politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Leadsom might not ever have a better chance of becoming PM tha

SystemSystem Posts: 12,551
edited July 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Leadsom might not ever have a better chance of becoming PM than the 2016 leadership race that she flunked

It is being reported over that Andrea Leadsom is ready to stand if there is move within the parliamentary party to try to anoint a successor to GE2017 failure, TMay, without the necessity of going through a full fledged leadership contest.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    edited July 2017
    I bloody well hope not.

    Let's not allow May's uselessness to blind us to the fact of Leadsom's being 100x worse. Though to be fair to Leadsom, she was right (though not less loathsome for it) to focus on May being childless. It was May's uinability to empathise over inheritances and univ fees which cost her majority.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,706
    That was a good example of an unfortunate interview that good leaders simply shrug off - we all say something embarrassing sometimes and if you express regret without being too cringing about it, people accept it and move on.

    I've just spent two days in the Commons talking to MPs on animal welfare issues, and inevitably the conversation sometimes strayed. The general view seems to be that a Tory leadership challenge is likely in the autumn, with the intention of then soldiering on until Brexit is complete. Treat with caution - a small sample of views, and not evident that they would necessarily know - but may be a straw in the wind.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,703
    FPT: Sci-fi fans: tomorrow at the San Diego Comic-Con there'll be an announcement about the future of Stargate.

    Indeed.

    Anyway, must be off.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,957
    JRM on LBC with Farage right now being asked if he would stand in a leadership contest: "I think it would be vanity on my part in these terms... I have very few personal ambitions, being the MP for North East Somerset was my life's ambition..."

    Nailed on for PM then? :D
  • NormNorm Posts: 1,251
    Leadsom at least by some accounts is a people person with a good sense of humour and does seem to come across quite well in the media except of course to those who viscerally detest her. They do so because she is exactly the type of traditional Tory they hate and of course she played a significant part in winning the campaign for Leave. My doubts though lie more in whether she has the overarching skills to be a successful PM. You could be substituting one set of downsides with May for another set in Leadsom who has not held any of the higher offices of state.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,022
    There could be a path for Leadsom to win. If she wielded the knife against May and said she was right last year to say we needed a leader who believed in the opportunities of Brexit, while suggesting that both Johnson and Davis were prepared for a sell-out she could be the only option for the true believers.

    Having knocked out her Brexit rivals she could then double cross them and pack the cabinet with Remainers in a deal to sow up the leadership.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,077
    Morris_Dancer said:

    FPT: Sci-fi fans: tomorrow at the San Diego Comic-Con there'll be an announcement about the future of Stargate.

    Indeed.

    Anyway, must be off.

    And in real space news, Musk has just announced that Red Dragon is dead. :(

    (Red Dragon was his plan to land one or more unmanned capsules on Mars in 2020).
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    If Leadsom had been prime minister in June, Jeremy Corbyn would be prime minister now. Making Leadsom Theresa May's successor would be the most stupid act in British political history.
  • Bob__SykesBob__Sykes Posts: 1,179
    Ishmael_Z said:

    I bloody well hope not.

    Let's not allow May's uselessness to blind us to the fact of Leadsom's being 100x worse. Though to be fair to Leadsom, she was right (though not less loathsome for it) to focus on May being childless. It was May's uinability to empathise over inheritances and univ fees which cost her majority.

    At least the pension age kick in the balls was left until after the election so as not to give the under 50s something else to make them vote Labour....

    I'm ambivalent about today's news despite being born in 1976. I'll still hopefully retire by 60 and draw on my own work pension pots and take the extra state payment as a bonus at 68 or whenever. I do think the Tories have again mismanaged this by allowing the media narrative to be about "work till you're 68" but really that's not what it means to most people - it just means you won't get a state payment until 68.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    Made me chuckle

    https://twitter.com/HansNiesund/status/887406732665917441
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,732
    Leadsom can never have imagined that she'd be Tory leader prior to the Brexit events. She was right not to do so.

    After the Brexit vote she got a bit carried away. Fair enough. There's no need to stay carried away though - she's clearly far from PM material.

    The rearguard action to prevent Corbyn forever extinguishing the flame of national self-respect must not fall in to the trap of delivering a worse outcome.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    Who is telling Leadsom she can be PM? Is it just the voices in her head or someone else, a puppet master perhaps.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Loathsome would not be in the final two now. The Tories have much worse candidates to pick from.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,613
    surbiton said:

    Loathsome would not be in the final two now. The Tories have much worse candidates to pick from.

    :smile:
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    I think Jo Johnson is the one. There is a certain irresistible symmetry about it.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,613
    Omnium said:

    Leadsom can never have imagined that she'd be Tory leader prior to the Brexit events. She was right not to do so.

    After the Brexit vote she got a bit carried away. Fair enough. There's no need to stay carried away though - she's clearly far from PM material.

