Are you saying that at that time you had a detailed understanding of tripartite regulation, the inter-bank lending system, the mortgage market and the credit default swap issue, and realised it was all going wrong and needed more regulation?
Because if so, I am afraid I don’t believe you. Even most experienced bankers didn’t get these things (therein lay much of the problem).
I don't believe I told you what my age was. I said I was relatively young but I don't reveal personal details on the Internet, so let's have no more discussion about that thank you.
I supported more regulation which people like Vince Cable - to his credit - supported and warned of the crash before it happened. I don't claim to have a deep knowledge of regulation, just that in my short experience unfettered capitalism always leads to disaster.
You said you were a university student in 2017. I am assuming that was undergraduate but let’s assume you did postgrad work (as several posters here have). You might therefore have been 25 in June 2017. That would put your DOB sometime in the early 1990s - around 1992 at the earliest. So you would have been at best 15 when the crisis hit.
Of course, you might be a mature student. But you have also repeatedly said you are a ‘young’ person in your mid-twenties.
You can’t have it both ways. You cannot say you are young and can speak for your demographic, and then that you were wise to highly complex economic events when you would have barely left primary school. That merely makes you look silly.
You can say you now support greater regulation and with hindsight NewLabour were wrong. That’s no problem. After all, those of us around at the time mostly missed the key weaknesses as well so we can hardly criticise you for using hindsight. I was doing a Masters in politics and economics and I missed most of the warning signs (my very confident prediction was of a London house price crash, which shows what I knew). But don’t try To have it both ways.
If it makes you feel better my father, who was hugely focused on understanding the London property market at the time (with 40 years experience in the topic) also expected a crash.
I think everyone who tried to play Nostradamus ended up with egg on their face. In my case I was lucky it didn't matter in any significant way!
My father still smirks about selling everything with 2% of the market peak in ‘99
Repeated the trick he did in ‘87
(He was the third best performing U.K. investment manager from 1970-1999)
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
The Tories would be besides themselves if the poor folk driving around in their Range Rovers hit a pot hole !
Potholes don't discriminate between bangers and Bentleys. And they're a problem for a much larger proportion of the population than just parents with kids aged about 5-12 who have a care gap to fill between the schools closing and getting home from work. So the sums (limited as they are, given that the Tories have clearly decided not to be the sort of party that's going to simply print two-thirds of a trillion pounds to finance a state investment bank) seem not unreasonable.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
It's not enough progress, that's the point. We're going to have to a lot more as a country - but also as a world - to stop climate change.
Given that China is probably constructing enough power plants each week to replace the emissions the UK have already cut, even cutting to zero would have no net benefit for global warming.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
Why? Clearly you've never lived anywhere remote or worked at night.
I live in a village, so yes I've experienced it. I'm just saying if we are to tackle climate change, we are going to have to phase out petrol and diesel cars. Electric cars are obviously better - but they're still a lot more damaging than public transport.
How?
Electric vehicles with electricity from renewable sources - how are they so evil?
Nicola cannot spell Minister, but uses the word clarity in its political operative context? Who could have written it? Clearly not an uninitiated member of the hoi poloi called Nicola. My money is on a not very bright politician. Diane Abbott?
She’s using clarity in its normal English sense?
This is not the 'lingua-franca' of a peasant to a toff. I know this as a fully signed up member of the peasant class.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
It's not enough progress, that's the point. We're going to have to a lot more as a country - but also as a world - to stop climate change.
Fair enough perfectly true. But I’d be impressed if XR glued themselves to a plane in Moscow or disrupted the Beijing underground, otherwise I might have cynical thoughts that we are just seen as a soft target. (Not to imply that I know if you support them or not).
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
It's not enough progress, that's the point. We're going to have to a lot more as a country - but also as a world - to stop climate change.
Given that China is probably constructing enough power plants each week to replace the emissions the UK have already cut, even cutting to zero would have no net benefit for global warming.
Yes. Cycling UK like to point out that it was cyclists who did a lot at the end of the 19th century to push government into improving the state of the roads, before cars were widely used.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
It's not enough progress, that's the point. We're going to have to a lot more as a country - but also as a world - to stop climate change.
Given that China is probably constructing enough power plants each week to replace the emissions the UK have already cut, even cutting to zero would have no net benefit for global warming.
But researching improved technology that we and China can use would make a difference.
This is where loony Greenpeace types are wrong. They may be prepared to send us back to the stoneage but nobody else is.
Yes. Cycling UK like to point out that it was cyclists who did a lot at the end of the 19th century to push government into improving the state of the roads, before cars were widely used.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
And rely on the State anytime we want to travel. Marvellous.
Plus the state knowing exactly where you are going all the time. Spooky!
Point of order - based on my trains into London, knowing I’ve caught one tells you very little little about either where I am or where I am going.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
Why? Clearly you've never lived anywhere remote or worked at night.
