State of the Union, Week 9 – politicalbetting.com

System

State of the Union, Week 9 – politicalbetting.com

This has not been, for me, an enjoyable process: the polls and predictions have tilted more and more towards Trump with each week passing, and there is even more red on the charts this week. Apart from the Cook Political Report, who have not updated their Electoral College ratings for TWO MONTHS, everyone is predicting a Trump win, and the Senate leans very Republican too.

Read the full story here

MarqueeMark

We are going to see the failure of polls weighting for previous vote.

Nigelb

Yes, worrying.

Nigelb

MarqueeMark said:

We are going to see the failure of polls weighting for previous vote.

We see that on a fairly regular basis.

But there's no obvious solution to the problem, TBF, given the uncertainties that surround US presidential polling every cycle.

Nigelb

Burning ballots pulled from inside smoking Vancouver ballot box; hundreds of ballots lost
https://www.katu.com/news/local/vancouver-ballot-box-seen-smoking-same-morning-as-portland-ballot-box-arson

MarqueeMark

Johnny Marr keeping me company on my travels, four shows he recorded for National Album Day.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0023q6l

williamglenn

MarqueeMark said:

We are going to see the failure of polls weighting for previous vote.

Do you think people are misremembering their vote?

rcs1000

williamglenn said:

MarqueeMark said:

We are going to see the failure of polls weighting for previous vote.

Do you think people are misremembering their vote?

It's hardly unusual for pollsters to fail to find people who voted for unpopular incumbents.

MarqueeMark

williamglenn said:

MarqueeMark said:

We are going to see the failure of polls weighting for previous vote.

Do you think people are misremembering their vote?

More the issue of those who didn't vote last time. Weren't registered, or too young previously. They don't register in this polling.

numbertwelve

I really don’t trust the polls this cycle.

That doesn’t mean I have anything that’s any better, other than the feeling that the Democratic GOTV will be strong. On the other hand, there’s the anti-incumbency effect, so who knows what will happen.

dixiedean

Nigelb said:

Burning ballots pulled from inside smoking Vancouver ballot box; hundreds of ballots lost
https://www.katu.com/news/local/vancouver-ballot-box-seen-smoking-same-morning-as-portland-ballot-box-arson

That's Vancouver, WA, USA, in case you were wondering.

Malmesbury

numbertwelve said:

I really don’t trust the polls this cycle.

That doesn’t mean I have anything that’s any better, other than the feeling that the Democratic GOTV will be strong. On the other hand, there’s the anti-incumbency effect, so who knows what will happen.

Unsurprising - we are in a country where there was a massive polling failure at the General Election.

maxh

I just want this election to be done, now.

It is so consequential for USA, a truly wonderful country, and also for the rest of the world. To me there is such an obvious, though imperfect choice. I agree with James that each person must vote for who they want, and I respect democracy more than I believe in any particular policy position.

And it is Trump's undermining of democracy, more so than his position on abortion or immigration, that makes him such an unfit candidate in my view. I can respect anyone who truly sees Harris as more of a threat to democracy than they do Trump, even if I think they are gravely mistaken.

But what I really struggle with are those who, either on here or elsewhere, seek to minimise his role in January 6th, or his comments about going after political opponents, or the other ways that he is risking the stability of democracy in USA, simply because they prefer the flavour of his politics over that of Harris.

Democracy is more important than tax rates, or immigration levels, or growth levels imo.

Nigelb

MarqueeMark said:

williamglenn said:

MarqueeMark said:

We are going to see the failure of polls weighting for previous vote.

Do you think people are misremembering their vote?

More the issue of those who didn't vote last time. Weren't registered, or too young previously. They don't register in this polling.

There's also the question of herding.
There are an awful lot of pollsters coming up with very similar figures for the national race. Kudos to Ipsos, this week, for publishing one showing Harris 4% ahead - even if they're wrong.

dixiedean

Meanwhile, in Vancouver, BC, the Provincial election will be settled today when 226 absentee ballots are counted in Surrey-Guildford riding.
The Tories currently lead by 12 votes.
Hold and it's a Hung Parliament.
NDP win gives them a majority of one.

williamglenn

MarqueeMark said:

williamglenn said:

MarqueeMark said:

We are going to see the failure of polls weighting for previous vote.

Do you think people are misremembering their vote?

S
More the issue of those who didn't vote last time. Weren't registered, or too young previously. They don't register in this polling.

Is Trump not doing better with young voters than he did in the last two elections?

Clinton led by 30 points among under 30s, Biden led by 25 points, and if the Harvard youth poll is to be believed, Harris is leading by 20 points.

Source:

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/06/30/behind-bidens-2020-victory/pp_2021-06-30_validated-voters_00-05-png/

https://iop.harvard.edu/youth-poll/latest-poll

Luckyguy1983

FPT:

TimS said:

Eabhal said:

biggles said:

Eabhal said:

biggles said:

Leon said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.

I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them

When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings

However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy

Climate change is basically fixed. With the advent of likely policy change plus foreseeable technology, we’re heading for about 2.5 degrees of warming. Not great if you live in certain places, but not existential for the human race. And we should gain decent red wine.

For the umpteenth time, it's not. The more carbon there is in the atmosphere, the worse it will be, and there are indications that the damage incurred will increase exponentially with temperature change. Even if we blast past 2 degrees, 3 would be much better than 4.

"Survival of the human race" is not the outcome on which we should assess our efforts, IMO. I'm a little more ambitious.

Nah. Doing any better than I suggest implies societal change nobody will accept. We need to accept 2.5 degrees as a win and help those who suffer most. Unless they are Russian.

You stated that climate change is fixed. It's not - it could be an awful lot worse than 2.5 degrees. I think it could still be a bit better with the astonishing technological progress we are experiencing.

After the various styles of denialism, we've now got to the stage where opponents to climate mitigation simply absolve themselves of any responsibility - "it's too late - should've don't something before". It's pathetic, self-imposed impotence. It's always just a bit too difficult.

The stages of climate scepticism are not dissimilar in outline to the established approach of industries facing product safety and public health scrutiny. Broadly speaking:

1. There is no warming
2. There is warming but it is explained by something else / natural causes
3. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases but it is less dramatic than predicted
4. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases but it's too late to do anything about it
5. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases, it can be mitigated but the alternative technologies are too unaffordable
6. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases, the alternative technologies work and are affordable, so we don't need any new policies just let things run

There are still a few who are at 1 or 2 but most of the debate has moved on to 4, 5 and 6. For me it's a relief. I remember the height of climate partisanship coming out of the US around 2008-14 and it was like whack-a-mole with basic science. Now it's a political and economic argument about speed and means, which is much more productive.

EDIT: I note biggles' reply to the original post - I agree I don't think it was intended to be a statement that there's nothing worth doing on mitigation.

You seem to have missed the step where humans banning the use of an ingredient within shipping fuel causes accelerated and disastrous warming, but rather than either reversing the step or taking alternative remedial action, the temperature jump is mandaciously put down to the greenhouse effect and used to add weight to the arguments of climate proselytisers.

MattW

FPT:

Taz said:

Starmer caves on the pressure over bus fares. Cap to go,to £3.

He’s really quite poor at this side of things. He really needs some comms management.

https://x.com/mrharrycole/status/1850868128604893352?s=61

From what I hear, not in Manchester, London or West Yorkshire.

It will tell us something about the priorities of Regional Mayors if that is accurate, subject to other factors .

Andy_JS

Nigelb said:

Burning ballots pulled from inside smoking Vancouver ballot box; hundreds of ballots lost
https://www.katu.com/news/local/vancouver-ballot-box-seen-smoking-same-morning-as-portland-ballot-box-arson

A comment under the video blames it on being in a Democratic precinct.

TimS

Luckyguy1983 said:

FPT:

TimS said:

Eabhal said:

biggles said:

Eabhal said:

biggles said:

Leon said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.

I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them

When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings

However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy

Climate change is basically fixed. With the advent of likely policy change plus foreseeable technology, we’re heading for about 2.5 degrees of warming. Not great if you live in certain places, but not existential for the human race. And we should gain decent red wine.

For the umpteenth time, it's not. The more carbon there is in the atmosphere, the worse it will be, and there are indications that the damage incurred will increase exponentially with temperature change. Even if we blast past 2 degrees, 3 would be much better than 4.

"Survival of the human race" is not the outcome on which we should assess our efforts, IMO. I'm a little more ambitious.

Nah. Doing any better than I suggest implies societal change nobody will accept. We need to accept 2.5 degrees as a win and help those who suffer most. Unless they are Russian.

You stated that climate change is fixed. It's not - it could be an awful lot worse than 2.5 degrees. I think it could still be a bit better with the astonishing technological progress we are experiencing.

After the various styles of denialism, we've now got to the stage where opponents to climate mitigation simply absolve themselves of any responsibility - "it's too late - should've don't something before". It's pathetic, self-imposed impotence. It's always just a bit too difficult.

