Cheapest electric car is about 22k new. The fairly high cost is regularly defended by advocates explaining that they are cheap to run because of low energy costs and it balances out. But the ban on petrol cars might unduly affect older people who need a car but only do a few miles pottering to shops etc. The cost per mile will work out to be a lot.
At some stage, the world has to move on. There are people driving around ancient diesels with no particulate filter and no AdBlue, and paying around third of the VED that I pay on a very clean car. At what stage do you say, 'enough already let's get these filthy beasts off the road'?
Tesla, for example, are planning to release a $25K car in the next 3 years. 300 mile range etc.
At that point, game over man. As Corporal Hudson said....
I have a friend (70 year old woman, highly organised) who has a little electric bmw who is forever limiting herself to 30/not having the heating on/not demisting the windscreen (hence having to have the windows open), all to conserve mileage. I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole. The ICE's yuge unnoticed advantage is that electric for all the auxiliaries is free. As for the "only" 40 minutes (is it?) recharging time, the history of industrial civilisation is the history of saving 40 minute slots of time. We pay £1000s to reduce latencies by 10s of ms. 40 minutes = lol. These things suck.
How old an electric model is that?
Early adopters of technologies do tend to not get the best versions of them as the technology is still nascent. Getting an electric car that runs all the auxiliaries is already easily doable and the technology is improving year on year.
If you have a long distance at full charge and can recharge hundreds of miles in 20 minutes then that will be perfect for most people as eg if driving a long distance then it'd be normal to take eg 20 minute breaks every few hours anyway for toilet/coffee/refreshment purposes anyway.
I would imagine that a typical journey is around 1.5-2.5 hrs. Having to build in stopping at Membury Services (and queue) to recharge might be a huge embuggerance.
2.5 hours should be doable without recharging if you have a modern vehicle and can set off fully charged.
The bigger issue for me is for people who don't have off-road parking. That needs a better solution than long-distance driving does.
To use the C-word analogy. Just as testing was and is key to addressing the virus, so charging points are likewise vital to this working. If it is as routine as filling up with petrol to charge your car there will be far higher takeup.
To torture our scenario further - if you can drive 2.5 hours with no charge then what do you do once you've arrived and/or have to go back again? Or there is a traffic jam/diversion/accident/etc?
If there's traffic/diversion/accident etc or once you've arrived after your journey you'll need to be able to recharge locally at your destination somewhere, just as someone who lives without off-road parking at your destination will need to be able to do so.
All paths to this being universal to me come back to a solution for those without off-road parking rather long distancing. Its easy enough for someone who lives in a detached home with a driveway and a £30,000 vehicle to be able to plug it in, count the savings and adopt to this . . . but for someone who lives in a flat, with no driveway, a £3,000 second hand vehicle that they're going to rely upon public access charging points that have a price premium attached to them its going to be a different matter.
An irony is this switchover is likely to hit poorer drivers harder than richer drivers, but that rarely gets mentioned probably because climate change is more a concern for the richer first world people who don't need to count every penny.
Don't disagree at all.
A guy on my road has a Tesla 75 and lives in a flat. Mostly uses the Superchargers, from what he says.
Interesting side note about electric cars that not seen mentioned in all our discussions of range, national gird etc....car mechanics. At the moment, they will have all been trained up on internal combustion engines and have all the kit for maintaining those.
Dealerships will be fine, but all those small back street garages that make a living out of being cheaper than the dealerships, they are going to have to spend a fortune retraining and retooling.
Cheapest electric car is about 22k new. The fairly high cost is regularly defended by advocates explaining that they are cheap to run because of low energy costs and it balances out. But the ban on petrol cars might unduly affect older people who need a car but only do a few miles pottering to shops etc. The cost per mile will work out to be a lot.
At some stage, the world has to move on. There are people driving around ancient diesels with no particulate filter and no AdBlue, and paying around third of the VED that I pay on a very clean car. At what stage do you say, 'enough already let's get these filthy beasts off the road'?
Tesla, for example, are planning to release a $25K car in the next 3 years. 300 mile range etc.
At that point, game over man. As Corporal Hudson said....
I have a friend (70 year old woman, highly organised) who has a little electric bmw who is forever limiting herself to 30/not having the heating on/not demisting the windscreen (hence having to have the windows open), all to conserve mileage. I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole. The ICE's yuge unnoticed advantage is that electric for all the auxiliaries is free. As for the "only" 40 minutes (is it?) recharging time, the history of industrial civilisation is the history of saving 40 minute slots of time. We pay £1000s to reduce latencies by 10s of ms. 40 minutes = lol. These things suck.
Those early electric cars suck - yes. Because they had tiny batteries. And in an attempt to use a tiny battery, tiny motors etc etc.
Test drive a Tesla. Different universe. A few minutes to put a 100 miles of range on it, you can run the AC/heating at full blast all day without noticing much effect, performance off the line is demented etc...
The whole point of Tesla (and the manufacturers now following in their wake) was to do away with the problems of the econo-shitbox style of electric cars.
And the "saving forty minutes" is only if you don't count the time taken to drive to a petrol station, park up, and refuel. 99% of the time, I recharge simply by plugging it in at home. And letting the timer kick in during the 5p/kWh time overnight.
Going electric has saved so much time previously spent refuelling.
My diesel Q5 does about 550 - 600 miles to a tank so 10 mins every other month ( or four months at present ) filling up is not much of a chore.
You got the 85-litre tank option on yours then Malc?
Interesting side note about electric cars that not seen mentioned in all our discussions of range, national gird etc....car mechanics. At the moment, they will have all been trained up on internal combustion engines and have all the kit for maintaining those.
Dealerships will be fine, but all those small back street garages that make a living out of being cheaper than the dealerships, they are going to have to spend a fortune retraining and retooling.
And they will have far less work because the maintenance on an EV is much less, due to their having vastly fewer moving parts...
Interesting side note about electric cars that not seen mentioned in all our discussions of range, national gird etc....car mechanics. At the moment, they will have all been trained up on internal combustion engines and have all the kit for maintaining those.
Dealerships will be fine, but all those small back street garages that make a living out of being cheaper than the dealerships, they are going to have to spend a fortune retraining and retooling.
And they will have far less work because the maintenance on an EV is much less, due to their having vastly fewer moving parts...
Cheapest electric car is about 22k new. The fairly high cost is regularly defended by advocates explaining that they are cheap to run because of low energy costs and it balances out. But the ban on petrol cars might unduly affect older people who need a car but only do a few miles pottering to shops etc. The cost per mile will work out to be a lot.
At some stage, the world has to move on. There are people driving around ancient diesels with no particulate filter and no AdBlue, and paying around third of the VED that I pay on a very clean car. At what stage do you say, 'enough already let's get these filthy beasts off the road'?
Tesla, for example, are planning to release a $25K car in the next 3 years. 300 mile range etc.
At that point, game over man. As Corporal Hudson said....
I have a friend (70 year old woman, highly organised) who has a little electric bmw who is forever limiting herself to 30/not having the heating on/not demisting the windscreen (hence having to have the windows open), all to conserve mileage. I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole. The ICE's yuge unnoticed advantage is that electric for all the auxiliaries is free. As for the "only" 40 minutes (is it?) recharging time, the history of industrial civilisation is the history of saving 40 minute slots of time. We pay £1000s to reduce latencies by 10s of ms. 40 minutes = lol. These things suck.
The main challenge as I see it is how you charge them. For example, I live in a second floor flat, so where would I plug it in?
You need a plug with a long lead.
The same way you manage without a petrol station in your flat?
All it needs is faster and convenient charge points for the minority who do not have offstreet parking.
Any idea what proportion of people don't have offstreet parking?
Here, where I live in London, there is a program of adding charging points to parking bays.
Apparently, the usage is monitored. When they start to get well used in an area, they add more....
I think the % without offstreet parking is around 30% ish (very ish - no time to look it up).
Green policies made more difficult by Greenies opposed to parking spaces at home - whodathunkit !
Cheapest electric car is about 22k new. The fairly high cost is regularly defended by advocates explaining that they are cheap to run because of low energy costs and it balances out. But the ban on petrol cars might unduly affect older people who need a car but only do a few miles pottering to shops etc. The cost per mile will work out to be a lot.
At some stage, the world has to move on. There are people driving around ancient diesels with no particulate filter and no AdBlue, and paying around third of the VED that I pay on a very clean car. At what stage do you say, 'enough already let's get these filthy beasts off the road'?
Tesla, for example, are planning to release a $25K car in the next 3 years. 300 mile range etc.
At that point, game over man. As Corporal Hudson said....
I have a friend (70 year old woman, highly organised) who has a little electric bmw who is forever limiting herself to 30/not having the heating on/not demisting the windscreen (hence having to have the windows open), all to conserve mileage. I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole. The ICE's yuge unnoticed advantage is that electric for all the auxiliaries is free. As for the "only" 40 minutes (is it?) recharging time, the history of industrial civilisation is the history of saving 40 minute slots of time. We pay £1000s to reduce latencies by 10s of ms. 40 minutes = lol. These things suck.
How old an electric model is that?
Early adopters of technologies do tend to not get the best versions of them as the technology is still nascent. Getting an electric car that runs all the auxiliaries is already easily doable and the technology is improving year on year.
If you have a long distance at full charge and can recharge hundreds of miles in 20 minutes then that will be perfect for most people as eg if driving a long distance then it'd be normal to take eg 20 minute breaks every few hours anyway for toilet/coffee/refreshment purposes anyway.
Recent, I assume. Bought new in the last year.
If it's the i3, it was introduced in 2013 I think. And for the price, it's rubbish these days.
I agree with Mike. I think it will go 1-1 with Jon Ossoff winning his battle against David Perdue. That's not simply because I'm on at 2-1 twice over with Betfair Sportsbook but because I think he has the best chance. David Perdue has run away scared from another mauling tv debate: https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/perdue-ossoff-runoff-debate/
In the other battle, Raphael Warnock is quite a controversial figure. He may rouse the black vote but will he put off white suburban Americans? My guess is, 'yes' and I favour Kelly Loeffler to win it.
The unknown factor here is the way the GOP are ripping into themselves, thanks to Trump's incendiary and volatile nature.
It's also worth bearing in mind that Stacey Adams is a formidable ground operator and the Democrats have momentum in the state.
You are aware the democrats are in a civil war ripping into themselves and GOP aren’t?
I know some sections of the US media are trying to spin "some prominent Democrats pointing out that while we won the White House, we expected to do a lot better across the board than we did: we need to figure out why and do something about it" equals "civil war" but really, it isn't.
It’s the GOP who are going to have the long-term problem of explaining their behaviour over the last couple of weeks, and why anyone should regard them as a serious party adhering to democratic values.
Are they going to replace buses with electric versions?
TfL is running 300 odd electric buses now, IIRC
I imagine that buses are ideal candidates for electric motors. Lots of slow stopping and starting, lack of exhaust emissions in city centres and easy to recharge at the depot overnight.
On topic, having seen the PA supreme court judgement that appears to say poll monitoring from whatever distance the authorities determine is OK is OK, I doubt whether I would ever bet on a meaningful republican victory in a US election again.
Interesting side note about electric cars that not seen mentioned in all our discussions of range, national gird etc....car mechanics. At the moment, they will have all been trained up on internal combustion engines and have all the kit for maintaining those.
Dealerships will be fine, but all those small back street garages that make a living out of being cheaper than the dealerships, they are going to have to spend a fortune retraining and retooling.