I live in a village, so yes I've experienced it. I'm just saying if we are to tackle climate change, we are going to have to phase out petrol and diesel cars. Electric cars are obviously better - but they're still a lot more damaging than public transport.
Have you seen the shit coming out of the back of a London bus?
We obviously need to transition those to electric power or hydrogen as well - and that is happening, albeit at too slow a rate. But they're a lot less environmentally damaging than driving petrol/diesel cars everywhere.
That's impossible for people who don't live in towns and cities. Cars are the only option most of the time.
Then we need to make strides to fix that, otherwise we're going to be really fucked in just a few short years.
Have you seen how far CO2 emissions have been cut so far? We're not the problem.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
Quite the contrary, there's been a tremendous amount of progress.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
Yes, I think people who want a lot more progress sometimes overdo it by implying there's been virtually nothing to date.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
It’s better than that. For most of July, August and September we were coal free. Wind and solar accounted much of the time for 50% of our power. That really is progress. Admittedly a large chunk was gas as well.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
And rely on the State anytime we want to travel. Marvellous.
Plus the state knowing exactly where you are going all the time. Spooky!
Point of order - based on my trains into London, knowing I’ve caught one tells you very little little about either where I am or where I am going.
Are you sure your Trainline app doesn't tell Google?
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
And rely on the State anytime we want to travel. Marvellous.
Plus the state knowing exactly where you are going all the time. Spooky!
Point of order - based on my trains into London, knowing I’ve caught one tells you very little little about either where I am or where I am going.
Are you sure your Trainline app doesn't tell Google?
No that only tells you where I should be and where I’m meant to be going.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
It’s better than that. For most of July, August and September we were coal free. Wind and solar accounted much of the time for 50% of our power. That really is progress. Admittedly a large chunk was gas as well.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
It's not enough progress, that's the point. We're going to have to a lot more as a country - but also as a world - to stop climate change.
Fair enough perfectly true. But I’d be impressed if XR glued themselves to a plane in Moscow or disrupted the Beijing underground, otherwise I might have cynical thoughts that we are just seen as a soft target. (Not to imply that I know if you support them or not).
It's not just that these protest groups don't go and protest in illiberal countries - given what would be done to them one can hardly blame them, frankly - it's that they don't even try to protest against them over here. Mucking about already stressed commuters is, apparently, both essential and very funny ha ha. Picketing the Chinese embassy is an entirely different matter.
One might almost gain the impression that they're only really interested in railing against the evil of the West. Fancy that.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
And rely on the State anytime we want to travel. Marvellous.
Plus the state knowing exactly where you are going all the time. Spooky!
Point of order - based on my trains into London, knowing I’ve caught one tells you very little little about either where I am or where I am going.
Are you sure your Trainline app doesn't tell Google?
No that only tells you where I should be and where I’m meant to be going.
That WASPI question to Boris in the leaders' debate could turn out to be the most expensive three minutes of tv ever if Corbyn gets into No 10.
However Labour's announcement could blow up in their face if voters see it as the cynical opportunism it is.
They need to win at the Supreme Court first, or are Labour just going to chuck money at them even if there has been no injustice?
It's the other way round, surely - if they win at the Suporeme Court, the Government will have to cough up, regardless of which party is in power? Or is Johnson saying he'll ignore the Court?
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
And rely on the State anytime we want to travel. Marvellous.
Strangely it never occurred to me that some people might have an ideological objection to using public transport. How weird that anyone would think of public transport as being state-owned, in this day and age.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
Ditto. Its funny we never hear about acid rain anymore, nor the hole in the ozone layer.
I also remember learning in science classes how in Britain large percentages of moths evolved from light to dark to light again because of the pollution that existed in the past and how cleaned up the country is now relative to the past.
That WASPI question to Boris in the leaders' debate could turn out to be the most expensive three minutes of tv ever if Corbyn gets into No 10.
However Labour's announcement could blow up in their face if voters see it as the cynical opportunism it is.
They need to win at the Supreme Court first, or are Labour just going to chuck money at them even if there has been no injustice?
It's the other way round, surely - if they win at the Suporeme Court, the Government will have to cough up, regardless of which party is in power? Or is Johnson saying he'll ignore the Court?
That's a peculiar interpretation of what he wrote. Seems like he means there's been no injustice unless the court says there has been, and since at present they are not saying that is the money to be committed regardless?
Because it is described as an injustice, and that's why the action is needed. If it's a policy disagreement that's one thing, but an injustice being done to them requires more than them not liking it.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
Very good post. And the hole in the ozone layer will be completely repaired by 2080 too.
That WASPI question to Boris in the leaders' debate could turn out to be the most expensive three minutes of tv ever if Corbyn gets into No 10.
However Labour's announcement could blow up in their face if voters see it as the cynical opportunism it is.
They need to win at the Supreme Court first, or are Labour just going to chuck money at them even if there has been no injustice?
It's the other way round, surely - if they win at the Suporeme Court, the Government will have to cough up, regardless of which party is in power? Or is Johnson saying he'll ignore the Court?