The stages of climate scepticism are not dissimilar in outline to the established approach of industries facing product safety and public health scrutiny. Broadly speaking:

1. There is no warming
2. There is warming but it is explained by something else / natural causes
3. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases but it is less dramatic than predicted
4. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases but it's too late to do anything about it
5. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases, it can be mitigated but the alternative technologies are too unaffordable
6. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases, the alternative technologies work and are affordable, so we don't need any new policies just let things run

There are still a few who are at 1 or 2 but most of the debate has moved on to 4, 5 and 6. For me it's a relief. I remember the height of climate partisanship coming out of the US around 2008-14 and it was like whack-a-mole with basic science. Now it's a political and economic argument about speed and means, which is much more productive.

EDIT: I note biggles' reply to the original post - I agree I don't think it was intended to be a statement that there's nothing worth doing on mitigation.

You seem to have missed the step where humans banning the use of an ingredient within shipping fuel causes accelerated and disastrous warming, but rather than either reversing the step or taking alternative remedial action, the temperature jump is mandaciously put down to the greenhouse effect and used to add weight to the arguments of climate proselytisers.

More accurately, banning the use of an ingredient in shipping fuel in order to save tens of thousands of lives lost to respiratory conditions removes the masking effect that sulphate emissions had on rising global temperatures.

carnforth

The Speaker is not happy with Rachel Reeves:

https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1850928321279979664

Jim_Miller

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

TimS

Malmesbury said:

numbertwelve said:

I really don’t trust the polls this cycle.

That doesn’t mean I have anything that’s any better, other than the feeling that the Democratic GOTV will be strong. On the other hand, there’s the anti-incumbency effect, so who knows what will happen.

Unsurprising - we are in a country where there was a massive polling failure at the General Election.

And our polling failures (and most of theirs) are always in one direction. UK Pollsters should simply take their previous methodology and deduct a few percentage points from Labour, add it to Conservative, and shave a couple off Reform. No need for elaborate scientific justifications. Just call it a heuristic adjustment.

Taz

MattW said:

FPT:

Taz said:

Starmer caves on the pressure over bus fares. Cap to go,to £3.

He’s really quite poor at this side of things. He really needs some comms management.

https://x.com/mrharrycole/status/1850868128604893352?s=61

From what I hear, not in Manchester, London or West Yorkshire.

It will tell us something about the priorities of Regional Mayors if that is accurate, subject to other factors .

So do those regions stay at £2.00 ?

Our North East mayors priority for buses is to bring them into public control.

TimS

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

We can predict a few days and weeks ahead, and we can get a sense of where large eruptions might take place, but not beyond that. And there's not really much you can do.

It's notable that since Pinatubo there's not been an eruption at a scale to generate a really noticeable cooling effect. There have been several that had measurable cumulative impacts but nothing on the scale of Pinatubo (or El Chichon in 1982, which happened at the same time as a mega-Nino so the effect was masked somewhat). Let alone something like Tambora.

Jim_Miller

FPT: This list of states and possessions by TFR has some data: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_fertility_rate

(In general, the more rural -- and the more religious -- a state, the higher the TFR.)

rottenborough

Thanks @jamesdoyle

Last paragraph could be crucial. Is there really this level of split ticketing about to happen?

Gotta hang on to every crumb of comfort.

Nigelb

.

TimS said:

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

We can predict a few days and weeks ahead, and we can get a sense of where large eruptions might take place, but not beyond that. And there's not really much you can do.

It's notable that since Pinatubo there's not been an eruption at a scale to generate a really noticeable cooling effect. There have been several that had measurable cumulative impacts but nothing on the scale of Pinatubo (or El Chichon in 1982, which happened at the same time as a mega-Nino so the effect was masked somewhat). Let alone something like Tambora.

Also, even the big ones' effects are relatively transient.
Anything really big would be another matter - but there's not all that much prep you can do for that.

moonshine

rottenborough said:

Thanks @jamesdoyle

Last paragraph could be crucial. Is there really this level of split ticketing about to happen?

Gotta hang on to every crumb of comfort.

Split vote is the ideal outcome, whichever of these fruit loops take the White House

Nigelb

Has Leon been sharing couches with JD ?

JD Vance laments the diversity of New York City ahead of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally:

“London doesn’t feel fully English to me anymore. Right? New York of course is the classic American city. Over time, I think New York will start to feel less American.”
https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1850580229665755330

Northern_Al

carnforth said:

The Speaker is not happy with Rachel Reeves:

https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1850928321279979664

I'm not either. I had hoped that we (Labour) would revert to proper protocols and announce stuff to Parliament before briefing the press or making policy announcements in interviews or speeches. But no. It's not just the changes to the fiscal rules, it's the (deliberate?) leaking of budget 'secrets' and stuff like today's bus fare announcement.
Disappointing.

Jim_Miller

The header raises an interesting possibility: Could reverse coattails help Harris?

(It is my considered opinion that they gave the edge to Trump in several key states in 2016.)

BlancheLivermore

HMRC envelopes say

"Your tax service - here to support"

on them

Is that new?

MattW

Thank-you for the header.

Two titbits I came across today.

First a bad one, Mahyar Tousi doing Far Right grooming in the UK wild, using the unauthenticated (at least the Library of Congress couldn't find a source) "instructions sent from Party Headquarters to every to every communist in the United States." This is an old one promoted mainly by the JohN Birch society. It's comical, for now. As a side dish, your link to Unite the Kingdom merchandise from Saturday's without-Tommy-Robinson demo in London.

Communists’ Secret PLOT Against The West (3 minutes): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDiaOu48gl0

And a good one. Ashley Neale the driving instructor Youtuber talking about anti-wheelchair barriers on the towpath of the Leeds and Liverpool canal, for his cycling channel. One or two may be interested. Deep link:

https://youtu.be/R0wJyj1KNwY?t=195

OnlyLivingBoy

Nigelb said:

Has Leon been sharing couches with JD ?

JD Vance laments the diversity of New York City ahead of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally:

“London doesn’t feel fully English to me anymore. Right? New York of course is the classic American city. Over time, I think New York will start to feel less American.”
https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1850580229665755330

Vance's own wife is the daughter of Indian immigrants so his whole approach to this issue is bizarre.
London of course has never really been an English city anyway. It predates the arrival of the English and has always been a diverse city as you'd expect from a major port and former administrative centre of a vast multi ethnic empire. It's why it attracts people from all over the world and lets them all feel at home.

williamglenn

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Nigelb said:

Has Leon been sharing couches with JD ?

JD Vance laments the diversity of New York City ahead of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally:

“London doesn’t feel fully English to me anymore. Right? New York of course is the classic American city. Over time, I think New York will start to feel less American.”
https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1850580229665755330

Vance's own wife is the daughter of Indian immigrants so his whole approach to this issue is bizarre.
London of course has never really been an English city anyway. It predates the arrival of the English and has always been a diverse city as you'd expect from a major port and former administrative centre of a vast multi ethnic empire. It's why it attracts people from all over the world and lets them all feel at home.

Reading this comment, you would think that London is no more diverse now than it was 50 years ago, but that's clearly not true. It has been transformed demographically.

Andy_JS

Nigelb said:

Has Leon been sharing couches with JD ?

JD Vance laments the diversity of New York City ahead of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally:

“London doesn’t feel fully English to me anymore. Right? New York of course is the classic American city. Over time, I think New York will start to feel less American.”
https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1850580229665755330

Also the sentiments of that well-known former liberal John Cleese.

MaxPB

BlancheLivermore said:

HMRC envelopes say

"Your tax service - here to support"

on them

Is that new?

Maybe they think a bald faced lie will make people feel better about it?

kyf_100

BlancheLivermore said:

HMRC envelopes say

"Your tax service - here to support"

on them

Is that new?

You have to turn it over.

On the other side it continues with "...benefit scroungers, asylum seekers, a bloated public sector, and enormous national debt".

Stuartinromford

MaxPB said:

BlancheLivermore said:

HMRC envelopes say

"Your tax service - here to support"

on them

Is that new?

Maybe they think a bald faced lie will make people feel better about it?

It's why everyone else does it.

Jim_Miller

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/ballot-boxes-set-fire-portland-vancouver-rcna177611

I have been worried about this, ever since Washington state adopted drop boxes. So I always take my ballot to the local Post Office, as I will do tomorrow.

In principle, there is time for voters to get replacement ballots.

( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouver,_Washington )

JosiasJessop

Northern_Al said:

carnforth said:

The Speaker is not happy with Rachel Reeves:

https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1850928321279979664

I'm not either. I had hoped that we (Labour) would revert to proper protocols and announce stuff to Parliament before briefing the press or making policy announcements in interviews or speeches. But no. It's not just the changes to the fiscal rules, it's the (deliberate?) leaking of budget 'secrets' and stuff like today's bus fare announcement.
Disappointing.

