The £ has recovered a little and it is nowhere near Armageddon levels...
To be honest, I would have difficulty using the phrase "recovered a little" to describe GBP at the moment.
It is not at a great rate against the $ but hardly at depression levels and a relatively low £ against the $ and Euro helps exporters and the UK tourism industry of course even if it hits shoppers and Brits travelling abroad
Leadsom gave a speech at 'Utility Week Energy Summit' today.
"The third corner of the energy trilemma is of course decarbonisation. And it’s here that I’d like to be especially clear, to correct any misperceptions people may have about the implications of the EU referendum result.
Decarbonising our energy system is not some abstract regulatory requirement; it is an essential responsibility that we hold towards our children and grandchildren, as the only way to effectively counter the threat of climate change. However we choose to leave the EU, let me be clear: we remain committed to dealing with climate change."
Stephen Crabb, of course, is more of a Leviticus kind of guy.
Can I say something controversial, that nearly cost me friends in the past.
I preferred Phil Collins Genesis to Peter Gabriel Genesis
This explains alot.
I was a massive PG fan when I was a kid, and during a summer job at an Insurance Company, I processed his insurance policy. It was filled in so meticulously. That was the highlight of my summer.
Christ, I hope life got more exciting for you after that.
"The need for us to recognise that we have deep seated divisions in our society that we need to do much better in tackling and mending"
Listening to this, one is bound to wonder whether Mr. Crabb wouldn't feel much more comfortable in the Labour Party?
Doesn't say much for the Tory Party if people making statements of the bleeding obvious would become uncomfortable within them.
Quite so. It's the kind of vacuous statement that could come from a politician of any stripe, a social worker or a religious figure. Its as if they live in a different dimension.
The roads are only a mile and a half apart, and there's already a couple of minor roads in the area that could be improved. Many people would have benefited from that the other Sunday.
I'd love to see some of our great scientists working on transport problems, it's not impossible to get a Hyperloop or Maglev up and running, and between the two busiest airports in the country would be an ideal place to start.
It seems we're scared as a country of developing new technology, preferring old and tested solutions to pushing the boundaries. Maybe we should ask the F1 teams for advise on how to push technological boundaries, they seem quite good at it from where I'm sitting. (Snip)
We're great at inventing new technology in this country. Developing it... less so.
But I'll defend us on this. We abandoned Maglev when it was clear that it was not particularly practical - and we were right, as the Germans also abandoned their system (which was meant to be 100% safe) after a fatal crash. The Chinese have replaced the extension to their one Maglev line with a traditional rail line. Only the Japanese are really pushing the technology (and to be fair, theirs is significantly different to the German/Chinese system).
The grand-daddy of them all - in every sense of the word - was Brunel's atmospheric railway in the 1850s, which ended rather disastrously when the £25,000 best oxhide leather first froze solid and was then eaten by rats.
I don't have a source immediately to hand, but I thought that was not the main reason - in fact they'd solved that problem? The main reason was that the system was expensive to run, and locos had improved rapidly enough to tackle the South Devon banks. I think.
When I was a kid I went to the pumping station at Starcross, which had been converted into a museum. It was fascinating.
"The need for us to recognise that we have deep seated divisions in our society that we need to do much better in tackling and mending"
Listening to this, one is bound to wonder whether Mr. Crabb wouldn't feel much more comfortable in the Labour Party?
If Stephen Crabb was now leading the Labour Party he might even beat Theresa May at the next election, fortunately for Theresa Labour cannot even remove a leader who makes Worzel Gummidge look professional and Crabb is now firmly in her camp!
"The need for us to recognise that we have deep seated divisions in our society that we need to do much better in tackling and mending"
Listening to this, one is bound to wonder whether Mr. Crabb wouldn't feel much more comfortable in the Labour Party?
What evidence is there that Labour care about divisions or social problems? Blair won three elections by protecting a small group of just over one-fifth of the population so well they consistently turned out to vote for him, but the others were given little more than the disastrous and counterproductive tax credits. It worked brilliantly, but not unexpectedly it alienated 40% of the population to the extent they stopped voting (well, OK, 75% of those had probably never voted anyway).