    The rearguard action to prevent Corbyn forever extinguishing the flame of national self-respect must not fall in to the trap of delivering a worse outcome.

    "...Corbyn forever extinguishing the flame of national self-respect..."?!

    Jeez, how do you guys sleep at night - when the bogeyman might get you? Do get a grip!
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    NickPalmer said:

    That was a good example of an unfortunate interview that good leaders simply shrug off - we all say something embarrassing sometimes and if you express regret without being too cringing about it, people accept it and move on.

    I've just spent two days in the Commons talking to MPs on animal welfare issues, and inevitably the conversation sometimes strayed. The general view seems to be that a Tory leadership challenge is likely in the autumn, with the intention of then soldiering on until Brexit is complete. Treat with caution - a small sample of views, and not evident that they would necessarily know - but may be a straw in the wind.

    I agree, a PM who cannot face Womans Hour will not be ready to enjoy Conference, I think she may well announce she is going at that point.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Bob__Sykes said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    I bloody well hope not.

    Let's not allow May's uselessness to blind us to the fact of Leadsom's being 100x worse. Though to be fair to Leadsom, she was right (though not less loathsome for it) to focus on May being childless. It was May's uinability to empathise over inheritances and univ fees which cost her majority.

    At least the pension age kick in the balls was left until after the election so as not to give the under 50s something else to make them vote Labour....

    I'm ambivalent about today's news despite being born in 1976. I'll still hopefully retire by 60 and draw on my own work pension pots and take the extra state payment as a bonus at 68 or whenever. I do think the Tories have again mismanaged this by allowing the media narrative to be about "work till you're 68" but really that's not what it means to most people - it just means you won't get a state payment until 68.
    It also gives Labour an issue for the next election -'We will not proceed with these plans'.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    surbiton said:

    Loathsome would not be in the final two now. The Tories have much worse candidates to pick from.

    She'd make a better PM than Diane Abacus.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    If she goes this Autumn, May will go down infamously as the worst PM since, well Cameron.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Jonathan said:

    Who is telling Leadsom she can be PM? Is it just the voices in her head or someone else, a puppet master perhaps.

    Makes you wonder who Nick n Fiona are working for these days.
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,275
    williamglenn said:

    There could be a path for Leadsom to win. If she wielded the knife against May and said she was right last year to say we needed a leader who believed in the opportunities of Brexit, while suggesting that both Johnson and Davis were prepared for a sell-out she could be the only option for the true believers.

    Having knocked out her Brexit rivals she could then double cross them and pack the cabinet with Remainers in a deal to sow up the leadership.

    Except it is not possible for any individual to wield a knife. There will be a vote of confidence in Mrs May if sufficient MPs request it. If she loses she is out; if she wins she carries on.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,022
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Jonathan said:

    Who is telling Leadsom she can be PM? Is it just the voices in her head or someone else, a puppet master perhaps.

    Makes you wonder who Nick n Fiona are working for these days.
    May must regret her 'no win no Fi' advice now.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,613
    edited July 2017
    FPT:
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Pointer, do you think there's no upper limit to human life expectancy? That's the logical conclusion of thinking life expectancy will continually increase as a matter of course.

    It's possible technology may alter the natural state of affairs, but we aren't there yet.

    Indeed, the obesity time bomb has often been used to suggest the generation born in the 1990s may live shorter lives than those of earlier decades. I remember reading at school the optimistic assessment people of my age might reach 130, but those born later might have shorter lives.

    Then there's the increase in antibiotic resistant disease to consider as well.

    I decided to dig a bit into the OEDC data on this one and in fairness to Morris_Dancer it looks like there is a consistent pattern of life expectancy at birth falling back very slightly in many developed countries (Germany, France, Iceland, Italy, Switzerland, Spain, UK, USA) since 2014. So, not unique to UK.

    UK life expectancy was 80.4 years in 2010, rose slightly to 81.4 by 2014 before falling back to 81.0 in 2015... hardly consistent with UK austerity causing falling life expectancy.

    I rest my case... in the bin :smile:

    (PS Cameron/Osborne's austerity was still the wrong approach for the country post-2010 though!)
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    We can hope.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,022
    PeterC said:

    williamglenn said:

    There could be a path for Leadsom to win. If she wielded the knife against May and said she was right last year to say we needed a leader who believed in the opportunities of Brexit, while suggesting that both Johnson and Davis were prepared for a sell-out she could be the only option for the true believers.

    Having knocked out her Brexit rivals she could then double cross them and pack the cabinet with Remainers in a deal to sow up the leadership.

    Except it is not possible for any individual to wield a knife. There will be a vote of confidence in Mrs May if sufficient MPs request it. If she loses she is out; if she wins she carries on.
    That's too process-centric. In practice if a member of the cabinet broke ranks it's hard to see all the contenders lining up to support her.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    williamglenn said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Jonathan said:

    Who is telling Leadsom she can be PM? Is it just the voices in her head or someone else, a puppet master perhaps.