An awful lot will be out of work. Electric cars need a great deal less maintenance on average.
(edit) I see the point has been made. If Tesla becomes one of the largest players, there will be far fewer dealers, too.
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
No. Ooohhhhhh no.
It wasn’t Corbyn driving policy, like having Palestinian flags all around conference hall, and bemused why election hopes weighted down with anti semitism, nor that Labour policy’s electable in one must have constituency cost them victory in other must have constituency’s. no. It was the party what made Corbyn.
If coalition is also more diverse, culturally and ideologically, the result is that different elected members need to occupy very different places on the political spectrum and on issues. What one would campaign on in one constituency would be suicide campaign in another must win constituency. You can’t speak as one in broad coalition.
Whereas conservative minded voters tend to coalesce around a couple of key issues you can campaign on and win anywhere.
Boris won on a Corbyn would be a disaster and look at my oven ready brexit, whilst Labour was in death spiral initiated by its pro Palestinian stance.
The worlds changed. It’s moved against Labour, just like it’s just moved against Dems in US. But their brains haven’t caught up yet.
Someone wants to boast about having half a million members, yet the entry fee to enter the broad tent is to embrace political correctness - in other words criticise voters for not being thoughtful enough, for not being conscientious enough, not being "woke" enough.
Their platform is join us, we are enlightened, we will save you from being an ignorant, racist, yokel in need of cultural guidance.
For all his faults, Boris doesn't talk down to or demean voters the way Labour has been doing. I don’t just mean Corbyn, Look at how Starmer tweets have been analyzed
Until Labour realises what they have become, and how unelectable it is, they go on losing digital, social media elections.
This is the kicker, as Boris would say, look how I describe Labour, it’s Labour who ensures there is a bigger coalition who will believe any old crap about them come election time. They create this majority against them themselves, by the personality they have become.
I suspect Labour will take the world changing and moving against them like the Dems in the US if that means, as for the Dems in the US, election victory.
More generally, I think too think the world is changing, but I find those who feel threatened by 'political correctness' or 'wokeness' (or even those who use those terms) to be the older voters. Maybe I'm just living in wokeville, but it's a long time since I've heard anyone my age or below use those terms or complain about those ideas. If anything, I think Labour's alleged wokeness is the way things are going more generally and I don't see that as a bad thing.
(Doesn't mean electoral success, Conservatives briefly went a bit 'woke' under Cameron - don't forget ideas such as gay marriage would have been considered incredibly PC/woke 10-20 years ago - and will do so again if the current populist approach stops working)
Interesting side note about electric cars that not seen mentioned in all our discussions of range, national gird etc....car mechanics. At the moment, they will have all been trained up on internal combustion engines and have all the kit for maintaining those.
Dealerships will be fine, but all those small back street garages that make a living out of being cheaper than the dealerships, they are going to have to spend a fortune retraining and retooling.
The Daily Mail has a story about financial service jobs moving to the continent after Brexit, and the comments are full of comparisons to Hitler... Deal or No Deal, there will be a lot of angry Brexiteers in a few weeks' time.
I just wandered over to Toby young's lockdownsceptics site to see what they're going on about now (sometimes useful to see the latest surge in misinformation before it gets fully out into the wild).
About two articles apart, we have an article on how terrible precautions are on hospitals with covid and how they're infecting patients... and one on how it's all false positives and hospitals don't have real covid in them.
And the readers and believers on this stuff don't see the problem of believing both at the same time?
Interesting side note about electric cars that not seen mentioned in all our discussions of range, national gird etc....car mechanics. At the moment, they will have all been trained up on internal combustion engines and have all the kit for maintaining those.
Dealerships will be fine, but all those small back street garages that make a living out of being cheaper than the dealerships, they are going to have to spend a fortune retraining and retooling.
An awful lot will be out of work. Electric cars need a great deal less maintenance on average.
(edit) I see the point has been made. If Tesla becomes one of the largest players, there will be far fewer dealers, too.
There should be plenty of time to wind the industry down. It's not like all those ICE cars are suddenly going to vanish in 2030, so there are quite a few years of work left in the industry.
Cheapest electric car is about 22k new. The fairly high cost is regularly defended by advocates explaining that they are cheap to run because of low energy costs and it balances out. But the ban on petrol cars might unduly affect older people who need a car but only do a few miles pottering to shops etc. The cost per mile will work out to be a lot.
At some stage, the world has to move on. There are people driving around ancient diesels with no particulate filter and no AdBlue, and paying around third of the VED that I pay on a very clean car. At what stage do you say, 'enough already let's get these filthy beasts off the road'?
Tesla, for example, are planning to release a $25K car in the next 3 years. 300 mile range etc.
At that point, game over man. As Corporal Hudson said....
I have a friend (70 year old woman, highly organised) who has a little electric bmw who is forever limiting herself to 30/not having the heating on/not demisting the windscreen (hence having to have the windows open), all to conserve mileage. I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole. The ICE's yuge unnoticed advantage is that electric for all the auxiliaries is free. As for the "only" 40 minutes (is it?) recharging time, the history of industrial civilisation is the history of saving 40 minute slots of time. We pay £1000s to reduce latencies by 10s of ms. 40 minutes = lol. These things suck.
Those early electric cars suck - yes. Because they had tiny batteries. And in an attempt to use a tiny battery, tiny motors etc etc.
Test drive a Tesla. Different universe. A few minutes to put a 100 miles of range on it, you can run the AC/heating at full blast all day without noticing much effect, performance off the line is demented etc...
The whole point of Tesla (and the manufacturers now following in their wake) was to do away with the problems of the econo-shitbox style of electric cars.
And the "saving forty minutes" is only if you don't count the time taken to drive to a petrol station, park up, and refuel. 99% of the time, I recharge simply by plugging it in at home. And letting the timer kick in during the 5p/kWh time overnight.
Going electric has saved so much time previously spent refuelling.
My diesel Q5 does about 550 - 600 miles to a tank so 10 mins every other month ( or four months at present ) filling up is not much of a chore.
You got the 85-litre tank option on yours then Malc?
I have on my Q7 – quite ludicrous range!!
I think it is just the normal tank but it is great on mpg. Mind you I have done about 1300 miles this year so an expensive toy sitting on the driveway. They are lovely to drive and I especially like the DSG auto. I cannot even work half the gadgets in it. Went to Germany in it last year and it was superb.
With more than 42,500 vehicle service and repair locations of all types, the UK aftermarket is a huge, diverse and highly competitive industry.
The report also reveals the significant economic contribution made by the UK automotive aftermarket, which delivers an annual £12.2 billion direct to the UK economy and supports more than 345,000 British jobs.
Cheapest electric car is about 22k new. The fairly high cost is regularly defended by advocates explaining that they are cheap to run because of low energy costs and it balances out. But the ban on petrol cars might unduly affect older people who need a car but only do a few miles pottering to shops etc. The cost per mile will work out to be a lot.
At some stage, the world has to move on. There are people driving around ancient diesels with no particulate filter and no AdBlue, and paying around third of the VED that I pay on a very clean car. At what stage do you say, 'enough already let's get these filthy beasts off the road'?
Tesla, for example, are planning to release a $25K car in the next 3 years. 300 mile range etc.
At that point, game over man. As Corporal Hudson said....
I have a friend (70 year old woman, highly organised) who has a little electric bmw who is forever limiting herself to 30/not having the heating on/not demisting the windscreen (hence having to have the windows open), all to conserve mileage. I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole. The ICE's yuge unnoticed advantage is that electric for all the auxiliaries is free. As for the "only" 40 minutes (is it?) recharging time, the history of industrial civilisation is the history of saving 40 minute slots of time. We pay £1000s to reduce latencies by 10s of ms. 40 minutes = lol. These things suck.
How old an electric model is that?
Early adopters of technologies do tend to not get the best versions of them as the technology is still nascent. Getting an electric car that runs all the auxiliaries is already easily doable and the technology is improving year on year.
If you have a long distance at full charge and can recharge hundreds of miles in 20 minutes then that will be perfect for most people as eg if driving a long distance then it'd be normal to take eg 20 minute breaks every few hours anyway for toilet/coffee/refreshment purposes anyway.
I would imagine that a typical journey is around 1.5-2.5 hrs. Having to build in stopping at Membury Services (and queue) to recharge might be a huge embuggerance.
2.5 hours should be doable without recharging if you have a modern vehicle and can set off fully charged.
The bigger issue for me is for people who don't have off-road parking. That needs a better solution than long-distance driving does.
To use the C-word analogy. Just as testing was and is key to addressing the virus, so charging points are likewise vital to this working. If it is as routine as filling up with petrol to charge your car there will be far higher takeup.
To torture our scenario further - if you can drive 2.5 hours with no charge then what do you do once you've arrived and/or have to go back again? Or there is a traffic jam/diversion/accident/etc?
If there's traffic/diversion/accident etc or once you've arrived after your journey you'll need to be able to recharge locally at your destination somewhere, just as someone who lives without off-road parking at your destination will need to be able to do so.
All paths to this being universal to me come back to a solution for those without off-road parking rather long distancing. Its easy enough for someone who lives in a detached home with a driveway and a £30,000 vehicle to be able to plug it in, count the savings and adopt to this . . . but for someone who lives in a flat, with no driveway, a £3,000 second hand vehicle that they're going to rely upon public access charging points that have a price premium attached to them its going to be a different matter.
An irony is this switchover is likely to hit poorer drivers harder than richer drivers, but that rarely gets mentioned probably because climate change is more a concern for the richer first world people who don't need to count every penny.
I don't see how that is materially different than with a petrol or diesel, other than in that the charging speed is still somewhat slower than filling with fuel. They already rely upon public petrol stations.
Even running out at home is similar - a portable power pack the weight of a can of petrol will give several miles of travel to the nearest charger. Cost/weight penalties though.
Perhaps the solution will be a removable bit of the car battery that can be recharged in your kitchen that will get you to the local charge-point if you run it down. Like a reserve tank that some cars had in the 60s and 70s - eg the Rover P6.
Though a megawhinge feature in the dashboard announcer may be better when running low.
I think an issue I would like to see fixed is hybrid car taxdodgers who never use the electric.
Cheapest electric car is about 22k new. The fairly high cost is regularly defended by advocates explaining that they are cheap to run because of low energy costs and it balances out. But the ban on petrol cars might unduly affect older people who need a car but only do a few miles pottering to shops etc. The cost per mile will work out to be a lot.
At some stage, the world has to move on. There are people driving around ancient diesels with no particulate filter and no AdBlue, and paying around third of the VED that I pay on a very clean car. At what stage do you say, 'enough already let's get these filthy beasts off the road'?
Tesla, for example, are planning to release a $25K car in the next 3 years. 300 mile range etc.
At that point, game over man. As Corporal Hudson said....
I have a friend (70 year old woman, highly organised) who has a little electric bmw who is forever limiting herself to 30/not having the heating on/not demisting the windscreen (hence having to have the windows open), all to conserve mileage. I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole. The ICE's yuge unnoticed advantage is that electric for all the auxiliaries is free. As for the "only" 40 minutes (is it?) recharging time, the history of industrial civilisation is the history of saving 40 minute slots of time. We pay £1000s to reduce latencies by 10s of ms. 40 minutes = lol. These things suck.
Those early electric cars suck - yes. Because they had tiny batteries. And in an attempt to use a tiny battery, tiny motors etc etc.