So the Labour bribe will be a) overruling the decision of the Supreme Court if it dismisses the case or b) a mute point as any government would have to do it regardless of being promised during an election.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
It's not enough progress, that's the point. We're going to have to a lot more as a country - but also as a world - to stop climate change.
Given that China is probably constructing enough power plants each week to replace the emissions the UK have already cut, even cutting to zero would have no net benefit for global warming.
Add in the Indians.
And countries like Vietnam, buidling power plants that use Indonesian coal - and that coal has to get there using rather horrible polluting bunker fuel.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
Ditto. Its funny we never hear about acid rain anymore, nor the hole in the ozone layer.
I also remember learning in science classes how in Britain large percentages of moths evolved from light to dark to light again because of the pollution that existed in the past and how cleaned up the country is now relative to the past.
I think in some ways those classes worked a bit too well, as it makes things now seem less serious than they usually are, since the rate i was told the rainforests were being felled I'm surprised there as much left of it as there is.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
It’s better than that. For most of July, August and September we were coal free. Wind and solar accounted much of the time for 50% of our power. That really is progress. Admittedly a large chunk was gas as well.
True, but even replacing coal with CCGT power stations makes a significant difference - and is a necessary interim step, looking at worldwide generating capacity.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
It’s better than that. For most of July, August and September we were coal free. Wind and solar accounted much of the time for 50% of our power. That really is progress. Admittedly a large chunk was gas as well.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
And rely on the State anytime we want to travel. Marvellous.
Strangely it never occurred to me that some people might have an ideological objection to using public transport. How weird that anyone would think of public transport as being state-owned, in this day and age.
Not at present, of course not. But if it were the sole means of travel? Hmm. It was dead easy to leave East Germany on public transport I’m sure, or just hop on a plane and leave Cuba if you didn’t fancy living in Castro’s paradise.
Hence “state internet connection”, even if I’m bribed with my own money that it’s “free” fills me with deep suspicion too.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
Very good post. And the hole in the ozone layer will be completely repaired by 2080 too.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
And rely on the State anytime we want to travel. Marvellous.
Plus the state knowing exactly where you are going all the time. Spooky!
Point of order - based on my trains into London, knowing I’ve caught one tells you very little little about either where I am or where I am going.
Are you sure your Trainline app doesn't tell Google?
No that only tells you where I should be and where I’m meant to be going.
"I'll tell you a riddle. You're waiting for a train, a train that will take you far away. You know where you hope this train will take you, but you don't know for sure. But it doesn't matter. How can it not matter to you where the train will take you?"
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
It’s better than that. For most of July, August and September we were coal free. Wind and solar accounted much of the time for 50% of our power. That really is progress. Admittedly a large chunk was gas as well.
The way we are progressing there's little reason continuing that by the end of the last decade 100% of electricity outside of surges or wind issues can't be renewable. And all new cars sold by then could be renewable too.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
That WASPI question to Boris in the leaders' debate could turn out to be the most expensive three minutes of tv ever if Corbyn gets into No 10.
However Labour's announcement could blow up in their face if voters see it as the cynical opportunism it is.
It is cynical opportunism but the recipients won’t care . If Cummings and co did this though Tories would be supporting it , they’ve written the book on cynicism .
Of course it could blow up in Labours face but they need to close the gap with that age group and it depends how the message is received more widely .
If women feel Labour are on their side then it’s not just those effected but it could impact others with how they view the party .
This 3 word address refers to an exact 3m x 3m location. Tap the link or enter the 3 words into the free what3words app to find it. (EDIT: W3W pastes this blurb with the link)
There is also a Correct.Horses.Batteries NW of Edmonton.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
It's not enough progress, that's the point. We're going to have to a lot more as a country - but also as a world - to stop climate change.
Given that China is probably constructing enough power plants each week to replace the emissions the UK have already cut, even cutting to zero would have no net benefit for global warming.
Add in the Indians.
And countries like Vietnam, buidling power plants that use Indonesian coal - and that coal has to get there using rather horrible polluting bunker fuel.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
Interesting view - why no private transport whatever, even if it was green? Are we going to have massively subsidised bus routes for the three people who live in Dunny-on-the-Wold, for example?
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
Ditto. Its funny we never hear about acid rain anymore, nor the hole in the ozone layer.
I also remember learning in science classes how in Britain large percentages of moths evolved from light to dark to light again because of the pollution that existed in the past and how cleaned up the country is now relative to the past.
Not so much they learnt, just that in some species such as Peppered Moth, the black form carbonaria was far less obvious to predating birds against sooty walls. The genes were still there and once we cleaned up the buildings, the black and white forms could again find better camouflaged places to rest. The carbonaria form is now again quite scarce (I've had a couple in the garden over the past six years).