Can I just say, good on you for saying this. And I agree.

OnlyLivingBoy

williamglenn said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Nigelb said:

Has Leon been sharing couches with JD ?

JD Vance laments the diversity of New York City ahead of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally:

“London doesn’t feel fully English to me anymore. Right? New York of course is the classic American city. Over time, I think New York will start to feel less American.”
https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1850580229665755330

Vance's own wife is the daughter of Indian immigrants so his whole approach to this issue is bizarre.
London of course has never really been an English city anyway. It predates the arrival of the English and has always been a diverse city as you'd expect from a major port and former administrative centre of a vast multi ethnic empire. It's why it attracts people from all over the world and lets them all feel at home.

Reading this comment, you would think that London is no more diverse now than it was 50 years ago, but that's clearly not true. It has been transformed demographically.

London was already a very diverse city in 1974 but yes clearly it is even more so now. I don't know if you live in London like I do but in my experience, living here since 2010 and earlier for periods since 1997, it doesn't feel "foreign" in the slightest. It just feels like London. Immigration has helped to make it the most dynamic and successful part of the country, with the strongest economy, the best performing schools and thriving local communities. I wouldn't live anywhere else, and if JD Vance doesn't like it all the better.

malcolmg

BlancheLivermore said:

HMRC envelopes say

"Your tax service - here to support"

on them

Is that new?

they have replaced "rip you off " then

Eabhal

MaxPB said:

BlancheLivermore said:

HMRC envelopes say

"Your tax service - here to support"

on them

Is that new?

Maybe they think a bald faced lie will make people feel better about it?

That's unfair - they've always been great with me.

Eabhal

Northern_Al said:

carnforth said:

The Speaker is not happy with Rachel Reeves:

https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1850928321279979664

I'm not either. I had hoped that we (Labour) would revert to proper protocols and announce stuff to Parliament before briefing the press or making policy announcements in interviews or speeches. But no. It's not just the changes to the fiscal rules, it's the (deliberate?) leaking of budget 'secrets' and stuff like today's bus fare announcement.
Disappointing.

In some cases it might be worth making some noises beforehand to prevent some sort of panic during the actual speech. But yes.

Luckyguy1983

TimS said:

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

We can predict a few days and weeks ahead, and we can get a sense of where large eruptions might take place, but not beyond that. And there's not really much you can do.

It's notable that since Pinatubo there's not been an eruption at a scale to generate a really noticeable cooling effect. There have been several that had measurable cumulative impacts but nothing on the scale of Pinatubo (or El Chichon in 1982, which happened at the same time as a mega-Nino so the effect was masked somewhat). Let alone something like Tambora.

TimS said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

FPT:

TimS said:

Eabhal said:

biggles said:

Eabhal said:

biggles said:

Leon said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.

I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them

When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings

However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy

Climate change is basically fixed. With the advent of likely policy change plus foreseeable technology, we’re heading for about 2.5 degrees of warming. Not great if you live in certain places, but not existential for the human race. And we should gain decent red wine.

For the umpteenth time, it's not. The more carbon there is in the atmosphere, the worse it will be, and there are indications that the damage incurred will increase exponentially with temperature change. Even if we blast past 2 degrees, 3 would be much better than 4.

"Survival of the human race" is not the outcome on which we should assess our efforts, IMO. I'm a little more ambitious.

Nah. Doing any better than I suggest implies societal change nobody will accept. We need to accept 2.5 degrees as a win and help those who suffer most. Unless they are Russian.

You stated that climate change is fixed. It's not - it could be an awful lot worse than 2.5 degrees. I think it could still be a bit better with the astonishing technological progress we are experiencing.

After the various styles of denialism, we've now got to the stage where opponents to climate mitigation simply absolve themselves of any responsibility - "it's too late - should've don't something before". It's pathetic, self-imposed impotence. It's always just a bit too difficult.

The stages of climate scepticism are not dissimilar in outline to the established approach of industries facing product safety and public health scrutiny. Broadly speaking:

1. There is no warming
2. There is warming but it is explained by something else / natural causes
3. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases but it is less dramatic than predicted
4. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases but it's too late to do anything about it
5. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases, it can be mitigated but the alternative technologies are too unaffordable
6. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases, the alternative technologies work and are affordable, so we don't need any new policies just let things run

There are still a few who are at 1 or 2 but most of the debate has moved on to 4, 5 and 6. For me it's a relief. I remember the height of climate partisanship coming out of the US around 2008-14 and it was like whack-a-mole with basic science. Now it's a political and economic argument about speed and means, which is much more productive.

EDIT: I note biggles' reply to the original post - I agree I don't think it was intended to be a statement that there's nothing worth doing on mitigation.

You seem to have missed the step where humans banning the use of an ingredient within shipping fuel causes accelerated and disastrous warming, but rather than either reversing the step or taking alternative remedial action, the temperature jump is mandaciously put down to the greenhouse effect and used to add weight to the arguments of climate proselytisers.

More accurately, banning the use of an ingredient in shipping fuel in order to save tens of thousands of lives lost to respiratory conditions removes the masking effect that sulphate emissions had on rising global temperatures.

A temperature is either up or down, it is not 'masked' - try to respect yourself enough not to resort to desperate contortions of the language.

As for your concern about the lungs of seapersons, a simple solution would be to spray sea water in the air, at a cost to nobodies respiratory health. It hasn't been tried because it would call into quesrion the entire ludiceous charade if, God forbid, temperatures were to fall without an economy-destroying Net Zero project.

Northern_Al

JosiasJessop said:

Northern_Al said:

carnforth said:

The Speaker is not happy with Rachel Reeves:

https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1850928321279979664

I'm not either. I had hoped that we (Labour) would revert to proper protocols and announce stuff to Parliament before briefing the press or making policy announcements in interviews or speeches. But no. It's not just the changes to the fiscal rules, it's the (deliberate?) leaking of budget 'secrets' and stuff like today's bus fare announcement.
Disappointing.

Can I just say, good on you for saying this. And I agree.

Thanks.
I'm still a raging leftie, though.

williamglenn

OnlyLivingBoy said:

williamglenn said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Nigelb said:

Has Leon been sharing couches with JD ?

JD Vance laments the diversity of New York City ahead of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally:

“London doesn’t feel fully English to me anymore. Right? New York of course is the classic American city. Over time, I think New York will start to feel less American.”
https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1850580229665755330

Vance's own wife is the daughter of Indian immigrants so his whole approach to this issue is bizarre.
London of course has never really been an English city anyway. It predates the arrival of the English and has always been a diverse city as you'd expect from a major port and former administrative centre of a vast multi ethnic empire. It's why it attracts people from all over the world and lets them all feel at home.

Reading this comment, you would think that London is no more diverse now than it was 50 years ago, but that's clearly not true. It has been transformed demographically.

London was already a very diverse city in 1974 but yes clearly it is even more so now. I don't know if you live in London like I do but in my experience, living here since 2010 and earlier for periods since 1997, it doesn't feel "foreign" in the slightest. It just feels like London. Immigration has helped to make it the most dynamic and successful part of the country, with the strongest economy, the best performing schools and thriving local communities. I wouldn't live anywhere else, and if JD Vance doesn't like it all the better.

What you are celebrating is essentially internal migration out of London: Brits out and migrants in. Maybe you benefit from this personally, but it's very much an "I'm all right, Jack" attitude.

spudgfsh

Eabhal said:

Northern_Al said:

carnforth said:

The Speaker is not happy with Rachel Reeves:

https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1850928321279979664

I'm not either. I had hoped that we (Labour) would revert to proper protocols and announce stuff to Parliament before briefing the press or making policy announcements in interviews or speeches. But no. It's not just the changes to the fiscal rules, it's the (deliberate?) leaking of budget 'secrets' and stuff like today's bus fare announcement.
Disappointing.

In some cases it might be worth making some noises beforehand to prevent some sort of panic during the actual speech. But yes.

There's making noises and then there's leaking all of the major budget measures beforehand though....

NickPalmer

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

I went to an Oxford Uni event yesterday where one of the speakers was an XR (Extinction Rebellion) founder, Rupert Read. He said that current thinking was that the climate in the UK was being made more unstable by failure to curb persistent emissions - perhaps irreversibly so, though he held out some hope of change - and could involve swings to more extreme cold as well as heat. The possible collapse of the Gulf Stream would be a relevant cause.

I didn't find him altogether persuasive, but it was distinctively different from the "world is simply getting hotter" thesis.

MarqueeMark

I expect the latest ABC Ipsos poll showing Harris with a four point lead to be broadly right. 51-47. The 47 that Trump can't break through. Late-breakers are going to Harris by ten percent or more.

I look at these metrics since 2020 exit polls - and I see a Trump loss. Harris is +6 with suburban women since 2020. Harris is +14 with black men since 2020. Harris is +7 with black women since 2020. Harris is +10 with graduates since 2020. Harris is +7 with white men with college degrees since 2020. Harris is +14 with white women with college degrees since 2020.

