Millenarianism and similar cults appear repeatedly throughout history. Environmentalism is the latest manifestation that incorporates an element of pseudo-science to resonate with modern culture.
Mistake to poo poo the hard evidence of man-made climate change.
People do that - poo poo it - because they do not want to accept it.
Here are some interesting graphs from those notorious eco-hippies at Bloomberg, with more detail in the link:
Real conservatives who want to maintain our way of life should take this seriously, as David Cameron did. Once Bangladesh is underwater, and Sub-saharan africa is in permanent drought is a bit too late. You think there are too many refugees already? well imagine that...
Strangely enough, the UK could be a pretty decent place to live in a warmer climate. We would have a longer growing season with more rain due to increased precipitation. There will be more storms however so we will need to upgrade our housing stock and improve flood defences - stop building on flood plains immediately and increase forestry on upland hills. The latter would also increase farmer prosperity, rural employment and allow us to develop carbon neutral power generation using softwood incinerator power stations.
Read "The New North" by Laurence Smith. His thesis is that Scandinavia, Siberia and Canada will be the places to be (and invest) in the future, given their mineral wealth and progressively improving climate.
Millenarianism and similar cults appear repeatedly throughout history. Environmentalism is the latest manifestation that incorporates an element of pseudo-science to resonate with modern culture.
Mistake to poo poo the hard evidence of man-made climate change.
People do that - poo poo it - because they do not want to accept it.
Here are some interesting graphs from those notorious eco-hippies at Bloomberg, with more detail in the link:
Real conservatives who want to maintain our way of life should take this seriously, as David Cameron did. Once Bangladesh is underwater, and Sub-saharan africa is in permanent drought is a bit too late. You think there are too many refugees already? well imagine that...
Strangely enough, the UK could be a pretty decent place to live in a warmer climate. We would have a longer growing season with more rain due to increased precipitation. There will be more storms however so we will need to upgrade our housing stock and improve flood defences - stop building on flood plains immediately and increase forestry on upland hills. The latter would also increase farmer prosperity, rural employment and allow us to develop carbon neutral power generation using softwood incinerator power stations.
Read "The New North" by Laurence Smith. His thesis is that Scandinavia, Siberia and Canada will be the places to be (and invest) in the future, given their mineral wealth and progressively improving climate.
Bumper wine harvests for Britain.
We've got more whine than we know what to do with already thanks to f***ing Brexit.
Millenarianism and similar cults appear repeatedly throughout history. Environmentalism is the latest manifestation that incorporates an element of pseudo-science to resonate with modern culture.
Mistake to poo poo the hard evidence of man-made climate change.
People do that - poo poo it - because they do not want to accept it.
Here are some interesting graphs from those notorious eco-hippies at Bloomberg, with more detail in the link:
Real conservatives who want to maintain our way of life should take this seriously, as David Cameron did. Once Bangladesh is underwater, and Sub-saharan africa is in permanent drought is a bit too late. You think there are too many refugees already? well imagine that...
Strangely enough, the UK could be a pretty decent place to live in a warmer climate. We would have a longer growing season with more rain due to increased precipitation. There will be more storms however so we will need to upgrade our housing stock and improve flood defences - stop building on flood plains immediately and increase forestry on upland hills. The latter would also increase farmer prosperity, rural employment and allow us to develop carbon neutral power generation using softwood incinerator power stations.
The UK is currently warmer than other places on the same latitude because of the gulf stream. As ice melts in the Arctic the gulf stream may weaken and we could end up colder in a warming world. The sea level would of course rise at the same time.
Staying in third is about the best they can manage I think. The key will be how they do in the locals - if both are disasters hard to explain away, but if they hold up in the locals the thrashing in the euros is more manageable
Staying in third is about the best they can manage I think. The key will be how they do in the locals - if both are disasters hard to explain away, but if they hold up in the locals the thrashing in the euros is more manageable
Given the National Government has so far failed to implement its key manifesto pledge, I suspect they are heading for a thrashing in both.
Staying in third is about the best they can manage I think. The key will be how they do in the locals - if both are disasters hard to explain away, but if they hold up in the locals the thrashing in the euros is more manageable
Given the National Government has so far failed to implement its key manifesto pledge, I suspect they are heading for a thrashing in both.
Doing badly is expected at this point in a cycle anyway. But they havent managed expectations as well as , say, Corbyn did in his first locals .