Test drive a Tesla. Different universe. A few minutes to put a 100 miles of range on it, you can run the AC/heating at full blast all day without noticing much effect, performance off the line is demented etc...
The whole point of Tesla (and the manufacturers now following in their wake) was to do away with the problems of the econo-shitbox style of electric cars.
And the "saving forty minutes" is only if you don't count the time taken to drive to a petrol station, park up, and refuel. 99% of the time, I recharge simply by plugging it in at home. And letting the timer kick in during the 5p/kWh time overnight.
Going electric has saved so much time previously spent refuelling.
You are generally in and out of a petrol station (if you can avoid spending time picking some chocolate mini-bites at the shop) in around 5 mins.
But as has been said, it should be designed those who live in Trellick Tower, etc.
Plus the time taken to get there, or divert off your normal route home, especially if you have to queue. When I had a diesel car, twice every three weeks, I had to go and fuel up - which involved going in a different direction, going into the petrol station, (occasionally queueing), parking up, refuelling, going in and paying (occasionally queueing). True, it only took ten to fifteen minutes, all in - petrol stations are plentiful and you rarely had to go much out of your way (as long as you remembered at the right time).
But, as we have had it pointed out, all those ten-to-fifteen minutes add up. Total time these days? Literally a handful of seconds on the way between my car door at home and my house door.
On topic, having seen the PA supreme court judgement that appears to say poll monitoring from whatever distance the authorities determine is OK is OK, I doubt whether I would ever bet on a meaningful republican victory in a US election again.
Ever.
If its upheld that is.
Why? You seem to be assuming that Democrats will always cheat and Republicans never cheat. Just showing a smidging of bias there aren't we?
My view is they should be able to view from close up like we do, but your assumption of what will happen if not is gobsmacking. All on one side are angels and all on the other are devils. Hmmm.
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
No. Ooohhhhhh no.
It wasn’t Corbyn driving policy, like having Palestinian flags all around conference hall, and bemused why election hopes weighted down with anti semitism, nor that Labour policy’s electable in one must have constituency cost them victory in other must have constituency’s. no. It was the party what made Corbyn.
If coalition is also more diverse, culturally and ideologically, the result is that different elected members need to occupy very different places on the political spectrum and on issues. What one would campaign on in one constituency would be suicide campaign in another must win constituency. You can’t speak as one in broad coalition.
Whereas conservative minded voters tend to coalesce around a couple of key issues you can campaign on and win anywhere.
Boris won on a Corbyn would be a disaster and look at my oven ready brexit, whilst Labour was in death spiral initiated by its pro Palestinian stance.
The worlds changed. It’s moved against Labour, just like it’s just moved against Dems in US. But their brains haven’t caught up yet.
Someone wants to boast about having half a million members, yet the entry fee to enter the broad tent is to embrace political correctness - in other words criticise voters for not being thoughtful enough, for not being conscientious enough, not being "woke" enough.
Their platform is join us, we are enlightened, we will save you from being an ignorant, racist, yokel in need of cultural guidance.
For all his faults, Boris doesn't talk down to or demean voters the way Labour has been doing. I don’t just mean Corbyn, Look at how Starmer tweets have been analyzed
Until Labour realises what they have become, and how unelectable it is, they go on losing digital, social media elections.
This is the kicker, as Boris would say, look how I describe Labour, it’s Labour who ensures there is a bigger coalition who will believe any old crap about them come election time. They create this majority against them themselves, by the personality they have become.
My general impression of this is you are someone who has totally bought into the alt right view of the left. We know how embedded that can be so I doubt little old me will be able to do much. But I think you'll find the public are not of similar mind. They are imo extremely unlikely in 2024 to confuse Starmer Labour with outre, ultra progressive culture warriors. The Starmer strategy - isam's bedroom wall photo of him taking a knee notwithstanding - is to not major on that stuff. To substantially disengage. Leave the other side punching at air. Or creating fantasies like you here.
And just to pick a random specific from many that I could -
Boris Johnson does not talk down to or demean voters? This must be one of the most breathtakingly unperceptive comments ever seen on PB.com. That is exactly what he does! He treats us all like idiots. The conman laughing at the little folk he's conned. If Boris "Boris" Johnson is talking at your level you need to take a few steps up.
Cheapest electric car is about 22k new. The fairly high cost is regularly defended by advocates explaining that they are cheap to run because of low energy costs and it balances out. But the ban on petrol cars might unduly affect older people who need a car but only do a few miles pottering to shops etc. The cost per mile will work out to be a lot.
At some stage, the world has to move on. There are people driving around ancient diesels with no particulate filter and no AdBlue, and paying around third of the VED that I pay on a very clean car. At what stage do you say, 'enough already let's get these filthy beasts off the road'?
Tesla, for example, are planning to release a $25K car in the next 3 years. 300 mile range etc.
At that point, game over man. As Corporal Hudson said....
I have a friend (70 year old woman, highly organised) who has a little electric bmw who is forever limiting herself to 30/not having the heating on/not demisting the windscreen (hence having to have the windows open), all to conserve mileage. I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole. The ICE's yuge unnoticed advantage is that electric for all the auxiliaries is free. As for the "only" 40 minutes (is it?) recharging time, the history of industrial civilisation is the history of saving 40 minute slots of time. We pay £1000s to reduce latencies by 10s of ms. 40 minutes = lol. These things suck.
Those early electric cars suck - yes. Because they had tiny batteries. And in an attempt to use a tiny battery, tiny motors etc etc.
Test drive a Tesla. Different universe. A few minutes to put a 100 miles of range on it, you can run the AC/heating at full blast all day without noticing much effect, performance off the line is demented etc...
The whole point of Tesla (and the manufacturers now following in their wake) was to do away with the problems of the econo-shitbox style of electric cars.
And the "saving forty minutes" is only if you don't count the time taken to drive to a petrol station, park up, and refuel. 99% of the time, I recharge simply by plugging it in at home. And letting the timer kick in during the 5p/kWh time overnight.
Going electric has saved so much time previously spent refuelling.
When people say electric is cheaper this is a bit of an issue. For you at home 5p/kWh is a great rate certainly.
For someone who needs to drive to a public recharging station and pay potentially 16p/kWh the savings for being electric aren't going to be so great.
I disagree with this. Ultimately electric motors are at least as efficient as ICE and they are improving much faster than ICE. The 'mpg equivalent' will keep rising, and costs of electricity generally will likely keep falling. We are around crossover now for the lifetime cost of running each type of car, but the electric versions are likely to improve out of sight from what ICE can compete and there's only so long public/home charger disparities will bridge that gap.
Plus they cause much less air pollution and lifetime carbon emissions, meaning they cause much less cost on health systems and other costs we all indirectly pay for.
Interesting side note about electric cars that not seen mentioned in all our discussions of range, national gird etc....car mechanics. At the moment, they will have all been trained up on internal combustion engines and have all the kit for maintaining those.
Dealerships will be fine, but all those small back street garages that make a living out of being cheaper than the dealerships, they are going to have to spend a fortune retraining and retooling.
An awful lot will be out of work. Electric cars need a great deal less maintenance on average.
(edit) I see the point has been made. If Tesla becomes one of the largest players, there will be far fewer dealers, too.
There should be plenty of time to wind the industry down. It's not like all those ICE cars are suddenly going to vanish in 2030, so there are quite a few years of work left in the industry.
Of course. But at some point, the transition, like that of horses to motors, will seem quite abrupt to those on the sharp end.
On topic, having seen the PA supreme court judgement that appears to say poll monitoring from whatever distance the authorities determine is OK is OK, I doubt whether I would ever bet on a meaningful republican victory in a US election again.
Ever.
If its upheld that is.
Maybe, just maybe, relying on a blogger who's polls got banned from 538 was a bad betting strategy?
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
After brexit, I think 'mainstream' parties will be under pressure. We will see BLM on the left and Reform/Reclaim on the right gain some ground.
I I heard an interesting comment this morning. The party that says it won;t take away your car might do quite well at the next election.
That will present a difficult choice for middle-of-the-road moderate types like you if our politics polarizes to that extent.
well I appreciate that continuing to own a car is somewhat 'niche' politically, given there are currently only 20 million or so motorists, but I reckon it will catch on..
Still, I;ve got some persuading to do, I grant you.
We've passed peak car though. No doubt about that. The habit is fading out rather than catching on. Even my beloved old Merc is having to go soon. By 21 Oct next year to be precise. The expanded London ULEZ zone will mean a fee of £12.50 every time I drive it. No exemption for residents. So, car goes or I must move to the sticks.
Can't you buy a compliant car instead? That's my plan. Although now I have a bike I am planning to drive less anyway.
I've just bought a clean diesel Q7, it's Ulez compliant. Getting rid of ancient filthy vehicles is overall a good thing.
I also support Boris' ban on all ICE cars by 2030 – will flip my car to an EV in four years or so. Exciting times.
Yeah. I am trying to contain my yearning for a Tesla this time around, feels too early to be buying an electric car.
A mate's in the market for a Model S – and would have one already were it not for the fact that his company's fleet manager was a dullard. Once companies become alive to the tax savings, there will be no way back for ICEs IMO.
Electric company cars are already a no-brainer, the benefit in kind of 0%, 1%, 2% over the next few years sees to that. Pretty soon (next year?) the price of new electric cars will crossover with ICE cars. By the time 2030 rolls around it will only be hobbyists buying fossil fuel cars.
Spot on.
As you imply, the 2030 Boris ban will have ceased to be controversial by the time it comes into force.
Not when the lights go out because we don't have the generation capacity to cope.
Look at the rate of grid power demand over 24 hour and weekly periods. The is plenty of capacity if it can be drawn on at the right times.
Smart meters, pricing incentives, and a fair lump of additional storage ought to deal with it quite easily.
And we've the best part of a decade to slowly get the systems in place.
Storage is not so easy, although easier if we have our car batteries in which to store excess energy.
You could be right about reduced usage elsewhere. There will after all be few primary and tertiary heavy industrial users, post Brexit.
I just wandered over to Toby young's lockdownsceptics site to see what they're going on about now (sometimes useful to see the latest surge in misinformation before it gets fully out into the wild).
About two articles apart, we have an article on how terrible precautions are on hospitals with covid and how they're infecting patients... and one on how it's all false positives and hospitals don't have real covid in them.
And the readers and believers on this stuff don't see the problem of believing both at the same time?
PA now at Biden +81K .. NV at +33K and Biden edging toward a 6M vote popular win with New York state still at 82% reporting and bits and bobs elsewhere including 2% from California.
Yes, it wasn't really that 'close' at all in the end was it?
It was close because the states Trump needed to hold onto the presidency were Georgia, Wisconsin and Arizona. The Biden majority in Georgia and Arizona is about 14,000 votes and 10,000 in Wisconsin. That would have led to a 269-269 result which would almost certainly have gone in Trump's favour.
That is the nature of FPTP though. If you add up the majorities in the closest seats in our General Elections you usually only get to a few thousand votes difference between a majority and not a majority (he says without checking).
Whereas, the Conservatives would need to lose 40 seats just to lose their majority - their 40th most marginal seat I think is Stroud where their victory margin was 5.8%.
For Biden to lose his EC majority he would just need to lose the states up to Wisconsin where his margin was 0.7%.
So way way closer.
Agree. Just making the point that in both system it is small margins in a few places that matter while huge margins are piled up elsewhere.