These are changes versus actual 2020 exit poll results, not opinion polls.

Harris is admittedly down 3 points with Hispanics - well, until last night's racist asshole's "joke" about Puerto Ricans.

Harris is level or ahead of Biden's 2020 numbers in all age groups except 18-39. But even there, look into the details and you see it is men only. Young men are up to Trump by 8% on Biden's 2020 numbers. Young women are up 9% on Biden 2020 though.

Note that "the share of voters assigning topmost importance to the economy or inflation, calling them “one of the single most important issues” in their vote, have declined by 7 points apiece since September."

On these numbers, the only way Trump wins is if there is a massive defection of 2020 Biden white non-educated.

But let's face it, they were already with Trump. And the polling shows Trump has lost a point since 2020 with both men and women:

White men without college degrees Harris 27 v Trump 68 T +41 (2020 28-70 T +42)
White women without college degrees Harris 36 v Trump 62 T +26 (2020: 6-63 T +27)

https://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1238a2TheClosingDays.pdf

The headline polls aren't stacking up with Trump losing across most metrics since 2020. Where are those blocs of voters moving to him? And all the evidence on enthusiasm to vote is with Harris.

MattW

Taz said:

MattW said:

FPT:

Taz said:

Starmer caves on the pressure over bus fares. Cap to go,to £3.

He’s really quite poor at this side of things. He really needs some comms management.

https://x.com/mrharrycole/status/1850868128604893352?s=61

From what I hear, not in Manchester, London or West Yorkshire.

It will tell us something about the priorities of Regional Mayors if that is accurate, subject to other factors .

So do those regions stay at £2.00 ?

Our North East mayors priority for buses is to bring them into public control.

I think the technical reason is to do with phasing of funding arrangements.

Bus fares in London with Transport for London will, however, remain at £1.75 and those in Greater Manchester at £2.

They are excluded from the broader fare cap as their funding is structured differently.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy0l99xz719o

DoubleCarpet

MarqueeMark said:

I expect the latest ABC Ipsos poll showing Harris with a four point lead to be broadly right. 51-47. The 47 that Trump can't break through. Late-breakers are going to Harris by ten percent or more.

I look at these metrics since 2020 exit polls - and I see a Trump loss. Harris is +6 with suburban women since 2020. Harris is +14 with black men since 2020. Harris is +7 with black women since 2020. Harris is +10 with graduates since 2020. Harris is +7 with white men with college degrees since 2020. Harris is +14 with white women with college degrees since 2020.

These are changes versus actual 2020 exit poll results, not opinion polls.

Harris is admittedly down 3 points with Hispanics - well, until last night's racist asshole's "joke" about Puerto Ricans.

Harris is level or ahead of Biden's 2020 numbers in all age groups except 18-39. But even there, look into the details and you see it is men only. Young men are up to Trump by 8% on Biden's 2020 numbers. Young women are up 9% on Biden 2020 though.

Note that "the share of voters assigning topmost importance to the economy or inflation, calling them “one of the single most important issues” in their vote, have declined by 7 points apiece since September."

On these numbers, the only way Trump wins is if there is a massive defection of 2020 Biden white non-educated.

But let's face it, they were already with Trump. And the polling shows Trump has lost a point since 2020 with both men and women:

White men without college degrees Harris 27 v Trump 68 T +41 (2020 28-70 T +42)
White women without college degrees Harris 36 v Trump 62 T +26 (2020: 6-63 T +27)

https://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1238a2TheClosingDays.pdf

The headline polls aren't stacking up with Trump losing across most metrics since 2020. Where are those blocs of voters moving to him? And all the evidence on enthusiasm to vote is with Harris.

What's your betting position? - thanks.

MarqueeMark

TimS said:

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

We can predict a few days and weeks ahead, and we can get a sense of where large eruptions might take place, but not beyond that. And there's not really much you can do.

It's notable that since Pinatubo there's not been an eruption at a scale to generate a really noticeable cooling effect. There have been several that had measurable cumulative impacts but nothing on the scale of Pinatubo (or El Chichon in 1982, which happened at the same time as a mega-Nino so the effect was masked somewhat). Let alone something like Tambora.

When the Yellowstone caldera goes off - and it is overdue - it will make everything we have seen in recent history look like a Standard fireworks 1/- Vesuvius...

MattW

NickPalmer said:

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

I went to an Oxford Uni event yesterday where one of the speakers was an XR (Extinction Rebellion) founder, Rupert Read. He said that current thinking was that the climate in the UK was being made more unstable by failure to curb persistent emissions - perhaps irreversibly so, though he held out some hope of change - and could involve swings to more extreme cold as well as heat. The possible collapse of the Gulf Stream would be a relevant cause.

I didn't find him altogether persuasive, but it was distinctively different from the "world is simply getting hotter" thesis.

I did not know that RR was an XR founder, though I have been aware of him as a fairly radical Green for years.

Luckyguy1983

NickPalmer said:

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

I went to an Oxford Uni event yesterday where one of the speakers was an XR (Extinction Rebellion) founder, Rupert Read. He said that current thinking was that the climate in the UK was being made more unstable by failure to curb persistent emissions - perhaps irreversibly so, though he held out some hope of change - and could involve swings to more extreme cold as well as heat. The possible collapse of the Gulf Stream would be a relevant cause.

I didn't find him altogether persuasive, but it was distinctively different from the "world is simply getting hotter" thesis.

The theories tend to change as the outcomes change. Hard to sell people on consistent warming when everyone's freezing their tits off. So just blame cold, rain, and every other less than optimal weather condition on the same thing and wagons roll.

ManchesterKurt

Be interesting to see what the rest of this article that is behind a paywall says...

https://www.themj.co.uk/exclusive-government-launch-reorganisation

williamglenn

MarqueeMark said:

The headline polls aren't stacking up with Trump losing across most metrics since 2020. Where are those blocs of voters moving to him? And all the evidence on enthusiasm to vote is with Harris.

Are you not ignoring the swing towards Trump among younger voters?

Renegade_pollster

MarqueeMark said:

I expect the latest ABC Ipsos poll showing Harris with a four point lead to be broadly right. 51-47. The 47 that Trump can't break through. Late-breakers are going to Harris by ten percent or more.

I look at these metrics since 2020 exit polls - and I see a Trump loss. Harris is +6 with suburban women since 2020. Harris is +14 with black men since 2020. Harris is +7 with black women since 2020. Harris is +10 with graduates since 2020. Harris is +7 with white men with college degrees since 2020. Harris is +14 with white women with college degrees since 2020.

These are changes versus actual 2020 exit poll results, not opinion polls.

Harris is admittedly down 3 points with Hispanics - well, until last night's racist asshole's "joke" about Puerto Ricans.

Harris is level or ahead of Biden's 2020 numbers in all age groups except 18-39. But even there, look into the details and you see it is men only. Young men are up to Trump by 8% on Biden's 2020 numbers. Young women are up 9% on Biden 2020 though.

Note that "the share of voters assigning topmost importance to the economy or inflation, calling them “one of the single most important issues” in their vote, have declined by 7 points apiece since September."

On these numbers, the only way Trump wins is if there is a massive defection of 2020 Biden white non-educated.

But let's face it, they were already with Trump. And the polling shows Trump has lost a point since 2020 with both men and women:

White men without college degrees Harris 27 v Trump 68 T +41 (2020 28-70 T +42)
White women without college degrees Harris 36 v Trump 62 T +26 (2020: 6-63 T +27)

https://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1238a2TheClosingDays.pdf

The headline polls aren't stacking up with Trump losing across most metrics since 2020. Where are those blocs of voters moving to him? And all the evidence on enthusiasm to vote is with Harris.

You are comparing apples with oranges - the Ipsos poll numbers with the 2020 exit polls - and then extrapolating off that. It doesn't work like that.

Luckyguy1983

ManchesterKurt said:

Be interesting to see what the rest of this article that is behind a paywall says...

https://www.themj.co.uk/exclusive-government-launch-reorganisation

One shudders to think.

dixiedean

Talk about every vote matters!
Cons now lead by nine votes in Surrey-Guildford.
NDP that many votes from BC majority.

dixiedean

MarqueeMark said:

TimS said:

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

We can predict a few days and weeks ahead, and we can get a sense of where large eruptions might take place, but not beyond that. And there's not really much you can do.

It's notable that since Pinatubo there's not been an eruption at a scale to generate a really noticeable cooling effect. There have been several that had measurable cumulative impacts but nothing on the scale of Pinatubo (or El Chichon in 1982, which happened at the same time as a mega-Nino so the effect was masked somewhat). Let alone something like Tambora.

When the Yellowstone caldera goes off - and it is overdue - it will make everything we have seen in recent history look like a Standard fireworks 1/- Vesuvius...