Where in the GFA does it say there has to be a seamless border? I'm not sure she has read it.
Please give us a trade agreement, the GFA doesn’t say there should be a seamless border may not cut it. The fact is that the Irish American lobby will veto any US/UK trade deal if Brexit is perceived to have harmed Ireland’s interests. There’s no getting round that.
Where in the GFA does it say there has to be a seamless border? I'm not sure she has read it.
Please give us a trade agreement, the GFA doesn’t say there should be a seamless border may not cut it. The fact is that the Irish American lobby will veto any US/UK trade deal if Brexit is perceived to have harmed Ireland’s interests. There’s no getting round that.
Then fair enough, no huge loss as it’ll be status quo ante with the US vis a vis trade.
You wonder a bit whether something similar might ultimately happen to Maduro, given all the crimes he will be accused of after he is eventually toppled.
Find a way to combat climate change without directly impacting on peoples lives in too much of a negative way.
Wind turbines, a move to low energy lightbulbs, solar panels, electric cars ?
It's err happening.
If you think any of that puts us close to net carbon is six years, or twelve or even the cut off point of thirty years outlined by IPCC you will be disappointed. Those things are important but they wont bring down carbon usage by the amounts claimed neeeded.
Where in the GFA does it say there has to be a seamless border? I'm not sure she has read it.
Please give us a trade agreement, the GFA doesn’t say there should be a seamless border may not cut it. The fact is that the Irish American lobby will veto any US/UK trade deal if Brexit is perceived to have harmed Ireland’s interests. There’s no getting round that.
Then fair enough, no huge loss as it’ll be status quo ante with the US vis a vis trade.
No, because we also fall out of EU deals with the US. And we won’t have a deal with the EU. So we’ll be worse off overall.
Where in the GFA does it say there has to be a seamless border? I'm not sure she has read it.
Please give us a trade agreement, the GFA doesn’t say there should be a seamless border may not cut it. The fact is that the Irish American lobby will veto any US/UK trade deal if Brexit is perceived to have harmed Ireland’s interests. There’s no getting round that.
Then fair enough, no huge loss as it’ll be status quo ante with the US vis a vis trade.
Except that we'd have thrown away seamless trade with one of the world's three mega trade partners and got nothing to partially compensate us for the loss from either of the other two. Not exactly a win, is it? And that's without even considering the difficulty we'll have scrabbling back some of the lost trade deals with smaller countries, 70 of them at the last count.
I must say, the argument that the possibility of doing our own trade deals was a positive advantage of leaving the EU was one of the most bizarre and irrational political arguments I've ever come across. So bizarre that for months I didn't believe those advocating it could possibly be serious. Maybe they weren't, but they do a good job pretending to believe it.
Where in the GFA does it say there has to be a seamless border? I'm not sure she has read it.
Please give us a trade agreement, the GFA doesn’t say there should be a seamless border may not cut it. The fact is that the Irish American lobby will veto any US/UK trade deal if Brexit is perceived to have harmed Ireland’s interests. There’s no getting round that.
Then fair enough, no huge loss as it’ll be status quo ante with the US vis a vis trade.
I'm not convinced that a trade deal with the US was likely in the first place - @rcs has explained his scepticism pretty thoroughly before. There doesn't seem to be much appetite for it from the Gove wing of the Tory party either. (There are some avowed Atlanticists, Liam Fox included, but they certainly haven't succeeded in recasting Brexit as a New Atlanticism - there's a guy in a pale-coloured house who isn't helping their cause at the moment...)
Where in the GFA does it say there has to be a seamless border? I'm not sure she has read it.
Please give us a trade agreement, the GFA doesn’t say there should be a seamless border may not cut it. The fact is that the Irish American lobby will veto any US/UK trade deal if Brexit is perceived to have harmed Ireland’s interests. There’s no getting round that.
Then fair enough, no huge loss as it’ll be status quo ante with the US vis a vis trade.
Except that we'd have thrown away seamless trade with one of the world's three mega trade partners and got nothing to partially compensate us for the loss from either of the other two. Not exactly a win, is it? And that's without even considering the difficulty we'll have scrabbling back some of the lost trade deals with smaller countries, 70 of them at the last count.
I am a naive optimist in thinking that there will be a deal with the EU in the end
I am a naive optimist in thinking that there will be a deal with the EU in the end
Yes, we might be able to scrabble something back, albeit inferior economically to what we had before, and giving up most of the 'sovereignty' advantage that we were supposed to be gaining in the first place.