Cheapest electric car is about 22k new. The fairly high cost is regularly defended by advocates explaining that they are cheap to run because of low energy costs and it balances out. But the ban on petrol cars might unduly affect older people who need a car but only do a few miles pottering to shops etc. The cost per mile will work out to be a lot.
At some stage, the world has to move on. There are people driving around ancient diesels with no particulate filter and no AdBlue, and paying around third of the VED that I pay on a very clean car. At what stage do you say, 'enough already let's get these filthy beasts off the road'?
Tesla, for example, are planning to release a $25K car in the next 3 years. 300 mile range etc.
At that point, game over man. As Corporal Hudson said....
I have a friend (70 year old woman, highly organised) who has a little electric bmw who is forever limiting herself to 30/not having the heating on/not demisting the windscreen (hence having to have the windows open), all to conserve mileage. I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole. The ICE's yuge unnoticed advantage is that electric for all the auxiliaries is free. As for the "only" 40 minutes (is it?) recharging time, the history of industrial civilisation is the history of saving 40 minute slots of time. We pay £1000s to reduce latencies by 10s of ms. 40 minutes = lol. These things suck.
Those early electric cars suck - yes. Because they had tiny batteries. And in an attempt to use a tiny battery, tiny motors etc etc.
Test drive a Tesla. Different universe. A few minutes to put a 100 miles of range on it, you can run the AC/heating at full blast all day without noticing much effect, performance off the line is demented etc...
The whole point of Tesla (and the manufacturers now following in their wake) was to do away with the problems of the econo-shitbox style of electric cars.
And the "saving forty minutes" is only if you don't count the time taken to drive to a petrol station, park up, and refuel. 99% of the time, I recharge simply by plugging it in at home. And letting the timer kick in during the 5p/kWh time overnight.
Going electric has saved so much time previously spent refuelling.
When people say electric is cheaper this is a bit of an issue. For you at home 5p/kWh is a great rate certainly.
For someone who needs to drive to a public recharging station and pay potentially 16p/kWh the savings for being electric aren't going to be so great.
In an e-niro, that 16p per kWh works out at around 4p per mile. Still a honking great saving over any petrol car.
Cheapest electric car is about 22k new. The fairly high cost is regularly defended by advocates explaining that they are cheap to run because of low energy costs and it balances out. But the ban on petrol cars might unduly affect older people who need a car but only do a few miles pottering to shops etc. The cost per mile will work out to be a lot.
At some stage, the world has to move on. There are people driving around ancient diesels with no particulate filter and no AdBlue, and paying around third of the VED that I pay on a very clean car. At what stage do you say, 'enough already let's get these filthy beasts off the road'?
Tesla, for example, are planning to release a $25K car in the next 3 years. 300 mile range etc.
At that point, game over man. As Corporal Hudson said....
I have a friend (70 year old woman, highly organised) who has a little electric bmw who is forever limiting herself to 30/not having the heating on/not demisting the windscreen (hence having to have the windows open), all to conserve mileage. I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole. The ICE's yuge unnoticed advantage is that electric for all the auxiliaries is free. As for the "only" 40 minutes (is it?) recharging time, the history of industrial civilisation is the history of saving 40 minute slots of time. We pay £1000s to reduce latencies by 10s of ms. 40 minutes = lol. These things suck.
Those early electric cars suck - yes. Because they had tiny batteries. And in an attempt to use a tiny battery, tiny motors etc etc.
Test drive a Tesla. Different universe. A few minutes to put a 100 miles of range on it, you can run the AC/heating at full blast all day without noticing much effect, performance off the line is demented etc...
The whole point of Tesla (and the manufacturers now following in their wake) was to do away with the problems of the econo-shitbox style of electric cars.
And the "saving forty minutes" is only if you don't count the time taken to drive to a petrol station, park up, and refuel. 99% of the time, I recharge simply by plugging it in at home. And letting the timer kick in during the 5p/kWh time overnight.
Going electric has saved so much time previously spent refuelling.
When people say electric is cheaper this is a bit of an issue. For you at home 5p/kWh is a great rate certainly.
For someone who needs to drive to a public recharging station and pay potentially 16p/kWh the savings for being electric aren't going to be so great.
In an e-niro, that 16p per kWh works out at around 4p per mile. Still a honking great saving over any petrol car.
On topic, having seen the PA supreme court judgement that appears to say poll monitoring from whatever distance the authorities determine is OK is OK, I doubt whether I would ever bet on a meaningful republican victory in a US election again.
Ever.
If its upheld that is.
Why? You seem to be assuming that Democrats will always cheat and Republicans never cheat. Just showing a smidging of bias there aren't we?
My view is they should be able to view from close up like we do, but your assumption of what will happen if not is gobsmacking. All on one side are angels and all on the other are devils. Hmmm.
Elections are a State matter and if the State Supreme Court has ruled, who is going to overrule them?
Hopeful grasping at straws seems to be a thing for Republicans and their supporters - a bit like last night's nonsense about Michigan being flipped.
On topic, having seen the PA supreme court judgement that appears to say poll monitoring from whatever distance the authorities determine is OK is OK, I doubt whether I would ever bet on a meaningful republican victory in a US election again.
Ever.
If its upheld that is.
You think the Republicans are that reliant on this kind of spurious challenge to election results? Wow.
On topic, having seen the PA supreme court judgement that appears to say poll monitoring from whatever distance the authorities determine is OK is OK, I doubt whether I would ever bet on a meaningful republican victory in a US election again.
I just wandered over to Toby young's lockdownsceptics site to see what they're going on about now (sometimes useful to see the latest surge in misinformation before it gets fully out into the wild).
About two articles apart, we have an article on how terrible precautions are on hospitals with covid and how they're infecting patients... and one on how it's all false positives and hospitals don't have real covid in them.
And the readers and believers on this stuff don't see the problem of believing both at the same time?
You need to re-read 1984. Believing two contradictory things at the same time is the *goal* for a Good Party Member.
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
After brexit, I think 'mainstream' parties will be under pressure. We will see BLM on the left and Reform/Reclaim on the right gain some ground.
I I heard an interesting comment this morning. The party that says it won;t take away your car might do quite well at the next election.
That will present a difficult choice for middle-of-the-road moderate types like you if our politics polarizes to that extent.
well I appreciate that continuing to own a car is somewhat 'niche' politically, given there are currently only 20 million or so motorists, but I reckon it will catch on..
Still, I;ve got some persuading to do, I grant you.
Over 80% of all new cars are personal contract hire. It stunned me when I heard it. So yes people have stopped owning a car. We own 2 that sit on our drive most of the time, but I can't bring myself to get rid of them even though it makes no sense to carry on owning them.
Do you mean PCP (personal contract purchase)?
PCH is a different thing (and less common – at least I think so)
In any case, it's utterly pointless 'owning' a car outright these days. Why would you?
I should say firstly that I don't know what I am talking about, but I looked it up because someone shocked me with a figure in the 90% a few months ago. I got this from 'What car' and they did refer to PCP. I have already gone way beyond my level of knowledge on the topic.
On topic, having seen the PA supreme court judgement that appears to say poll monitoring from whatever distance the authorities determine is OK is OK, I doubt whether I would ever bet on a meaningful republican victory in a US election again.
Ever.
If its upheld that is.
Maybe, just maybe, relying on a blogger who's polls got banned from 538 was a bad betting strategy?
Yeah maybe I should rely on the mainstream media polls instead? Florida Biden plus 6? Wisconsin Biden plus 17? Texas/Ohio/NC going blue? Kentucky too close to call?
Cheapest electric car is about 22k new. The fairly high cost is regularly defended by advocates explaining that they are cheap to run because of low energy costs and it balances out. But the ban on petrol cars might unduly affect older people who need a car but only do a few miles pottering to shops etc. The cost per mile will work out to be a lot.
At some stage, the world has to move on. There are people driving around ancient diesels with no particulate filter and no AdBlue, and paying around third of the VED that I pay on a very clean car. At what stage do you say, 'enough already let's get these filthy beasts off the road'?
Tesla, for example, are planning to release a $25K car in the next 3 years. 300 mile range etc.
At that point, game over man. As Corporal Hudson said....
I have a friend (70 year old woman, highly organised) who has a little electric bmw who is forever limiting herself to 30/not having the heating on/not demisting the windscreen (hence having to have the windows open), all to conserve mileage. I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole. The ICE's yuge unnoticed advantage is that electric for all the auxiliaries is free. As for the "only" 40 minutes (is it?) recharging time, the history of industrial civilisation is the history of saving 40 minute slots of time. We pay £1000s to reduce latencies by 10s of ms. 40 minutes = lol. These things suck.
Those early electric cars suck - yes. Because they had tiny batteries. And in an attempt to use a tiny battery, tiny motors etc etc.
Test drive a Tesla. Different universe. A few minutes to put a 100 miles of range on it, you can run the AC/heating at full blast all day without noticing much effect, performance off the line is demented etc...
The whole point of Tesla (and the manufacturers now following in their wake) was to do away with the problems of the econo-shitbox style of electric cars.
And the "saving forty minutes" is only if you don't count the time taken to drive to a petrol station, park up, and refuel. 99% of the time, I recharge simply by plugging it in at home. And letting the timer kick in during the 5p/kWh time overnight.
Going electric has saved so much time previously spent refuelling.
My diesel Q5 does about 550 - 600 miles to a tank so 10 mins every other month ( or four months at present ) filling up is not much of a chore.
You got the 85-litre tank option on yours then Malc?
I have on my Q7 – quite ludicrous range!!
I think it is just the normal tank but it is great on mpg. Mind you I have done about 1300 miles this year so an expensive toy sitting on the driveway. They are lovely to drive and I especially like the DSG auto. I cannot even work half the gadgets in it. Went to Germany in it last year and it was superb.
Ha ha – enjoy Malc. Trip across Europe in mine sounds like a dream. As you say, lots of kit sitting on the street at the moment.
For electric car charging for people without off road parking what we need is a network of street aligned electricity cables with regularly spaced access points.
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
After brexit, I think 'mainstream' parties will be under pressure. We will see BLM on the left and Reform/Reclaim on the right gain some ground.
I I heard an interesting comment this morning. The party that says it won;t take away your car might do quite well at the next election.
That will present a difficult choice for middle-of-the-road moderate types like you if our politics polarizes to that extent.
well I appreciate that continuing to own a car is somewhat 'niche' politically, given there are currently only 20 million or so motorists, but I reckon it will catch on..
Still, I;ve got some persuading to do, I grant you.
Over 80% of all new cars are personal contract hire. It stunned me when I heard it. So yes people have stopped owning a car. We own 2 that sit on our drive most of the time, but I can't bring myself to get rid of them even though it makes no sense to carry on owning them.
Do you mean PCP (personal contract purchase)?
PCH is a different thing (and less common – at least I think so)
In any case, it's utterly pointless 'owning' a car outright these days. Why would you?
I should say firstly that I don't know what I am talking about, but I looked it up because someone shocked me with a figure in the 90% a few months ago. I got this from 'What car' and they did refer to PCP. I have already gone way beyond my level of knowledge on the topic.
Given the cost of the first mile in depreciation, it is surprising that *anyone* buys a new car, too be frank.
For electric car charging for people without off road parking what we need is a network of street aligned electricity cables with regularly spaced access points.
Which we already have in street lighting.
...and in many places, they are installing charging point. In lamp posts. This is helped by the switch to LEDs - the lights require much less power, meaning there is a larger capacity in the system to supply charging power.