In fact, in about 2002 Davis and Duncan Smith were talking more about social justice and tackling poverty than Lavour were. That's a pretty damning indictment of their complacency on the issue. And under Corbyn, he's more concerned about being politically right-on than helping poor people, which is why he won't compromise to win power.
Right now, it's not that hard to see why somebody who wants to improves things feels the Tories are the way to go. That may change again as it did in the early 90s of course.
If Leadsom is in the final two she will have a month to introduce herself to the membership. Don't ignore the YouGov poll but be aware of its limitations.
Mr W., It was only a few weeks ago that you assured me that remain were going to win comfortably. Forgive me if I take a holiday from your forecasts.
You think Leadsom will defeat May in the members ballot?
Dunno, Mr. W., but you will understand if that a pundit/tipster turned out so awfully wrong then he/she has some ground to make up before at least some of his/her readers will trust those tips again.
Furthermore, a tipster who tips a one horse race is seldom required and will certainly gain no credit from it.
The roads are only a mile and a half apart, and there's already a couple of minor roads in the area that could be improved. Many people would have benefited from that the other Sunday.
I'd love to see some of our great scientists working on transport problems, it's not impossible to get a Hyperloop or Maglev up and running, and between the two busiest airports in the country would be an ideal place to start.
It seems we're scared as a country of developing new technology, preferring old and tested solutions to pushing the boundaries. Maybe we should ask the F1 teams for advise on how to push technological boundaries, they seem quite good at it from where I'm sitting.
Hopefully Mrs May will have the new runway as her first announcement as PM. We need to show the world we're open for business and that's a good starting point.
Fair go, Mr. Pit,/ On the wider idea of developing new technology, the Uk was once very good at this. However, consider the response of Mr. Jessop upthread - which in this context boils down to "it will never work". Yet Mr. Jessop is one of the few engineers we have on this site.
We can see the same thing in nuclear power. The only option is to spend squillions of pounds with the the French and hand over enormous amounts of dosh to the Chinese every year for the next god knows how many years. All for what one power station? Built to a design which has yet to be completed anywhere. I cannot accept that. There have to be better options.
I think there's much more risk aversion from a lot of the major players than there ever used to be. BAE or RR aren't up for dropping a billion quid on something they're not 100% sure will be a success, to the point that they want to be handed a developed product on a plate. They also look at failures such as the F35-B and can't justify the investment to their shareholders unless there's a governmental underwriting involved.
In this neck of the woods there's currently a four -reactor nuclear plant under construction, for a total of 5600MWe. The Koreans are building it to a standard design at a cost of approx $25bn - how is Hinkley Point C being talked about as £50 or £60bn for only 3200MWe across two slightly larger reactors? The numbers just don't make sense for Hinkley, and I really don't understand why. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barakah_nuclear_power_plant
The roads are only a mile and a half apart, and there's already a couple of minor roads in the area that could be improved. Many people would have benefited from that the other Sunday.
I'd love to see some of our great scientists working on transport problems, it's not impossible to get a Hyperloop or Maglev up and running, and between the two busiest airports in the country would be an ideal place to start.
It seems we're scared as a country of developing new technology, preferring old and tested solutions to pushing the boundaries. Maybe we should ask the F1 teams for advise on how to push technological boundaries, they seem quite good at it from where I'm sitting. (Snip)
We're great at inventing new technology in this country. Developing it... less so.
But I'll defend us on this. We abandoned Maglev when it was clear that it was not particularly practical - and we were right, as the Germans also abandoned their system (which was meant to be 100% safe) after a fatal crash. The Chinese have replaced the extension to their one Maglev line with a traditional rail line. Only the Japanese are really pushing the technology (and to be fair, theirs is significantly different to the German/Chinese system).
The grand-daddy of them all - in every sense of the word - was Brunel's atmospheric railway in the 1850s, which ended rather disastrously when the £25,000 best oxhide leather first froze solid and was then eaten by rats.
I don't have a source immediately to hand, but I thought that was not the main reason - in fact they'd solved that problem? The main reason was that the system was expensive to run, and locos had improved rapidly enough to tackle the South Devon banks. I think.