Where in the GFA does it say there has to be a seamless border? I'm not sure she has read it.
Please give us a trade agreement, the GFA doesn’t say there should be a seamless border may not cut it. The fact is that the Irish American lobby will veto any US/UK trade deal if Brexit is perceived to have harmed Ireland’s interests. There’s no getting round that.
Then fair enough, no huge loss as it’ll be status quo ante with the US vis a vis trade.
Except that we'd have thrown away seamless trade with one of the world's three mega trade partners and got nothing to partially compensate us for the loss from either of the other two. Not exactly a win, is it? And that's without even considering the difficulty we'll have scrabbling back some of the lost trade deals with smaller countries, 70 of them at the last count.
I must say, the argument that the possibility of doing our own trade deals was a positive advantage of leaving the EU was one of the most bizarre and irrational political arguments I've ever come across. So bizarre that for months I didn't believe those advocating it could possibly be serious. Maybe they weren't, but they do a good job pretending to believe it.
On your second point. Given that we are on the way out (optimism strikes again), better that than being locked into a customs union with zero ability to set trade policy?
It doesn't work, because they can never be more than a nuisance, rather than bringing the country to a standstill. They aren't the NUM or T&GWU of old. So, the only way to win, is to win people over, and these antics will alienate people.
That is kind of what I'm getting at. I'm actually quite bullish on this climate issue. I think the problem is moving up the radar and it is going to be sorted. We will all be living in a far more green and sustainable way in a few decades from now. You can see it in the attitudes of younger people. They get it quite naturally, whereas people like me have to force ourselves.
Climate will change irrespective of levels of CO2. Sorry it isn’t us controlling the planet.
The graphs the other day showed the oscillations in climate getting more divergent over the past 2 million years (earlier record are not supported by ice cores). We as a species have been affecting the climate what - 10,000 years, tops?
Taking steps to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is surely prudent. But will it make a jot of difference? Probably not. The best shot we have at changing climate is a single-species mass extinction event - for homo sapiens.
/EvenGloomierThanToriesMode
The level of CO2 we reach will determine which ice sheets will survive, if any, and how many metres of sea level rise future generations experience.
But it isn't likely to happen fast enough that we have to worry about the Thames Barrier being overwhelmed in our lifetime so no-one gives a monkey.
And that's why protestors are taking more radical action.
Plainly, people do give a monkey's. That's why the UK's carbon emissions are falling.
What people don't want is to destroy a system which generates the highest ever standard of living.
We are missing our targets which are not ambitious enough. I think I would characterise that as paying lip service to the problem.
I do not agree that taking more rapid action necessarily requires dismantling capitalism.
There are three givens:-
1. The World's population will peak at 10 - 11 bn 2. People in rich countries want to remain rich 3. People in poor countries want to become rich.
Those are the parameters one has to work within, while tackling climate change and environmental degradation. I don't think Extinction Rebellion and other activists are prepared to do so.
What if there is, on polling day, a Brexit majority?
From the breakdowns, the only way we can be certain there is a Brexit majority int he country is if the Brexit party and UKIP win 50%+ of the votes. Obviously, that will not prevent people from claiming one if the Tories are added in, but it seems the remaining Tory voters are more Remain than Leave.
I am happy to listen to climate change bores and activists provided they can confirm that they walk or bicycle to work (having, if necessary, moved house to do so) and that they do not heat their houses at all in winter beyond one afternoon a week to prevent damage to the fabric of the building - you can survive a British winter by piling on the sustainable pullovers.
It is the same with homeopaths - I have huge respect for them and their views, provided they can confirm that they have undergone surgery under homeopathic anaesthetic.
Looks like Farage is overcoming any issues around whether he is still Ukip or not, Brexit party has shot ahead.
For the remain side, they haven't helped the cause by not standing under one umbrella, but of course the big problem is that the by far largest chunk of Remainers is in the Labour Party, and as long as Corbyn doesn't come down on either side he seems capable of keeping enough Remainers on board.
Damage control would be to start laying the groundwork for adding the labour vote share into the "peoples vote support" post election seeing as they have whipped on it before. Need to do that early before the leave side claims the Labour vote as their own.