This 3 word address refers to an exact 3m x 3m location. Tap the link or enter the 3 words into the free what3words app to find it. (EDIT: W3W pastes this blurb with the link)
There is also a Correct.Horses.Batteries NW of Edmonton.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
Ditto. Its funny we never hear about acid rain anymore, nor the hole in the ozone layer.
I also remember learning in science classes how in Britain large percentages of moths evolved from light to dark to light again because of the pollution that existed in the past and how cleaned up the country is now relative to the past.
Not so much they learnt, just that in some species such as Peppered Moth, the black form carbonaria was far less obvious to predating birds against sooty walls. The genes were still there and once we cleaned up the buildings, the black and white forms could again find better camouflaged places to rest. The carbonaria form is now again quite scarce (I've had a couple in the garden over the past six years).
More upsetting for keen horticulturalists, the reduction of sulphur compounds in the atmosphere is greatly increasing the incidence of fungal infections such as rose black spot.
Nothing for allotment holders in the tory manifesto. Toffs one and all.
That WASPI question to Boris in the leaders' debate could turn out to be the most expensive three minutes of tv ever if Corbyn gets into No 10.
However Labour's announcement could blow up in their face if voters see it as the cynical opportunism it is.
They need to win at the Supreme Court first, or are Labour just going to chuck money at them even if there has been no injustice?
They have taken the view that they will pay as if the government had lost in court. Notwithstanding that they won and right to appeal was denied. My private pension will be appropriated to pay for this shit.
I can understand why the Tories wanted a safe manifesto but this is incredibly thin and the social care policy is pathetic .
They seem to have gone from one extreme to another after the May fiasco . And they’ve given Labour quite a few opportunities to attack them on a range of issues .
It seems to me that the Tories are putting everything on get Brexit done and that’s it.
May actually worried about her legacy. Bozo just wants the job title.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
It's not enough progress, that's the point. We're going to have to a lot more as a country - but also as a world - to stop climate change.
Given that China is probably constructing enough power plants each week to replace the emissions the UK have already cut, even cutting to zero would have no net benefit for global warming.
Add in the Indians.
And countries like Vietnam, buidling power plants that use Indonesian coal - and that coal has to get there using rather horrible polluting bunker fuel.
Germany still uses lignite.
What really irritates me about all this is that the same people who make are talking about the most extreme reductions are, in general, the same ones who campaign hard against nuclear power despite its ability to produce vast amounts of low carbon electricity.
Back to betting rather than the bear-pit for a moment.
I'm still sitting on my BUY of Conservative seats at 325 - should I cash out now and take a reasonable profit or should I stick it out? I think 360-380 is the range and I'd prefer more than 380 for obvious reasons - might happen but less certain than I was.
Looking at the election battles in East London, I can back Labour to win East Ham at 1/100 with Paddy and Betfair, not a bad bet and if you have £100k lying around and you want to have £101k on 13/12 it's as much a certainty as anything in this life.
The three seats which interest me in my neck of the woods are as follows:
Dagenham & Rainham: - Jon Cruddas is defending a majority of 4,652 and the Conservatives need a 5% swing which is right on the mark of the polls. The Tories are marginally favourites and you can bet 9/10 with Bet365 while Labour are Evens with Sky Bet which looks tempting. Many firms have both parties odds on suggesting this is going to be very close. For now, I'll stay out.
Ilford South: Mike Gapes held for Labour last time with a majority of 31.647 but he has defected to and is running as a Change UK - TIG candidate. He is on offer at 3s generally with Labour at 1/5. It's my experience MPs have an exaggerated view of their "personal" vote and I can't see Gapes holding this seat - indeed, I think he'll finish third. Labour at 1/5 looks a cracking bet.
Ilford North: Against the run of play, this was a rare Conservative loss in 2015 when Wes Streeting got home by 589 votes. Despite no UKIP candidate in 2017, Streeting stretched his majority to nearly 10,000. There is a BXP candidate this time and Labour are 1/5 with the Conservatives at 3s.
I simply can't understand how Labour are 1/5 in both Ilford seats - both prices are absurd. Labour should be 1/20 to hold Ilford South and shouldn't even be favourites to hold North.
I don't like betting odds on but the 1/5 for Labour to hold South is very tempting while the 3/1 for the Conservatives to take North is also worth a punt.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
Ditto. Its funny we never hear about acid rain anymore, nor the hole in the ozone layer.
I also remember learning in science classes how in Britain large percentages of moths evolved from light to dark to light again because of the pollution that existed in the past and how cleaned up the country is now relative to the past.
Not so much they learnt, just that in some species such as Peppered Moth, the black form carbonaria was far less obvious to predating birds against sooty walls. The genes were still there and once we cleaned up the buildings, the black and white forms could again find better camouflaged places to rest. The carbonaria form is now again quite scarce (I've had a couple in the garden over the past six years).
More upsetting for keen horticulturalists, the reduction of sulphur compounds in the atmosphere is greatly increasing the incidence of fungal infections such as rose black spot.
Nothing for allotment holders in the tory manifesto. Toffs one and all.
