I was being deliberately provocative. But there is a strand of greenery that strikes me as being profoundly anti-science. I don't think it's a coincidence that so many of this country's most prominent small g greens are from the most privileged parts of society. Just look at the organic movement, for example. You can't move for wealthy celebs, lords and ladies, multi-millionaires and various other members of the elite. Being small g green is deeply conservative.
I'm not sure that the organic movement is a good example.
That's simply a case of product differentiation. They've convinced themselves that organic food tastes/is better and healthier. It also costs a lot more, so it is a signalling device for wealth and privilege.
Essentially they are paying to (a) show they are rich and (b) feel morally superior.
It's also about wanting to keep things as they are, or to regress. And, happily enough, doing that ensures that the privileged keep their privileges.
I think you are muddling up causation here.
Certainly there is a strand of green thought - let's call it conservationalism - which is an extreme intepretation of "stewardship and dominion". They like the way things are and don't see any need to take risks - I don't think, though, that it is a conscious intention to keep people down; they just don't think through the implications. The types of greens who want to see economic regression are more typically on the left (and don't get me started on Population Matters)
However, I think although there is an overlap between both these groups and organic fans, they are not completely identical. For instance, I much prefer organic eggs (mainly because of the poultry farms I have visited in a professional capacity) but am neither a conservationalist or a Green.
1) There are two different things going on here, a discussion about the merits of fracking and a challenge to public order. These should not be confused. The challenge to public order should be seen off, not caved into.
2) I'm relaxed about fracking in principle, but I don't see the huge hurry to get the frackable oil and gas out of the ground right now. It's been down there rather a long time and I doubt it's going anywhere in the next few years. Nor do I anticipate that oil and gas prices are going to crash any time soon either. If it is a valuable resource, it will keep.
3) When the oil and gas is used up, what next?
On point number 2, it all depends on whether your priority is to make money for producers from a high fuel price or help consumers with a lower fuel price.
Assuming a reasonably competitive market, which AFAIK there is, those are the same thing.
Jonothon.. self appointed King Ludd... has pointed out that the gas and oil are dinosaur farts.. I wonder where he thinks oil and coal come from. When I was involved in mining engineering we were told that the seams of coal running from England and out under Ireland were so thick they could not be mined....It would have been too difficult to support the roof and the subsidence would have been massive using back fill.
Although West Sussex is some way off my normal parish, it is an area which which I have a passing acquaintance.
My son was at 'College' in nearby Forest Row - Emerson College, to be precise. It's a Steiner school, whose approach can definitely be characterised as 'alternative'. It fits in well with a the area, one of great natural beauty and containing possibly the highest concentration of whackjobs per square mile outside of California.
It was no surprise to me that the locals protested vigourously at any attempt to dig, mine or disturb the local tranquility for any purpose that was not holistially sound, homeopathically orientated, or auspiciously ordained by the correct configuration of the moon and the stars. Grubby engineers looking for a cheap form of normal, non-psychic energy, were never going to be welcome.
The good people of West Sussex are sweet folk, and well-intentioned to a fault. It is a great place to pass a hot summer's evening, fortified with elderberry wine and thoughts of dancing maidens in diaphanous robes. For good sense and reasonable policy making however, one has to look elsewhere.
The Police and the Government should tell them to frack off - but nicely, of course.
GM crops, airports runways, ring-roads, housing developments. It's always the same story.but let's not just blame a few McProtestors as Prince Charles, various lords and ladies, and hugely wealthy celebs continually demonstrate, environmentalism and greenery is deeply conservative and often profoundly anti-science. There's a reason very privileged people are opposed to change.
SO.
Environmentalism and greenery is not anti-science. With my Chemical Engineering hat on, about one-third of our projects are Environmental Impact Assessments and what-if scenarios.
The biggest dinosaur is the Environment Agency as they do not know what they are doing and do not understand Nature. so yesterday, a main trunk road was flooded as they had forbidden the farmers to do their annual dredge of the river, yet they allow the water company to continue to mix street rain water with the sewage which all overflows and puts raw sewage onto the local beaches where children are paddling.
I was being deliberately provocative. But there is a strand of greenery that strikes me as being profoundly anti-science. I don't think it's a coincidence that so many of this country's most prominent small g greens are from the most privileged parts of society. Just look at the organic movement, for example. You can't move for wealthy celebs, lords and ladies, multi-millionaires and various other members of the elite. Being small g green is deeply conservative.
Exhibit 1: Prince Charles.
On the 'methane in well water' issue, since 99.86% of E/W households are on mains water, this is unlikely to be a major problem......
I agree with Mikes position on this, it's the same argument as GM crops. Dig a dozen test wells ASAP and see what the environmental impact is
"(it’s probable that there was a majority in favour of female suffrage in principle in the 1906 Commons but not one that was going to be seen to be bombed into passing the measure)."
Difficult to see how that was the case given that the bombs didnt start until after the 1910 election
I was very surprised by Herdson's needless suffragettes rant. The article would have been stronger if he'd omitted that element.
Although Herdson is on the (small) sane wing of the Tory party, even he just cannot help himself sometimes. Even good writers need wise sub-editors, but sub-editing of PB articles seems to be close to non existent. Mind you, the mainstream press are hardly any better than blogs in that respect.
I was going to get into the class base of the Suffragist movement in the cotton mills but thought I'd correct the more obvious PB Tory ignorance first.
I have zero knowledge of fracking but it is curious how the pro/anti camps seem to split down right/left lines.
Perhaps former Trots and Commies are driving the anti-fracking and anti-nuclear campaigns in the hope that we will one day be totally dependant on the old Soviet Union for energy. Wouldn't that be the ultimate revenge against the capitalist pigs!
Grubby engineers looking for a cheap form of normal, non-psychic energy, were never going to be welcome.
Very funny PtP. You clearly are versed in Biodynamic ways.
As you allude, Emerson College is actually in East Sussex. A very different place indeed to West Sussex. A bit like the Judean People's Front vs. The People's Front of Judea.
I was being deliberately provocative. But there is a strand of greenery that strikes me as being profoundly anti-science. I don't think it's a coincidence that so many of this country's most prominent small g greens are from the most privileged parts of society. Just look at the organic movement, for example. You can't move for wealthy celebs, lords and ladies, multi-millionaires and various other members of the elite. Being small g green is deeply conservative.
Quite. I thought that this bit from an article I posted upthread was spot on
"...And so the poisonous meme spreads from corporate liar to greenie activist to useful idiot to gullible prat to Home Counties Tory voter. Suddenly, everyone thinks they know fracking is a bad thing. Even the Church of England now feels able to chip in its tuppenny ha'penny's worth, though on God knows what evidence. Faith in Gaia, presumably.
Again, Ayn Rand foresaw all this. Swelling the ranks of the anti-Rearden-Metal protesters are all sorts of unlikely pressure groups – especially after Rearden Metal is used to make the sleepers on the new, fast, efficient Rio Norte railway line.
"I don't like the resolution passed by the convention of grade school teachers of New Mexico" said Taggart.
"What resolution?"
"They resolved that it was their opinion that children should not be permitted to ride on the new Rio Norte Line of Taggart Transcontinental when it's completed because it is unsafe."
I have zero knowledge of fracking but it is curious how the pro/anti camps seem to split down right/left lines.
Perhaps former Trots and Commies are driving the anti-fracking and anti-nuclear campaigns in the hope that we will one day be totally dependant on the old Soviet Union for energy. Wouldn't that be the ultimate revenge against the capitalist pigs!
The right have really taken to Fracking as the cure of all the worlds' ills, it is their magical money tree.
Jonathan ..So its only those on the right who want fracking .."as a cure for all of the worlds ills" do you really believe this or is it your Saturday morning joke ..nice one...
Why would a benevolent God allow free will? Our time on earth is but a blink of an eye in eternity. Surely a loving God would not allow any of us to risk eternal peace, love, tranquility for sins committed over such a comparatively tiny amount of time. If God does exist, can't we only conclude that He is malign. Of course, as a classically English agnostic, I am not saying this is the case, I am merely posing the question.
Because without free will we'd be angels...
Aren't angels God's bouncers? I always had the impression that most people think they're nice and cuddly but actually they go round enforcing his orders blindly?
If I've got this totally wrong - apols - its not exactly my specialist subject!