Some cause for cheer on a dark, drizzly evening.

Luckyguy1983

Rumours are that it's low turnout in the Tory leadership race. Not sure who that favours. Our Tories have voted heavily in favour of Kemi, with varying degrees of enthusiasm. Who are the non-voters - dismayed centrists? I'd still be pretty certain that they'd plump for Kemi to block Jenrick.

JosiasJessop

Northern_Al said:

JosiasJessop said:

Northern_Al said:

carnforth said:

The Speaker is not happy with Rachel Reeves:

https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1850928321279979664

I'm not either. I had hoped that we (Labour) would revert to proper protocols and announce stuff to Parliament before briefing the press or making policy announcements in interviews or speeches. But no. It's not just the changes to the fiscal rules, it's the (deliberate?) leaking of budget 'secrets' and stuff like today's bus fare announcement.
Disappointing.

Can I just say, good on you for saying this. And I agree.

Thanks.
I'm still a raging leftie, though.

Nobody's perfect.

Fishing

BlancheLivermore said:

HMRC envelopes say

"Your tax service - here to support"

If it's MY SERVICE can I decide how much I pay? Or just get them to leave me alone?

Dumbosaurus

Luckyguy1983 said:

Rumours are that it's low turnout in the Tory leadership race. Not sure who that favours. Our Tories have voted heavily in favour of Kemi, with varying degrees of enthusiasm. Who are the non-voters - dismayed centrists? I'd still be pretty certain that they'd plump for Kemi to block Jenrick.

I'm not sure either, but market continues to pile on Kemi to levels that are just not justified on the publically available info that I'm aware of.

squareroot2

BlancheLivermore said:

HMRC envelopes say

"Your tax service - here to support"

on them

Is that new?

A few words missing ...

.. here to support Labour's lunatic spending plans....

Stuartinromford

Luckyguy1983 said:

Rumours are that it's low turnout in the Tory leadership race. Not sure who that favours. Our Tories have voted heavily in favour of Kemi, with varying degrees of enthusiasm. Who are the non-voters - dismayed centrists? I'd still be pretty certain that they'd plump for Kemi to block Jenrick.

A fair few of them will be members who have gone to that blessed place where there are no party leadership elections but central office hasn't got the memo.

But, less crassly, low turnout with no way of doing GOTV... It all comes down to enthusiasm. Either to go online, or pay HOW MUCH?! for a stamp.

And frankly, flip knows what happens then.

Anabobazina

MarqueeMark said:

I expect the latest ABC Ipsos poll showing Harris with a four point lead to be broadly right. 51-47. The 47 that Trump can't break through. Late-breakers are going to Harris by ten percent or more.

I look at these metrics since 2020 exit polls - and I see a Trump loss. Harris is +6 with suburban women since 2020. Harris is +14 with black men since 2020. Harris is +7 with black women since 2020. Harris is +10 with graduates since 2020. Harris is +7 with white men with college degrees since 2020. Harris is +14 with white women with college degrees since 2020.

These are changes versus actual 2020 exit poll results, not opinion polls.

Harris is admittedly down 3 points with Hispanics - well, until last night's racist asshole's "joke" about Puerto Ricans.

Harris is level or ahead of Biden's 2020 numbers in all age groups except 18-39. But even there, look into the details and you see it is men only. Young men are up to Trump by 8% on Biden's 2020 numbers. Young women are up 9% on Biden 2020 though.

Note that "the share of voters assigning topmost importance to the economy or inflation, calling them “one of the single most important issues” in their vote, have declined by 7 points apiece since September."

On these numbers, the only way Trump wins is if there is a massive defection of 2020 Biden white non-educated.

But let's face it, they were already with Trump. And the polling shows Trump has lost a point since 2020 with both men and women:

White men without college degrees Harris 27 v Trump 68 T +41 (2020 28-70 T +42)
White women without college degrees Harris 36 v Trump 62 T +26 (2020: 6-63 T +27)

https://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1238a2TheClosingDays.pdf

The headline polls aren't stacking up with Trump losing across most metrics since 2020. Where are those blocs of voters moving to him? And all the evidence on enthusiasm to vote is with Harris.

Somehow I completely missed this poll (been partying all weekend). Thanks for the exposition.

darkage

williamglenn said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

williamglenn said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Nigelb said:

Has Leon been sharing couches with JD ?

JD Vance laments the diversity of New York City ahead of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally:

“London doesn’t feel fully English to me anymore. Right? New York of course is the classic American city. Over time, I think New York will start to feel less American.”
https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1850580229665755330

Vance's own wife is the daughter of Indian immigrants so his whole approach to this issue is bizarre.
London of course has never really been an English city anyway. It predates the arrival of the English and has always been a diverse city as you'd expect from a major port and former administrative centre of a vast multi ethnic empire. It's why it attracts people from all over the world and lets them all feel at home.

Reading this comment, you would think that London is no more diverse now than it was 50 years ago, but that's clearly not true. It has been transformed demographically.

London was already a very diverse city in 1974 but yes clearly it is even more so now. I don't know if you live in London like I do but in my experience, living here since 2010 and earlier for periods since 1997, it doesn't feel "foreign" in the slightest. It just feels like London. Immigration has helped to make it the most dynamic and successful part of the country, with the strongest economy, the best performing schools and thriving local communities. I wouldn't live anywhere else, and if JD Vance doesn't like it all the better.

What you are celebrating is essentially internal migration out of London: Brits out and migrants in. Maybe you benefit from this personally, but it's very much an "I'm all right, Jack" attitude.

It is hard to understand why people would want London to be a depopulating wasteland, which is what the reality would be if the immigration and economic growth of the last 30 years did not happen. The reality is just that things change over time and with economic and cultural circumstances. A lot of the 'Brits' who have left have made a lot of money out of rising house prices and are actually beneficiaries of immigration.

Having said that there is a good point that is made by people like Iain Sinclair: a lot of the people who have lived in London for many generations have left over the past few decades, which does change the psychological character of a place, but I suppose this is also true of a lot of places in England (ie rural villages etc).

carnforth

Stuartinromford said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Rumours are that it's low turnout in the Tory leadership race. Not sure who that favours. Our Tories have voted heavily in favour of Kemi, with varying degrees of enthusiasm. Who are the non-voters - dismayed centrists? I'd still be pretty certain that they'd plump for Kemi to block Jenrick.

A fair few of them will be members who have gone to that blessed place where there are no party leadership elections but central office hasn't got the memo.

But, less crassly, low turnout with no way of doing GOTV... It all comes down to enthusiasm. Either to go online, or pay HOW MUCH?! for a stamp.

And frankly, flip knows what happens then.

First class stamps are now so expensive that you only need two of them to airmail a letter anywhere in the world (1.65 * 2 = 3.30, world airmail up to 100g is 2.80).

MarqueeMark

Renegade_pollster said:

MarqueeMark said:

I expect the latest ABC Ipsos poll showing Harris with a four point lead to be broadly right. 51-47. The 47 that Trump can't break through. Late-breakers are going to Harris by ten percent or more.

I look at these metrics since 2020 exit polls - and I see a Trump loss. Harris is +6 with suburban women since 2020. Harris is +14 with black men since 2020. Harris is +7 with black women since 2020. Harris is +10 with graduates since 2020. Harris is +7 with white men with college degrees since 2020. Harris is +14 with white women with college degrees since 2020.

These are changes versus actual 2020 exit poll results, not opinion polls.

Harris is admittedly down 3 points with Hispanics - well, until last night's racist asshole's "joke" about Puerto Ricans.

Harris is level or ahead of Biden's 2020 numbers in all age groups except 18-39. But even there, look into the details and you see it is men only. Young men are up to Trump by 8% on Biden's 2020 numbers. Young women are up 9% on Biden 2020 though.

Note that "the share of voters assigning topmost importance to the economy or inflation, calling them “one of the single most important issues” in their vote, have declined by 7 points apiece since September."

On these numbers, the only way Trump wins is if there is a massive defection of 2020 Biden white non-educated.

But let's face it, they were already with Trump. And the polling shows Trump has lost a point since 2020 with both men and women:

White men without college degrees Harris 27 v Trump 68 T +41 (2020 28-70 T +42)
White women without college degrees Harris 36 v Trump 62 T +26 (2020: 6-63 T +27)

https://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1238a2TheClosingDays.pdf

The headline polls aren't stacking up with Trump losing across most metrics since 2020. Where are those blocs of voters moving to him? And all the evidence on enthusiasm to vote is with Harris.

You are comparing apples with oranges - the Ipsos poll numbers with the 2020 exit polls - and then extrapolating off that. It doesn't work like that.

I can see why you would want to take that position...

MattW

I'm off for the evening - enjoy it, everyone. Even @Anabobazina & his hangover.

This is my photo quota for today - a figure about accessible seating from Wheels for Wellbeing, who publish useful "what to think about guides" for design of public spaces. A lot of things to think about, that we never think about.

