025 by Trump or another Republican that everything will change. The implications of that not only for Ukraine, but for NATO as a whole, are huge.
As it is at least a 50% chance, and quite possibly higher, that the GOP takes the presidency next time around, the UK and the rest of Europe really need to start thinking about it now - and working out how they will react. Of course, that will not happen. So, that is when Putin wins.
The fact that the US is no longer an entirely reliable ally - and is unlikely ever to be so again - has huge consequences for the whole of Europe that cannot be solved unless the whole of Europe works closely together. It is, quite frankly, terrifying!
Another geopolitical benefit chalked up to the master stroke that is Brexit. The weakening of European relations at the time we need them most.
This is too serious for Brexit knockabout. Unless European countries work together on defence in a way that does not depend on the Americans, we are always going to be at the mercy of the whims of whoever is in charge in the Kremlin - and Ukraine is likely to pay the consequences as soon as the GOP takes control of the White House.
The UK, France and Germany have to find a way to work together - and to convince the countries of central and eastern Europe that we are serious about doing so. Anything else is a total failure of leadership. Throwing blame around, as I am sure will happen on here and elsewhere, is entirely pointless. It will not solve the problem.
I am less than optimistic.
If you think America under the Republicans is unreliable, France under Le Pen or Italy under their neo-Commies or neo-Fascists would be much worse. And neither country can remotely offer the capabilities and deep pockets that America can. Remember the Kraut idea of military aid was 5,000 helmets and the Frogs, well, are Frogs. America is simply irreplaceable.
Comments
The Government just needs to GTFO of the way and not block it with planning regulations.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/322874/electricity-consumption-from-all-electricity-suppliers-in-the-united-kingdom/
Partly deindustrialisation (though France and Germany have also seen declined despite industrial output rising), largely energy efficiency. Offset partially in most rich countries by energy consumption from server
farms. But the trend still down.
Renewables have then partially decarbonised the energy mix, hence carbon emissions per $ GDP going down in most countries.
As if people think that's a problem!
Having too much cheap energy, and having issues wondering what to do with it, is a far better "problem" to solve than having extremely expensive energy. And can also allow a relocation of industry here. Heavy industry that can scale up to take advantage when there is abundant cheap energy, and scale down there is not, can be a productive and efficient export opportunity. Countries with ample hydro etc resources can already have businesses operating this way.
Which is not a popular opinion it seems as one extreme of lunatics want to act as if we're literally doing nothing other than setting the world on fire, while the other extreme of lunatics wants to act as if climate change isn't a problem and we shouldn't transition to clean energy.
Tories pretty likely to lose all 3 defences counting tonight, should hold in Croydon tomorrow
The Fed did keep rates too low for too long.
Would basically nick what Lab are planning if they equalised CGT and income tax rates.
Was it any good? I've been meaning to go for a while.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/11/03/tim-ryan-senate-ohio-00064670
He’s a very effective speaker - even in front of an unfriendly audience.
https://twitter.com/SawyerHackett/status/1587591552322371585
He deserves to win as Vance is a loathsome creature but it would be a huge shock if he did .
Salisbury St Paul's (Wiltshire) Council By-Election Result:
LDM: 60.0% (+30.0)
LAB: 21.9% (+0.1)
CON: 18.1% (-14.2)
No GRN (-15.9) as previous.
Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative.
Changes w/ 2022
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1588322025348927490?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet
Longstanton (South Cambridgeshire) Council By-Election Result:
LDM: 26.9% (-39.3)
CON: 26.4% (+5.2)
IND: 19.7% (New)
LAB: 19.2% (+6.6)
GRN: 7.9% (New)
1x Lib Dem HOLD.
1x Conservative GAIN from Lib Dem.
Changes w/ 2022.
Eastwood (Nottinghamshire) Council By-Election Result:
IND: 43.1% (New)
LAB: 41.7% (-0.1)
CON: 15.2% (-31.2)
No LDM (-7.9) or GRN (-5.0) as previous.
Independent GAIN from Conservative.
Changes w/ 2021.
Sunak is being made to look like an idiot over COP27.
Doesn't matter that the Mask of Tutankhamun had one. It's still offensive. They could have dropped it from the cartoon.
#Belize is not in negotiations with the #UK or any other country to accept #migrants. We will not agree to accept exported migrants. That is inhumane and contrary to #InternationalLaw.
https://twitter.com/ecourtbzeeamon/status/1587956771750137856?s=46&t=0gmgzEFNaR4p_Lta4d39UQ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambourne
Camborne, Cornwall:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camborne
The 'u' makes all the difference.
https://mobile.twitter.com/JamesFallows/status/1588342429085835264
On CNN Tom Cotton is going all in on Vietnam revisionism.