I have zero knowledge of fracking but it is curious how the pro/anti camps seem to split down right/left lines.
Perhaps former Trots and Commies are driving the anti-fracking and anti-nuclear campaigns in the hope that we will one day be totally dependant on the old Soviet Union for energy. Wouldn't that be the ultimate revenge against the capitalist pigs!
The right have really taken to Fracking as the cure of all the worlds' ills, it is their magical money tree.
Does it produce energy? Does it make money? Does it cost more than wind farms? Does it produce more energy than wind farms Does it make more money than wind farms? If you live near a fracking site, how likely is your house to be gobbled by an earthquake or sink hole? If we don't frack, will the other EU nations frack, and leave us behind? Will there ever be a man who can swim as fast as a shark?
I know zilch about it, but we do have a lot of wind farms around us in Wales (they ain't that much of an eye-sore) and I've noticed there is an anti-fracking brigade on my Facebook page. Made up of lefties, conspiracy theorists (one guy is always on about contrails!?!?) and people who eat tofu.
Jonathan ..So its only those on the right who want fracking .."as a cure for all of the worlds ills" do you really believe this or is it your Saturday morning joke ..nice one...
I think both sides have totally overstated the benefits and risks. Opponents claim it virtually causes armageddon (earthquake, flood, poison), supporters claim it is free of problems, costs nothing and lasts forever (a magic money tree).
As with all real things the truth is in between (or somewhere else entirely). It could be useful, but you don't get something for nothing and it still doesn't solve long-term energy problems.
Again, Ayn Rand foresaw all this. Swelling the ranks of the anti-Rearden-Metal protesters are all sorts of unlikely pressure groups – especially after Rearden Metal is used to make the sleepers on the new, fast, efficient Rio Norte railway line.
Right-wingers quoting Ayn Rand remind me of left-wingers claiming Marx was right all along. Perhaps with less facial hair, but with no more credibility.
(My god though, Atlas Shrugged is a tedious book. Some credit is due to anyone who gets to the end.)
I'm sure that, had they been around, the lefties would have been demonstrating against the digging of coal mines just as much as they demonstrated against their closure
Jonathan .. I have never seen any article or discusssion that stated it was without cost or problems, and like all things it is finite.Some have said it might last a hundred years .. hey, how the hell do they know that. One thing is for sure tho, if we don't secure our own energy supply ... and reasonably quickly, then someone else will.
Fracking,yes but avoid the green and populated sites
It's not like an open cast mine - the typical pad is the size of a cricket pitch. There are several in the South Downs National Park and no one notices. They aren't 400ft tall.
Coal mines needed workers and some Lefties are still blaming Thatcher - now the same ones are demanding that the mineral resources under their own feet aren't turned into local jobs because errr...
Top notch tory Public Relations as we've come to expect from the same twits who want to frack in the desolate north, if they could only work out which part they were talking about.
Hard to believe Yeo is so incompetent just after he was spouting off about Quail Eggs and food banks.
But at least all the tory backbenchers with seats to worry about are behind Cammie.
Tory MP warns Cameron on fracking
A Tory MP has warned David Cameron that he needs to tread carefully on fracking to avoid alienating the wider Conservative Party.
Mark Pritchard said: "Ministers need to avoid fracking replacing wind farms as the new energy issue that antagonises Tory grassroots."
But other Tory MPs have backed Mr Cameron's stance on fracking, the FT reports.
Whatever happens with fracking the idea that your average joe will benefit from lower prices is laughable. Landowners will get rich, shareholders will get rich, we'll subsidise it with our taxes and still pay huge bills. We'll just get shafted like always.
I think this comment is substantively incorrect - though it's politically relevant because I'm sure lots of people share the same view.
The reason it's very likely that the average joe will benefit is the consumer surplus - it's a sensible prediction that fracking will bring energy prices down, at least relative to the no-fracking counterfactual. There are other reasons to think fracking would make us better off: more domestic hydrocarbon production would be a shot in the arm to the balance of payments (funny how a few decades ago the BoP dominated headline news - dread to think what they'd make of ours now!), some average joes are going to be employed to frack, and more taxes are going to be paid than if this economic value were not to be extracted. But the taxes and the jobs and the boost to net exports aren't the main point - if the industry can add value to the economy then there's going to be a potentially sizeable economic surplus, and if there's no added-value then there's no incentive for them to frack.
The idea that fracking is going to, on net, suck up government subsidy seem unlikely to me. The reason companies are eager, is that with modern techniques and at current price expectations, it looks a profitable proposition. The government certainly pumps masses of direct and indirect subsidies around the economy, everything from renewable energy to industrial R&D to the banking sector. Some of that is wise, some of it appalling - but it's a value judgment which is which, and not one that all PBers will agree on! But the reason an austerity-era government is looking so favourably on fracking is precisely because they see it as a cash-cow and revenue-raiser (and in wider industrial policy and foreign trade contexts, a useful rebalancer) and not as a new pit to pour money down.
Yep I know all that bigger picture stuff but it is being 'sold' to some degree as a bill depressant. And that's not going to happen.
Can't wait for the howls of anguish from the Luddites, protest groups, eco warriors etc. when the leccy goes off...everywhere..and why did the guninment not do sumfink....They seem to think it all happens by magic .. or holding hands in a circle and chanting.
Jonathan ..So its only those on the right who want fracking .."as a cure for all of the worlds ills" do you really believe this or is it your Saturday morning joke ..nice one...
I think both sides have totally overstated the benefits and risks. Opponents claim it virtually causes armageddon (earthquake, flood, poison), supporters claim it is free of problems, costs nothing and lasts forever (a magic money tree).
As with all real things the truth is in between (or somewhere else entirely). It could be useful, but you don't get something for nothing and it still doesn't solve long-term energy problems.
I'm easy on blighting the landscape me. A few years back the Labour council and AM's sanctioned a massive, grey, miserable-looking hospital and built it on our beautiful village 'fawr', smashing down listed buildings and concreting the rugby, football and cricket pitches. It looks shit and serves little purpose.
The lefties were big into that until they found out the giant NHS extravaganza had no A&E and can't carry out any basic emergency services. Now they are joining marches complaining about it. You can't win.
That hospital also came with a new and totally unnecessary road system. The main road into it is called the Ludwigsberger Strasse! Built right through farm fields, which were compulsorily purchashed. I love that, it's the kind of thing which would send MikeK over the edge.
Anyway, I'm sure a fracking site would struggle hard to do more environmental damage than that thing. And it is makes money, then great. That hospital certainly isn't making any money, or any people any better.
If we do frack and it makes money I say go for it. Any rosy money and energy making schemes on the horizon should be looked at sensibly. Our poor kids have a pretty miserable future to look forward to, so at least this looks to be one positive outlet.
The money should then be put into some Norwegian oil-type future fund, from which we get years of benefit, But I doubt that would happen. My guess is that our politicians - from whichever corner - would spend it. Probably on more Ludwigsberger Strasses.
Top notch tory Public Relations as we've come to expect from the same twits who want to frack in the desolate north, if they could only work out which part they were talking about.
Hard to believe Yeo is so incompetent just after he was spouting off about Quail Eggs and food banks.
But at least all the backbenches with seats to worry about are behind Cammie.
Tory MP warns Cameron on fracking
A Tory MP has warned David Cameron that he needs to tread carefully on fracking to avoid alienating the wider Conservative Party.
Mark Pritchard said: "Ministers need to avoid fracking replacing wind farms as the new energy issue that antagonises Tory grassroots."
But other Tory MPs have backed Mr Cameron's stance on fracking, the FT reports.
The local benefits are probably mostly bogus (apart from the cash payoff), but he's right that local government shouldn't have a veto on this kind of thing.
There are several different issues here getting tangled up, which is why we see some odd alliances.
1. Should we be shifting from gas and oil to renewable energy, because of climate change concerns and/or the wish to become more permanently energy-independent? This is what the core of the anti-fracking movement is about. They don't like gas and oil as it's carbon energy, and they see this as a dangerous distraction from getting on with wind, wave, tidal, solar, etc - some would say nuclear too.
2. Should we be messing up bits of our countryside with moderately obtrusive drills? This is what gets local opinion opposed. Some of it may be bought off with the offer of a share in the profits, others not.