They came out with 4 more today. These are the figures from Accessible Seating, made into one diagram. Link for this one, with notes on all the features: https://wheelsforwellbeing.org.uk/benches-and-seating-in-public-spaces/



Really need to get these into CPD for Road and Park Designers, so we can begin educating.

Sunil_Prasannan

Luckyguy1983 said:

Rumours are that it's low turnout in the Tory leadership race.

"I LOVE rumours. Facts can be so misleading, but rumours, true or false, are often revealing."

Benpointer

Stuartinromford said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Rumours are that it's low turnout in the Tory leadership race. Not sure who that favours. Our Tories have voted heavily in favour of Kemi, with varying degrees of enthusiasm. Who are the non-voters - dismayed centrists? I'd still be pretty certain that they'd plump for Kemi to block Jenrick.

A fair few of them will be members who have gone to that blessed place where there are no party leadership elections but central office hasn't got the memo.

But, less crassly, low turnout with no way of doing GOTV... It all comes down to enthusiasm. Either to go online, or pay HOW MUCH?! for a stamp.

And frankly, flip knows what happens then.

They gone to Reform?

TimS

Luckyguy1983 said:

NickPalmer said:

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

I went to an Oxford Uni event yesterday where one of the speakers was an XR (Extinction Rebellion) founder, Rupert Read. He said that current thinking was that the climate in the UK was being made more unstable by failure to curb persistent emissions - perhaps irreversibly so, though he held out some hope of change - and could involve swings to more extreme cold as well as heat. The possible collapse of the Gulf Stream would be a relevant cause.

I didn't find him altogether persuasive, but it was distinctively different from the "world is simply getting hotter" thesis.

The theories tend to change as the outcomes change. Hard to sell people on consistent warming when everyone's freezing their tits off. So just blame cold, rain, and every other less than optimal weather condition on the same thing and wagons roll.

More to the point ignore ideologues, regardless of whether they’re XR or contrarians, and listen to what scientific research and data show, and that is a pretty monotonic warming with the chances of some day after tomorrow cooling scenario pretty low. Rainfall and short term events are getting more volatile, not regional or global climate.

As to your previous characteristically acid response to my ship pollution comment, yes requiring ships to spray another harmless reflective particle would be sensible. Certainly better than letting them emit sulphates again. It’s not primarily seamen getting the lung damage, it’s communities in coastal settlements.

Sean_F

Anabobazina said:

MarqueeMark said:

I expect the latest ABC Ipsos poll showing Harris with a four point lead to be broadly right. 51-47. The 47 that Trump can't break through. Late-breakers are going to Harris by ten percent or more.

I look at these metrics since 2020 exit polls - and I see a Trump loss. Harris is +6 with suburban women since 2020. Harris is +14 with black men since 2020. Harris is +7 with black women since 2020. Harris is +10 with graduates since 2020. Harris is +7 with white men with college degrees since 2020. Harris is +14 with white women with college degrees since 2020.

These are changes versus actual 2020 exit poll results, not opinion polls.

Harris is admittedly down 3 points with Hispanics - well, until last night's racist asshole's "joke" about Puerto Ricans.

Harris is level or ahead of Biden's 2020 numbers in all age groups except 18-39. But even there, look into the details and you see it is men only. Young men are up to Trump by 8% on Biden's 2020 numbers. Young women are up 9% on Biden 2020 though.

Note that "the share of voters assigning topmost importance to the economy or inflation, calling them “one of the single most important issues” in their vote, have declined by 7 points apiece since September."

On these numbers, the only way Trump wins is if there is a massive defection of 2020 Biden white non-educated.

But let's face it, they were already with Trump. And the polling shows Trump has lost a point since 2020 with both men and women:

White men without college degrees Harris 27 v Trump 68 T +41 (2020 28-70 T +42)
White women without college degrees Harris 36 v Trump 62 T +26 (2020: 6-63 T +27)

https://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1238a2TheClosingDays.pdf

The headline polls aren't stacking up with Trump losing across most metrics since 2020. Where are those blocs of voters moving to him? And all the evidence on enthusiasm to vote is with Harris.

Somehow I completely missed this poll (been partying all weekend). Thanks for the exposition.

Well, Ipsos may be right. But, OTOH, so may Siena, Atlas, Yougov, or Emerson.

I would not be surprised by a Harris lead of 4%, but nor would I be surprised by a Trump lead of 3%.

I don’t see any reason to believe that the polling is overstating Trump.

TimS

squareroot2 said:

BlancheLivermore said:

HMRC envelopes say

"Your tax service - here to support"

on them

Is that new?

A few words missing ...

.. here to support Labour's lunatic spending plans....

Reeves is threatening spending cuts, and has already restricted the WFA to the chagrin of many. It’s feeling more like austerity than lunatic spending plans.

I’d rather they did actually spend more so I could live in a less tatty country.

Andy_JS

dixiedean said:

Talk about every vote matters!
Cons now lead by nine votes in Surrey-Guildford.
NDP that many votes from BC majority.

Won't make any difference because the Greens will support the NDP.

Anabobazina

MattW said:

I'm off for the evening - enjoy it, everyone. Even @Anabobazina & his hangover.

This is my photo quota for today - a figure about accessible seating from Wheels for Wellbeing, who publish useful "what to think about guides" for design of public spaces. A lot of things to think about, that we never think about.

They came out with 4 more today. These are the figures from Accessible Seating, made into one diagram. Link for this one, with notes on all the features: https://wheelsforwellbeing.org.uk/benches-and-seating-in-public-spaces/



Really need to get these into CPD for Road and Park Designers, so we can begin educating.

Ha, cheers! Been a bit of a struggle through work today but looking forward to a few days off the hooch

stodge

NickPalmer said:

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

I went to an Oxford Uni event yesterday where one of the speakers was an XR (Extinction Rebellion) founder, Rupert Read. He said that current thinking was that the climate in the UK was being made more unstable by failure to curb persistent emissions - perhaps irreversibly so, though he held out some hope of change - and could involve swings to more extreme cold as well as heat. The possible collapse of the Gulf Stream would be a relevant cause.

I didn't find him altogether persuasive, but it was distinctively different from the "world is simply getting hotter" thesis.

We had a lurid two page piece in the Mail on Saturday which was long on digs against Labour and short on anything approaching evidence. The premise was the Atlantic meridonal overturning Circulation (AMOC) was about to stop due to global warming and that would plunge north west Europe in particular and Britain in particular into an ice age akin to The Day After Tomorrow (that film has so much for which to answer).

Anyway, despite anything approaching evidence AMOC was doing anything more than slowing, we were treated to the oncoming ice age with power cuts, riots (all the fault of Starmer and Labour of course) and basically the collapse of civilisation as we knew it starting in December 2025.

Reports AMOC is slowing have been doing the rounds for the last decade - there are theories it "could collapse" by 2100 but no one seems particularly certain of that (except the Mail which thinks it will happen next year).

Benpointer

NickPalmer said:

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

I went to an Oxford Uni event yesterday where one of the speakers was an XR (Extinction Rebellion) founder, Rupert Read. He said that current thinking was that the climate in the UK was being made more unstable by failure to curb persistent emissions - perhaps irreversibly so, though he held out some hope of change - and could involve swings to more extreme cold as well as heat. The possible collapse of the Gulf Stream would be a relevant cause.

I didn't find him altogether persuasive, but it was distinctively different from the "world is simply getting hotter" thesis.

The collapse of the Gulf Stream would spell the end for Britain as we know it.

Sunil_Prasannan

Starmer's Britain:

"Disgusted Heathrow Airport passengers find 'urine and sewage' dripping from the ceiling at arrivals"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14010227/Disgusted-Heathrow-Airport-passengers-urine-sewage-dripping-ceiling-arrivals.html

EDIT: Soz if you're having dinner...

Andy_JS

New video from the BlackBeltBarrister on Tommy Robinson.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ANqh5Ooc9w

stodge

Benpointer said:

NickPalmer said:

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

I went to an Oxford Uni event yesterday where one of the speakers was an XR (Extinction Rebellion) founder, Rupert Read. He said that current thinking was that the climate in the UK was being made more unstable by failure to curb persistent emissions - perhaps irreversibly so, though he held out some hope of change - and could involve swings to more extreme cold as well as heat. The possible collapse of the Gulf Stream would be a relevant cause.

I didn't find him altogether persuasive, but it was distinctively different from the "world is simply getting hotter" thesis.

The collapse of the Gulf Stream would spell the end for Britain as we know it.

Probably not though it might not be pleasant for a while. Given the world is warming, it seems reasonable to assume the summers would still be warm and perhaps our climate would be more "continental" in nature - drier and colder in winter, drier and warmer in summer though of course it would still rain.

We might end up like Labrador or the NE United States - I doubt it would be Greenland though doubtless the Mail would blame Starmer if the glaciers started advancing towards London.