-"There wasn't a lot of new revelations there [in Pentagon Papers]. It was already well known to the public."
"We in effect had the war won by 1973."
Oh. Come. On.
Exclusive: CT Group, co-owned by Lynton Crosby, planned secretive African campaign on behalf of Canadian mining giant
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/nov/03/tory-linked-lobbying-firm-agreed-to-help-swing-drc-election-leak-suggests
“Boris Johnson had signed up enough MPs to mount a challenge to Rishi Sunak for the Conservative leadership, senior Tory Sir Graham Brady has confirmed.
Mr Johnson dramatically pulled out of the race amid speculation he did not have the 100 nominations needed.
But Sir Graham, who runs Tory leadership contests, said Mr Johnson had just decided not to stand.”
I said at the time, I believed his campaign when they said he had the numbers. He just concluded he didn’t have the numbers to actually govern, which was correct.
I doubt he’d have even become PM.
Quite likely Charles would have forced an immediate election, I recon.
Back to a treasury that just says 'No'....
“A British Airways plane suffered 'significant damage' and staff sustained injuries after it tipped forward and its nose hit the ground while preparing for takeoff at Heathrow.
“A pin inserted in the wrong place led the landing gear under the plane's nose to retract during a maintenance procedure, causing the aircraft to fall forwards, a report by the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) has found.”
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/aaib-report-boeing-787-8-inadvertent-nose-landing-gear-retraction-whilst-parked-on-stand-london-heathrow-airport
His government should have more important things on the domestic agenda right now, that need to be prioritised.
You think that we have a migration crisis now? Wait until the Nile and Niger delta flood. Wait until the Himalayen glaciers melt and the great rivers of India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Vietnam and China become seasonal. We will see population movements unimaginable in human history.
If we don't conserve the environment there will be little else for a Conservative government to conserve.
When those at the top of society take these things seriously enough to change their own behaviour, then they might stand a chance of bringing the rest of us with them.
WRT to the spending review what is the actual point of the tightening process when all the PGs and chatterers are clamouring on Sky, the Beeb and Twitter to try and ensure that everyuone is given a government handout to cover their bills. Whe the f*** are they gonna say look we're in the shit and everyone must take a bit of a hit or we 'll never get out of it.! Put a jumper on ffs! And now I can face another sunny day in the mid 20s as I head out beachwards....
Someone at Boeing had already had a 787 ‘take a bow’, and this incident happened before the fix (to make the wrong hole too small for the gear pin) had been applied to all in-service aircraft. Combination of a poor design, an inexperienced and badly-supervised mechanic, poor documentation, Covid-related workload changes, time pressure etc etc.
Sometimes all the holes in the landing gear cheese line up, and one mechanic unexpectedly had a few million invested in his training!
"Under Republicans, not another penny will go to Ukraine" says MTG to Republican cheers.
https://twitter.com/BillKristol/status/1588300985482764288?t=lthMwIXgpZd8NeaB-vqi9Q&s=19
The most unexpected people are for and against the war, for and against arming Ukraine, and a surprising number on all political sides can’t see it as anything but a US domestic spending issue. A surprising number also think the West should bow to nuclear blackmail, rather than stand up to the madman.
Very few commentators understand that most of the billions of dollars in military aid, has come from existing stocks at book values. The actual American money spent this year in Ukraine has been a tiny fraction of the numbers announced by Biden.
If we elect two more Democrats to the Senate and keep control of the House, we’re going to codify Roe v. Wade in January so it’s the law of the land.
https://mobile.twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1588305048626495489
Can’t quite see how that would work. The current Supreme Court is quite capable of striking a federal law down on the grounds it’s not in the Constitution and therefore is a state matter.
Interesting that Shapps is the one effectively making the announcements given he (a) isn’t the Transport Minister any longer and (b) came up with the original fraud and put it to the House. I do find myself wondering exactly what his motivation is for the appalling damage he’s doing to our transport infrastructure.
"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else."
For some unfathomable reason, despite the fact it’s manifestly shit and about 300 years out of date, the Americans love their constitution. I’d say it’s the single biggest problem in America right now, given its disastrous effects.
As it is at least a 50% chance, and quite possibly higher, that the GOP takes the presidency next time around, the UK and the rest of Europe really need to start thinking about it now - and working out how they will react. Of course, that will not happen. So, that is when Putin wins.