3. Is there a risk involved - earthquakes, polluting the ground water, etc.? This is an engineering question which governments have a right to take a view on: if there's a risk, it may outweigh any economic rights. Proponents say there were some risks, but they've got the hang of it now and the risks have gone away.
4. Will it make energy in Britain much cheaper? Not really as the global market is so integrated, but it'll help at the margin and also help the balance of payments.
5. Will it make us more proof against blackmail by Middle Eastern countries or Russia? Yes, a bit.
6. Should a legal activity which the Government doesn't oppose on national grounds be prevented by demonstrations? No, though it's not all that cut and dried - there are precedents of legislation, now generally accepted, that were preceded by illegal activity to prompt it (the right to roam, for instance). I doubt if most people really want to see water-cannons and police charges.
Personally it seems to me tricky and "proceed with caution" is the right policy. The gas isn't going anywhere so we don't need a frantic rush.
Deep thought: I doubt that there are a lot of local jobs involved in experimental drilling, which presumably needs skilled people. But one thing that could provide employment for low-skilled local people is security. Maybe the protests are needed to turn fracking into a short-term local job creation scheme, which is in turn needed to make people in the next location willing to accept it.
Can't wait for the howls of anguish from the Luddites, protest groups, eco warriors etc. when the leccy goes off...everywhere..and why did the guninment not do sumfink....They seem to think it all happens by magic .. or holding hands in a circle and chanting.
Richard, we will be fine with our renewables supplying us comfortably, stuff your fracking where the sun don't shine
Organic food is definitely the sign of being posh. I'd only eat it if they added a few e-numbers and preservative to ensure it's safe.
Organic bacon ... preserved with NaCl...
Isn't non-organic food still, er, organic (as opposed to synthetic)?
its full of crap, hormones and pesticides
Didn't realise SNP policy was to ban it!
I doubt it is , they believe in personal choice. I prefer decent food and would prefer a smaller amount of quality food rather than a bucket full of hormone / pesticide garbage. Personal choice evry time but quite amazing the garbage people will eat, usually processed crap whilst complaining they are too poor to buy anything decent , rather than cook a decent meal.
The local benefits are probably mostly bogus (apart from the cash payoff), but he's right that local government shouldn't have a veto on this kind of thing.
A say and a veto are not the same thing. Yeo is helping the cause of Fracking about as much as Lord Howell did with his 'desolate north' stupidity. Not to mention Yeo is hardly the person anyone would want as a defacto spokesperson on Fracking given his previous involvement in lobbying scandals involving energy policy.
Deep thought: I doubt that there are a lot of local jobs involved in experimental drilling, which presumably needs skilled people. But one thing that could provide employment for low-skilled local people is security. Maybe the protests are needed to turn fracking into a short-term local job creation scheme, which is in turn needed to make people in the next location willing to accept it.
Yes a couple of minimum wage , 12 hour night shift jobs will really placate the locals, what planet do you live on.
Shadow Cabinet meeting again. Just me and Chris Bryant again.
“I know I said I wanted to dominate the news agenda,” I say, “but I’d rather we hadn’t done it by being a complete laughing stock.”
Chris says I should have been more specific. Then we sit there in silence for a while. Then I open my laptop and ask him if it’s really true about these websites, where you can advertise for hard-working Poles to come over and do jobs that British people just don’t fancy.
“Of course!” says Chris. “I didn’t just make it up!”
The local benefits are probably mostly bogus (apart from the cash payoff), but he's right that local government shouldn't have a veto on this kind of thing.
A say and a veto are not the same thing. Yeo is helping the cause of Fracking about as much as Lord Howell did with his 'desolate north' stupidity. Not to mention Yeo is hardly the person anyone would want as a defacto spokesperson on Fracking given his previous involvement in lobbying scandals involving energy policy.
Yeo supports it because he will make even more money out of it and will not be anywhere near it happening
Again, Ayn Rand foresaw all this. Swelling the ranks of the anti-Rearden-Metal protesters are all sorts of unlikely pressure groups – especially after Rearden Metal is used to make the sleepers on the new, fast, efficient Rio Norte railway line.
Right-wingers quoting Ayn Rand remind me of left-wingers claiming Marx was right all along. Perhaps with less facial hair, but with no more credibility.
(My god though, Atlas Shrugged is a tedious book. Some credit is due to anyone who gets to the end.)
You mean Ayn Rand the welfare queen?
Ayn Rand, Hypocrite? Legendary opponent of “welfare state” received Social Security and probably Medicare
Critics of Social Security and Medicare frequently invoke the words and ideals of author and philosopher Ayn Rand, one of the fiercest critics of federal insurance programs. But a little-known fact is that Ayn Rand herself collected Social Security. She may also have received Medicare benefits.
An interview recently surfaced that was conducted in 1998 by the Ayn Rand Institute with a social worker who says she helped Rand and her husband, Frank O’Connor, sign up for Social Security and Medicare in 1974.
Shadow Cabinet meeting again. Just me and Chris Bryant again.
“I know I said I wanted to dominate the news agenda,” I say, “but I’d rather we hadn’t done it by being a complete laughing stock.”
Chris says I should have been more specific. Then we sit there in silence for a while. Then I open my laptop and ask him if it’s really true about these websites, where you can advertise for hard-working Poles to come over and do jobs that British people just don’t fancy.
“Of course!” says Chris. “I didn’t just make it up!”
The Guardian have helpfully linked to this article from 2006
"As the day wore on, it was impossible to ignore the anxiety - verging on panic - in No 10, as the prime minister and his chancellor met to attempt to thrash out a deal in meetings that ended inconclusively, and to no one's satisfaction. Whatever was being said in briefings, Mr Blair's allies were clear about how to characterise the manoeuvering: an attempted coup.
Behind it, or certainly a part of it, was Tom Watson, the defence minister, whose name was among those on a letter calling for Mr Blair to quit. No 10 had been bracing itself for the note ever since officials were contacted by the Guardian in York late on Monday night.
The chief whip, Jacqui Smith, had told Mr Watson to withdraw his name. He did not, and his fate was sealed. He quit the government at 11.12am. His resignation statement was given to the media while most lobby journalists were in their daily briefing at No 10.
He said in his letter to the prime minister: "I have to say that I no longer believe that your remaining in office is in the interest of either the party or the country." It didn't take long for Downing Street to hit back, and brutally..." http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2006/sep/07/uk.labourleadership1
Why would a benevolent God allow free will? Our time on earth is but a blink of an eye in eternity. Surely a loving God would not allow any of us to risk eternal peace, love, tranquility for sins committed over such a comparatively tiny amount of time. If God does exist, can't we only conclude that He is malign. Of course, as a classically English agnostic, I am not saying this is the case, I am merely posing the question.
Because without free will we'd be angels...
Aren't angels God's bouncers? I always had the impression that most people think they're nice and cuddly but actually they go round enforcing his orders blindly?
If I've got this totally wrong - apols - its not exactly my specialist subject!
You're pretty much spot on - the only description of one (that I recall) gives it 6 eyes, 6 wings and two flaming swords. I'd describe them as 'enforcers' rather than bouncers... they don't just keep you out of places...
It's why they don't need free will (and Lucifer is what you get with a rebellious angel)
The Guardian have helpfully linked to this article from 2006
I wonder if we are starting to see the same sort of psycho-drama that gripped the Conservatives after Thatcher was ousted playing itself out in the Labour party - they ditched a PM who won three GE's and replaced him with someone who lost the only one he ever contested - many of the losers' acolytes sit on the front benches......and their leader, another acolyte, has yet to make a positive impression.....
MG..I did not have electricity in my home until I was 21, I am aware of the limitations it places on one's life...unlike the luddite protestors..they really do think it is magic and their total right to have complete access to it at all times ..forever..Pr*ts
Grubby engineers looking for a cheap form of normal, non-psychic energy, were never going to be welcome.
Very funny PtP. You clearly are versed in Biodynamic ways.
As you allude, Emerson College is actually in East Sussex. A very different place indeed to West Sussex. A bit like the Judean People's Front vs. The People's Front of Judea.
My son studied Biodynamic Agriculture, Jonathan.
I'm not in fact a complete skeptic. Biodynamic wine is brilliant. Try some. I don't know how or why it works, but who cares?