LostPassword

OnlyLivingBoy said:

williamglenn said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Nigelb said:

Has Leon been sharing couches with JD ?

JD Vance laments the diversity of New York City ahead of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally:

“London doesn’t feel fully English to me anymore. Right? New York of course is the classic American city. Over time, I think New York will start to feel less American.”
https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1850580229665755330

Vance's own wife is the daughter of Indian immigrants so his whole approach to this issue is bizarre.
London of course has never really been an English city anyway. It predates the arrival of the English and has always been a diverse city as you'd expect from a major port and former administrative centre of a vast multi ethnic empire. It's why it attracts people from all over the world and lets them all feel at home.

Reading this comment, you would think that London is no more diverse now than it was 50 years ago, but that's clearly not true. It has been transformed demographically.

London was already a very diverse city in 1974 but yes clearly it is even more so now. I don't know if you live in London like I do but in my experience, living here since 2010 and earlier for periods since 1997, it doesn't feel "foreign" in the slightest. It just feels like London. Immigration has helped to make it the most dynamic and successful part of the country, with the strongest economy, the best performing schools and thriving local communities. I wouldn't live anywhere else, and if JD Vance doesn't like it all the better.

I grew up in London, and it felt normal to me at the time. Exeter felt strange for the contrary reason when I moved there, and Edinburgh also. But, over time, I adjusted, and so then London felt strange when I visited. But I've ended up in the most British part of the Republic of Ireland, though no cricket matches in the vicinity that I've noticed.

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2024/03/16/i-dont-feel-either-irish-or-british-english-expats-on-being-blow-ins-in-irelands-most-british-town/

bigjohnowls

50% increase in buss fairs

Next?

SKS briefing some bus passengers are millionaires and we ought to be means testing passengers.

TimS

stodge said:

Benpointer said:

NickPalmer said:

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

I went to an Oxford Uni event yesterday where one of the speakers was an XR (Extinction Rebellion) founder, Rupert Read. He said that current thinking was that the climate in the UK was being made more unstable by failure to curb persistent emissions - perhaps irreversibly so, though he held out some hope of change - and could involve swings to more extreme cold as well as heat. The possible collapse of the Gulf Stream would be a relevant cause.

I didn't find him altogether persuasive, but it was distinctively different from the "world is simply getting hotter" thesis.

The collapse of the Gulf Stream would spell the end for Britain as we know it.

Probably not though it might not be pleasant for a while. Given the world is warming, it seems reasonable to assume the summers would still be warm and perhaps our climate would be more "continental" in nature - drier and colder in winter, drier and warmer in summer though of course it would still rain.

We might end up like Labrador or the NE United States - I doubt it would be Greenland though doubtless the Mail would blame Starmer if the glaciers started advancing towards London.

No problem, we could just leave the ECHR

Andy_JS

OnlyLivingBoy said:

williamglenn said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Nigelb said:

Has Leon been sharing couches with JD ?

JD Vance laments the diversity of New York City ahead of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally:

“London doesn’t feel fully English to me anymore. Right? New York of course is the classic American city. Over time, I think New York will start to feel less American.”
https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1850580229665755330

Vance's own wife is the daughter of Indian immigrants so his whole approach to this issue is bizarre.
London of course has never really been an English city anyway. It predates the arrival of the English and has always been a diverse city as you'd expect from a major port and former administrative centre of a vast multi ethnic empire. It's why it attracts people from all over the world and lets them all feel at home.

Reading this comment, you would think that London is no more diverse now than it was 50 years ago, but that's clearly not true. It has been transformed demographically.

London was already a very diverse city in 1974 but yes clearly it is even more so now. I don't know if you live in London like I do but in my experience, living here since 2010 and earlier for periods since 1997, it doesn't feel "foreign" in the slightest. It just feels like London. Immigration has helped to make it the most dynamic and successful part of the country, with the strongest economy, the best performing schools and thriving local communities. I wouldn't live anywhere else, and if JD Vance doesn't like it all the better.

London was around 90% white British in 1971.

williamglenn

darkage said:

williamglenn said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

williamglenn said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Nigelb said:

Has Leon been sharing couches with JD ?

JD Vance laments the diversity of New York City ahead of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally:

“London doesn’t feel fully English to me anymore. Right? New York of course is the classic American city. Over time, I think New York will start to feel less American.”
https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1850580229665755330

Vance's own wife is the daughter of Indian immigrants so his whole approach to this issue is bizarre.
London of course has never really been an English city anyway. It predates the arrival of the English and has always been a diverse city as you'd expect from a major port and former administrative centre of a vast multi ethnic empire. It's why it attracts people from all over the world and lets them all feel at home.

Reading this comment, you would think that London is no more diverse now than it was 50 years ago, but that's clearly not true. It has been transformed demographically.

London was already a very diverse city in 1974 but yes clearly it is even more so now. I don't know if you live in London like I do but in my experience, living here since 2010 and earlier for periods since 1997, it doesn't feel "foreign" in the slightest. It just feels like London. Immigration has helped to make it the most dynamic and successful part of the country, with the strongest economy, the best performing schools and thriving local communities. I wouldn't live anywhere else, and if JD Vance doesn't like it all the better.

What you are celebrating is essentially internal migration out of London: Brits out and migrants in. Maybe you benefit from this personally, but it's very much an "I'm all right, Jack" attitude.

It is hard to understand why people would want London to be a depopulating wasteland, which is what the reality would be if the immigration and economic growth of the last 30 years did not happen. The reality is just that things change over time and with economic and cultural circumstances. A lot of the 'Brits' who have left have made a lot of money out of rising house prices and are actually beneficiaries of immigration.

Having said that there is a good point that is made by people like Iain Sinclair: a lot of the people who have lived in London for many generations have left over the past few decades, which does change the psychological character of a place, but I suppose this is also true of a lot of places in England (ie rural villages etc).

That wasn't the alternative. The alternative was balanced internal migration with more young people moving into London, as they have always done, to match the people retiring out to the provinces.

This process has been suppressed as a result of turning London into a 50% British city and has created one of the biggest dividing lines in our society.

Flatlander

Benpointer said:

NickPalmer said:

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

I went to an Oxford Uni event yesterday where one of the speakers was an XR (Extinction Rebellion) founder, Rupert Read. He said that current thinking was that the climate in the UK was being made more unstable by failure to curb persistent emissions - perhaps irreversibly so, though he held out some hope of change - and could involve swings to more extreme cold as well as heat. The possible collapse of the Gulf Stream would be a relevant cause.

I didn't find him altogether persuasive, but it was distinctively different from the "world is simply getting hotter" thesis.

The collapse of the Gulf Stream would spell the end for Britain as we know it.

I'd be able to take my XC skis out of retirement!

Canada seems to survive OK.

LostPassword

Luckyguy1983 said:

TimS said:

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

We can predict a few days and weeks ahead, and we can get a sense of where large eruptions might take place, but not beyond that. And there's not really much you can do.

It's notable that since Pinatubo there's not been an eruption at a scale to generate a really noticeable cooling effect. There have been several that had measurable cumulative impacts but nothing on the scale of Pinatubo (or El Chichon in 1982, which happened at the same time as a mega-Nino so the effect was masked somewhat). Let alone something like Tambora.

TimS said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

FPT:

TimS said:

Eabhal said:

biggles said:

Eabhal said:

biggles said:

Leon said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.

I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them

When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings

However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy

Climate change is basically fixed. With the advent of likely policy change plus foreseeable technology, we’re heading for about 2.5 degrees of warming. Not great if you live in certain places, but not existential for the human race. And we should gain decent red wine.

For the umpteenth time, it's not. The more carbon there is in the atmosphere, the worse it will be, and there are indications that the damage incurred will increase exponentially with temperature change. Even if we blast past 2 degrees, 3 would be much better than 4.

"Survival of the human race" is not the outcome on which we should assess our efforts, IMO. I'm a little more ambitious.

Nah. Doing any better than I suggest implies societal change nobody will accept. We need to accept 2.5 degrees as a win and help those who suffer most. Unless they are Russian.

You stated that climate change is fixed. It's not - it could be an awful lot worse than 2.5 degrees. I think it could still be a bit better with the astonishing technological progress we are experiencing.

After the various styles of denialism, we've now got to the stage where opponents to climate mitigation simply absolve themselves of any responsibility - "it's too late - should've don't something before". It's pathetic, self-imposed impotence. It's always just a bit too difficult.

The stages of climate scepticism are not dissimilar in outline to the established approach of industries facing product safety and public health scrutiny. Broadly speaking:

1. There is no warming
2. There is warming but it is explained by something else / natural causes
3. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases but it is less dramatic than predicted
4. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases but it's too late to do anything about it
5. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases, it can be mitigated but the alternative technologies are too unaffordable
6. There is warming caused by greenhouse gases, the alternative technologies work and are affordable, so we don't need any new policies just let things run

There are still a few who are at 1 or 2 but most of the debate has moved on to 4, 5 and 6. For me it's a relief. I remember the height of climate partisanship coming out of the US around 2008-14 and it was like whack-a-mole with basic science. Now it's a political and economic argument about speed and means, which is much more productive.