When I was a kid I went to the pumping station at Starcross, which had been converted into a museum. It was fascinating.
No, they double headed for years. Indeed, as late as 1959 Rolt noted that the locomotives of the western Region still struggled with the Devon gradients.
The expense was replacing the oxhide - otherwise it was actually quite cheap to run.
There were other problems as well, e.g. points and shunting and so on, but that failure of the leather was what killed it.
Thanks. The tories really can't afford to stitch up the referendum result or try to ignore it on the basis of England having a ten point lead for leave
May will undertake Brexit but it will be Brexit lite, keeping us in the EEA and the single market, UKIP are so heavily pushing Leadsom partly for political advantage, they know she will almost certainly lose and they will then try and hammer May for alleged betrayal
"The need for us to recognise that we have deep seated divisions in our society that we need to do much better in tackling and mending"
Listening to this, one is bound to wonder whether Mr. Crabb wouldn't feel much more comfortable in the Labour Party?
If Stephen Crabb was now leading the Labour Party he might even beat Theresa May at the next election, fortunately for Theresa Labour cannot even remove a leader who makes Worzel Gummidge look professional and Crabb is now firmly in her camp!
faisalislam tweets So I ask @gove2016 why him not Leadsom, says "I've been arguing for fundamental change in our relationship with EU for more than 20 years"
"There are even reports that Nicolas Sarkozy, the previous President of France, is preparing to move to London with his wife Carla Bruni for economic reasons."
Don't believe it for a minute. But it's a lovely thought.
Sigh, lots of people who don't anything about the railways moan about HS2 and yet often go ga ga over techno vapour ware like Maglev and now the Hyperloop.
Maglev has been the future since the 60's and until cheap superconductors arrive it's going nowhere and will still suffer from not being compatible with the existing rail network.
And then there is the Hyperloop!!! Sigh. Just because it's proposed by a tech billionaire everyone swoons and believe his bullshit. First his scheme involves building a partial vacuum in a long steel tube. In this tube he proposes to shoot tube full of people at 500 mph to their destination. He says because it will be cheap to build and make money.
Arrrggghhhhhhhhhhhh. Their are so many holes in this retro future dream scheme.
If you think High speed line is pricey imagine a sealed tube with gradients gentle enough for 500 mph running and air tight for hundreds of miles, with motors keeping the air out.
Imagine the machined tolerances required to shoot a passenger capsule at 500mph in a partial vacuum over hundreds of miles!!!
He also proposes to keep capacity up for each small capsule to be just 7 seconds apart at full speed. Just imagine, if something went wrong and a capsule stopped. In fact don't even if every thing stopped automatically how would they get out of vacuum tube?
All of this would need to built on viaducts (that's plan to avoid paying for rights of way, but this ignores you'd still have to do that so people can access the tube line).
The main problem is that even after all that it would still only have a 1/3 the capacity of a conventional high speed line. And there is no way in the world it could be built for less that a normal high speed railway and reality it's got to cost a lot more.
It seems to me to be a spoiler to stop the building of high speed train line, as this wonderous technology is around the corner. I've read he is an opponent of the California High Speed Project.
Watching Gove on Sky. Why is he always interviewed in front of that same fireplace?
One might equally ask why and on who's advice he wore those ridiculously over-sized spectacle frames a few months ago, which so totally dominated his face that he looked ridiculous.
"The need for us to recognise that we have deep seated divisions in our society that we need to do much better in tackling and mending"
Listening to this, one is bound to wonder whether Mr. Crabb wouldn't feel much more comfortable in the Labour Party?
If Stephen Crabb was now leading the Labour Party he might even beat Theresa May at the next election, fortunately for Theresa Labour cannot even remove a leader who makes Worzel Gummidge look professional and Crabb is now firmly in her camp!
I know you like tennis....I don't think I have ever managed to get through a ladies game- once it gets to 15 love or 15 all, my attention drifts......never mind or a set, or god forbid a match...but I am really pleased the Williams sisters are back in the semis.