I am happy to listen to climate change bores and activists provided they can confirm that they walk or bicycle to work (having, if necessary, moved house to do so) and that they do not heat their houses at all in winter beyond one afternoon a week to prevent damage to the fabric of the building - you can survive a British winter by piling on the sustainable pullovers.
It is the same with homeopaths - I have huge respect for them and their views, provided they can confirm that they have undergone surgery under homeopathic anaesthetic.
That's just silly. Individuals can only do a certain amount to tackle Climate Change, e.g solar panels, it's governments that can make real differences by the decisions they make. This government has removed the solar feed in tariff and cancelled the tidal power project.
It doesn't work, because they can never be more than a nuisance, rather than bringing the country to a standstill. They aren't the NUM or T&GWU of old. So, the only way to win, is to win people over, and these antics will alienate people.
That is kind of what I'm getting at. I'm actually quite bullish on this climate issue. I think the problem is moving up the radar and it is going to be sorted. We will all be living in a far more green and sustainable way in a few decades from now. You can see it in the attitudes of younger people. They get it quite naturally, whereas people like me have to force ourselves.
Climate will change irrespective of levels of CO2. Sorry it isn’t us controlling the planet.
The graphs the other day showed the oscillations in climate
/EvenGloomierThanToriesMode
The level of CO2 we reach will determine which ice sheets will survive, if any, and how many metres of sea level rise future generations experience.
But it isn't likely to happen fast enough that we have to worry about the Thames Barrier being overwhelmed in our lifetime so no-one gives a monkey.
And that's why protestors are taking more radical action.
Plainly, people do give a monkey's. That's why the UK's carbon emissions are falling.
What people don't want is to destroy a system which generates the highest ever standard of living.
We are missing our targets which are not ambitious enough. I think I would characterise that as paying lip service to the problem.
I do not agree that taking more rapid action necessarily requires dismantling capitalism.
There are three givens:-
1. The World's population will peak at 10 - 11 bn 2. People in rich countries want to remain rich 3. People in poor countries want to become rich.
Those are the parameters one has to work within, while tackling climate change and environmental degradation. I don't think Extinction Rebellion and other activists are prepared to do so.
There is an interesting body of opinion that fertility rates are dropping so quickly that the world population may peak at around 9 billion in 2060, and then start to reduce. This may impact significantly on all three of the above. This book summarises it:
It is worth noting that becoming rich in an environmentally sustainable way is not impossible, indeed our population in the UK has demonstrated this in many ways.
Mr. 86, well, quite. Making up nonsense and then attributing it to opponents is fashionable, though.
Much easier to argue against a position you invent for an opponent than the alternative... actually *engaging* with them.
Quite interested to see, endless woe aside, how this EU business gets resolved. Or, at least, how the current quagmire ends and the labyrinth of the second stage begins.
I am happy to listen to climate change bores and activists provided they can confirm that they walk or bicycle to work (having, if necessary, moved house to do so) and that they do not heat their houses at all in winter beyond one afternoon a week to prevent damage to the fabric of the building - you can survive a British winter by piling on the sustainable pullovers.
It is the same with homeopaths - I have huge respect for them and their views, provided they can confirm that they have undergone surgery under homeopathic anaesthetic.
That's just silly. Individuals can only do a certain amount to tackle Climate Change, e.g solar panels, it's governments that can make real differences by the decisions they make. This government has removed the solar feed in tariff and cancelled the tidal power project.
Governments can only tell individuals what to do. If you can't walk the walk, don't talk the talk.
It doesn't work, because they can never be more than a nuisance, rather than bringing the country to a standstill. They aren't the NUM or T&GWU of old. So, the only way to win, is to win people over, and these antics will alienate people.
That is kind of what I'm getting at. I'm actually quite bullish on this climate issue. I think the problem is moving up the radar and it is going to be sorted. We will all be living in a far more green and sustainable way in a few decades from now. You can see it in the attitudes of younger people. They get it quite naturally, whereas people like me have to force ourselves.
Climate will change irrespective of levels of CO2. Sorry it isn’t us controlling the planet.
The graphs the other day showed the oscillations in climate
/EvenGloomierThanToriesMode
The level of CO2 we reach will determine which ice sheets will survive, if any, and how many metres of sea level rise future generations experience.
But it isn't likely to happen fast enough that we have to worry about the Thames Barrier being overwhelmed in our lifetime so no-one gives a monkey.
And that's why protestors are taking more radical action.
Plainly, people do give a monkey's. That's why the UK's carbon emissions are falling.