    Makes you wonder who Nick n Fiona are working for these days.
    May must regret her 'no win no Fi' advice now.
    That's quality material.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,538
    williamglenn said:

    PeterC said:

    williamglenn said:

    There could be a path for Leadsom to win. If she wielded the knife against May and said she was right last year to say we needed a leader who believed in the opportunities of Brexit, while suggesting that both Johnson and Davis were prepared for a sell-out she could be the only option for the true believers.

    Having knocked out her Brexit rivals she could then double cross them and pack the cabinet with Remainers in a deal to sow up the leadership.

    Except it is not possible for any individual to wield a knife. There will be a vote of confidence in Mrs May if sufficient MPs request it. If she loses she is out; if she wins she carries on.
    That's too process-centric. In practice if a member of the cabinet broke ranks it's hard to see all the contenders lining up to support her.
    Unless the rebel was Boris Johnson.
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,591
    Leadsom was stupid at the time with her comments. She blew it, along with a whole lot of other Tories. Quite right the comments the other day on here that said there are no clever people left in politics any more.

    On another note, NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU caught faking global temperature data. The oncoming grand solar minimum is being increasingly noticed by many people. Just one of the many cogs in the global crisis in confidence in government worldwide:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVLZ2_wxiDI
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,275
    williamglenn said:

    PeterC said:

    williamglenn said:

    There could be a path for Leadsom to win. If she wielded the knife against May and said she was right last year to say we needed a leader who believed in the opportunities of Brexit, while suggesting that both Johnson and Davis were prepared for a sell-out she could be the only option for the true believers.

    Having knocked out her Brexit rivals she could then double cross them and pack the cabinet with Remainers in a deal to sow up the leadership.

    Except it is not possible for any individual to wield a knife. There will be a vote of confidence in Mrs May if sufficient MPs request it. If she loses she is out; if she wins she carries on.
    That's too process-centric. In practice if a member of the cabinet broke ranks it's hard to see all the contenders lining up to support her.
    Only Hammond would have the credibility to do that. Possibly Fallon too, but I can't imagine him doing it. Boris or Davis I think would just look ridiculous, disloyal, self-absorbed and unpatriotic they pulled such a stunt.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,159
    Jonathan said:

    Who is telling Leadsom she can be PM? Is it just the voices in her head or someone else, a puppet master perhaps.

    Why have Leadsom as your puppet when you can have May instead, who is more reliably weak and unstable? True Brexiteers are happy to keep May in place because they think they can easily manipulate her to get their version of Brexit. The May regime will stagger on, despised by everyone, including Mrs May herself.
    O
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Too much is being made of the idea that a leader needs to have been tested via a series of campaign hustings.It is a pretty recent development , Heath was not tested in his contest v Maudling and Powell , and neither was Thatcher v Heath and the other candidates who entered the second round in 1975. Even the 1990 election to succeed Thatcher was confined to a series of weekend TV interviews in which Major, Heseltine & Hurd appeared separately.Much the same was true of Labour leadership elections until 2010.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,022
    FF43 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Who is telling Leadsom she can be PM? Is it just the voices in her head or someone else, a puppet master perhaps.

    Why have Leadsom as your puppet when you can have May instead, who is more reliably weak and unstable? True Brexiteers are happy to keep May in place because they think they can easily manipulate her to get their version of Brexit. The May regime will stagger on, despised by everyone, including Mrs May herself.
    O
    Perhaps it's time for May to do an Estelle Morris. She could reshuffle herself back to the Home Office.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,159
    williamglenn said:

    FF43 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Who is telling Leadsom she can be PM? Is it just the voices in her head or someone else, a puppet master perhaps.

    Why have Leadsom as your puppet when you can have May instead, who is more reliably weak and unstable? True Brexiteers are happy to keep May in place because they think they can easily manipulate her to get their version of Brexit. The May regime will stagger on, despised by everyone, including Mrs May herself.
    O
    Perhaps it's time for May to do an Estelle Morris. She could reshuffle herself back to the Home Office.
    I think Mrs May saying enough's enough is the biggest threat to her carrying on.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,538
    Big News (and this is serious).

    It looks like Richard Caring has bought the infamous Ed Stone. It's currently occupying a prime position in the garden of The Ivy Restaurant's Chelsea spin-off.

    I will attempt to post a picture.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    rcs1000 said:

    Big News (and this is serious).

    It looks like Richard Caring has bought the infamous Ed Stone. It's currently occupying a prime position in the garden of The Ivy Restaurant's Chelsea spin-off.

    I will attempt to post a picture.

    Dammit, I wanted to make an epic glass-covered dining table out of it.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 78,865
    kyf_100 said:

    JRM on LBC with Farage right now being asked if he would stand in a leadership contest: "I think it would be vanity on my part in these terms... I have very few personal ambitions, being the MP for North East Somerset was my life's ambition..."