The fact that the US is no longer an entirely reliable ally - and is unlikely ever to be so again - has huge consequences for the whole of Europe that cannot be solved unless the whole of Europe works closely together. It is, quite frankly, terrifying!
The corresponding tankies on the left are of smaller influence.
I think he’ll also be wary of setting a precedent the Republicans might exploit later (although lack of precedent and indeed breach of precedent hasn’t stopped them in the recent past).
https://mobile.twitter.com/FardadFarahzad/status/1588216697323929603
https://twitter.com/RMac18/status/1588304086792667136?t=2WzTKaGJRtjuWuyLN1Og6w&s=19
Apparebtly thr new "pay for blue tick" system doesn't actually involved any Identity Verification.
The next few months are going to be scam city. You will need to abandon the instinct of "trusting" tweets by blue check marks fast.
Musk is an absolute moron, he genuinely thinks the purpose of the blue check is as a status symbol. He's genuinely the kind of fucking moron who would massively overpay for a social network.
https://mobile.twitter.com/anneapplebaum/status/1588410574572224512
In Bucha, 'Russians hunted people on lists prepared by their intelligence services and went door to door to identify potential threats. Those who didn’t pass this filtration...were tortured and executed"
Exactly what the NKVD did in occupied Europe in 1945
Most Americans think that this war isn’t existential for the US - unless it goes nuclear - which it probably isn’t, so domestic politics takes over. Biden keeps announcing billions in aid, and those opposed to him are opposed to this spending at a time of domestic financial turmoil. Even though the billions aren’t really being spent.
That said, and as noted by @TimS upthread, there’s still plenty of lobbying power in the defence industry, for whom war is good.
Then I start to wonder if the problem is his customers are even stupider than he is…
The actual process, the violent disagreements, the almost entire writing out of the most stridently anti-slavery founders and that contemporary writing of the Founders actually describe the process as "It was Late and we were Tired"
The @AP and @FrontlinePBS obtained hundreds of hours of CCTV footage and intercepts of audio calls by Russian soldiers that show what a Russian "cleansing" operation looked like.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AP/status/1588301270850347015
It would be much harder for the SC to uphold state bans on travel to obtain abortion treatment, for example. And simpler to set up facilities on land subject to federal jurisdiction within states.
Introducing a mandatory retirement age or a term limit, on the other hand, is a little more reasonable - even coming from an 80-year-old, who sat in the Senate for half a century before entering the WH!
Chris Philp: "Well I've been a member of parliament for the last seven years ..."
Brutal. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1588436699142840320/photo/1
https://twitter.com/skydavidblevins/status/1588435246143639552
So what does happen now? They can’t form a government, can’t have elections and won’t have direct rule.
The UK, France and Germany have to find a way to work together - and to convince the countries of central and eastern Europe that we are serious about doing so. Anything else is a total failure of leadership. Throwing blame around, as I am sure will happen on here and elsewhere, is entirely pointless. It will not solve the problem.
I am less than optimistic.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11388081/Ukraine-brands-Jeremy-Corbyn-one-Putins-useful-idiots-hes-set-speak-propaganda-event.html
And I think it's foolish to think that the current incarnation of the US right wouldn't find ways to subvert a more rationally designed system.
Funny, then, that Philp was privately claiming credit for the decision to abolish the 45p tax rate.
https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1588438191639756800
From the point of view of those posting stuff, blue tick is status and the usual suspects making out they're more important than the plebs.
If you are listening, blue tick is a service for the audience, confirming who is really who.
But does Elon Musk strike anyone as the sort of person who was taught that he have one mouth but to ears?
***Betting Post***
I think some were asking how to beat 10% inflation with their savings the other day.
One answer: back a Republican Majority in the House of Representatives at 1.1 on Betfair. You get a 10% return on your cash (less a bit of commission) in just a few working days.
They only need six gains to take the House over the 2020 elections (they even advanced when all the Dems turned out for Biden in the presidential) and all the polls are pointing to a clear win, and maybe even a blowout. It's probably a 90%+ chance (not 100%, so DYOR) but nothing is really a 100% chance - not even an cash ISA.
I've stuck a grand on because the profit will pay for a nice family meal out we'd otherwise not have. Obviously, don't put your whole life savings in it. Be sensible. But this is as clear as it gets.
There are actually decent reasons for increasing the size of both the Supreme Court and the federal courts in the tier below it, other than that it's constitutionally much easier, as they have failed to grow in line with either the US population or the amount of cases which come before them.
Set up a new European NATO and govern it through the EPU at intergovernmental level.
Boris Johnson had backing to challenge Rishi Sunak, Sir Graham Brady confirms
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63503932