Black spot has always been and remains a problem in Devon.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
Interesting view - why no private transport whatever, even if it was green? Are we going to have massively subsidised bus routes for the three people who live in Dunny-on-the-Wold, for example?
You’ll be relocated to Skelmersdale.
The largest town in the North West without a rail station is probably a poor example to choose here :-)
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
It's not enough progress, that's the point. We're going to have to a lot more as a country - but also as a world - to stop climate change.
Given that China is probably constructing enough power plants each week to replace the emissions the UK have already cut, even cutting to zero would have no net benefit for global warming.
Add in the Indians.
And countries like Vietnam, buidling power plants that use Indonesian coal - and that coal has to get there using rather horrible polluting bunker fuel.
Germany still uses lignite.
What really irritates me about all this is that the same people who make are talking about the most extreme reductions are, in general, the same ones who campaign hard against nuclear power despite its ability to produce vast amounts of low carbon electricity.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
Why? Clearly you've never lived anywhere remote or worked at night.
I live in a village, so yes I've experienced it. I'm just saying if we are to tackle climate change, we are going to have to phase out petrol and diesel cars. Electric cars are obviously better - but they're still a lot more damaging than public transport.
How about less kids?
There isn't a problem this planet faces that wouldn't be eased if humans were smart enough to stop breeding at the rate they are.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
I'm old enough that I was taught that global warning and global cooling were caused by the earth not having a stable orbit round the sun.. Moves in it warms, moves out it cools. Hence several ice ages each ended by a period of global warming.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
Very good post. And the hole in the ozone layer will be completely repaired by 2080 too.
It's not all bad news on the environment.
It's not even all bad with regards to China. China is building a lot of coal power plants, but they are also building loads of solar farms, wind farms, hydroelectric plants, and nuclear power plants. China's use of solar went up 1000 fold in the decade to 2018, and wind by over 20 fold. So the Chinese energy mix is moving to renewables, despite what some people seem to think, and quite rapidly as well. It is the large increase in overall energy generation and consumption that is leading to an increase in fossil fuel use, not some aversion to renewables, or ignorance about climate change.
I can understand why the Tories wanted a safe manifesto but this is incredibly thin and the social care policy is pathetic .
They seem to have gone from one extreme to another after the May fiasco . And they’ve given Labour quite a few opportunities to attack them on a range of issues .
It seems to me that the Tories are putting everything on get Brexit done and that’s it.
May actually worried about her legacy. Bozo just wants the job title.
This 3 word address refers to an exact 3m x 3m location. Tap the link or enter the 3 words into the free what3words app to find it. (EDIT: W3W pastes this blurb with the link)
There is also a Correct.Horses.Batteries NW of Edmonton.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
It's not enough progress, that's the point. We're going to have to a lot more as a country - but also as a world - to stop climate change.
Given that China is probably constructing enough power plants each week to replace the emissions the UK have already cut, even cutting to zero would have no net benefit for global warming.
Add in the Indians.
And countries like Vietnam, buidling power plants that use Indonesian coal - and that coal has to get there using rather horrible polluting bunker fuel.
Germany still uses lignite.
What really irritates me about all this is that the same people who make are talking about the most extreme reductions are, in general, the same ones who campaign hard against nuclear power despite its ability to produce vast amounts of low carbon electricity.
I simply can't understand how Labour are 1/5 in both Ilford seats - both prices are absurd. Labour should be 1/20 to hold Ilford South and shouldn't even be favourites to hold North.
I don't like betting odds on but the 1/5 for Labour to hold South is very tempting while the 3/1 for the Conservatives to take North is also worth a punt.
You mean Labour should be favourites in Ilford North?
Back to betting rather than the bear-pit for a moment.
I'm still sitting on my BUY of Conservative seats at 325 - should I cash out now and take a reasonable profit or should I stick it out? I think 360-380 is the range and I'd prefer more than 380 for obvious reasons - might happen but less certain than I was.
Looking at the election battles in East London, I can back Labour to win East Ham at 1/100 with Paddy and Betfair, not a bad bet and if you have £100k lying around and you want to have £101k on 13/12 it's as much a certainty as anything in this life.
The three seats which interest me in my neck of the woods are as follows:
Dagenham & Rainham: - Jon Cruddas is defending a majority of 4,652 and the Conservatives need a 5% swing which is right on the mark of the polls. The Tories are marginally favourites and you can bet 9/10 with Bet365 while Labour are Evens with Sky Bet which looks tempting. Many firms have both parties odds on suggesting this is going to be very close. For now, I'll stay out.
Ilford South: Mike Gapes held for Labour last time with a majority of 31.647 but he has defected to and is running as a Change UK - TIG candidate. He is on offer at 3s generally with Labour at 1/5. It's my experience MPs have an exaggerated view of their "personal" vote and I can't see Gapes holding this seat - indeed, I think he'll finish third. Labour at 1/5 looks a cracking bet.