    Nailed on for PM then? :D

    Being a well read sort of chap, he's probably just channeling Julius C. from the Shakespeare play...

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 78,865
    It's all very well saying that a contest would have 'honed' May, but it's just as possible that she would have folded like a wet paper bag and given the country PM Leadsom. (Though I suppose the spectacle of her trying to duck the leadership debates might have been entertaining.)

    I'm not particularly keen on either brand of back to the 1950s, but I know which I dislike more.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 78,865
    rcs1000 said:

    Big News (and this is serious).

    It looks like Richard Caring has bought the infamous Ed Stone. It's currently occupying a prime position in the garden of The Ivy Restaurant's Chelsea spin-off.

    I will attempt to post a picture.

    You sure it's not a knockoff ?

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,613
    kyf_100 said:

    JRM on LBC with Farage right now being asked if he would stand in a leadership contest: "I think it would be vanity on my part in these terms... I have very few personal ambitions, being the MP for North East Somerset was my life's ambition..."

    Nailed on for PM then? :D

    ...being the MP for North East Somerset was my life's ambition..."

    Yeah right. Presume he wasn't really wanting to win when he stood for Central Fife and The Wreking then.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,613
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Big News (and this is serious).

    It looks like Richard Caring has bought the infamous Ed Stone. It's currently occupying a prime position in the garden of The Ivy Restaurant's Chelsea spin-off.

    I will attempt to post a picture.

    You sure it's not a knockoff ?

    That stone has been much copied to be fair... e.g. 2017 Tory Manifesto
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    get away.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited July 2017
    This is really frustrating;

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jul/19/hpv-vaccine-anger-decision-not-extend-nhs-scheme-boys-cancer

    The next generation of gay/bi/flexible/closeted men deserve protection. This jab will significantly benefit them and has few side effects. If not a universal jab for all boys, at least offer a free opt-in, confidential, go-to-your-gp, option for teenage boys with or without their parents knowledge.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,225
    rcs1000 said:

    Big News (and this is serious).

    It looks like Richard Caring has bought the infamous Ed Stone. It's currently occupying a prime position in the garden of The Ivy Restaurant's Chelsea spin-off.

    I will attempt to post a picture.

    Nice place; but I prefer the (relative) intimacy of Daphne's.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,538
    Mortimer said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Big News (and this is serious).

    It looks like Richard Caring has bought the infamous Ed Stone. It's currently occupying a prime position in the garden of The Ivy Restaurant's Chelsea spin-off.

    I will attempt to post a picture.

    Nice place; but I prefer the (relative) intimacy of Daphne's.
    I'm a Le Caprice (original) fan, myself.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    If Leadsom is the answer then the Conservative Party and the country are in even deeper sh1t than when the answer was J R-M
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    Benpointer said:

    kyf_100 said:

    JRM on LBC with Farage right now being asked if he would stand in a leadership contest: "I think it would be vanity on my part in these terms... I have very few personal ambitions, being the MP for North East Somerset was my life's ambition..."

    Nailed on for PM then? :D

    ...being the MP for North East Somerset was my life's ambition..."

    Yeah right. Presume he wasn't really wanting to win when he stood for Central Fife and The Wreking then.
    Do you genuinely think he was *expecting* to win Central Fife?

    Or even thought that he might run it a bit close on a good night?
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,225
    edited July 2017
    rcs1000 said:

    Mortimer said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Big News (and this is serious).

    It looks like Richard Caring has bought the infamous Ed Stone. It's currently occupying a prime position in the garden of The Ivy Restaurant's Chelsea spin-off.

    I will attempt to post a picture.

    Nice place; but I prefer the (relative) intimacy of Daphne's.
    I'm a Le Caprice (original) fan, myself.
    Never been - will have to try it.

    The Chelsea Garden Ivy is very handy for the Chelsea Book Fair; but so is Rabbit, down the road. Quite decent choice down that end of the KR nowadays. Not so even 2 years ago...
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,812
    MarkSenior said:

    If Leadsom is the answer then the Conservative Party and the country are in even deeper sh1t than when the answer was J R-M

    Tories 42%
    LibDems 7%

    Tories 317 seats
    LibDems 12 seats
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    Mortimer said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Mortimer said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Big News (and this is serious).

    It looks like Richard Caring has bought the infamous Ed Stone. It's currently occupying a prime position in the garden of The Ivy Restaurant's Chelsea spin-off.

    I will attempt to post a picture.

    Nice place; but I prefer the (relative) intimacy of Daphne's.
    I'm a Le Caprice (original) fan, myself.
    Never been - will have to try it.

    The Chelsea Garden Ivy is very handy for the Chelsea Book Fair; but so is Rabbit, down the road. Quite decent choice down that end of the KR nowadays. Not so even 2 years ago...
    Not a patch on the Berni Inn.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,538
    Mortimer said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Mortimer said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Big News (and this is serious).