The Guardian have helpfully linked to this article from 2006
I wonder if we are starting to see the same sort of psycho-drama that gripped the Conservatives after Thatcher was ousted playing itself out in the Labour party - they ditched a PM who won three GE's and replaced him with someone who lost the only one he ever contested - many of the losers' acolytes sit on the front benches......and their leader, another acolyte, has yet to make a positive impression.....
I really wouldn't want Tom Watson and his knuckle dusters on the outside myself - he's doing a marvellous job of peeing into the tent.
Grubby engineers looking for a cheap form of normal, non-psychic energy, were never going to be welcome.
Very funny PtP. You clearly are versed in Biodynamic ways.
As you allude, Emerson College is actually in East Sussex. A very different place indeed to West Sussex. A bit like the Judean People's Front vs. The People's Front of Judea.
My son studied Biodynamic Agriculture, Jonathan.
I'm not in fact a complete skeptic. Biodynamic wine is brilliant. Try some. I don't know how or why it works, but who cares?
My in-laws have been involved for years in Forest Row/Steiner knit-your-own-yoghurt scene. I will try to source some Biodynamic wine. As you say, who cares if it's brilliant.
"...Philip Fletcher, chair of the group, which advises the General Synod and the archbishops of Canterbury and York, said: “Fuel poverty is an increasingly urgent issue for many in society – the impact on energy bills is felt most by the least well off...
Speaking to The Telegraph, he stopped short of accusing opponents of promoting “hysteria” but said: “There is a real danger of distorting the arguments through protest. “If we take an example from a little way back you will recall the completely misguided attack on the MMR jab.
“[That] is still causing outbreaks of measles now in our vulnerable children because it gave many households and many parents the wrong impression that MMR was somehow dangerous. You could be in the same position with fracking if you just take the very limited views being expressed by some opponents of fracking at the moment.”
Although West Sussex is some way off my normal parish, it is an area which which I have a passing acquaintance.
My son was at 'College' in nearby Forest Row - Emerson College, to be precise. It's a Steiner school, whose approach can definitely be characterised as 'alternative'. It fits in well with a the area, one of great natural beauty and containing possibly the highest concentration of whackjobs per square mile outside of California.
It was no surprise to me that the locals protested vigourously at any attempt to dig, mine or disturb the local tranquility for any purpose that was not holistially sound, homeopathically orientated, or auspiciously ordained by the correct configuration of the moon and the stars. Grubby engineers looking for a cheap form of normal, non-psychic energy, were never going to be welcome.
The good people of West Sussex are sweet folk, and well-intentioned to a fault. It is a great place to pass a hot summer's evening, fortified with elderberry wine and thoughts of dancing maidens in diaphanous robes. For good sense and reasonable policy making however, one has to look elsewhere.
The Police and the Government should tell them to frack off - but nicely, of course.
Peter, not seen you on much , any tips for horses today, just pottering waiting on jumps proper getting started up. Think madame Vestris in 17:25 at Chester is my best bet today.
For most people, whatever the approval ratings are in principle for cutting carbon emissions and supporting renewable sources, their overriding priorities are that the lights stay on and that the bills stay down (or at least, don’t rise too high).
As a committed Greenie, my overriding priority is also to keep the lights on (or at least the freezer powered) and bills down.
Given the vast increases in gas and oil prices in recent years I don't see this as being incompatible with a more determined development of renewable energy sources.
OT, but does anyone here have any experience of / thoughts on outfits like Funding Circle that enable you to lend direct to businesses?
Plusses: Good rates. I was getting 10.2% (before tax) on a fairly small (four figure) sum. Secondary market, so there's no problem about getting your money out at any time.
Minuses: It is very time consuming to invest. It can almost feel like a part-time job. Is it worth all that effort for a reward (for most people) of a few hundred quid extra interest per year? It might make sense for larger investors e.g. >£100,000. You must diversify greatly to minimize the impact of the inevitable bad debt. Say no more than 1% or 2% in any one business. That's 50 or 100 businesses. It could literally take months to drip your wonga into so many different pots. There are IIRC only a handful different loans offered every day across the four (now five) different risk bands. To get the best rates you must be sitting there at any hour of the day when the loan auction closes, ready to snipe with your bid. There is a robot that can autobid for you but my experience was that it got you in at a shit rate, or didn't get you in at all... Offered rates were definitely heading south over the course of my time there. They have now introduced minimum rates. One consequence seems to be even more sniping, with loans now disappearing fast, sometimes in minutes. The website is a bit daunting and confusing, so many things going on, and not many tools to keep close tabs on your portfolio. You have to declare your income under Self-Assessment. If not already under SA, you have to sign up. More time-consuming admin to consider.
I pulled my money out in the end to invest elsewhere, but I might get back in sometime with a larger wedge...
On topic, constituencies with fracking licenses granted, per Greenpeace:
There seems to be a bit in Kent including Thanet South. Are UKIP for this because drilling is right-wing or against because it's a good local issue to jump on?
Wealden Charles Hendry Con Bexhill and Battle Gregory Barker Con Eastbourne Stephen Lloyd Lib Dem Hastings and Rye Amber Rudd Con Lewes Norman Baker Lib Dem Arundel and South Downs Nick Herbert Con Bognor Regis and Littlehampton Nick Gibb Con Chichester Andrew Tyrie Con Crawley Henry Smith Con East Worthing and Shoreham Tim Loughton Con Horsham Francis Maude Con Mid Sussex Nicholas Soames Con Worthing West Peter Bottomley Con East Surrey Sam Gyimah - Cameron PPS Con Mole Valley Paul Beresford Con Reigate Crispin Blunt Con Surrey Heath Michael Gove Con Epsom & Ewell Chris Grayling Con Runnymede and Weybridge Philip Hammond Con South West Surrey Jeremy Hunt Con Spelthorne Kwasi Kwarteng Con Woking Jonathan Lord Con Guildford Anne Milton Con Esher and Walton Dominic Raab Con Dover and Deal Charlie Elphicke Con Canterbury Julian Brazier Con Gillingham and Rainham Rehman Chishti Con Sevenoaks Michael Fallon (DECC) Con Thanet North Roger Gale Con Sittingbourne and Sheppey Gordon Henderson Con Gravesham Adam Holloway Con Dartford Gareth Johnson Con Tonbridge and Malling John Stanley Con Tunbridge Wells Greg Clark Con Folkestone and Hythe Damian Collins Con Chatham and Aylesford Tracey Crouch Con Maidstone and Weald Helen Grant Con Ashford Damian Green Con Rochester and Strood Mark Reckless Con Faversham and Kent Mid Hugh Roberston Con Thanet South Laura Sandys Con North East Hampshire James Arbuthnot Con Winchester Steve Brine Con Southampton Itchen John Denham Lab Gosport Caroline Dinenage Con Portsmouth South Mike Hancock LD East Hampshire Damian Hinds Con Fareham Mark Hoban Con Meon Valley George Hollingbery Con Eastleigh Mike Thornton LD New Forest East Julian Lewis Con Basingstoke Maria Miller Con Portsmouth North Penny Mordaunt Con Romsey and Southampton North Caroline Nokes Con New Forest West Desmond Swayne Con Southampton Test Alan Whitehead Lab Havant David Willetts Con North West Hampshire Sir George Young Con
It would be interesting to how the anti-fracking protesters financially support themselves. My guess would be that any of them actually having a job it would be of a parasitical nature.
It would be interesting to how the anti-fracking protesters financially support themselves. My guess would be that any of them actually having a job it would be of a parasitical nature.
How many rely on The Bank of Mum & Dad or are supposedly *available for work* as a % is probably rather high.
"The unknown donor set up the National Fund some 85 years ago with a donation of £500,000 - a huge sum at the time which corresponds to £26.6 million in today's prices. However, it has grown sevenfold and is now effectively the 30th largest charity in Britain by net assets, making it bigger than the Royal British Legion, the Financial Times reported.
The original donor, possibly responding to a request from the government in 1919 for voluntary donations from the rich to help pay off Britain's First World War debts, specified that the money should be placed in trust until the country had collected enough money to pay off the entire national debt - which now stands at £1.2 trillion.
However, the donor said trustees could use part of the funds to pay down the debt if "in their opinion at any time or times national exigencies [should] require."