Ilford North: Against the run of play, this was a rare Conservative loss in 2015 when Wes Streeting got home by 589 votes. Despite no UKIP candidate in 2017, Streeting stretched his majority to nearly 10,000. There is a BXP candidate this time and Labour are 1/5 with the Conservatives at 3s.
I simply can't understand how Labour are 1/5 in both Ilford seats - both prices are absurd. Labour should be 1/20 to hold Ilford South and shouldn't even be favourites to hold North.
I don't like betting odds on but the 1/5 for Labour to hold South is very tempting while the 3/1 for the Conservatives to take North is also worth a punt.
Followed you for a little on Ilford North - value tip. Ta.
I can understand why the Tories wanted a safe manifesto but this is incredibly thin and the social care policy is pathetic .
They seem to have gone from one extreme to another after the May fiasco . And they’ve given Labour quite a few opportunities to attack them on a range of issues .
It seems to me that the Tories are putting everything on get Brexit done and that’s it.
May actually worried about her legacy. Bozo just wants the job title.
Her legacy is being a dismal failure. Less said about her legacy the better.
No need to worry about saving the planet. According to James Lovelock's Gaia hypothesis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis) the planet will take steps to save itself by reducing the human population to a sustainable level. Opening up yawning potholes to kill cyclists could be a modest start.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
Ditto. Its funny we never hear about acid rain anymore, nor the hole in the ozone layer.
I also remember learning in science classes how in Britain large percentages of moths evolved from light to dark to light again because of the pollution that existed in the past and how cleaned up the country is now relative to the past.
Not so much they learnt, just that in some species such as Peppered Moth, the black form carbonaria was far less obvious to predating birds against sooty walls. The genes were still there and once we cleaned up the buildings, the black and white forms could again find better camouflaged places to rest. The carbonaria form is now again quite scarce (I've had a couple in the garden over the past six years).
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
Why? Clearly you've never lived anywhere remote or worked at night.
I live in a village, so yes I've experienced it. I'm just saying if we are to tackle climate change, we are going to have to phase out petrol and diesel cars. Electric cars are obviously better - but they're still a lot more damaging than public transport.
How about less kids?
There isn't a problem this planet faces that wouldn't be eased if humans were smart enough to stop breeding at the rate they are.
Kind of my point, though there’s all kinds of issues that one child policies create ( as China knows). I think ( please correct me folks ) the founder of XR has three kids?
What amounts should it be, what should the ratio be? There are a lot of potholes and roads and their maintenance are expensive. I don't see how the relative amounts without explanation or context reveal anything here, I have nothing to judge on whether making it, for instance, 2bn on childcare would be sufficient, or too much, or not enough.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
Why? Clearly you've never lived anywhere remote or worked at night.
I live in a village, so yes I've experienced it. I'm just saying if we are to tackle climate change, we are going to have to phase out petrol and diesel cars. Electric cars are obviously better - but they're still a lot more damaging than public transport.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
It’s better than that. For most of July, August and September we were coal free. Wind and solar accounted much of the time for 50% of our power. That really is progress. Admittedly a large chunk was gas as well.
True, but even replacing coal with CCGT power stations makes a significant difference - and is a necessary interim step, looking at worldwide generating capacity.
The last time I looked our power supply has been decarbonised by about 75%, and the only sectors not making very major progress were buildings and transport. Though arguably renewable power and electric cars will fix much of transport within 20 years or so.
Personally I think that ER need to be stamped on very heavily indeed; demonstrators willing to prevent patients getting to hospital, and defend their actions, are self-obsessed beneath contempt nutters .
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
Very good post. And the hole in the ozone layer will be completely repaired by 2080 too.
It's not all bad news on the environment.
It's not even all bad with regards to China. China is building a lot of coal power plants, but they are also building loads of solar farms, wind farms, hydroelectric plants, and nuclear power plants. China's use of solar went up 1000 fold in the decade to 2018, and wind by over 20 fold. So the Chinese energy mix is moving to renewables, despite what some people seem to think, and quite rapidly as well. It is the large increase in overall energy generation and consumption that is leading to an increase in fossil fuel use, not some aversion to renewables, or ignorance about climate change.
This 3 word address refers to an exact 3m x 3m location. Tap the link or enter the 3 words into the free what3words app to find it. (EDIT: W3W pastes this blurb with the link)
There is also a Correct.Horses.Batteries NW of Edmonton.
What amounts should it be, what should the ratio be? There are a lot of potholes and roads and their maintenance are expensive. I don't see how the relative amounts without explanation or context reveal anything here, I have nothing to judge on whether making it, for instance, 2bn on childcare would be sufficient, or too much, or not enough.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
Why? Clearly you've never lived anywhere remote or worked at night.
I live in a village, so yes I've experienced it. I'm just saying if we are to tackle climate change, we are going to have to phase out petrol and diesel cars. Electric cars are obviously better - but they're still a lot more damaging than public transport.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
It's not enough progress, that's the point. We're going to have to a lot more as a country - but also as a world - to stop climate change.