It is not at a great rate against the $ but hardly at depression levels
I think you may not comprehend how low £1=$1.3 GBP is. It didn't hit that low during the 1930's (never less than £1=$3), the 60's devaluation, the 70's oil shock, the 1981 recession, the 90's ERM devaluation, or the 2008 recession. It's only surpassed by February 1985, when it was hit by an appreciating dollar and the Miners' strike simultaneously.
I understand many people think a low pound is good (mistakenly IMHO, but YMMV). But whether good or bad, it is extraordinarily low at the moment.
No way does a converted A330 cost just 2k/hour to run.
Does that include downtime?
You can wet lease it on a PBH basis. It's inclusive democracy....
£2k an hour will just about cover the fuel for the Voyager, if the oil price stays where it is long term. Chartering one would be closer to £10k an hour plus lots of variable costs like handling, takeoff weight, landing and parking fees etc etc.
I know you like tennis....I don't think I have ever managed to get through a ladies game- once it gets to 15 love or 15 all, my attention drifts......never mind or a set, or god forbid a match...but I am really pleased the Williams sisters are back in the semis.
Venus has got some decent form back too. Not bad for an oldie ....
Might have to dust off my old Dunlop Maxply Fort rackets.
Sadly the Teddy Tinling outfits are a bit of a squeeze now !! ....
"There are even reports that Nicolas Sarkozy, the previous President of France, is preparing to move to London with his wife Carla Bruni for economic reasons."
Don't believe it for a minute. But it's a lovely thought.
It is not at a great rate against the $ but hardly at depression levels
I think you may not comprehend how low £1=$1.3 GBP is. It didn't hit that low during the 1930's (never less than £1=$3), the 60's devaluation, the 70's oil shock, the 1981 recession, the 90's ERM devaluation, or the 2008 recession. It's only surpassed by February 1985, when it was hit by an appreciating dollar and the Miners' strike simultaneously.
I understand many people think a low pound is good (mistakenly IMHO, but YMMV). But whether good or bad, it is extraordinarily low at the moment.
I tend to take the view a high pound is not a symbol of the nation's virility, in fact it hits exporters and UK tourism so a relatively low £ for a short while is hardly a disaster especially when UK unemployment is at 5%, one of the lowest rates in the western world and far lower than the periods you mention and the FTSE has recovered many of its earlier losses.
It is not at a great rate against the $ but hardly at depression levels
I think you may not comprehend how low £1=$1.3 GBP is. It didn't hit that low during the 1930's (never less than £1=$3), the 60's devaluation, the 70's oil shock, the 1981 recession, the 90's ERM devaluation, or the 2008 recession. It's only surpassed by February 1985, when it was hit by an appreciating dollar and the Miners' strike simultaneously.
I understand many people think a low pound is good (mistakenly IMHO, but YMMV). But whether good or bad, it is extraordinarily low at the moment.
"There are even reports that Nicolas Sarkozy, the previous President of France, is preparing to move to London with his wife Carla Bruni for economic reasons."
Don't believe it for a minute. But it's a lovely thought.
The Liam Byrne award hereby goes to......
I believe truth is an adequate defence against libel .
Sigh, lots of people who don't anything about the railways moan about HS2 and yet often go ga ga over techno vapour ware like Maglev and now the Hyperloop.
Maglev has been the future since the 60's and until cheap superconductors arrive it's going nowhere and will still suffer from not being compatible with the existing rail network.
And then there is the Hyperloop!!! Sigh. Just because it's proposed by a tech billionaire everyone swoons and believe his bullshit. First his scheme involves building a partial vacuum in a long steel tube. In this tube he proposes to shoot tube full of people at 500 mph to their destination. He says because it will be cheap to build and make money.
Arrrggghhhhhhhhhhhh. Their are so many holes in this retro future dream scheme.
If you think High speed line is pricey imagine a sealed tube with gradients gentle enough for 500 mph running and air tight for hundreds of miles, with motors keeping the air out.
Imagine the machined tolerances required to shoot a passenger capsule at 500mph in a partial vacuum over hundreds of miles!!!