What people don't want is to destroy a system which generates the highest ever standard of living.
We are missing our targets which are not ambitious enough. I think I would characterise that as paying lip service to the problem.
I do not agree that taking more rapid action necessarily requires dismantling capitalism.
There are three givens:-
1. The World's population will peak at 10 - 11 bn 2. People in rich countries want to remain rich 3. People in poor countries want to become rich.
Those are the parameters one has to work within, while tackling climate change and environmental degradation. I don't think Extinction Rebellion and other activists are prepared to do so.
It is worth noting that becoming rich in an environmentally sustainable way is not impossible, indeed our population in the UK has demonstrated this in many ways.
I agree, totally. Getting richer means that one can afford to avoid all kinds of environmentally damaging activities.
I am happy to listen to climate change bores and activists provided they can confirm that they walk or bicycle to work (having, if necessary, moved house to do so) and that they do not heat their houses at all in winter beyond one afternoon a week to prevent damage to the fabric of the building - you can survive a British winter by piling on the sustainable pullovers.
It is the same with homeopaths - I have huge respect for them and their views, provided they can confirm that they have undergone surgery under homeopathic anaesthetic.
That's just silly. Individuals can only do a certain amount to tackle Climate Change, e.g solar panels, it's governments that can make real differences by the decisions they make. This government has removed the solar feed in tariff and cancelled the tidal power project.
Governments can only tell individuals what to do. If you can't walk the walk, don't talk the talk.
Been on any nice overseas holidays recently?
Another silly answer. Go build yourself a gas fired power station
There is an interesting body of opinion that fertility rates are dropping so quickly that the world population may peak at around 9 billion in 2060, and then start to reduce. This may impact significantly on all three of the above. This book summarises it:
It is worth noting that becoming rich in an environmentally sustainable way is not impossible, indeed our population in the UK has demonstrated this in many ways.
And becoming even richer is even easier - you can't beat wind farming, if you own the necessary acreage in the first place.
I am happy to listen to climate change bores and activists provided they can confirm that they walk or bicycle to work (having, if necessary, moved house to do so) and that they do not heat their houses at all in winter beyond one afternoon a week to prevent damage to the fabric of the building - you can survive a British winter by piling on the sustainable pullovers.
It is the same with homeopaths - I have huge respect for them and their views, provided they can confirm that they have undergone surgery under homeopathic anaesthetic.
That's just silly. Individuals can only do a certain amount to tackle Climate Change, e.g solar panels, it's governments that can make real differences by the decisions they make. This government has removed the solar feed in tariff and cancelled the tidal power project.
Governments can only tell individuals what to do. If you can't walk the walk, don't talk the talk.
Been on any nice overseas holidays recently?
Another silly answer. Go build yourself a gas fired power station
Turnout will be a key factor. A lot of Con voters will be sitting on their hands. Lab/Green/LD voters are quite energised. More difficult to gauge how many Brexit voters will bother voting. But I still expect them to win.
The argument is excellent, as always, and compelling. However I think there is more than a small problem if we assume that the election is in 2022. Usually we don't know anything much about three years time but this time we know less as the climate politically is so fissile. Unless something Black Swan like happens either Labour or Cons are going to get most seats in 2022. A question is 'Are the Tories any use'? And plainly they aren't. But if you ask 'Are Labour electable if they have a left platform and leader, and the Tories have a half competent leader and campaign' it is equally challenging. And in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king. So I am not convinced. The EU elections and current polling tell you nothing about 2022 - except maybe that Tiggers are on a sticky wicket.
I am happy to listen to climate change bores and activists provided they can confirm that they walk or bicycle to work (having, if necessary, moved house to do so) and that they do not heat their houses at all in winter beyond one afternoon a week to prevent damage to the fabric of the building - you can survive a British winter by piling on the sustainable pullovers.
It is the same with homeopaths - I have huge respect for them and their views, provided they can confirm that they have undergone surgery under homeopathic anaesthetic.
That's just silly. Individuals can only do a certain amount to tackle Climate Change, e.g solar panels, it's governments that can make real differences by the decisions they make. This government has removed the solar feed in tariff and cancelled the tidal power project.
Governments can only tell individuals what to do. If you can't walk the walk, don't talk the talk.
Been on any nice overseas holidays recently?
Another silly answer. Go build yourself a gas fired power station
Nothing clever or funny about hypocrisy.