Given that China is probably constructing enough power plants each week to replace the emissions the UK have already cut, even cutting to zero would have no net benefit for global warming.
Add in the Indians.
And countries like Vietnam, buidling power plants that use Indonesian coal - and that coal has to get there using rather horrible polluting bunker fuel.
Germany still uses lignite.
What really irritates me about all this is that the same people who make are talking about the most extreme reductions are, in general, the same ones who campaign hard against nuclear power despite its ability to produce vast amounts of low carbon electricity.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
Why? Clearly you've never lived anywhere remote or worked at night.
I live in a village, so yes I've experienced it. I'm just saying if we are to tackle climate change, we are going to have to phase out petrol and diesel cars. Electric cars are obviously better - but they're still a lot more damaging than public transport.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
And rely on the State anytime we want to travel. Marvellous.
Plus the state knowing exactly where you are going all the time. Spooky!
Point of order - based on my trains into London, knowing I’ve caught one tells you very little little about either where I am or where I am going.
There’s a channel 5 programme on the moment following TFL staff as they track down fare dodgers. The amount of information they have is eye-opening
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
Why? Clearly you've never lived anywhere remote or worked at night.
I live in a village, so yes I've experienced it. I'm just saying if we are to tackle climate change, we are going to have to phase out petrol and diesel cars. Electric cars are obviously better - but they're still a lot more damaging than public transport.
I can understand why the Tories wanted a safe manifesto but this is incredibly thin and the social care policy is pathetic .
They seem to have gone from one extreme to another after the May fiasco . And they’ve given Labour quite a few opportunities to attack them on a range of issues .
It seems to me that the Tories are putting everything on get Brexit done and that’s it.
May actually worried about her legacy. Bozo just wants the job title.
Her legacy is being a dismal failure. Less said about her legacy the better.
Exactly. The lesson of 2017 is that we need to WIN first, otherwise all our plans vanish into nothingness.
Rather slow and nothing like as good as the first two.
Wilson and Heath are good though. The episodes slow and tedious, except Aberfan.
The trouble is probably that as we come up to date, the writers lose historical perspective and start including all sorts of trivial incidents that they happen to remember. We have seen this with other series too.
I wonder whether Damian Lyons Lowe from Survation are doing some polling including a question on the Waspi women . Going by his tweet he thinks this is likely to hurt the Tories.
I know, they seem small in comparison to Labour's trillion pound bill, but it's still a lot of money.
Do you honestly think potholes deserve more money than childcare though?
As a childless singleton that doesn't drive I don't care about either. But anybody claiming to be green should oppose both subsiding care pollution and over population.
I personally think we should be encouraging the use of public transport as much as possible and phasing out cars entirely - that should be the ultimate goal IMHO
Not a fan of electric cars?
They're better than petrol and diesel cars - and if there is no reasonable public transport they seem like a good compromise. But fundamentally we need to transition away from private transport.
And rely on the State anytime we want to travel. Marvellous.
Strangely it never occurred to me that some people might have an ideological objection to using public transport. How weird that anyone would think of public transport as being state-owned, in this day and age.
Until recently it never occurred to me that anyone might have an ideological objection to broadband being owned by the private sector, but one of our major parties sure as hell does!
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
Very good post. And the hole in the ozone layer will be completely repaired by 2080 too.
It's not all bad news on the environment.
And work continues. For example HFA is being switched across to a different form of HFA which is 80% less damaging.
The UK has to do a lot more - as does every other country. You're right it's a global problem.
But just trumpeting "we're not the problem" is why there's been so little progress.
So little progress? Again, look how far emissions have been cut since the peak in the 1970s.
That is a fair point. I'm old enough to remember learning about acid rain in school geography lessons circa 1990. British coal-fired power stations used to chuck out so much carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide that they created toxic clouds that, basically, dissolved trees in Norway.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
Very good post. And the hole in the ozone layer will be completely repaired by 2080 too.
It's not all bad news on the environment.
And work continues. For example HFA is being switched across to a different form of HFA which is 80% less damaging.
And HFA is already massively less bad than CFC
Good news but none of this would have happened if scientists and campaigners hadn't made a fuss in the first place.
I wonder whether Damian Lyons Lowe from Survation are doing some polling including a question on the Waspi women . Going by his tweet he thinks this is likely to hurt the Tories.
Thing is Labour can have all sorts of popular individual policies... The problem is that no one actually believes they can deliver them.
I wonder whether Damian Lyons Lowe from Survation are doing some polling including a question on the Waspi women . Going by his tweet he thinks this is likely to hurt the Tories.
Will the question include the information that it will cost the public an extra £58 billion in uncosted borrowing and / or taxes? Because that seems like a relevant piece of context, no?
I wonder whether Damian Lyons Lowe from Survation are doing some polling including a question on the Waspi women . Going by his tweet he thinks this is likely to hurt the Tories.