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
Big mistake IMO to equate relief that Starmer has replaced Corbyn with any sort of ringing endorsement for Starmer.
I agree that atm it's more 'deduct negative' than 'add positive'. But mathematically these two things are exactly the same. And continuing the algebra theme -
Con 19 Win = +80 = "Boris" + Brexit + Corbyn.
24 result = No Brexit + No Corbyn + No "Boris" (if still there he will be old hat Johnson).
So assuming the 3 factors = 50 each, the 24 result = +80 - 150 which = -70.
On topic, having seen the PA supreme court judgement that appears to say poll monitoring from whatever distance the authorities determine is OK is OK, I doubt whether I would ever bet on a meaningful republican victory in a US election again.
Ever.
If its upheld that is.
Maybe, just maybe, relying on a blogger who's polls got banned from 538 was a bad betting strategy?
Yeah maybe I should rely on the mainstream media polls instead? Florida Biden plus 6? Wisconsin Biden plus 17? Texas/Ohio/NC going blue? Kentucky too close to call?
On topic, having seen the PA supreme court judgement that appears to say poll monitoring from whatever distance the authorities determine is OK is OK, I doubt whether I would ever bet on a meaningful republican victory in a US election again.
Ever.
The problem for the Republicans is not the observing of the votes but the casting of them by Americans. Too much of this going on and they tend to come second. This is why they view the act with such suspicion. It's perfectly rational. In their eyes the denizen of a big city intending to partake in an election might as well be purchasing a balaclava and casing their house.
PCP is very different to PCH...PCP is just a different form of financing, you are still agreeing to actually buy the car. Totally unsurprising most people use finance to purchase new cars (although some concern that like houses in 2008 too many people over stretching themselves).
PCH ie. Leasing, is really popular in places like the US, but here outside higher end cars, here, it often poor deal for your standard £15k car.
I just wandered over to Toby young's lockdownsceptics site to see what they're going on about now (sometimes useful to see the latest surge in misinformation before it gets fully out into the wild).
About two articles apart, we have an article on how terrible precautions are on hospitals with covid and how they're infecting patients... and one on how it's all false positives and hospitals don't have real covid in them.
And the readers and believers on this stuff don't see the problem of believing both at the same time?
You need to re-read 1984. Believing two contradictory things at the same time is the *goal* for a Good Party Member.
There's some good stuff on the site or linked to from the site. Indeed, I have posted some items here.
I just wandered over to Toby young's lockdownsceptics site to see what they're going on about now (sometimes useful to see the latest surge in misinformation before it gets fully out into the wild).
About two articles apart, we have an article on how terrible precautions are on hospitals with covid and how they're infecting patients... and one on how it's all false positives and hospitals don't have real covid in them.
And the readers and believers on this stuff don't see the problem of believing both at the same time?
You need to re-read 1984. Believing two contradictory things at the same time is the *goal* for a Good Party Member.
There's some good stuff on the site or linked to from the site. Indeed, I have posted some items here.
What percentage would you say has turned out not to be complete, unmitigated nonsense?
In another sign of the end to the previous regime’s attitude to the Lobby, Stratton told the gathered journos “The media has had a very good and powerful role during the pandemic so far”
Well that's a load of old bollocks...in the last 3 days alone they have run totally bullshit stories because they can't read and understand very simple shit.
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
Big mistake IMO to equate relief that Starmer has replaced Corbyn with any sort of ringing endorsement for Starmer.
I agree that atm it's more 'deduct negative' than 'add positive'. But mathematically these two things are exactly the same. And continuing the algebra theme -
Con 19 Win = +80 = "Boris" + Brexit + Corbyn.
24 result = No Brexit + No Corbyn + No "Boris" (if still there he will be old hat Johnson).
So assuming the 3 factors = 50 each, the 24 result = +80 - 150 which = -70.
I could quibble - esp with that plus 40 - but I won't since at least you're getting into the spirit of it. I like these number style analyses. It is all about the numbers after all.
Interesting side note about electric cars that not seen mentioned in all our discussions of range, national gird etc....car mechanics. At the moment, they will have all been trained up on internal combustion engines and have all the kit for maintaining those.
Dealerships will be fine, but all those small back street garages that make a living out of being cheaper than the dealerships, they are going to have to spend a fortune retraining and retooling.
An awful lot will be out of work. Electric cars need a great deal less maintenance on average.
(edit) I see the point has been made. If Tesla becomes one of the largest players, there will be far fewer dealers, too.
There should be plenty of time to wind the industry down. It's not like all those ICE cars are suddenly going to vanish in 2030, so there are quite a few years of work left in the industry.
Afternoon everyone. You wouldn't recommend a young person to do an apprenticeship in it, though, would you? And Grandson Two, just learning to drive, is learning on a manual car, although Younger Son, his uncle, is asking why. According to him there were very few manual cars on the market elsewhere nowadays, and AFAIK, you only need an automatic licence to drive and electric. Think I can see both arguments!
On topic, having seen the PA supreme court judgement that appears to say poll monitoring from whatever distance the authorities determine is OK is OK, I doubt whether I would ever bet on a meaningful republican victory in a US election again.
Ever.
The problem for the Republicans is not the observing of the votes but the casting of them by Americans. Too much of this going on and they tend to come second. This is why they view the act with such suspicion. It's perfectly rational. In their eyes the denizen of a big city intending to partake in an election might as well be purchasing a balaclava and casing their house.
If both sides can't directly observe the counting process in the new US mail in ballot system and in some cases are frozen out of the entire process for hours at a time, its game over. The rest is window dressing.
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
Big mistake IMO to equate relief that Starmer has replaced Corbyn with any sort of ringing endorsement for Starmer.
I agree that atm it's more 'deduct negative' than 'add positive'. But mathematically these two things are exactly the same. And continuing the algebra theme -
Con 19 Win = +80 = "Boris" + Brexit + Corbyn.
24 result = No Brexit + No Corbyn + No "Boris" (if still there he will be old hat Johnson).
So assuming the 3 factors = 50 each, the 24 result = +80 - 150 which = -70.
On topic, having seen the PA supreme court judgement that appears to say poll monitoring from whatever distance the authorities determine is OK is OK, I doubt whether I would ever bet on a meaningful republican victory in a US election again.
Ever.
The problem for the Republicans is not the observing of the votes but the casting of them by Americans. Too much of this going on and they tend to come second. This is why they view the act with such suspicion. It's perfectly rational. In their eyes the denizen of a big city intending to partake in an election might as well be purchasing a balaclava and casing their house.
If both sides can't directly observe the counting process in the new US mail in ballot system and in some cases are frozen out of the entire process for hours at a time, its game over. The rest is window dressing.
If we could harness your resistance to facts and somehow apply it to prevent heat from melting Siberian permafrost or Greenlandic glaciers, we could save the world. You are energetically and persistently ignorant in just about everything related to US elections, but that doesn't stop you. It's admirable.
On topic, having seen the PA supreme court judgement that appears to say poll monitoring from whatever distance the authorities determine is OK is OK, I doubt whether I would ever bet on a meaningful republican victory in a US election again.
Ever.
The problem for the Republicans is not the observing of the votes but the casting of them by Americans. Too much of this going on and they tend to come second. This is why they view the act with such suspicion. It's perfectly rational. In their eyes the denizen of a big city intending to partake in an election might as well be purchasing a balaclava and casing their house.
If both sides can't directly observe the counting process in the new US mail in ballot system and in some cases are frozen out of the entire process for hours at a time, its game over. The rest is window dressing.
Do you actually check what actually happened or just believe the bits you want to believe and why as per your previous quote do you think this will always and only negatively impact Republicans?
Yes both sides should be able to watch from close up.
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
Big mistake IMO to equate relief that Starmer has replaced Corbyn with any sort of ringing endorsement for Starmer.
I agree that atm it's more 'deduct negative' than 'add positive'. But mathematically these two things are exactly the same. And continuing the algebra theme -
Con 19 Win = +80 = "Boris" + Brexit + Corbyn.
24 result = No Brexit + No Corbyn + No "Boris" (if still there he will be old hat Johnson).
So assuming the 3 factors = 50 each, the 24 result = +80 - 150 which = -70.
On topic, does anyone know whether those registered to vote by post in November in Georgia will automatically receive a postal ballot for the run-off?
The last time there was a Senate election run-off in Georgia in a Presidential election cycle, turnout fell from 3.8 million in November to 2.1 million in January - a huge drop-off. No doubt that will be a factor again, but one assumes it will fall away less for postal voters.
My personal view is GOP will probably hold on. Perdue was very close to 50% and Loeffler was embroiled in a brutal battle to be top GOP dog, hurting both her and Collins - she can now focus her fire on Warnock. I'm also inclined to think the desire for revenge among staunch Republicans will be relevant in a low turnout election. But the postal votes issue adds a different dimension to that.
Steve Reed was accused of anti-Semitism but to be fair he admitted it and apologised, is there much of a story here? Robert Jenrick suggesting there is
Cheapest electric car is about 22k new. The fairly high cost is regularly defended by advocates explaining that they are cheap to run because of low energy costs and it balances out. But the ban on petrol cars might unduly affect older people who need a car but only do a few miles pottering to shops etc. The cost per mile will work out to be a lot.
At some stage, the world has to move on. There are people driving around ancient diesels with no particulate filter and no AdBlue, and paying around third of the VED that I pay on a very clean car. At what stage do you say, 'enough already let's get these filthy beasts off the road'?
Tesla, for example, are planning to release a $25K car in the next 3 years. 300 mile range etc.
At that point, game over man. As Corporal Hudson said....
I have a friend (70 year old woman, highly organised) who has a little electric bmw who is forever limiting herself to 30/not having the heating on/not demisting the windscreen (hence having to have the windows open), all to conserve mileage. I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole. The ICE's yuge unnoticed advantage is that electric for all the auxiliaries is free. As for the "only" 40 minutes (is it?) recharging time, the history of industrial civilisation is the history of saving 40 minute slots of time. We pay £1000s to reduce latencies by 10s of ms. 40 minutes = lol. These things suck.
Those early electric cars suck - yes. Because they had tiny batteries. And in an attempt to use a tiny battery, tiny motors etc etc.
Test drive a Tesla. Different universe. A few minutes to put a 100 miles of range on it, you can run the AC/heating at full blast all day without noticing much effect, performance off the line is demented etc...
The whole point of Tesla (and the manufacturers now following in their wake) was to do away with the problems of the econo-shitbox style of electric cars.
And the "saving forty minutes" is only if you don't count the time taken to drive to a petrol station, park up, and refuel. 99% of the time, I recharge simply by plugging it in at home. And letting the timer kick in during the 5p/kWh time overnight.
Going electric has saved so much time previously spent refuelling.
When people say electric is cheaper this is a bit of an issue. For you at home 5p/kWh is a great rate certainly.
For someone who needs to drive to a public recharging station and pay potentially 16p/kWh the savings for being electric aren't going to be so great.
I disagree with this. Ultimately electric motors are at least as efficient as ICE and they are improving much faster than ICE. The 'mpg equivalent' will keep rising, and costs of electricity generally will likely keep falling. We are around crossover now for the lifetime cost of running each type of car, but the electric versions are likely to improve out of sight from what ICE can compete and there's only so long public/home charger disparities will bridge that gap.
Plus they cause much less air pollution and lifetime carbon emissions, meaning they cause much less cost on health systems and other costs we all indirectly pay for.
In the long term I agree.