I think people will be discouraged from making donations to the national coffers in future because of the risk of the money being used for partisan purposes.
The Guardian have helpfully linked to this article from 2006
I wonder if we are starting to see the same sort of psycho-drama that gripped the Conservatives after Thatcher was ousted playing itself out in the Labour party - they ditched a PM who won three GE's and replaced him with someone who lost the only one he ever contested - many of the losers' acolytes sit on the front benches......and their leader, another acolyte, has yet to make a positive impression.....
I really wouldn't want Tom Watson and his knuckle dusters on the outside myself - he's doing a marvellous job of peeing into the tent.
Watson voted for Ed Balls ahead of Ed Milliband for the Leadership election. Watson is part of the Unite clique (Whelan etc) that pushed hard for more backing of Balls than Ed Milliband but one of the then co-Leaders of Unite pushed for Ed Milliband to get the free envelope advertising as EdM had a better chance of winning against the candidate they all did not want, brother David. De-stabalizing EdM should be viewed from a Balls perspective. Later Len McCluskey took over Unite and the rest is history.
a nice little earner for the managers too. £1 million a year in expenses...
which may not be unrelated to
'However, the donor said trustees could use part of the funds to pay down the debt if "in their opinion at any time or times national exigencies [should] require."'
I mean, which trustees are going to kill their golden goose?
Peter, not seen you on much , any tips for horses today, just pottering waiting on jumps proper getting started up. Think madame Vestris in 17:25 at Chester is my best bet today.
Malcolm, had a tip for Tawhid in the 3.15 Newbury, 4/1-ish. The tipster in question tends to be a bit hit and miss with shorter (i.e. single figure) prices, so full health warning included.
"Ed Miliband needs to “turn up the volume” and prove that he, not the trade unions, runs the Labour Party, a former Cabinet minister has warned.
Jack Straw, who was Foreign Secretary under Tony Blair, made the plea as a current Shadow Cabinet minister set out a series of measures that Labour could deploy to attract voters.
A major proposal on childcare and an ambitious school-building and refurbishment programme should form part of Labour’s election pitch, according to Stephen Twigg, the Shadow Education Secretary. He also said that scrapping a benefit cut inflicted on thousands of families in social housing with spare rooms should be a priority..." http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3845423.ece
"Ed Miliband rarely goes a day at the moment without some damaging intervention from a Labour figure. With the party holding off on all policy announcements until next month's conference, the vacuum has been filled by malcontents from past and present. The latest specimen is Tom Watson's interview in today's Guardian. The party's former campaign co-ordinator reminds us that the row over Falkirk remains unresolved, declaring that "a huge injustice has been done" to Karie Murphy, his former office manager and Unite's candidate of choice in the constituency. He adds: "When they finally complete this inquiry they will find out that she hasn't done anything wrong."
But more harmful than Watson's comments on Falkirk (which are merely a reiteration of his long-standing position) are those on Labour's EU referendum policy. No longer bound by collective responsibility, he calls for the party to support an early referendum next May (becoming the most senior figure in the party to do so) and criticises it for allowing the Tories to set the terms of debate. He warns: "Cameron has set the agenda on Europe; he wants a referendum, and if we don't engage with that debate then it won't be on our terms. So I would argue for a referendum next May – get it out the way before the election. That should be Labour's position. Yes to a referendum, and yes to remaining part of Europe." ... http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/08/its-tom-watsons-attack-labours-eu-referendum-policy-should-really-worry-miliband
At Paddy Power you can get 6/5 for Labour to win Brighton Pavilion.
Has Caroline Lucas MP really been such a dud that she is in serious danger of losing her seat at the first defence?
Caroline was elected with 31.3% of the vote and just 2.4% ahead of Labour. With Labour clearly going to do better in 2015 than 2010 then she was always going to be in a battle to retain her seat however she performed. I'm biased obviously but I think she has done very well and I'm relatively confident about her chances. Anyway I'm on her to win at 8/1 thanks to the generosity of Mark Senior.
I think he completed the Stereotype Application Form
" Jamie Kelsey-Fry, 49, a leading Left-wing protester, has refused to condemn those who break the law, describing them as brave heroes and likening them to the Suffragettes.
The former secondary school teacher, who was a member of the Occupy Movement campaigning against global capitalism in 2011, said some causes were worth risking liberty for.
Mr Kelsey-Fry, who lives in Islington, north London, said: “There comes a time when you have to risk your own liberty and your own safety if you are so concerned about your chance for a fair future or a sustainable future.”
His radical views are unlikely to win the support of his older brother, John Kelsey-Fry QC, who is one of the most respected criminal lawyers in the country. Charging fees of up to £20,000 a day, John Kelsey-Fry, 56, has successfully defended the likes of Harry Redknapp, the football manager, and Kieren Fallon, the jockey. He is due to defend Rebekah Brooks, the former News International chief executive" http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/10248532/Anti-fracking-firebrand-and-his-brother-the-senior-barrister.html
At Paddy Power you can get 6/5 for Labour to win Brighton Pavilion.
Has Caroline Lucas MP really been such a dud that she is in serious danger of losing her seat at the first defence?
Caroline was elected with 31.3% of the vote and just 2.4% ahead of Labour. With Labour clearly going to do better in 2015 than 2010 then she was always going to be in a battle to retain her seat however she performed. I'm biased obviously but I think she has done very well and I'm relatively confident about her chances. Anyway I'm on her to win at 8/1 thanks to the generosity of Mark Senior.
Performance aside, the national Lab improvement mostly seems to be 2010 LibDems. It's not obvious that those people break more for Lab than Green now that they have a Green MP.
Peter, not seen you on much , any tips for horses today, just pottering waiting on jumps proper getting started up. Think madame Vestris in 17:25 at Chester is my best bet today.
Malcolm, had a tip for Tawhid in the 3.15 Newbury, 4/1-ish. The tipster in question tends to be a bit hit and miss with shorter (i.e. single figure) prices, so full health warning included.
Union/Malcolm
Not been posting much but still check in regularly.
Been ploughing the All Weather, to good effect generally. Two for tonite are:
7.30 Zero Game 4/1 8.00 Aminaah 11/1
Biggest bet of the day though is at Market Rasen - fifty ew on Lap Of Honor.
Peter, not seen you on much , any tips for horses today, just pottering waiting on jumps proper getting started up. Think madame Vestris in 17:25 at Chester is my best bet today.
Malcolm, had a tip for Tawhid in the 3.15 Newbury, 4/1-ish. The tipster in question tends to be a bit hit and miss with shorter (i.e. single figure) prices, so full health warning included.
Another helpful intervention erm... "Ed Miliband needs to “turn up the volume” and prove that he, not the trade unions, runs the Labour Party, a former Cabinet minister has warned. Jack Straw, who was Foreign Secretary under Tony Blair, made the plea...... " http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3845423.ece
So, he is really going to turn on the main providors of 8 out of 10 pounds that come into his outfit from the very people that held the casting vote in the selection process that appointed him? Surely shome mishtake. It is just like Ratner insulting the customers who were buying his 9 carat necklasses ....... (What Ratner actually did that?)
Another helpful intervention erm... "Ed Miliband needs to “turn up the volume” and prove that he, not the trade unions, runs the Labour Party, a former Cabinet minister has warned. Jack Straw, who was Foreign Secretary under Tony Blair, made the plea...... " http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3845423.ece
So, he is really going to turn on the main providors of 8 out of 10 pounds that come into his outfit from the very people that held the casting vote in the selection process that appointed him? Surely shome mishtake. It is just like Ratner insulting the customers who were buying his 9 carat necklasses ....... (What Ratner actually did that?)
It depends what you mean by "turn on". Labour will obviously continue to be the main party with the friendliest policies towards workers' rights and other issues that trade unions tend to care about. But the relationship between the party and the movement looks as if it will be redefined. I dont think that necessarily amounts to "turning on" the trade unions though (particularly as the new relationship will not come to pass without the agreement of said trade unions).
Grubby engineers looking for a cheap form of normal, non-psychic energy, were never going to be welcome.
Very funny PtP. You clearly are versed in Biodynamic ways.
As you allude, Emerson College is actually in East Sussex. A very different place indeed to West Sussex. A bit like the Judean People's Front vs. The People's Front of Judea.