Will the question include the information that it will cost the public an extra £58 billion in uncosted borrowing and / or taxes? Because that seems like a relevant piece of context, no?
Comments
Electric vehicles with electricity from renewable sources - how are they so evil?
It's small beer for an election manifesto though.
This is where loony Greenpeace types are wrong. They may be prepared to send us back to the stoneage but nobody else is.
Technological progress is the solution.
Earlier this year, Britain had the first recorded days since the advent of widespread electrical power in which 0% of the electricity in the National Grid came from burning coal. If that's not progress I'm not sure what is.
Low risk, will be watching the response.
One might almost gain the impression that they're only really interested in railing against the evil of the West. Fancy that.
New LeanTossup UK Model!! #FBPE #Boris #Corbyn Tories: 399 Labour: 163 LD: 23 SNP: 41 Others: 24 Tory majority of 148
I also remember learning in science classes how in Britain large percentages of moths evolved from light to dark to light again because of the pollution that existed in the past and how cleaned up the country is now relative to the past.
Because it is described as an injustice, and that's why the action is needed. If it's a policy disagreement that's one thing, but an injustice being done to them requires more than them not liking it.
It's not all bad news on the environment.
Hmmmmm.
We should have as little to do with him as possible.
Hence “state internet connection”, even if I’m bribed with my own money that it’s “free” fills me with deep suspicion too.
Of course it could blow up in Labours face but they need to close the gap with that age group and it depends how the message is received more widely .
If women feel Labour are on their side then it’s not just those effected but it could impact others with how they view the party .
What3Words has you down (well, Horses, anyway) as a bit of wilderness near the Newfoundland / Quebec border:
https://w3w.co/correct.horses.battery
This 3 word address refers to an exact 3m x 3m location. Tap the link or enter the 3 words into the free what3words app to find it. (EDIT: W3W pastes this blurb with the link)
There is also a Correct.Horses.Batteries NW of Edmonton.
EDIT image here:
https://ukmoths.org.uk/species/biston-betularia/ab-carbonaria/
Not a serious agenda for government. It will turn most swing voters off.
How long until the PLA does the equivalent of the Boston Massacre?*
*Yes, I know it wasn’t a massacre but it was a shot which rang around the world.
Rather slow and nothing like as good as the first two.
Wilson and Heath are good though. The episodes slow and tedious, except Aberfan.
Nothing for allotment holders in the tory manifesto. Toffs one and all.
eg Report of an inquest in Sept of a cyclist killed by a car when she swerved round a pothole to avoid going over the handlebars.
https://road.cc/content/news/266893-cyclist-died-after-pothole-crash-council-says-it-had-no-record-defect-despite
Back to betting rather than the bear-pit for a moment.
I'm still sitting on my BUY of Conservative seats at 325 - should I cash out now and take a reasonable profit or should I stick it out? I think 360-380 is the range and I'd prefer more than 380 for obvious reasons - might happen but less certain than I was.
Looking at the election battles in East London, I can back Labour to win East Ham at 1/100 with Paddy and Betfair, not a bad bet and if you have £100k lying around and you want to have £101k on 13/12 it's as much a certainty as anything in this life.
The three seats which interest me in my neck of the woods are as follows:
Dagenham & Rainham: - Jon Cruddas is defending a majority of 4,652 and the Conservatives need a 5% swing which is right on the mark of the polls. The Tories are marginally favourites and you can bet 9/10 with Bet365 while Labour are Evens with Sky Bet which looks tempting. Many firms have both parties odds on suggesting this is going to be very close. For now, I'll stay out.
Ilford South: Mike Gapes held for Labour last time with a majority of 31.647 but he has defected to and is running as a Change UK - TIG candidate. He is on offer at 3s generally with Labour at 1/5. It's my experience MPs have an exaggerated view of their "personal" vote and I can't see Gapes holding this seat - indeed, I think he'll finish third. Labour at 1/5 looks a cracking bet.
Ilford North: Against the run of play, this was a rare Conservative loss in 2015 when Wes Streeting got home by 589 votes. Despite no UKIP candidate in 2017, Streeting stretched his majority to nearly 10,000. There is a BXP candidate this time and Labour are 1/5 with the Conservatives at 3s.
I simply can't understand how Labour are 1/5 in both Ilford seats - both prices are absurd. Labour should be 1/20 to hold Ilford South and shouldn't even be favourites to hold North.
I don't like betting odds on but the 1/5 for Labour to hold South is very tempting while the 3/1 for the Conservatives to take North is also worth a punt.
Anyway I have money on Norwich, Southampton and Villa!
Personally I think that ER need to be stamped on very heavily indeed; demonstrators willing to prevent patients getting to hospital, and defend their actions, are self-obsessed beneath contempt nutters .
One suspects the xkcd cartoon was known to the W3W guys.
But IF we beat Southampton on Sat then the dream is back!
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html
And HFA is already massively less bad than CFC