    It looks like Richard Caring has bought the infamous Ed Stone. It's currently occupying a prime position in the garden of The Ivy Restaurant's Chelsea spin-off.

    I will attempt to post a picture.

    Nice place; but I prefer the (relative) intimacy of Daphne's.
    I'm a Le Caprice (original) fan, myself.
    Never been - will have to try it.

    The Chelsea Garden Ivy is very handy for the Chelsea Book Fair; but so is Rabbit, down the road. Quite decent choice down that end of the KR nowadays. Not so even 2 years ago...
    Don't you spend most of your time in Dorset?
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,084
    hunchman said:

    Leadsom was stupid at the time with her comments. She blew it, along with a whole lot of other Tories. Quite right the comments the other day on here that said there are no clever people left in politics any more.

    On another note, NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU caught faking global temperature data. The oncoming grand solar minimum is being increasingly noticed by many people. Just one of the many cogs in the global crisis in confidence in government worldwide:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVLZ2_wxiDI

    LOL! The video is a joke!

    The world is warming, largely through anthropogenic forcing - that's pretty much a fact now. Moronic flat-earthers like you may not agree but quite frankly who gives a fvck!
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,225
    rcs1000 said:

    Mortimer said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Mortimer said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Big News (and this is serious).

    It looks like Richard Caring has bought the infamous Ed Stone. It's currently occupying a prime position in the garden of The Ivy Restaurant's Chelsea spin-off.

    I will attempt to post a picture.

    Nice place; but I prefer the (relative) intimacy of Daphne's.
    I'm a Le Caprice (original) fan, myself.
    Never been - will have to try it.

    The Chelsea Garden Ivy is very handy for the Chelsea Book Fair; but so is Rabbit, down the road. Quite decent choice down that end of the KR nowadays. Not so even 2 years ago...
    Don't you spend most of your time in Dorset?
    I do now, but used to work on Draycott Avenue. Old habits etc.... Handily quite a few book fairs are that end of town: Chelsea town hall, Kensington town hall, Olympia.

    Though this year I'm exhibiting at the INK fair at Two Temple Place too - will have to find a decent restaurant that end of town.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    murali_s said:

    hunchman said:

    Leadsom was stupid at the time with her comments. She blew it, along with a whole lot of other Tories. Quite right the comments the other day on here that said there are no clever people left in politics any more.

    On another note, NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU caught faking global temperature data. The oncoming grand solar minimum is being increasingly noticed by many people. Just one of the many cogs in the global crisis in confidence in government worldwide:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVLZ2_wxiDI

    LOL! The video is a joke!

    The world is warming, largely through anthropogenic forcing - that's pretty much a fact now. Moronic flat-earthers like you may not agree but quite frankly who gives a fvck!
    Bless. Isn't it past your bedtime?

    It's a school night, remember?
  • bunncobunnco Posts: 169
    I've said it before, but it bears repeating. Former colleagues of hers from the days when she was a one-term district councillor about ten years ago describe her as 'lazy, useless and stupid'. People can change. But not that much.

    Bunnco - Your Man on the Spot
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,538
    edited July 2017
    GeoffM said:

    murali_s said:

    hunchman said:

    Leadsom was stupid at the time with her comments. She blew it, along with a whole lot of other Tories. Quite right the comments the other day on here that said there are no clever people left in politics any more.

    On another note, NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU caught faking global temperature data. The oncoming grand solar minimum is being increasingly noticed by many people. Just one of the many cogs in the global crisis in confidence in government worldwide:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVLZ2_wxiDI

    LOL! The video is a joke!

    The world is warming, largely through anthropogenic forcing - that's pretty much a fact now. Moronic flat-earthers like you may not agree but quite frankly who gives a fvck!
    Bless. Isn't it past your bedtime?

    It's a school night, remember?
    While I wouldn't want to comment on the anthopogenic part of the question, the NOAA data on ocean heat content matches the expected expansion of water within a couple of percent.

    So, you either have to say:

    1. The earth has not warmed, but the oceans have.
    or
    2. Two entirely differently collected data sets are both being tampered with.

    I find the either of these propositions to be unconvincing. The evidence for rising sea levels (i.e. expansion of water) is extremely strong. The evidence from buoys of water warming is very strong. I also struggle - although I realise there may well be explanations - to think of a situation where the ocean becomes warmer without the world as a whole warming.
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,591
    murali_s said:

    hunchman said:

    Leadsom was stupid at the time with her comments. She blew it, along with a whole lot of other Tories. Quite right the comments the other day on here that said there are no clever people left in politics any more.

    On another note, NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU caught faking global temperature data. The oncoming grand solar minimum is being increasingly noticed by many people. Just one of the many cogs in the global crisis in confidence in government worldwide:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVLZ2_wxiDI

    LOL! The video is a joke!