However currently we are around crossover now for people who have access to at home charging using super-cheap overnight rates. For people who need to charge away from home paying daytime rates with a premium attached its a different matter.
In the longterm it may change, but we aren't at crossover yet for people who can't charge at home necessarily. That's a reason to solve the problem so that we can reach there eventually, not an argument against an electric future.
If we don't address the at home/public disparity then its going to become harder to finish a switchover.
On topic, having seen the PA supreme court judgement that appears to say poll monitoring from whatever distance the authorities determine is OK is OK, I doubt whether I would ever bet on a meaningful republican victory in a US election again.
Ever.
The problem for the Republicans is not the observing of the votes but the casting of them by Americans. Too much of this going on and they tend to come second. This is why they view the act with such suspicion. It's perfectly rational. In their eyes the denizen of a big city intending to partake in an election might as well be purchasing a balaclava and casing their house.
If both sides can't directly observe the counting process in the new US mail in ballot system and in some cases are frozen out of the entire process for hours at a time, its game over. The rest is window dressing.
If we could harness your resistance to facts and somehow apply it to prevent heat from melting Siberian permafrost or Greenlandic glaciers, we could save the world. You are energetically and persistently ignorant in just about everything related to US elections, but that doesn't stop you. It's admirable.
I just wandered over to Toby young's lockdownsceptics site to see what they're going on about now (sometimes useful to see the latest surge in misinformation before it gets fully out into the wild).
About two articles apart, we have an article on how terrible precautions are on hospitals with covid and how they're infecting patients... and one on how it's all false positives and hospitals don't have real covid in them.
And the readers and believers on this stuff don't see the problem of believing both at the same time?
You need to re-read 1984. Believing two contradictory things at the same time is the *goal* for a Good Party Member.
There's some good stuff on the site or linked to from the site. Indeed, I have posted some items here.
I've yet to see anything from that site that isn't either:
- Wrong - Misleading - Meretricious - Harmful - Or focusing almost wholly on all-but irrelevancies.
The only thing it's good at is in providing rationale for snake oil.
Cheapest electric car is about 22k new. The fairly high cost is regularly defended by advocates explaining that they are cheap to run because of low energy costs and it balances out. But the ban on petrol cars might unduly affect older people who need a car but only do a few miles pottering to shops etc. The cost per mile will work out to be a lot.
At some stage, the world has to move on. There are people driving around ancient diesels with no particulate filter and no AdBlue, and paying around third of the VED that I pay on a very clean car. At what stage do you say, 'enough already let's get these filthy beasts off the road'?
Tesla, for example, are planning to release a $25K car in the next 3 years. 300 mile range etc.
At that point, game over man. As Corporal Hudson said....
I have a friend (70 year old woman, highly organised) who has a little electric bmw who is forever limiting herself to 30/not having the heating on/not demisting the windscreen (hence having to have the windows open), all to conserve mileage. I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole. The ICE's yuge unnoticed advantage is that electric for all the auxiliaries is free. As for the "only" 40 minutes (is it?) recharging time, the history of industrial civilisation is the history of saving 40 minute slots of time. We pay £1000s to reduce latencies by 10s of ms. 40 minutes = lol. These things suck.
Those early electric cars suck - yes. Because they had tiny batteries. And in an attempt to use a tiny battery, tiny motors etc etc.
Test drive a Tesla. Different universe. A few minutes to put a 100 miles of range on it, you can run the AC/heating at full blast all day without noticing much effect, performance off the line is demented etc...
The whole point of Tesla (and the manufacturers now following in their wake) was to do away with the problems of the econo-shitbox style of electric cars.
And the "saving forty minutes" is only if you don't count the time taken to drive to a petrol station, park up, and refuel. 99% of the time, I recharge simply by plugging it in at home. And letting the timer kick in during the 5p/kWh time overnight.
Going electric has saved so much time previously spent refuelling.
My diesel Q5 does about 550 - 600 miles to a tank so 10 mins every other month ( or four months at present ) filling up is not much of a chore.
You got the 85-litre tank option on yours then Malc?
I have on my Q7 – quite ludicrous range!!
I get about 450 if I drive aggressively or 500 if carefully on my hybrid, with a normal sized tank
In another sign of the end to the previous regime’s attitude to the Lobby, Stratton told the gathered journos “The media has had a very good and powerful role during the pandemic so far”
Well that's a load of old bollocks...in the last 3 days alone they have run totally bullshit stories because they can't read and understand very simple shit.
Off topic
I have never met anyone called Allegra, infact I have only heard of two (although my dad did have an Allegro in 1975). Boris married an Allegra and another is now his Press Secretary. Curious.
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
Big mistake IMO to equate relief that Starmer has replaced Corbyn with any sort of ringing endorsement for Starmer.
I agree that atm it's more 'deduct negative' than 'add positive'. But mathematically these two things are exactly the same. And continuing the algebra theme -
Con 19 Win = +80 = "Boris" + Brexit + Corbyn.
24 result = No Brexit + No Corbyn + No "Boris" (if still there he will be old hat Johnson).
So assuming the 3 factors = 50 each, the 24 result = +80 - 150 which = -70.
What is woke bollocks? Labour ‘allegedly’ always raise taxes Johnson recognized as a turd but have no one else in your party because you threw the talent out and when fed up with the exciting turd we’ve had enough of and there is no one else
There will always be idiots who vote Tory even if if it was led dumbo
Although there has been lots of talk - for example on CNN - about the red state governors and no masks, in relation to the currently high states, what strikes me with that list is that most of them are where winter comes early.
I was in South Dakota last autumn, and found that it doesn’t really have one - as September turned to October it was still hot summer weather; two weeks later (by which time I was down in the South) they had their first snows. Snow comes early in the mid west.
As in Europe - where Italy and Germany appeared to be holding off the second wave as the UK succumbed - then followed along a month or so behind - ISTM that the weather driving social activity indoors has a lot more to do with the pattern of spread than the level of precautions being taken.
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
Big mistake IMO to equate relief that Starmer has replaced Corbyn with any sort of ringing endorsement for Starmer.
I agree that atm it's more 'deduct negative' than 'add positive'. But mathematically these two things are exactly the same. And continuing the algebra theme -
Con 19 Win = +80 = "Boris" + Brexit + Corbyn.
24 result = No Brexit + No Corbyn + No "Boris" (if still there he will be old hat Johnson).
So assuming the 3 factors = 50 each, the 24 result = +80 - 150 which = -70.
I could quibble - esp with that plus 40 - but I won't since at least you're getting into the spirit of it. I like these number style analyses. It is all about the numbers after all.
+40 Labour's Woke Bollocks
You are not going to quibble with Bluestofblues about it? having told me, it doesn’t resonate with the general public, there is no I am woke form to get signed off to enter the Labour tent, and woke bollocks is definitely not building a big anti labour coalition, where any old rubbish can be made up by enemies, associated with labours woke badges and medals, and believed by this anti woke majority?
Can I take this as a sign you are actually thinking about it?
If the new sales ban comes in in 2030, people will run ICE cars till ~ 2045 or so. Well that's my plan anyway.
Nothing to stop you doing that. Your new ICE car in 2030 will cost more than an equivalent electric car and will cost more to run. It's not just petrol, which may be more difficult to get and hence more expensive than now, but there's also oil changes, maintenance, exhausts etc. But, it's a free country.
Although there has been lots of talk - for example on CNN - about the red state governors and no masks, in relation to the currently high states, what strikes me with that list is that most of them are where winter comes early.
I was in South Dakota last autumn, and found that it doesn’t really have one - as September turned to October it was still hot summer weather; two weeks later (by which time I was down in the South) they had their first snows. Snow comes early in the mid west.
As in Europe - where Italy and Germany appeared to be holding off the second wave as the UK succumbed - then followed along a month or so behind - ISTM that the weather driving social activity indoors has a lot more to do with the pattern of spread than the level of precautions being taken.
I too would like to see some mapping against temperature and hours of sunlight.
The number of votes outweighs the number of eligible voters. Which is a pretty neat trick, if true.
Which it won't be.
Link?
Twit?
Just to explain 'twit?'.
You serious think that Trump and Trump alone has just noticed that there are more votes than voters after all this time and nobody else just happened not to stumble over that fact after all the fatuous court cases.
And you want me to provide you with a link?!
How about you providing a link or better still Trump doing so rather than spewing out a lot of crap based upon nothing (that applies to you and Trump).
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
No. Ooohhhhhh no.
It wasn’t Corbyn driving policy, like having Palestinian flags all around conference hall, and bemused why election hopes weighted down with anti semitism, nor that Labour policy’s electable in one must have constituency cost them victory in other must have constituency’s. no. It was the party what made Corbyn.
If coalition is also more diverse, culturally and ideologically, the result is that different elected members need to occupy very different places on the political spectrum and on issues. What one would campaign on in one constituency would be suicide campaign in another must win constituency. You can’t speak as one in broad coalition.
Whereas conservative minded voters tend to coalesce around a couple of key issues you can campaign on and win anywhere.
Boris won on a Corbyn would be a disaster and look at my oven ready brexit, whilst Labour was in death spiral initiated by its pro Palestinian stance.
The worlds changed. It’s moved against Labour, just like it’s just moved against Dems in US. But their brains haven’t caught up yet.
Someone wants to boast about having half a million members, yet the entry fee to enter the broad tent is to embrace political correctness - in other words criticise voters for not being thoughtful enough, for not being conscientious enough, not being "woke" enough.
Their platform is join us, we are enlightened, we will save you from being an ignorant, racist, yokel in need of cultural guidance.
For all his faults, Boris doesn't talk down to or demean voters the way Labour has been doing. I don’t just mean Corbyn, Look at how Starmer tweets have been analyzed
Until Labour realises what they have become, and how unelectable it is, they go on losing digital, social media elections.
This is the kicker, as Boris would say, look how I describe Labour, it’s Labour who ensures there is a bigger coalition who will believe any old crap about them come election time. They create this majority against them themselves, by the personality they have become.
My general impression of this is you are someone who has totally bought into the alt right view of the left. We know how embedded that can be so I doubt little old me will be able to do much. But I think you'll find the public are not of similar mind. They are imo extremely unlikely in 2024 to confuse Starmer Labour with outre, ultra progressive culture warriors. The Starmer strategy - isam's bedroom wall photo of him taking a knee notwithstanding - is to not major on that stuff. To substantially disengage. Leave the other side punching at air. Or creating fantasies like you here.
And just to pick a random specific from many that I could -
Boris Johnson does not talk down to or demean voters? This must be one of the most breathtakingly unperceptive comments ever seen on PB.com. That is exactly what he does! He treats us all like idiots. The conman laughing at the little folk he's conned. If Boris "Boris" Johnson is talking at your level you need to take a few steps up.
What about
“ If coalition is also more diverse, culturally and ideologically, the result is that different elected members need to occupy very different places on the political spectrum and on issues. What one would campaign on in one constituency would be suicide campaign in another must win constituency. You can’t speak as one in broad coalition.
Whereas conservative minded voters tend to coalesce around a couple of key issues you can campaign on and win anywhere”
You agree, the world isn’t made fair, and this impacts on politics?
If the new sales ban comes in in 2030, people will run ICE cars till ~ 2045 or so. Well that's my plan anyway.
Nothing to stop you doing that. Your new ICE car in 2030 will cost more than an equivalent electric car and will cost more to run. It's not just petrol, which may be more difficult to get and hence more expensive than now, but there's also oil changes, maintenance, exhausts etc. But, it's a free country.