My son studied Biodynamic Agriculture, Jonathan.
I'm not in fact a complete skeptic. Biodynamic wine is brilliant. Try some. I don't know how or why it works, but who cares?
My in-laws have been involved for years in Forest Row/Steiner knit-your-own-yoghurt scene. I will try to source some Biodynamic wine. As you say, who cares if it's brilliant.
Jonathan
My son and I joke a lot about it but there is a perfectly plausible rationale for biodynamic production methods.
For a start, they eschew artificial inputs. Nor is the emphasis on the right phases of the seasons entirely daft, if it is not taken too far. They also use only the purest products. (I once asked my lad if they really moistened the soil with virgins' blood and he said 'Yes if we can get it but virgins not easy to find in Sussex." Not lacking in self-deprecating humour, these biodynamic types.)
Biodynamic wine is a bit pricy, but that is an indication that it is highly regarded. Having sampled a fair bit, I can understand why. It not only tastes pretty good but it never gives me a hangover. This is a serious factor with me because I suffer so much after drinking normal alcoholic beverages that I've become almost teetotal these days - unless of course I can lay my hands on the bio-d grog.
Another helpful intervention erm... "Ed Miliband needs to “turn up the volume” and prove that he, not the trade unions, runs the Labour Party, a former Cabinet minister has warned. Jack Straw, who was Foreign Secretary under Tony Blair, made the plea...... " http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3845423.ece
So, he is really going to turn on the main providors of 8 out of 10 pounds that come into his outfit from the very people that held the casting vote in the selection process that appointed him? Surely shome mishtake. It is just like Ratner insulting the customers who were buying his 9 carat necklasses ....... (What Ratner actually did that?)
It depends what you mean by "turn on". Labour will obviously continue to be the main party with the friendliest policies towards workers' rights and other issues that trade unions tend to care about. But the relationship between the party and the movement looks as if it will be redefined. I dont think that necessarily amounts to "turning on" the trade unions though (particularly as the new relationship will not come to pass without the agreement of said trade unions).
Very glad that you trust EdM and are in the camp of most PB labourites (whatever that means) and think that RedEdM is the bestest leader in the whole wide world.
Toby Harnden @tobyharnden Just found old list of Oxford PPE Firsts 1988 - includes David Cameron, Ed Balls, Ed Davey, Jeremy Hunt pic.twitter.com/6ndIqmXTSz
More Good News For Labour courtesy of the MD of Ipsos MORI
"Our poll this week for the Evening Standard showed that 63% of the public don’t like Ed Miliband. It is a headline writer's dream in a difficult week for Miliband – but focusing on this finding misses the really important points from the poll. True, digging into the data and trends on that question, if anything, makes it look worse for the Labour leader. If we see leaders as an electoral asset to attract voters from other parties, David Cameron comes out much stronger: he is liked by nearly twice as many non-Conservative voters (33%) than Miliband is liked by non-Labour voters (18%). Comparisons with Cameron in opposition are not good either: two years out, only 36% said they didn’t like Cameron, some 27 percentage points lower than Miliband’s current level of dislike.
On satisfaction with how Miliband is doing his job as leader of the opposition, he gets his lowest ever rating in this latest poll and is now at exactly the same level as William Hague was at this point in his leadership of the Conservatives. And interestingly, satisfaction with Miliband is lower, not higher, than average among public sector workers – a key target constituency for Labour at the election..." http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/08/biggest-problem-labour-people-dont-know-what-it-stands
Another helpful intervention erm... "Ed Miliband needs to “turn up the volume” and prove that he, not the trade unions, runs the Labour Party, a former Cabinet minister has warned. Jack Straw, who was Foreign Secretary under Tony Blair, made the plea...... " http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3845423.ece
So, he is really going to turn on the main providors of 8 out of 10 pounds that come into his outfit from the very people that held the casting vote in the selection process that appointed him? Surely shome mishtake. It is just like Ratner insulting the customers who were buying his 9 carat necklasses ....... (What Ratner actually did that?)
It depends what you mean by "turn on". Labour will obviously continue to be the main party with the friendliest policies towards workers' rights and other issues that trade unions tend to care about. But the relationship between the party and the movement looks as if it will be redefined. I dont think that necessarily amounts to "turning on" the trade unions though (particularly as the new relationship will not come to pass without the agreement of said trade unions).
Very glad that you trust EdM and are in the camp of most PB labourites (whatever that means) and think that RedEdM is the bestest leader in the whole wide world.
I'm struggling to see how you managed to draw that conclusion from my post but whatever makes you happy.
Another helpful intervention erm... "Ed Miliband needs to “turn up the volume” and prove that he, not the trade unions, runs the Labour Party, a former Cabinet minister has warned. Jack Straw, who was Foreign Secretary under Tony Blair, made the plea...... " http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3845423.ece
So, he is really going to turn on the main providors of 8 out of 10 pounds that come into his outfit from the very people that held the casting vote in the selection process that appointed him? Surely shome mishtake. It is just like Ratner insulting the customers who were buying his 9 carat necklasses ....... (What Ratner actually did that?)
Gerald. To be fair he was being absolutely honest in the context of an investor meeting. He was asked how Ratners could sell "diamond" earings for 99p and he replied that they were "crap". The rest, as they say, was history...
More Good News For Labour courtesy of the MD of Ipsos MORI. "Our poll this week for the Evening Standard showed that 63% of the public don’t like Ed Miliband. It is a headline writer's dream in a difficult week for Miliband – but focusing on this finding misses the really important points from the poll........... If we see leaders as an electoral asset to attract voters from other parties, David Cameron comes out much stronger: he is liked by nearly twice as many non-Conservative voters (33%) than Miliband is liked by non-Labour voters (18%). Comparisons with Cameron in opposition are not good either: two years out, only 36% said they didn’t like Cameron, some 27 percentage points lower than Miliband’s current level of dislike. .... Miliband as ... leader of the opposition, ..gets his lowest ever rating in this latest poll ...exactly the same level as William Hague was at this point in his leadership .... satisfaction with Miliband is lower, not higher, than average among public sector workers ....." http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/08/biggest-problem-labour-people-dont-know-what-it-stands
Plato, have a heart and please slow down on all this good news for Labour, one can hardly absorb all this sunshine that is being spread about. Unite may start to worry about what sort of leader their money brought to power?
Comments
Certainly there is a strand of green thought - let's call it conservationalism - which is an extreme intepretation of "stewardship and dominion". They like the way things are and don't see any need to take risks - I don't think, though, that it is a conscious intention to keep people down; they just don't think through the implications. The types of greens who want to see economic regression are more typically on the left (and don't get me started on Population Matters)
However, I think although there is an overlap between both these groups and organic fans, they are not completely identical. For instance, I much prefer organic eggs (mainly because of the poultry farms I have visited in a professional capacity) but am neither a conservationalist or a Green.
When I was involved in mining engineering we were told that the seams of coal running from England and out under Ireland were so thick they could not be mined....It would have been too difficult to support the roof and the subsidence would have been massive using back fill.
Although West Sussex is some way off my normal parish, it is an area which which I have a passing acquaintance.
My son was at 'College' in nearby Forest Row - Emerson College, to be precise. It's a Steiner school, whose approach can definitely be characterised as 'alternative'. It fits in well with a the area, one of great natural beauty and containing possibly the highest concentration of whackjobs per square mile outside of California.
It was no surprise to me that the locals protested vigourously at any attempt to dig, mine or disturb the local tranquility for any purpose that was not holistially sound, homeopathically orientated, or auspiciously ordained by the correct configuration of the moon and the stars. Grubby engineers looking for a cheap form of normal, non-psychic energy, were never going to be welcome.
The good people of West Sussex are sweet folk, and well-intentioned to a fault. It is a great place to pass a hot summer's evening, fortified with elderberry wine and thoughts of dancing maidens in diaphanous robes. For good sense and reasonable policy making however, one has to look elsewhere.
The Police and the Government should tell them to frack off - but nicely, of course.
On the 'methane in well water' issue, since 99.86% of E/W households are on mains water, this is unlikely to be a major problem......
http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/researchandlibrary/2010/11310.pdf
In the Southern region, 645 out of 5,154,240 households are not on the mains.....