He also proposes to keep capacity up for each small capsule to be just 7 seconds apart at full speed. Just imagine, if something went wrong and a capsule stopped. In fact don't even if every thing stopped automatically how would they get out of vacuum tube?
All of this would need to built on viaducts (that's plan to avoid paying for rights of way, but this ignores you'd still have to do that so people can access the tube line).
The main problem is that even after all that it would still only have a 1/3 the capacity of a conventional high speed line. And there is no way in the world it could be built for less that a normal high speed railway and reality it's got to cost a lot more.
It seems to me to be a spoiler to stop the building of high speed train line, as this wonderous technology is around the corner. I've read he is an opponent of the California High Speed Project.
@RationalPlan - good to see your sensible articles on railways again.
Someone has let her out of her New York penthouse luxury prison for the night. The outcome isn't good.
God, how I hate that mid-Atlantic accent - it makes it almost impossible to take her seriously.
Ironic since she's only on the show because she's English. Andrew Sullivan is another desperate to please sad act who's developed a fraudulent American accent. Plastics.
I tend to take the view a high pound is not a symbol of the nation's virility, in fact it hits exporters and UK tourism so a relatively low £ for a short while is hardly a disaster
1) We haven't had a high pound for quite a while. A high pound is the Noughties £1=$2.1. Even the £1=$1.5 when the polls shut was pitiful. 2) £1=$1.3 is not relatively low. £1=$1.3 is extraordinarily low.
Yet two days earlier she was on the Channel 4 Brexit debate with a standard RP British accent. Weird.
Corby had a lucky escape, considering...
Don't start me! I knocked doors for her in May 2010, only for her to bugger off to the USA and hand the seat back to the opposition two years later. Grr...
Labour planning "peace talks", shadow cabinet minister tells me, likening it to Northern Irish disarmament process.
Corbyn departure looking more possible than before. "But not with a gun to his head".
Labour may have benefited slightly from the spotlight being on the Tories for a few days. Yet until Corbyn actually does one we'd be wise not to get caught up in the hype.
I tend to take the view a high pound is not a symbol of the nation's virility, in fact it hits exporters and UK tourism so a relatively low £ for a short while is hardly a disaster
1) We haven't had a high pound for quite a while. A high pound is the Noughties £1=$2.1. Even the £1=$1.5 when the polls shut was pitiful. 2) £1=$1.3 is not relatively low. £1=$1.3 is extraordinarily low.
Again, unless you are going on holiday to the states or you buy a lot of goods from the states why is a low pound against the dollar of great concern? It may also encourage more Americans to visit London and the UK and help sell more British goods to the US
The roads are only a mile and a half apart, and there's already a couple of minor roads in the area that could be improved. Many people would have benefited from that the other Sunday.
I'd love to see some of our great scientists working on transport problems, it's not impossible to get a Hyperloop or Maglev up and running, and between the two busiest airports in the country would be an ideal place to start.
It seems we're scared as a country of developing new technology, preferring old and tested solutions to pushing the boundaries. Maybe we should ask the F1 teams for advise on how to push technological boundaries, they seem quite good at it from where I'm sitting.
Hopefully Mrs May will have the new runway as her first announcement as PM. We need to show the world we're open for business and that's a good starting point.
Fair go, Mr. Pit,/ On the wider idea of developing new technology, the Uk was once very good at this. However, consider the response of Mr. Jessop upthread - which in this context boils down to "it will never work". Yet Mr. Jessop is one of the few engineers we have on this site.
We can see the same thing in nuclear power. The only option is to spend squillions of pounds with the the French and hand over enormous amounts of dosh to the Chinese every year for the next god knows how many years. All for what one power station? Built to a design which has yet to be completed anywhere. I cannot accept that. There have to be better options.
I think there's much more risk aversion from a lot of the major players than there ever used to be. BAE or RR aren't up for dropping a billion quid on something they're not 100% sure will be a success, to the point that they want to be handed a developed product on a plate. They also look at failures such as the F35-B and can't justify the investment to their shareholders unless there's a governmental underwriting involved.