    The world is warming, largely through anthropogenic forcing - that's pretty much a fact now. Moronic flat-earthers like you may not agree but quite frankly who gives a fvck!
    Firstly I'm not a flat earther. I have no idea where you got that idea from. You can look through my whole history of posting on here and I haven't used the term once.

    You might like to have a look at the article below as well:

    https://www.iceagenow.info/bombshell-climate-change-study/

    And I think the data from the Vostok glacier demolishes your case as well:

    https://www.iceagenow.info/vostok-ice-cores-prove-co2-not-driver/

    Secondly, what exactly about the video is a joke? I think the joke is on you. Just in the past few months we've had record coldest July temperature in the northern hemisphere ever recorded in Greenland of -33C. Indeed, we've hardly seen any ice melt there this summer.

    It has also snowed in northern Quebec in recent days, as well as Santiago (very unusual as the residents there will tell you) as well as being incredibly cold across Chile and Argentina generally. Southern Australia has set plenty of record cold temperatures this winter, as well as it being the coldest winter in Perth for many years.

    The evidence is all around you wherever you look of the oncoming Grand Solar Minimum. And people like you will be expecting the government to support you with cold winter fuel payments etc with the oncoming cold weather. I can't help that you like in denial of the obvious, but that's your problem and not mine.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    O/T

    Discovered this nice Italian place near Euston station this evening.

    https://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Restaurant_Review-g186338-d1043936-Reviews-Brizzi_s-London_England.html
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,538
    AndyJS said:

    O/T

    Discovered this nice Italian place near Euston station this evening.

    https://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Restaurant_Review-g186338-d1043936-Reviews-Brizzi_s-London_England.html

    Normally I go to Diwana on Drummond Street! Appalling service, but very nice food.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    murali_s said:

    hunchman said:

    Leadsom was stupid at the time with her comments. She blew it, along with a whole lot of other Tories. Quite right the comments the other day on here that said there are no clever people left in politics any more.

    On another note, NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU caught faking global temperature data. The oncoming grand solar minimum is being increasingly noticed by many people. Just one of the many cogs in the global crisis in confidence in government worldwide:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVLZ2_wxiDI

    LOL! The video is a joke!

    The world is warming, largely through anthropogenic forcing - that's pretty much a fact now. Moronic flat-earthers like you may not agree but quite frankly who gives a fvck!
    That claim makes you moronic, not him. No one with any understanding of how science works would call AGW "pretty much a fact" when the claim is pretty much exclusively based on computer modelling.

    Please feel free to embarrass yourself further by saying something about 97% of scientists, to confirm that you do not understand that the appeal to authority is a fallacy. And you can call me a moron if you want to, but not on the grounds that I dispute the existence of AGW, because I don't. I just don't like self-righteous stupidity.
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 2,052
    AndyJS said:

    O/T

    Discovered this nice Italian place near Euston station this evening.

    https://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Restaurant_Review-g186338-d1043936-Reviews-Brizzi_s-London_England.html

    I had a 99p Aldi tuna pasta salad sat on a bench outside the Crick Institute :)
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,836
    As they say, every President of the fifth Republic has been worse than his predecessor:

    ' The head of the French armed forces has resigned amid a bitter public row with the president, Emmanuel Macron – an unprecedented dispute that has highlighted the strain on the French military, deployed in numerous operations abroad and at home.

    The military chief, Gen Pierre de Villiers, said in a resignation statement on Wednesday that he no longer felt able to command the sort of armed forces “that I think is necessary to guarantee the protection of France and the French people”.

    The row began last week when a government minister revealed in a newspaper interview that – despite assurances that the French military budget would rise – there would be a surprise €850m cut to military finances as Macron seeks to slash public spending. '

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/19/head-of-french-military-quits-after-row-with-emmanuel-macron

    And does anyone still believe that Macron is opposed to austerity ?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,817
    hunchman said:



    It has also snowed in northern Quebec in recent days, as well as Santiago (very unusual as the residents there will tell you) as well as being incredibly cold across Chile and Argentina generally. Southern Australia has set plenty of record cold temperatures this winter, as well as it being the coldest winter in Perth for many years.

    The evidence is all around you wherever you look of the oncoming Grand Solar Minimum. And people like you will be expecting the government to support you with cold winter fuel payments etc with the oncoming cold weather. I can't help that you like in denial of the obvious, but that's your problem and not mine.

    OTOH, the Spanish temperature record went earlier this week with 47.3C recorded near Cordoba and it has also been very hot in Portugal and Greece this summer.

    It's complicated and, to be honest, I don't know.

    Given the large numbers of humanity living in coastal regions for example, any increase in sea levels and storminess is going to cause problems irrespective of the cause.

    Our numbers and the structure of our civilisation create a hyper-sensitivity to weather and climate changes that didn't exist thousands of years ago.