Perhaps former Trots and Commies are driving the anti-fracking and anti-nuclear campaigns in the hope that we will one day be totally dependant on the old Soviet Union for energy. Wouldn't that be the ultimate revenge against the capitalist pigs!
As you allude, Emerson College is actually in East Sussex. A very different place indeed to West Sussex. A bit like the Judean People's Front vs. The People's Front of Judea.
"...And so the poisonous meme spreads from corporate liar to greenie activist to useful idiot to gullible prat to Home Counties Tory voter. Suddenly, everyone thinks they know fracking is a bad thing. Even the Church of England now feels able to chip in its tuppenny ha'penny's worth, though on God knows what evidence. Faith in Gaia, presumably.
Again, Ayn Rand foresaw all this. Swelling the ranks of the anti-Rearden-Metal protesters are all sorts of unlikely pressure groups – especially after Rearden Metal is used to make the sleepers on the new, fast, efficient Rio Norte railway line.
"I don't like the resolution passed by the convention of grade school teachers of New Mexico" said Taggart.
"What resolution?"
"They resolved that it was their opinion that children should not be permitted to ride on the new Rio Norte Line of Taggart Transcontinental when it's completed because it is unsafe."
If I've got this totally wrong - apols - its not exactly my specialist subject!
We should indeed frack on.
Does it make money?
Does it cost more than wind farms?
Does it produce more energy than wind farms
Does it make more money than wind farms?
If you live near a fracking site, how likely is your house to be gobbled by an earthquake or sink hole?
If we don't frack, will the other EU nations frack, and leave us behind?
Will there ever be a man who can swim as fast as a shark?
I know zilch about it, but we do have a lot of wind farms around us in Wales (they ain't that much of an eye-sore) and I've noticed there is an anti-fracking brigade on my Facebook page. Made up of lefties, conspiracy theorists (one guy is always on about contrails!?!?) and people who eat tofu.
As with all real things the truth is in between (or somewhere else entirely). It could be useful, but you don't get something for nothing and it still doesn't solve long-term energy problems.
(My god though, Atlas Shrugged is a tedious book. Some credit is due to anyone who gets to the end.)
One thing is for sure tho, if we don't secure our own energy supply ... and reasonably quickly, then someone else will.
Coal mines needed workers and some Lefties are still blaming Thatcher - now the same ones are demanding that the mineral resources under their own feet aren't turned into local jobs because errr...
Hard to believe Yeo is so incompetent just after he was spouting off about Quail Eggs and food banks.
But at least all the tory backbenchers with seats to worry about are behind Cammie. Well at least some of them are. ;^ )
The lefties were big into that until they found out the giant NHS extravaganza had no A&E and can't carry out any basic emergency services. Now they are joining marches complaining about it. You can't win.
That hospital also came with a new and totally unnecessary road system. The main road into it is called the Ludwigsberger Strasse! Built right through farm fields, which were compulsorily purchashed. I love that, it's the kind of thing which would send MikeK over the edge.
Anyway, I'm sure a fracking site would struggle hard to do more environmental damage than that thing. And it is makes money, then great. That hospital certainly isn't making any money, or any people any better.
If we do frack and it makes money I say go for it. Any rosy money and energy making schemes on the horizon should be looked at sensibly. Our poor kids have a pretty miserable future to look forward to, so at least this looks to be one positive outlet.
The money should then be put into some Norwegian oil-type future fund, from which we get years of benefit, But I doubt that would happen. My guess is that our politicians - from whichever corner - would spend it. Probably on more Ludwigsberger Strasses.
Hard to believe Yeo is so incompetent just after he was spouting off about Quail Eggs and food banks.
But at least all the backbenches with seats to worry about are behind Cammie. Well at least some of them are. ;^ )
The local benefits are probably mostly bogus (apart from the cash payoff), but he's right that local government shouldn't have a veto on this kind of thing.
1. Should we be shifting from gas and oil to renewable energy, because of climate change concerns and/or the wish to become more permanently energy-independent? This is what the core of the anti-fracking movement is about. They don't like gas and oil as it's carbon energy, and they see this as a dangerous distraction from getting on with wind, wave, tidal, solar, etc - some would say nuclear too.
2. Should we be messing up bits of our countryside with moderately obtrusive drills? This is what gets local opinion opposed. Some of it may be bought off with the offer of a share in the profits, others not.
3. Is there a risk involved - earthquakes, polluting the ground water, etc.? This is an engineering question which governments have a right to take a view on: if there's a risk, it may outweigh any economic rights. Proponents say there were some risks, but they've got the hang of it now and the risks have gone away.
4. Will it make energy in Britain much cheaper? Not really as the global market is so integrated, but it'll help at the margin and also help the balance of payments.
5. Will it make us more proof against blackmail by Middle Eastern countries or Russia? Yes, a bit.
6. Should a legal activity which the Government doesn't oppose on national grounds be prevented by demonstrations? No, though it's not all that cut and dried - there are precedents of legislation, now generally accepted, that were preceded by illegal activity to prompt it (the right to roam, for instance). I doubt if most people really want to see water-cannons and police charges.
Personally it seems to me tricky and "proceed with caution" is the right policy. The gas isn't going anywhere so we don't need a frantic rush.
Shadow Cabinet meeting again. Just me and Chris Bryant again.
“I know I said I wanted to dominate the news agenda,” I say, “but I’d rather we hadn’t done it by being a complete laughing stock.”
Chris says I should have been more specific. Then we sit there in silence for a while. Then I open my laptop and ask him if it’s really true about these websites, where you can advertise for hard-working Poles to come over and do jobs that British people just don’t fancy.
“Of course!” says Chris. “I didn’t just make it up!”
Right, I say. So what’s the Polish for “Shadow Cabinet”? http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3845451.ece
The PB Burleys wouldn't put up with her benefit scrounging. ;^ )
"As the day wore on, it was impossible to ignore the anxiety - verging on panic - in No 10, as the prime minister and his chancellor met to attempt to thrash out a deal in meetings that ended inconclusively, and to no one's satisfaction. Whatever was being said in briefings, Mr Blair's allies were clear about how to characterise the manoeuvering: an attempted coup.
Behind it, or certainly a part of it, was Tom Watson, the defence minister, whose name was among those on a letter calling for Mr Blair to quit. No 10 had been bracing itself for the note ever since officials were contacted by the Guardian in York late on Monday night.
The chief whip, Jacqui Smith, had told Mr Watson to withdraw his name. He did not, and his fate was sealed. He quit the government at 11.12am. His resignation statement was given to the media while most lobby journalists were in their daily briefing at No 10.
He said in his letter to the prime minister: "I have to say that I no longer believe that your remaining in office is in the interest of either the party or the country." It didn't take long for Downing Street to hit back, and brutally..." http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2006/sep/07/uk.labourleadership1
BBC2 are repeating "Thatcher - The Downing Street Years" at 8.10pm
It's why they don't need free will (and Lucifer is what you get with a rebellious angel)
Can't remember if I showed you my own cat videos, but I recently got three of them uploaded here:
http://www.youtube.com/user/SunilP2
My son studied Biodynamic Agriculture, Jonathan.
I'm not in fact a complete skeptic. Biodynamic wine is brilliant. Try some. I don't know how or why it works, but who cares?
"...Philip Fletcher, chair of the group, which advises the General Synod and the archbishops of Canterbury and York, said: “Fuel poverty is an increasingly urgent issue for many in society – the impact on energy bills is felt most by the least well off...
Speaking to The Telegraph, he stopped short of accusing opponents of promoting “hysteria” but said: “There is a real danger of distorting the arguments through protest. “If we take an example from a little way back you will recall the completely misguided attack on the MMR jab.
“[That] is still causing outbreaks of measles now in our vulnerable children because it gave many households and many parents the wrong impression that MMR was somehow dangerous. You could be in the same position with fracking if you just take the very limited views being expressed by some opponents of fracking at the moment.”
He added: “I think what often happens in a polarised debate [is that] you have those who are very strongly for or against something and the evidence gets lost in the middle.” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10248468/Fracking-campaigners-like-MMR-scaremongers-says-Church-of-England.html
http://projecthawker2013.com/schedule/
Flies over Tower Bridge c. 10.50 on Wednesday.
Given the vast increases in gas and oil prices in recent years I don't see this as being incompatible with a more determined development of renewable energy sources.