In this neck of the woods there's currently a four -reactor nuclear plant under construction, for a total of 5600MWe. The Koreans are building it to a standard design at a cost of approx $25bn - how is Hinkley Point C being talked about as £50 or £60bn for only 3200MWe across two slightly larger reactors? The numbers just don't make sense for Hinkley, and I really don't understand why. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barakah_nuclear_power_plant
Rolls-Royce doesn't have a billion pounds to lose. The risk to reward in nuclear is too poor to justify that kind of investment
It is not at a great rate against the $ but hardly at depression levels
I think you may not comprehend how low £1=$1.3 GBP is. It didn't hit that low during the 1930's (never less than £1=$3), the 60's devaluation, the 70's oil shock, the 1981 recession, the 90's ERM devaluation, or the 2008 recession. It's only surpassed by February 1985, when it was hit by an appreciating dollar and the Miners' strike simultaneously.
I understand many people think a low pound is good (mistakenly IMHO, but YMMV). But whether good or bad, it is extraordinarily low at the moment.
Leadsom gave a speech at 'Utility Week Energy Summit' today.
"The third corner of the energy trilemma is of course decarbonisation. And it’s here that I’d like to be especially clear, to correct any misperceptions people may have about the implications of the EU referendum result.
Decarbonising our energy system is not some abstract regulatory requirement; it is an essential responsibility that we hold towards our children and grandchildren, as the only way to effectively counter the threat of climate change. However we choose to leave the EU, let me be clear: we remain committed to dealing with climate change."
Labour planning "peace talks", shadow cabinet minister tells me, likening it to Northern Irish disarmament process.
Corbyn departure looking more possible than before. "But not with a gun to his head".
Both Andy Burnham, and Ed Miliband have been pressing Clive Lewis (my man) to stand. When I mentioned him a week last Sunday, posting a link, he didn't even figure on the betfair market.
Could pbCOM actually be quite influential after all?
I tend to take the view a high pound is not a symbol of the nation's virility, in fact it hits exporters and UK tourism so a relatively low £ for a short while is hardly a disaster
1) We haven't had a high pound for quite a while. A high pound is the Noughties £1=$2.1. Even the £1=$1.5 when the polls shut was pitiful. 2) £1=$1.3 is not relatively low. £1=$1.3 is extraordinarily low.
The statement also seems like a bit of a non-sequitur to me. A floating currency is one of the economy's automatic stabilisers. Of course a weak currency has some positive side-effects. That's the whole point! But when the currency is weak, the nation is by definition poorer.
The roads are only a mile and a half apart, and there's already a couple of minor roads in the area that could be improved. Many people would have benefited from that the other Sunday.
I'd love to see some of our great scientists working on transport problems, it's not impossible to get a Hyperloop or Maglev up and running, and between the two busiest airports in the country would be an ideal place to start.
It seems we're scared as a country of developing new technology, preferring old and tested solutions to pushing the boundaries. Maybe we should ask the F1 teams for advise on how to push technological boundaries, they seem quite good at it from where I'm sitting. (Snip)
We're great at inventing new technology in this country. Developing it... less so.
But I'll defend us on this. We abandoned Maglev when it was clear that it was not particularly practical - and we were right, as the Germans also abandoned their system (which was meant to be 100% safe) after a fatal crash. The Chinese have replaced the extension to their one Maglev line with a traditional rail line. Only the Japanese are really pushing the technology (and to be fair, theirs is significantly different to the German/Chinese system).
The grand-daddy of them all - in every sense of the word - was Brunel's atmospheric railway in the 1850s, which ended rather disastrously when the £25,000 best oxhide leather first froze solid and was then eaten by rats.
I don't have a source immediately to hand, but I thought that was not the main reason - in fact they'd solved that problem? The main reason was that the system was expensive to run, and locos had improved rapidly enough to tackle the South Devon banks. I think.
When I was a kid I went to the pumping station at Starcross, which had been converted into a museum. It was fascinating.
No, they double headed for years. Indeed, as late as 1959 Rolt noted that the locomotives of the western Region still struggled with the Devon gradients.
The expense was replacing the oxhide - otherwise it was actually quite cheap to run.
There were other problems as well, e.g. points and shunting and so on, but that failure of the leather was what killed it.