I'd be suprised if it's cheaper to go down the electric route till about 2040 or thereabouts. Going to get a few more years out my 09 reg Peugeot for now anyway
The number of votes outweighs the number of eligible voters. Which is a pretty neat trick, if true.
Which it won't be.
Link?
Twit?
Just to explain 'twit?'.
You serious think that Trump and Trump alone has just noticed that there are more votes than voters after all this time and nobody else just happened not to stumble over that fact after all the fatuous court cases.
And you want me to provide you with a link?!
How about you providing a link or better still Trump doing so rather than spewing out a lot of crap based upon nothing (that applies to you and Trump).
The idea that there were more votes than voters is so obviously fake that it fails any sort of plausibility test. It`s worse than homeopathy.
It's truly terrifying that people have been convicted to death row by people that believe this shit. If they're buying this nonsense, what sort of plea bargaining crap have prosecutors got felons to state to save their own skins in order to send others to the chair ? Now that might sound a bit tangential but half the potential jury members of the US seem unsafe right now, and more than that in the deep south.
The number of votes outweighs the number of eligible voters. Which is a pretty neat trick, if true.
Which it won't be.
Link?
Twit?
Just to explain 'twit?'.
You serious think that Trump and Trump alone has just noticed that there are more votes than voters after all this time and nobody else just happened not to stumble over that fact after all the fatuous court cases.
And you want me to provide you with a link?!
How about you providing a link or better still Trump doing so rather than spewing out a lot of crap based upon nothing (that applies to you and Trump).
The idea that there were more votes than voters is so obviously fake that it fails any sort of plausibility test. It`s worse than homeopathy.
PCP is very different to PCH...PCP is just a different form of financing, you are still agreeing to actually buy the car. Totally unsurprising most people use finance to purchase new cars (although some concern that like houses in 2008 too many people over stretching themselves).
PCH ie. Leasing, is really popular in places like the US, but here outside higher end cars, here, it often poor deal for your standard £15k car.
You never actually own the car outright in PCP though – unless you pay the bubble at the end. And why would you do that? You might as well replace it with a more modern vehicle!
The number of votes cast outweighs the number of eligible voters to cast them. Which is a pretty neat trick, if true.
Still, as the voter in the Dunny on the Wold election, a mister E Blackadder, said, I liked our candidate so much I voted for him 16,000 times
That's simply not true. Nobody is claiming a turnout of over 100%.
The argument is that in some precincts, the initial count of the overall number of ballots received didn't precisely match the totals counted when it came to the Trump/Biden race. This is pretty common across the country, normally due to minor errors in the initial count- we're looking at single figures per precinct. The two GOP representatives on the four person board certifying the results initially wouldn't do so but later changed their minds and certified.
Trump's (ludicrous) assertion is that all Detroit ballots should be invalidated. Indeed this is the killer for just about all his cases, which proceed on the basis "there are trivial issues affecting a handful of ballots in this blue county, so ALL ballots should be discounted, and kindly ignore similar, trivial discrepancies in red counties". Court after court after court say "firstly you haven't actually shown irregularities but, even if you had, the idea that the proportionate remedy would be to throw tens of thousands of perfectly valid ballots for every one possibly iffy one is patently absurd".
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
No. Ooohhhhhh no.
It wasn’t Corbyn driving policy, like having Palestinian flags all around conference hall, and bemused why election hopes weighted down with anti semitism, nor that Labour policy’s electable in one must have constituency cost them victory in other must have constituency’s. no. It was the party what made Corbyn.
If coalition is also more diverse, culturally and ideologically, the result is that different elected members need to occupy very different places on the political spectrum and on issues. What one would campaign on in one constituency would be suicide campaign in another must win constituency. You can’t speak as one in broad coalition.
Whereas conservative minded voters tend to coalesce around a couple of key issues you can campaign on and win anywhere.
Boris won on a Corbyn would be a disaster and look at my oven ready brexit, whilst Labour was in death spiral initiated by its pro Palestinian stance.
The worlds changed. It’s moved against Labour, just like it’s just moved against Dems in US. But their brains haven’t caught up yet.
Someone wants to boast about having half a million members, yet the entry fee to enter the broad tent is to embrace political correctness - in other words criticise voters for not being thoughtful enough, for not being conscientious enough, not being "woke" enough.
Their platform is join us, we are enlightened, we will save you from being an ignorant, racist, yokel in need of cultural guidance.
For all his faults, Boris doesn't talk down to or demean voters the way Labour has been doing. I don’t just mean Corbyn, Look at how Starmer tweets have been analyzed
Until Labour realises what they have become, and how unelectable it is, they go on losing digital, social media elections.
This is the kicker, as Boris would say, look how I describe Labour, it’s Labour who ensures there is a bigger coalition who will believe any old crap about them come election time. They create this majority against them themselves, by the personality they have become.
My general impression of this is you are someone who has totally bought into the alt right view of the left. We know how embedded that can be so I doubt little old me will be able to do much. But I think you'll find the public are not of similar mind. They are imo extremely unlikely in 2024 to confuse Starmer Labour with outre, ultra progressive culture warriors. The Starmer strategy - isam's bedroom wall photo of him taking a knee notwithstanding - is to not major on that stuff. To substantially disengage. Leave the other side punching at air. Or creating fantasies like you here.
And just to pick a random specific from many that I could -
Boris Johnson does not talk down to or demean voters? This must be one of the most breathtakingly unperceptive comments ever seen on PB.com. That is exactly what he does! He treats us all like idiots. The conman laughing at the little folk he's conned. If Boris "Boris" Johnson is talking at your level you need to take a few steps up.
What about
“ If coalition is also more diverse, culturally and ideologically, the result is that different elected members need to occupy very different places on the political spectrum and on issues. What one would campaign on in one constituency would be suicide campaign in another must win constituency. You can’t speak as one in broad coalition.
Whereas conservative minded voters tend to coalesce around a couple of key issues you can campaign on and win anywhere”
You agree, the world isn’t made fair, and this impacts on politics?
Is it true though? There has always been a bit of tension between right wingers and dries in the Conservative party. Right wingers hate the BBC for not playing Land of Hope and Glory enough, dries hate the BBC for not being economically competitive. Right wingers want Brexit to bring more industry back to Britain, dries want Brexit to push even more industry offshore. Right wingers are somewheres, dries are anywheres, maybe even nowheres.
In 2019, that didn't matter. Dries and right wingers united in wanting Brexit Done (even though they haven't and won't agree about what to do with the resulting freedoms) and Corbyn done over. In Boris Johnson, they also had the ideal candidate to tapdance round the contradiction in their respective visions. But the contradiction hasn't gone away, and it's hard to see how the stars will align so favourably in 2024.
And that's before we consider the tension between those strands of Conservative thinking and Carrie's Conservatism (which seems to be Brexity Cameroonism) and the scattered remains of the One Nation tradition...
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
Big mistake IMO to equate relief that Starmer has replaced Corbyn with any sort of ringing endorsement for Starmer.
I agree that atm it's more 'deduct negative' than 'add positive'. But mathematically these two things are exactly the same. And continuing the algebra theme -
Con 19 Win = +80 = "Boris" + Brexit + Corbyn.
24 result = No Brexit + No Corbyn + No "Boris" (if still there he will be old hat Johnson).
So assuming the 3 factors = 50 each, the 24 result = +80 - 150 which = -70.
I could quibble - esp with that plus 40 - but I won't since at least you're getting into the spirit of it. I like these number style analyses. It is all about the numbers after all.
+40 Labour's Woke Bollocks
You are not going to quibble with Bluestofblues about it? having told me, it doesn’t resonate with the general public, there is no I am woke form to get signed off to enter the Labour tent, and woke bollocks is definitely not building a big anti labour coalition, where any old rubbish can be made up by enemies, associated with labours woke badges and medals, and believed by this anti woke majority?
Can I take this as a sign you are actually thinking about it?
No, of course I recognize both the strategy - of painting Labour as a hive of crazy pol pots intent on a ground zero re-imagining of society where the beleaguered white male is tarred and feathered in public if he puts a word out of place - and the danger of it working. But my sincere and considered view is that we've peaked with that stuff. It will still resonate with some - course it will - but its glory days are over. One, because Labour under Starmer won't be playing. Two, because as in the US if you insist on doing that polarization, forcing the binary, there will be a modest but decisive majority against.
In another sign of the end to the previous regime’s attitude to the Lobby, Stratton told the gathered journos “The media has had a very good and powerful role during the pandemic so far”
Well that's a load of old bollocks...in the last 3 days alone they have run totally bullshit stories because they can't read and understand very simple shit.
Off topic
I have never met anyone called Allegra, infact I have only heard of two (although my dad did have an Allegro in 1975). Boris married an Allegra and another is now his Press Secretary. Curious.
I've never met an Allegra, a Marina or a Carrie. Nor a Petronella for that matter. Perhaps Johnson has a thing for women with unusual names?
In another sign of the end to the previous regime’s attitude to the Lobby, Stratton told the gathered journos “The media has had a very good and powerful role during the pandemic so far”
Well that's a load of old bollocks...in the last 3 days alone they have run totally bullshit stories because they can't read and understand very simple shit.
Off topic
I have never met anyone called Allegra, infact I have only heard of two (although my dad did have an Allegro in 1975). Boris married an Allegra and another is now his Press Secretary. Curious.
I've never met an Allegra, a Marina or a Carrie. Nor a Petronella for that matter. Perhaps Johnson has a thing for women with unusual names?
I've never met a Carrie but any time I hear her name I think of Princess Leia, so its not a completely unheard of name.
In another sign of the end to the previous regime’s attitude to the Lobby, Stratton told the gathered journos “The media has had a very good and powerful role during the pandemic so far”
Well that's a load of old bollocks...in the last 3 days alone they have run totally bullshit stories because they can't read and understand very simple shit.
Off topic
I have never met anyone called Allegra, infact I have only heard of two (although my dad did have an Allegro in 1975). Boris married an Allegra and another is now his Press Secretary. Curious.
I've never met an Allegra, a Marina or a Carrie. Nor a Petronella for that matter. Perhaps Johnson has a thing for women with unusual names?
I've never met a Carrie but any time I hear her name I think of Princess Leia, so its not a completely unheard of name.
Have we ever had such a poor choice of leaders as Johnson and Starmer. No wonder the Scots prefer Sturgeon.
You rate Corbyn over Starmer as Labour leader?
Take off all your tinted glasses and The problem for labour is kind of obvious now. Initially Starmer was a fresh change after hollowed out Corbyn. But Starmer doesn’t have charisma nor has a very good team around him, so PMQs are poor - no zingers, nothing for evening news to use. Getting good sound bite on news ironically Corbyn did manage more successfully than Starmer.
I agree that Corbyn's big problem as a leader wasn't his performance in the House. It was his lack of intellect on policy and his inability to make decisions or handle confrontation.
Starmer is much better on all of that. Charisma? He has enough, I think. And his team will improve with experience and exposure.
Long way to go but right now I'm not seeing the Cons winning the 24 election.
Big mistake IMO to equate relief that Starmer has replaced Corbyn with any sort of ringing endorsement for Starmer.
I agree that atm it's more 'deduct negative' than 'add positive'. But mathematically these two things are exactly the same. And continuing the algebra theme -
Con 19 Win = +80 = "Boris" + Brexit + Corbyn.