What has that got to do with anything? It seems obvious to me that building power stations, sticking solar panels on government buildings and creating incentives for people to save energy is something that only governments can do. Do you have a non-sarcastic answer?
Predicted seats are interesting because, amongst other things, they'd see Labour and the Conservatives hold station as second and third parties respectively, with Farage's Party (formerly UKIP, now Brexit) remaining in first.
Turnout will be a key factor. A lot of Con voters will be sitting on their hands. Lab/Green/LD voters are quite energised. More difficult to gauge how many Brexit voters will bother voting. But I still expect them to win.
I do not agree that Con voters will sit on their hands. Down thread Mr Herdson in a twitter thread has already stated that the generational divide of brexit is still there. Old people are still brexit and young still remain. We know old people vote, the question is are the young going to vote?
The Extinction Rebellion crowd are pretty good at grabbing the agenda of a Brexit bored media. They are running quite an effective campaign.
They are admirably dedicated and focused, if a bit of a pain to handle queries from in my experience as they are relentless about pushing their message even to the sod on the phone, that is me. Though at some point stunts are ineffective.
There is an interesting body of opinion that fertility rates are dropping so quickly that the world population may peak at around 9 billion in 2060, and then start to reduce. This may impact significantly on all three of the above. This book summarises it:
It is worth noting that becoming rich in an environmentally sustainable way is not impossible, indeed our population in the UK has demonstrated this in many ways.
And becoming even richer is even easier - you can't beat wind farming, if you own the necessary acreage in the first place.
I read a great story about this Irish farmer who made a fortune from he wind turbine on his farm - until the government found out he'd fitted a diesel motor to it.
The CHUK(a) party seems to have disappeared rather quickly. Euro elections, ideal for them as a remain party ..... yet they've already reached the mythical 0%.
There is an interesting body of opinion that fertility rates are dropping so quickly that the world population may peak at around 9 billion in 2060, and then start to reduce. This may impact significantly on all three of the above. This book summarises it:
It is worth noting that becoming rich in an environmentally sustainable way is not impossible, indeed our population in the UK has demonstrated this in many ways.
And becoming even richer is even easier - you can't beat wind farming, if you own the necessary acreage in the first place.
I read a great story about this Irish farmer who made a fortune from he wind turbine on his farm - until the government found out he'd fitted a diesel motor to it.
He was known locally for being a very oily character.
I am happy to listen to climate change bores and activists provided they can confirm that they walk or bicycle to work (having, if necessary, moved house to do so) and that they do not heat their houses at all in winter beyond one afternoon a week to prevent damage to the fabric of the building - you can survive a British winter by piling on the sustainable pullovers.
It is the same with homeopaths - I have huge respect for them and their views, provided they can confirm that they have undergone surgery under homeopathic anaesthetic.
That's just silly. Individuals can only do a certain amount to tackle Climate Change, e.g solar panels, it's governments that can make real differences by the decisions they make. This government has removed the solar feed in tariff and cancelled the tidal power project.
Governments can only tell individuals what to do. If you can't walk the walk, don't talk the talk.
Been on any nice overseas holidays recently?
Another silly answer. Go build yourself a gas fired power station
Nothing clever or funny about hypocrisy.
What has that got to do with anything? It seems obvious to me that building power stations, sticking solar panels on government buildings and creating incentives for people to save energy is something that only governments can do. Do you have a non-sarcastic answer?
As a well-heeled Westerner you can make a more-than-token difference by personal choices and the great thing is you can make the difference here and now, you don't have to lobby yourself in the hope that you will pass some watered down half assed legislation in ten years time. So if you want to sound off on the subject you can very legitimately be asked what you personally are doing about it.
Edit: I assume you are not serious about having to ask what overseas holidays have to do with anything? You do know that aeroplanes run on fossil fuel?
97. When it comes to valuation of Mr Campbell's distress, I do not accept that he can hold others to a higher standard of respect than he is willing himself to adopt. He has chosen insult and condemnation as his style. He has received these in return......I do not accept that he can dismiss the feelings or reputations of his opponents cheaply, but receive a high valuation of his own.
98. Had I been awarding damages, those damages would have been assessed at £100.
Campbell had claimed £25,000.
Costs to be agreed - DavidL - in the event of a failure of an action Campbell will have to pay Dugdale's costs?
What if there is, on polling day, a Brexit majority?