  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,836
    For the pension experts, would today's pension age change have been necessary if triple lock pensions had not been introduced ?
  • FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 4,779
    Ishmael_Z said:

    murali_s said:

    hunchman said:

    Leadsom was stupid at the time with her comments. She blew it, along with a whole lot of other Tories. Quite right the comments the other day on here that said there are no clever people left in politics any more.

    On another note, NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU caught faking global temperature data. The oncoming grand solar minimum is being increasingly noticed by many people. Just one of the many cogs in the global crisis in confidence in government worldwide:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVLZ2_wxiDI

    LOL! The video is a joke!

    The world is warming, largely through anthropogenic forcing - that's pretty much a fact now. Moronic flat-earthers like you may not agree but quite frankly who gives a fvck!
    That claim makes you moronic, not him. No one with any understanding of how science works would call AGW "pretty much a fact" when the claim is pretty much exclusively based on computer modelling.

    Please feel free to embarrass yourself further by saying something about 97% of scientists, to confirm that you do not understand that the appeal to authority is a fallacy. And you can call me a moron if you want to, but not on the grounds that I dispute the existence of AGW, because I don't. I just don't like self-righteous stupidity.
    The folk at the Royal Society know a bit about science, and they seem pretty sure about it:

    How do scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities?

    "Scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities from an understanding of basic physics, comparing observations with models, and fingerprinting the detailed patterns of climate change caused by different human and natural influences."
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,905
    another_richard said:

    For the pension experts, would today's pension age change have been necessary if triple lock pensions had not been introduced ?

    It's not like a funded pension scheme, where you can at least attempt some sort of assessment of measures needed to bring a scheme back to balance. The state pension is funded from current taxation. Since there is a continuing deficit, which government is struggling to reduce, and which would not have been eliminated by a lower than triple-lock pensions increase, the answer is probably yes. I haven't done the sums on a drastic option such as a state pension freeze for seven years, but would be surprised if even that would alone have eliminated the deficit, not least because there will be a balancing effect through the benefits bill.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,613
    edited July 2017
    GeoffM said:

    Benpointer said:

    kyf_100 said:

    JRM on LBC with Farage right now being asked if he would stand in a leadership contest: "I think it would be vanity on my part in these terms... I have very few personal ambitions, being the MP for North East Somerset was my life's ambition..."

    Nailed on for PM then? :D

    ...being the MP for North East Somerset was my life's ambition..."

    Yeah right. Presume he wasn't really wanting to win when he stood for Central Fife and The Wreking then.
    Do you genuinely think he was *expecting* to win Central Fife?

    Or even thought that he might run it a bit close on a good night?
    No, but The Wrekin in 2001 was a serious possiblity, given the Tories won it 4 years later. Had he won in 2001 do you seriously think he would have given it up to pursue his "life's ambition" of being MP for North East Somerset? My point is, he's as full of spin as the next politician.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,836
    Dadge said:

    AndyJS said:

    O/T

    Discovered this nice Italian place near Euston station this evening.

    https://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Restaurant_Review-g186338-d1043936-Reviews-Brizzi_s-London_England.html

    I had a 99p Aldi tuna pasta salad sat on a bench outside the Crick Institute :)
    I had one of those last week.

    And I can recommend:

    http://www.poundbakery.co.uk/store-search/

    Two Cornish Pasties for a quid, right tasty they are as well.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited July 2017
    another_richard said:

    For the pension experts, would today's pension age change have been necessary if triple lock pensions had not been introduced ?

    Triple lock is perfectly viable, we just have to tax property/land as well.

    In fact, we could afford to *increase* pensions and *lower* the pension age from the revenue raised via a LVT.

    All we need is a strong and stable labour government to fix the tory pensions crisis and put provision on a sure footing for the coming generations.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,538
    another_richard said:

    For the pension experts, would today's pension age change have been necessary if triple lock pensions had not been introduced ?

    I haven't looked at the numbers in detail, but I would guess it's been a contributory factor, but not the biggest one.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,836
    IanB2 said:

    another_richard said:

    For the pension experts, would today's pension age change have been necessary if triple lock pensions had not been introduced ?

    It's not like a funded pension scheme, where you can at least attempt some sort of assessment of measures needed to bring a scheme back to balance. The state pension is funded from current taxation. Since there is a continuing deficit, which government is struggling to reduce, and which would not have been eliminated by a lower than triple-lock pensions increase, the answer is probably yes. I haven't done the sums on a drastic option such as a state pension freeze for seven years, but would be surprised if even that would alone have eliminated the deficit, not least because there will be a balancing effect through the benefits bill.
    I realise that it wouldn't have affected the current finances but in 20+ years time a smaller non triple lock pension would have reduced the overall cost which would have removed the need to increase the pension age at that point.