24 result = No Brexit + No Corbyn + No "Boris" (if still there he will be old hat Johnson).
So assuming the 3 factors = 50 each, the 24 result = +80 - 150 which = -70.
I could quibble - esp with that plus 40 - but I won't since at least you're getting into the spirit of it. I like these number style analyses. It is all about the numbers after all.
+40 Labour's Woke Bollocks
You are not going to quibble with Bluestofblues about it? having told me, it doesn’t resonate with the general public, there is no I am woke form to get signed off to enter the Labour tent, and woke bollocks is definitely not building a big anti labour coalition, where any old rubbish can be made up by enemies, associated with labours woke badges and medals, and believed by this anti woke majority?
Can I take this as a sign you are actually thinking about it?
No, of course I recognize both the strategy - of painting Labour as a hive of crazy pol pots intent on a ground zero re-imagining of society where the beleaguered white male is tarred and feathered in public if he puts a word out of place - and the danger of it working. But my sincere and considered view is that we've peaked with that stuff. It will still resonate with some - course it will - but its glory days are over. One, because Labour under Starmer won't be playing. Two, because as in the US if you insist on doing that polarization, forcing the binary, there will be a modest but decisive majority against.
I.e. if it comes to it, the woke soy libs will be defeated as hard as Biden was
Comments
Dealerships will be fine, but all those small back street garages that make a living out of being cheaper than the dealerships, they are going to have to spend a fortune retraining and retooling.
I have on my Q7 – quite ludicrous range!!
Green policies made more difficult by Greenies opposed to parking spaces at home - whodathunkit !
And for the price, it's rubbish these days.
https://twitter.com/TedPetrou/status/1329073931202904068?s=19
Ever.
If its upheld that is.
Electric cars need a great deal less maintenance on average.
(edit) I see the point has been made.
If Tesla becomes one of the largest players, there will be far fewer dealers, too.
More generally, I think too think the world is changing, but I find those who feel threatened by 'political correctness' or 'wokeness' (or even those who use those terms) to be the older voters. Maybe I'm just living in wokeville, but it's a long time since I've heard anyone my age or below use those terms or complain about those ideas. If anything, I think Labour's alleged wokeness is the way things are going more generally and I don't see that as a bad thing.
(Doesn't mean electoral success, Conservatives briefly went a bit 'woke' under Cameron - don't forget ideas such as gay marriage would have been considered incredibly PC/woke 10-20 years ago - and will do so again if the current populist approach stops working)
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/republicans-won-almost-every-election-where-redistricting-was-at-stake/
About two articles apart, we have an article on how terrible precautions are on hospitals with covid and how they're infecting patients... and one on how it's all false positives and hospitals don't have real covid in them.
And the readers and believers on this stuff don't see the problem of believing both at the same time?
With more than 42,500 vehicle service and repair locations of all types, the UK aftermarket is a huge, diverse and highly competitive industry.
The report also reveals the significant economic contribution made by the UK automotive aftermarket, which delivers an annual £12.2 billion direct to the UK economy and supports more than 345,000 British jobs.
Even running out at home is similar - a portable power pack the weight of a can of petrol will give several miles of travel to the nearest charger. Cost/weight penalties though.
Perhaps the solution will be a removable bit of the car battery that can be recharged in your kitchen that will get you to the local charge-point if you run it down. Like a reserve tank that some cars had in the 60s and 70s - eg the Rover P6.
Though a megawhinge feature in the dashboard announcer may be better when running low.
I think an issue I would like to see fixed is hybrid car taxdodgers who never use the electric.
When I had a diesel car, twice every three weeks, I had to go and fuel up - which involved going in a different direction, going into the petrol station, (occasionally queueing), parking up, refuelling, going in and paying (occasionally queueing).
True, it only took ten to fifteen minutes, all in - petrol stations are plentiful and you rarely had to go much out of your way (as long as you remembered at the right time).
But, as we have had it pointed out, all those ten-to-fifteen minutes add up. Total time these days? Literally a handful of seconds on the way between my car door at home and my house door.
My view is they should be able to view from close up like we do, but your assumption of what will happen if not is gobsmacking. All on one side are angels and all on the other are devils. Hmmm.
And just to pick a random specific from many that I could -
Boris Johnson does not talk down to or demean voters? This must be one of the most breathtakingly unperceptive comments ever seen on PB.com. That is exactly what he does! He treats us all like idiots. The conman laughing at the little folk he's conned. If Boris "Boris" Johnson is talking at your level you need to take a few steps up.
Plus they cause much less air pollution and lifetime carbon emissions, meaning they cause much less cost on health systems and other costs we all indirectly pay for.
But at some point, the transition, like that of horses to motors, will seem quite abrupt to those on the sharp end.
You could be right about reduced usage elsewhere. There will after all be few primary and tertiary heavy industrial users, post Brexit.
Blood pressure.
https://twitter.com/MichaelRStrain/status/1329081665642106880?s=19
Hopeful grasping at straws seems to be a thing for Republicans and their supporters - a bit like last night's nonsense about Michigan being flipped.
The pollution's shifting to another country, and the tax revenue's vanished as well.
Possibly you will have to buy petrol as a special product, towards the end. Perhaps they will sell it at the chemists....
Which we already have in street lighting.
+20 Labour's Higher Taxes
+20 Starmer Charisma Vacuum
= +10 = Tories hold on, 1992-style.
PCH ie. Leasing, is really popular in places like the US, but here outside higher end cars, here, it often poor deal for your standard £15k car.
https://order-order.com/2020/11/18/allegra-to-go-on-the-record/
Well that's a load of old bollocks...in the last 3 days alone they have run totally bullshit stories because they can't read and understand very simple shit.
You wouldn't recommend a young person to do an apprenticeship in it, though, would you? And Grandson Two, just learning to drive, is learning on a manual car, although Younger Son, his uncle, is asking why. According to him there were very few manual cars on the market elsewhere nowadays, and AFAIK, you only need an automatic licence to drive and electric.
Think I can see both arguments!
Yes both sides should be able to watch from close up.
The last time there was a Senate election run-off in Georgia in a Presidential election cycle, turnout fell from 3.8 million in November to 2.1 million in January - a huge drop-off. No doubt that will be a factor again, but one assumes it will fall away less for postal voters.
My personal view is GOP will probably hold on. Perdue was very close to 50% and Loeffler was embroiled in a brutal battle to be top GOP dog, hurting both her and Collins - she can now focus her fire on Warnock. I'm also inclined to think the desire for revenge among staunch Republicans will be relevant in a low turnout election. But the postal votes issue adds a different dimension to that.
Steve Reed was accused of anti-Semitism but to be fair he admitted it and apologised, is there much of a story here? Robert Jenrick suggesting there is
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1329087255168708608?s=21
However currently we are around crossover now for people who have access to at home charging using super-cheap overnight rates. For people who need to charge away from home paying daytime rates with a premium attached its a different matter.
In the longterm it may change, but we aren't at crossover yet for people who can't charge at home necessarily. That's a reason to solve the problem so that we can reach there eventually, not an argument against an electric future.
If we don't address the at home/public disparity then its going to become harder to finish a switchover.
- Wrong
- Misleading
- Meretricious
- Harmful
- Or focusing almost wholly on all-but irrelevancies.
The only thing it's good at is in providing rationale for snake oil.
Still, as the voter in the Dunny on the Wold election, a mister E Blackadder, said, I liked our candidate so much I voted for him 16,000 times
I have never met anyone called Allegra, infact I have only heard of two (although my dad did have an Allegro in 1975). Boris married an Allegra and another is now his Press Secretary. Curious.
Labour ‘allegedly’ always raise taxes
Johnson recognized as a turd but have no one else in your party because you threw the talent out and when fed up with the exciting turd we’ve had enough of and there is no one else
There will always be idiots who vote Tory even if if it was led dumbo
I was in South Dakota last autumn, and found that it doesn’t really have one - as September turned to October it was still hot summer weather; two weeks later (by which time I was down in the South) they had their first snows. Snow comes early in the mid west.
As in Europe - where Italy and Germany appeared to be holding off the second wave as the UK succumbed - then followed along a month or so behind - ISTM that the weather driving social activity indoors has a lot more to do with the pattern of spread than the level of precautions being taken.
You are not going to quibble with Bluestofblues about it? having told me, it doesn’t resonate with the general public, there is no I am woke form to get signed off to enter the Labour tent, and woke bollocks is definitely not building a big anti labour coalition, where any old rubbish can be made up by enemies, associated with labours woke badges and medals, and believed by this anti woke majority?
Can I take this as a sign you are actually thinking about it?
Your new ICE car in 2030 will cost more than an equivalent electric car and will cost more to run. It's not just petrol, which may be more difficult to get and hence more expensive than now, but there's also oil changes, maintenance, exhausts etc.
But, it's a free country.
You serious think that Trump and Trump alone has just noticed that there are more votes than voters after all this time and nobody else just happened not to stumble over that fact after all the fatuous court cases.
And you want me to provide you with a link?!
How about you providing a link or better still Trump doing so rather than spewing out a lot of crap based upon nothing (that applies to you and Trump).
I prefer Corbyn to Starmer because he is truer to the ideology on which the LP is based. He is honest and authentic.
Starmer, whilst impressive from a "you can see him as PM" point of view, is dishonest and false.
I`ve stopped watching PMQs because it`s got to the point that I can`t stand either the sight or sound of him, to be honest.
Electorally, if that`s all you care about, then the LP may be on to something with Starmer. But I`m not even convinced about that.
“ If coalition is also more diverse, culturally and ideologically, the result is that different elected members need to occupy very different places on the political spectrum and on issues. What one would campaign on in one constituency would be suicide campaign in another must win constituency. You can’t speak as one in broad coalition.
Whereas conservative minded voters tend to coalesce around a couple of key issues you can campaign on and win anywhere”
You agree, the world isn’t made fair, and this impacts on politics?
Not good with this whole maths thing are you?
https://www.clickondetroit.com/decision-2020/2020/11/11/how-detroit-suburbs-voted-in-2020-presidential-election/
The argument is that in some precincts, the initial count of the overall number of ballots received didn't precisely match the totals counted when it came to the Trump/Biden race. This is pretty common across the country, normally due to minor errors in the initial count- we're looking at single figures per precinct. The two GOP representatives on the four person board certifying the results initially wouldn't do so but later changed their minds and certified.
Trump's (ludicrous) assertion is that all Detroit ballots should be invalidated. Indeed this is the killer for just about all his cases, which proceed on the basis "there are trivial issues affecting a handful of ballots in this blue county, so ALL ballots should be discounted, and kindly ignore similar, trivial discrepancies in red counties". Court after court after court say "firstly you haven't actually shown irregularities but, even if you had, the idea that the proportionate remedy would be to throw tens of thousands of perfectly valid ballots for every one possibly iffy one is patently absurd".
In 2019, that didn't matter. Dries and right wingers united in wanting Brexit Done (even though they haven't and won't agree about what to do with the resulting freedoms) and Corbyn done over. In Boris Johnson, they also had the ideal candidate to tapdance round the contradiction in their respective visions. But the contradiction hasn't gone away, and it's hard to see how the stars will align so favourably in 2024.
And that's before we consider the tension between those strands of Conservative thinking and Carrie's Conservatism (which seems to be Brexity Cameroonism) and the scattered remains of the One Nation tradition...
Starmer seems more the kind of guy who would like to work out a policy (and fund it) to reduce the average class size in schools by 3, say.