From the breakdowns, the only way we can be certain there is a Brexit majority int he country is if the Brexit party and UKIP win 50%+ of the votes. Obviously, that will not prevent people from claiming one if the Tories are added in, but it seems the remaining Tory voters are more Remain than Leave.
That’s handy!! 🤣🤣👏🏻
Pre the ref it was widely assumed that Farage and UKIP had a ceiling of around 35%... and the other 17% needed convincing by Tory and Labour. But now if Farage and UKIP don’t get 51% we can assume the country has a Remain majority 🤔
Comments
It's err happening.
https://twitter.com/whatukthinks/status/1118512885607563265
https://twitter.com/davidherdson/status/1118492951825539072?s=21
Quite a nice day.
https://twitter.com/BBCJonSopel/status/1118517465506615296
Peru's ex-President Alan García shoots himself before arrest
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-47961425
You wonder a bit whether something similar might ultimately happen to Maduro, given all the crimes he will be accused of after he is eventually toppled.
I must say, the argument that the possibility of doing our own trade deals was a positive advantage of leaving the EU was one of the most bizarre and irrational political arguments I've ever come across. So bizarre that for months I didn't believe those advocating it could possibly be serious. Maybe they weren't, but they do a good job pretending to believe it.
1. The World's population will peak at 10 - 11 bn
2. People in rich countries want to remain rich
3. People in poor countries want to become rich.
Those are the parameters one has to work within, while tackling climate change and environmental degradation. I don't think Extinction Rebellion and other activists are prepared to do so.
It is the same with homeopaths - I have huge respect for them and their views, provided they can confirm that they have undergone surgery under homeopathic anaesthetic.
For the remain side, they haven't helped the cause by not standing under one umbrella, but of course the big problem is that the by far largest chunk of Remainers is in the Labour Party, and as long as Corbyn doesn't come down on either side he seems capable of keeping enough Remainers on board.
Damage control would be to start laying the groundwork for adding the labour vote share into the "peoples vote support" post election seeing as they have whipped on it before. Need to do that early before the leave side claims the Labour vote as their own.
This government has removed the solar feed in tariff and cancelled the tidal power project.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/37585564-empty-planet
It is worth noting that becoming rich in an environmentally sustainable way is not impossible, indeed our population in the UK has demonstrated this in many ways.
Much easier to argue against a position you invent for an opponent than the alternative... actually *engaging* with them.
Quite interested to see, endless woe aside, how this EU business gets resolved. Or, at least, how the current quagmire ends and the labyrinth of the second stage begins.
Been on any nice overseas holidays recently?
Go build yourself a gas fired power station
I don't even need to make an effort there...
It seems obvious to me that building power stations, sticking solar panels on government buildings and creating incentives for people to save energy is something that only governments can do.
Do you have a non-sarcastic answer?
If CHUK get nothing what is their purpose outside of Westminster and this parliament Specifically?
* Do NOT say it.
We know old people vote, the question is are the young going to vote?
Edit - BTW, I never knew you were one of the Knights Who Like To Say Ni.
Fairly easily dissolved with nail polish remover, but shush, let them have their fun.
Mr. Kinabalu, you don't want to be one of those posters with a ridiculous post count due to writing a load of nonsense.
Edit: I assume you are not serious about having to ask what overseas holidays have to do with anything? You do know that aeroplanes run on fossil fuel?
97. When it comes to valuation of Mr Campbell's distress, I do not accept that he can hold others to a higher standard of respect than he is willing himself to adopt. He has chosen insult and condemnation as his style. He has received these in return......I do not accept that he can dismiss the feelings or reputations of his opponents cheaply, but receive a high valuation of his own.
98. Had I been awarding damages, those damages would have been assessed at £100.
Campbell had claimed £25,000.
Costs to be agreed - DavidL - in the event of a failure of an action Campbell will have to pay Dugdale's costs?
https://wingsoverscotland.com/wp-content/EDI-A409-17.pdf
Pre the ref it was widely assumed that Farage and UKIP had a ceiling of around 35%... and the other 17% needed convincing by Tory and Labour. But now if Farage and UKIP don’t get 51% we can assume the country has a Remain majority 🤔
Well, quite, but I do not wish to contribute to falling standards.
My phrase to unsettle people is not 'Ni' it is 'fallopian tubes'.
When I sneak up on someone and whisper that in their ear, they run a mile.