Good rates. I was getting 10.2% (before tax) on a fairly small (four figure) sum.
Secondary market, so there's no problem about getting your money out at any time.
Minuses:
It is very time consuming to invest. It can almost feel like a part-time job. Is it worth all that effort for a reward (for most people) of a few hundred quid extra interest per year? It might make sense for larger investors e.g. >£100,000.
You must diversify greatly to minimize the impact of the inevitable bad debt. Say no more than 1% or 2% in any one business. That's 50 or 100 businesses. It could literally take months to drip your wonga into so many different pots. There are IIRC only a handful different loans offered every day across the four (now five) different risk bands.
To get the best rates you must be sitting there at any hour of the day when the loan auction closes, ready to snipe with your bid. There is a robot that can autobid for you but my experience was that it got you in at a shit rate, or didn't get you in at all...
Offered rates were definitely heading south over the course of my time there. They have now introduced minimum rates. One consequence seems to be even more sniping, with loans now disappearing fast, sometimes in minutes.
The website is a bit daunting and confusing, so many things going on, and not many tools to keep close tabs on your portfolio.
You have to declare your income under Self-Assessment. If not already under SA, you have to sign up. More time-consuming admin to consider.
I pulled my money out in the end to invest elsewhere, but I might get back in sometime with a larger wedge...
http://eorailway.co.uk/events/trains-and-planes-sunday/
There seems to be a bit in Kent including Thanet South. Are UKIP for this because drilling is right-wing or against because it's a good local issue to jump on? https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlcEvov1OlyHdENObmVONzdVMkU0OUJKU0ladVNGTGc#gid=0
Blimey. Interesting.
1) Filter that down to marginals
2) Add the marginals in the north.
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabinet_cieni
I see they#ve been playing with the idea in Poland.
"The unknown donor set up the National Fund some 85 years ago with a donation of £500,000 - a huge sum at the time which corresponds to £26.6 million in today's prices. However, it has grown sevenfold and is now effectively the 30th largest charity in Britain by net assets, making it bigger than the Royal British Legion, the Financial Times reported.
The original donor, possibly responding to a request from the government in 1919 for voluntary donations from the rich to help pay off Britain's First World War debts, specified that the money should be placed in trust until the country had collected enough money to pay off the entire national debt - which now stands at £1.2 trillion.
However, the donor said trustees could use part of the funds to pay down the debt if "in their opinion at any time or times national exigencies [should] require."
Neither the Second World War nor the recent financial crisis led to a payout. Barclays, which became the trustee in 2009, has attempted to use the money to make grants to charities, or hand the fund over to The Treasury..." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10249212/Bequest-to-nation-worth-350-million-lies-untouched.html
a nice little earner for the managers too. £1 million a year in expenses...
which may not be unrelated to
'However, the donor said trustees could use part of the funds to pay down the debt if "in their opinion at any time or times national exigencies [should] require."'
I mean, which trustees are going to kill their golden goose?
"Ed Miliband needs to “turn up the volume” and prove that he, not the trade unions, runs the Labour Party, a former Cabinet minister has warned.
Jack Straw, who was Foreign Secretary under Tony Blair, made the plea as a current Shadow Cabinet minister set out a series of measures that Labour could deploy to attract voters.
A major proposal on childcare and an ambitious school-building and refurbishment programme should form part of Labour’s election pitch, according to Stephen Twigg, the Shadow Education Secretary. He also said that scrapping a benefit cut inflicted on thousands of families in social housing with spare rooms should be a priority..." http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3845423.ece
"Ed Miliband rarely goes a day at the moment without some damaging intervention from a Labour figure. With the party holding off on all policy announcements until next month's conference, the vacuum has been filled by malcontents from past and present. The latest specimen is Tom Watson's interview in today's Guardian. The party's former campaign co-ordinator reminds us that the row over Falkirk remains unresolved, declaring that "a huge injustice has been done" to Karie Murphy, his former office manager and Unite's candidate of choice in the constituency. He adds: "When they finally complete this inquiry they will find out that she hasn't done anything wrong."
But more harmful than Watson's comments on Falkirk (which are merely a reiteration of his long-standing position) are those on Labour's EU referendum policy. No longer bound by collective responsibility, he calls for the party to support an early referendum next May (becoming the most senior figure in the party to do so) and criticises it for allowing the Tories to set the terms of debate. He warns: "Cameron has set the agenda on Europe; he wants a referendum, and if we don't engage with that debate then it won't be on our terms. So I would argue for a referendum next May – get it out the way before the election. That should be Labour's position. Yes to a referendum, and yes to remaining part of Europe." ... http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/08/its-tom-watsons-attack-labours-eu-referendum-policy-should-really-worry-miliband
" Jamie Kelsey-Fry, 49, a leading Left-wing protester, has refused to condemn those who break the law, describing them as brave heroes and likening them to the Suffragettes.
The former secondary school teacher, who was a member of the Occupy Movement campaigning against global capitalism in 2011, said some causes were worth risking liberty for.
Mr Kelsey-Fry, who lives in Islington, north London, said: “There comes a time when you have to risk your own liberty and your own safety if you are so concerned about your chance for a fair future or a sustainable future.”
His radical views are unlikely to win the support of his older brother, John Kelsey-Fry QC, who is one of the most respected criminal lawyers in the country. Charging fees of up to £20,000 a day, John Kelsey-Fry, 56, has successfully defended the likes of Harry Redknapp, the football manager, and Kieren Fallon, the jockey. He is due to defend Rebekah Brooks, the former News International chief executive" http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/10248532/Anti-fracking-firebrand-and-his-brother-the-senior-barrister.html
I would say Caroline is 3/1 on to win.
Not been posting much but still check in regularly.
Been ploughing the All Weather, to good effect generally. Two for tonite are:
7.30 Zero Game 4/1
8.00 Aminaah 11/1
Biggest bet of the day though is at Market Rasen - fifty ew on Lap Of Honor.
I'll be doing one if it wins.
Toodle pip1
Surely shome mishtake. It is just like Ratner insulting the customers who were buying his 9 carat necklasses ....... (What Ratner actually did that?)
But I know nothing of local factors in Brighton, which might militate against that...
My son and I joke a lot about it but there is a perfectly plausible rationale for biodynamic production methods.
For a start, they eschew artificial inputs. Nor is the emphasis on the right phases of the seasons entirely daft, if it is not taken too far. They also use only the purest products. (I once asked my lad if they really moistened the soil with virgins' blood and he said 'Yes if we can get it but virgins not easy to find in Sussex." Not lacking in self-deprecating humour, these biodynamic types.)
Biodynamic wine is a bit pricy, but that is an indication that it is highly regarded. Having sampled a fair bit, I can understand why. It not only tastes pretty good but it never gives me a hangover. This is a serious factor with me because I suffer so much after drinking normal alcoholic beverages that I've become almost teetotal these days - unless of course I can lay my hands on the bio-d grog.
If it works, why question it?
I thought Nancy Platts going for selection in a different Brighton constituency was a good sign for Caroline's re-election chances!
Just found old list of Oxford PPE Firsts 1988 - includes David Cameron, Ed Balls, Ed Davey, Jeremy Hunt pic.twitter.com/6ndIqmXTSz
http://t.co/6ndIqmXTSz
"Our poll this week for the Evening Standard showed that 63% of the public don’t like Ed Miliband. It is a headline writer's dream in a difficult week for Miliband – but focusing on this finding misses the really important points from the poll. True, digging into the data and trends on that question, if anything, makes it look worse for the Labour leader. If we see leaders as an electoral asset to attract voters from other parties, David Cameron comes out much stronger: he is liked by nearly twice as many non-Conservative voters (33%) than Miliband is liked by non-Labour voters (18%). Comparisons with Cameron in opposition are not good either: two years out, only 36% said they didn’t like Cameron, some 27 percentage points lower than Miliband’s current level of dislike.
On satisfaction with how Miliband is doing his job as leader of the opposition, he gets his lowest ever rating in this latest poll and is now at exactly the same level as William Hague was at this point in his leadership of the Conservatives. And interestingly, satisfaction with Miliband is lower, not higher, than average among public sector workers – a key target constituency for Labour at the election..." http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/08/biggest-problem-labour-people-dont-know-what-it-stands