Ah okay; I'll see if I can find where I got that impression from.
I tend to take the view a high pound is not a symbol of the nation's virility, in fact it hits exporters and UK tourism so a relatively low £ for a short while is hardly a disaster
1) We haven't had a high pound for quite a while. A high pound is the Noughties £1=$2.1. Even the £1=$1.5 when the polls shut was pitiful. 2) £1=$1.3 is not relatively low. £1=$1.3 is extraordinarily low.
Again, unless you are going on holiday to the states or you buy a lot of goods from the states why is a low pound against the dollar of great concern? It may also encourage more Americans to visit London and the UK and help sell more British goods to the US
It's fantastic if you get paid in dollars but have a mortgage in Sterling
More seriously, it will encourage exports and inward tourism, might even encourage a few Brits to take local holidays rather than going abroad this summer. I paid £9 a pint yesterday in my local bar, so it will only be the rich British tourists that come here next winter if the exchange rate stays so low.
I tend to take the view a high pound is not a symbol of the nation's virility, in fact it hits exporters and UK tourism so a relatively low £ for a short while is hardly a disaster
1) We haven't had a high pound for quite a while. A high pound is the Noughties £1=$2.1. Even the £1=$1.5 when the polls shut was pitiful. 2) £1=$1.3 is not relatively low. £1=$1.3 is extraordinarily low.
Again, unless you are going on holiday to the states or you buy a lot of goods from the states why is a low pound against the dollar of great concern? It may also encourage more Americans to visit London and the UK and help sell more British goods to the US
Virtually everyone buys lots of goods in dollars. It's what oil is priced in.
Comments
"The third corner of the energy trilemma is of course decarbonisation.
And it’s here that I’d like to be especially clear, to correct any misperceptions people may have about the implications of the EU referendum result.
Decarbonising our energy system is not some abstract regulatory requirement; it is an essential responsibility that we hold towards our children and grandchildren, as the only way to effectively counter the threat of climate change.
However we choose to leave the EU, let me be clear: we remain committed to dealing with climate change."
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/andrea-leadsom-speech-to-utility-week-energy-summit
Disappointing.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3675732/Theresa-WINS-round-Tory-race-No-10-Andrea-Leadsom-finishes-second-s-Liam-Fox.html
When I was a kid I went to the pumping station at Starcross, which had been converted into a museum. It was fascinating.
The Germans went even weirder: the Schienenzeppelin. Imagine having that propeller whizz past whilst you're waiting on a platform!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schienenzeppelin
In fact, in about 2002 Davis and Duncan Smith were talking more about social justice and tackling poverty than Lavour were. That's a pretty damning indictment of their complacency on the issue. And under Corbyn, he's more concerned about being politically right-on than helping poor people, which is why he won't compromise to win power.
Right now, it's not that hard to see why somebody who wants to improves things feels the Tories are the way to go. That may change again as it did in the early 90s of course.
https://twitter.com/LouiseMensch/status/750414888854585344
Just trying to give TSE a chance to rest on his oars.
Furthermore, a tipster who tips a one horse race is seldom required and will certainly gain no credit from it.
In this neck of the woods there's currently a four -reactor nuclear plant under construction, for a total of 5600MWe. The Koreans are building it to a standard design at a cost of approx $25bn - how is Hinkley Point C being talked about as £50 or £60bn for only 3200MWe across two slightly larger reactors? The numbers just don't make sense for Hinkley, and I really don't understand why.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barakah_nuclear_power_plant
The expense was replacing the oxhide - otherwise it was actually quite cheap to run.
There were other problems as well, e.g. points and shunting and so on, but that failure of the leather was what killed it.
So I ask @gove2016 why him not Leadsom, says "I've been arguing for fundamental change in our relationship with EU for more than 20 years"
Claws..
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/france-is-totally-bankrupt-french-jobs-minister-michel-sapin-embarrasses-francois-hollande-with-8471077.html
Favourite part:
"There are even reports that Nicolas Sarkozy, the previous President of France, is preparing to move to London with his wife Carla Bruni for economic reasons."