EDIT: I note biggles' reply to the original post - I agree I don't think it was intended to be a statement that there's nothing worth doing on mitigation.

You seem to have missed the step where humans banning the use of an ingredient within shipping fuel causes accelerated and disastrous warming, but rather than either reversing the step or taking alternative remedial action, the temperature jump is mandaciously put down to the greenhouse effect and used to add weight to the arguments of climate proselytisers.

More accurately, banning the use of an ingredient in shipping fuel in order to save tens of thousands of lives lost to respiratory conditions removes the masking effect that sulphate emissions had on rising global temperatures.

A temperature is either up or down, it is not 'masked' - try to respect yourself enough not to resort to desperate contortions of the language.

As for your concern about the lungs of seapersons, a simple solution would be to spray sea water in the air, at a cost to nobodies respiratory health. It hasn't been tried because it would call into quesrion the entire ludiceous charade if, God forbid, temperatures were to fall without an economy-destroying Net Zero project.

Carbon dioxide causes a warming. Sulphate aerosols cause a cooling - but carbon dioxide persists on the atmosphere for thousands of years, sulphate aerosols for a few days.

Therefore it's entirely appropriate to talk about sulphate aerosols temporarily masking the warning effect of carbon dioxide. Even if you continued to burn high sulphur fuel then over time the accumulation of carbon dioxide, while the concentration of sulphate remained constant, would see the warning effect win out over the temporary cooling.

Malmesbury

Northern_Al said:

JosiasJessop said:

Northern_Al said:

carnforth said:

The Speaker is not happy with Rachel Reeves:

https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1850928321279979664

I'm not either. I had hoped that we (Labour) would revert to proper protocols and announce stuff to Parliament before briefing the press or making policy announcements in interviews or speeches. But no. It's not just the changes to the fiscal rules, it's the (deliberate?) leaking of budget 'secrets' and stuff like today's bus fare announcement.
Disappointing.

Can I just say, good on you for saying this. And I agree.

Thanks.
I'm still a raging leftie, though.

Thanks for remaining so.

If everyone acknowledges the Great Truth about economics, then we who are Right won’t have anyone to condescend. That would be intolerable.

TimS

LostPassword said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

williamglenn said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Nigelb said:

Has Leon been sharing couches with JD ?

JD Vance laments the diversity of New York City ahead of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally:

“London doesn’t feel fully English to me anymore. Right? New York of course is the classic American city. Over time, I think New York will start to feel less American.”
https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1850580229665755330

Vance's own wife is the daughter of Indian immigrants so his whole approach to this issue is bizarre.
London of course has never really been an English city anyway. It predates the arrival of the English and has always been a diverse city as you'd expect from a major port and former administrative centre of a vast multi ethnic empire. It's why it attracts people from all over the world and lets them all feel at home.

Reading this comment, you would think that London is no more diverse now than it was 50 years ago, but that's clearly not true. It has been transformed demographically.

London was already a very diverse city in 1974 but yes clearly it is even more so now. I don't know if you live in London like I do but in my experience, living here since 2010 and earlier for periods since 1997, it doesn't feel "foreign" in the slightest. It just feels like London. Immigration has helped to make it the most dynamic and successful part of the country, with the strongest economy, the best performing schools and thriving local communities. I wouldn't live anywhere else, and if JD Vance doesn't like it all the better.

I grew up in London, and it felt normal to me at the time. Exeter felt strange for the contrary reason when I moved there, and Edinburgh also. But, over time, I adjusted, and so then London felt strange when I visited. But I've ended up in the most British part of the Republic of Ireland, though no cricket matches in the vicinity that I've noticed.

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2024/03/16/i-dont-feel-either-irish-or-british-english-expats-on-being-blow-ins-in-irelands-most-british-town/

Few people like it when the look and feel of places they love and grew up in changes markedly. I think it’s a deep rooted emotion and explains a lot of anti-immigration, anti-gentrification, resistance to housing and infrastructure development, campaigns to save the local library etc.

We all have our comfort zones and places where we feel like outsiders.

Eabhal

bigjohnowls said:

50% increase in buss fairs

Next?

SKS briefing some bus passengers are millionaires and we ought to be means testing passengers.

50% increase in fuel duty?

(I'm half serious. The marginal cost of driving keeps getting relatively cheaper).

logical_song

stodge said:

Benpointer said:

NickPalmer said:

Jim_Miller said:

FPT: Recently, I have been thinking, more and more, that we should be preparing for the possibility of global cooling. Why? Because of what I have read of the effects of volcanos, for example, Stommel and Stommel's "Volcano Weather": https://www.amazon.com/Volcano-Weather-Story-Without-Summer/dp/0915160714

We will have a volcanic eruption that cools the earth, some time in the future. Perhaps not again in my life time, but very likely in the next hundred years, and nearly certain in the next thousand.

If there is a way to predict such an event, long enough in advance to be useful, I am not aware of it. (We certainly should be looking for a way, or ways.)

I went to an Oxford Uni event yesterday where one of the speakers was an XR (Extinction Rebellion) founder, Rupert Read. He said that current thinking was that the climate in the UK was being made more unstable by failure to curb persistent emissions - perhaps irreversibly so, though he held out some hope of change - and could involve swings to more extreme cold as well as heat. The possible collapse of the Gulf Stream would be a relevant cause.

I didn't find him altogether persuasive, but it was distinctively different from the "world is simply getting hotter" thesis.

The collapse of the Gulf Stream would spell the end for Britain as we know it.

Probably not though it might not be pleasant for a while. Given the world is warming, it seems reasonable to assume the summers would still be warm and perhaps our climate would be more "continental" in nature - drier and colder in winter, drier and warmer in summer though of course it would still rain.

We might end up like Labrador or the NE United States - I doubt it would be Greenland though doubtless the Mail would blame Starmer if the glaciers started advancing towards London.

"The Gulf Stream originates in the Gulf of Mexico and transports warm water across the Atlantic towards north-west Europe. As such, it has a strong warming effect on the region and is the reason why the UK does not experience similarly harsh conditions to places like Canada or Siberia, despite being on a similar latitude."
https://www.yourweather.co.uk/news/trending/what-will-happen-to-the-uk-if-the-gulf-stream-collapses.html

bigjohnowls

Northern_Al said:

JosiasJessop said:

Northern_Al said:

carnforth said:

The Speaker is not happy with Rachel Reeves:

https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1850928321279979664

I'm not either. I had hoped that we (Labour) would revert to proper protocols and announce stuff to Parliament before briefing the press or making policy announcements in interviews or speeches. But no. It's not just the changes to the fiscal rules, it's the (deliberate?) leaking of budget 'secrets' and stuff like today's bus fare announcement.
Disappointing.

Can I just say, good on you for saying this. And I agree.

Thanks.
I'm still a raging leftie, though.

Austerity Reeves isn't though

rottenborough

If Trump wins next week then presumably Tesla shares are a sell?

Seems Musk will soon be working full time cutting 1/3 of US government. No way he will have time to make cars.

Stuartinromford

Benpointer said:

Stuartinromford said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Rumours are that it's low turnout in the Tory leadership race. Not sure who that favours. Our Tories have voted heavily in favour of Kemi, with varying degrees of enthusiasm. Who are the non-voters - dismayed centrists? I'd still be pretty certain that they'd plump for Kemi to block Jenrick.

A fair few of them will be members who have gone to that blessed place where there are no party leadership elections but central office hasn't got the memo.

But, less crassly, low turnout with no way of doing GOTV... It all comes down to enthusiasm. Either to go online, or pay HOW MUCH?! for a stamp.

And frankly, flip knows what happens then.

They gone to Reform?

Not the place I was thinking of... But now you mention it, yes.

Seems likely that quite a few Conservative members have defected, in fact or in spirit, since the Faragasm. How likely are people who have joined another party to still be on the Conservative lists?

CharlieShark

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Nigelb said:

Has Leon been sharing couches with JD ?

JD Vance laments the diversity of New York City ahead of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally:

“London doesn’t feel fully English to me anymore. Right? New York of course is the classic American city. Over time, I think New York will start to feel less American.”
https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1850580229665755330

Vance's own wife is the daughter of Indian immigrants so his whole approach to this issue is bizarre.
London of course has never really been an English city anyway. It predates the arrival of the English and has always been a diverse city as you'd expect from a major port and former administrative centre of a vast multi ethnic empire. It's why it attracts people from all over the world and lets them all feel at home.

Rarely read such utter nonsense. 87% white British in 1971, now 36.8%. In the preceding two thousands years it was almost always 90% plus white British. Take a look at any census.