Don't believe it for a minute. But it's a lovely thought.
http://abcnews.go.com/live?stream=1
Maglev has been the future since the 60's and until cheap superconductors arrive it's going nowhere and will still suffer from not being compatible with the existing rail network.
And then there is the Hyperloop!!! Sigh. Just because it's proposed by a tech billionaire everyone swoons and believe his bullshit. First his scheme involves building a partial vacuum in a long steel tube. In this tube he proposes to shoot tube full of people at 500 mph to their destination. He says because it will be cheap to build and make money.
Arrrggghhhhhhhhhhhh. Their are so many holes in this retro future dream scheme.
If you think High speed line is pricey imagine a sealed tube with gradients gentle enough for 500 mph running and air tight for hundreds of miles, with motors keeping the air out.
Imagine the machined tolerances required to shoot a passenger capsule at 500mph in a partial vacuum over hundreds of miles!!!
He also proposes to keep capacity up for each small capsule to be just 7 seconds apart at full speed. Just imagine, if something went wrong and a capsule stopped. In fact don't even if every thing stopped automatically how would they get out of vacuum tube?
All of this would need to built on viaducts (that's plan to avoid paying for rights of way, but this ignores you'd still have to do that so people can access the tube line).
The main problem is that even after all that it would still only have a 1/3 the capacity of a conventional high speed line. And there is no way in the world it could be built for less that a normal high speed railway and reality it's got to cost a lot more.
It seems to me to be a spoiler to stop the building of high speed train line, as this wonderous technology is around the corner. I've read he is an opponent of the California High Speed Project.
You know what - I don't even want to think about it. I'm off to wash my mind out and then to bed.
Good night all.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3674909/Chilcot-publish-29-letters-Blair-Bush-run-Iraq-War-WON-T-release-replies-2-6million-word-report-released-tomorrow.html
twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/750416911326937088
@MSmithsonPB: If May is the CON Andy Burnham Leadsom is the Corbyn and could win.
Was she ever in possession of the plot?
I understand many people think a low pound is good (mistakenly IMHO, but YMMV). But whether good or bad, it is extraordinarily low at the moment.
http://www.miketodd.net/encyc/dollar-verylong.gif
http://www.miketodd.net/encyc/dollhist.htm
Kevin McKeever, Portland employee named in tonight's Canary piece, receives death threats warning he'll "be coxed".
Wow, this isn't pleasant stuff at all.
Might have to dust off my old Dunlop Maxply Fort rackets.
Sadly the Teddy Tinling outfits are a bit of a squeeze now !! ....
Quick someone post that interview of the wally with the brolly and his faux Netherlander accent
This would be a fantastic way to waste the opportunities of brexit. Rather than having a full reboot, let's just reshuffle the pack!
Labour planning "peace talks", shadow cabinet minister tells me, likening it to Northern Irish disarmament process.
Corbyn departure looking more possible than before. "But not with a gun to his head".
More revelations from Ken Clarke and Sir Malcolm Rifkind:
https://youtu.be/14njUwJUg1I
Sorry, I'll get my coat again.
2) £1=$1.3 is not relatively low. £1=$1.3 is extraordinarily low.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xhtq1ObGHy8
.. Of the Duchy of Lancaster..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business/market_data/currency/default.stm
Again, unless you are going on holiday to the states or you buy a lot of goods from the states why is a low pound against the dollar of great concern? It may also encourage more Americans to visit London and the UK and help sell more British goods to the US
It's not even a mix of English and generic American, it's a mix between English and Noo Yawk Baybee!
But back in a couple weeks to have a few drinks with someone in Colorado (but flying to Montrose not Denver!)
- You make me vomit?
And they'd better do it before Conference, when JC will probably change the rules to exclude the MPs from the challenge process!
Could pbCOM actually be quite influential after all?
Brexit is great for me.
That is quite alot in dividends. Mine are shit in comparison.
More seriously, it will encourage exports and inward tourism, might even encourage a few Brits to take local holidays rather than going abroad this summer. I paid £9 a pint yesterday in my local bar, so it will only be the rich British tourists that come here next winter if the exchange rate stays so low.