    Of course the better idea would have been to increase the pension age and to get rid of the triple lock.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,836
    Pong said:

    another_richard said:

    For the pension experts, would today's pension age change have been necessary if triple lock pensions had not been introduced ?

    Triple lock is perfectly viable, we just have to tax property/land as well.

    In fact, we could afford to *increase* pensions and *lower* the pension age from the revenue raised via a LVT.

    All we need is a strong and stable labour government to fix the tory pensions crisis and put provision on a sure footing for the coming generations.
    I hope you're being ironic ?

    Anyway that's certainly not going to happen.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,613
    edited July 2017
    rcs1000 said:

    another_richard said:

    For the pension experts, would today's pension age change have been necessary if triple lock pensions had not been introduced ?

    I haven't looked at the numbers in detail, but I would guess it's been a contributory factor, but not the biggest one.
    How much would the country have saved if, instead of the triple lock, a 1% cap had been applied to state pensions? It's not something I'd advocate, I just find it hypocritical that two such different approaches have been taken to two sectors of society, especially when we were supposed to be 'all in it together'.

    Of course, it's a complete coincidence that the favoured sector predominately votes Conservative whilst the other predominantly votes Labour...
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,613
    another_richard said:

    Pong said:

    another_richard said:

    For the pension experts, would today's pension age change have been necessary if triple lock pensions had not been introduced ?

    Triple lock is perfectly viable, we just have to tax property/land as well.

    In fact, we could afford to *increase* pensions and *lower* the pension age from the revenue raised via a LVT.

    All we need is a strong and stable labour government to fix the tory pensions crisis and put provision on a sure footing for the coming generations.
    I hope you're being ironic ?

    Anyway that's certainly not going to happen.
    And your certainty is based on... what exactly?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,836
    rcs1000 said:

    another_richard said:

    For the pension experts, would today's pension age change have been necessary if triple lock pensions had not been introduced ?

    I haven't looked at the numbers in detail, but I would guess it's been a contributory factor, but not the biggest one.
    I suspect there are few people under the age of 50 and none under the age of 40 who don't expect the state pension age to have risen to 70 by the time they get there.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,836
    Benpointer said:

    another_richard said:

    Pong said:

    another_richard said:

    For the pension experts, would today's pension age change have been necessary if triple lock pensions had not been introduced ?

    Triple lock is perfectly viable, we just have to tax property/land as well.

    In fact, we could afford to *increase* pensions and *lower* the pension age from the revenue raised via a LVT.

    All we need is a strong and stable labour government to fix the tory pensions crisis and put provision on a sure footing for the coming generations.
    I hope you're being ironic ?

    Anyway that's certainly not going to happen.
    And your certainty is based on... what exactly?
    Labour's previous record in government.

    Remind me when was the last time the pension age was lowered ?
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited July 2017
    another_richard said:

    rcs1000 said:

    another_richard said:

    For the pension experts, would today's pension age change have been necessary if triple lock pensions had not been introduced ?

    I haven't looked at the numbers in detail, but I would guess it's been a contributory factor, but not the biggest one.
    I suspect there are few people under the age of 50 and none under the age of 40 who don't expect the state pension age to have risen to 70 by the time they get there.
    Yes.

    The whole point of the current government is to protect the interests, assets and pensions of the tory client vote - older property owners. Under 40's are irrelevant. Even under 50's don't really matter.

    The tories don't give a damn that the system isn't sustainable, long term.

    They listen and nod when David Willetts is in the room, then go back to scraping the barrel for more pork to give to their client vote.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    stodge said:

    hunchman said:



    It has also snowed in northern Quebec in recent days, as well as Santiago (very unusual as the residents there will tell you) as well as being incredibly cold across Chile and Argentina generally. Southern Australia has set plenty of record cold temperatures this winter, as well as it being the coldest winter in Perth for many years.

    The evidence is all around you wherever you look of the oncoming Grand Solar Minimum. And people like you will be expecting the government to support you with cold winter fuel payments etc with the oncoming cold weather. I can't help that you like in denial of the obvious, but that's your problem and not mine.

    OTOH, the Spanish temperature record went earlier this week with 47.3C recorded near Cordoba and it has also been very hot in Portugal and Greece this summer.

    It's complicated and, to be honest, I don't know.

    Given the large numbers of humanity living in coastal regions for example, any increase in sea levels and storminess is going to cause problems irrespective of the cause.

    Our numbers and the structure of our civilisation create a hyper-sensitivity to weather and climate changes that didn't exist thousands of years ago.


    Here is an interesting set of maps of the world if all the ice melted (I think unlikely for Antartica as sheer volume and mass in the short term) :

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/what-the-world-would-look-like-if-all-the-ice-melted-a7847386.html

    Note to self: to be on the safe side always live above 100 meters...
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 31,925
    I like Andrea Leadsom, and I think she'd have been good, as I said at the time.

    Many others vehemently disagreed, praising Theresa's qualities, but all they were really interested in was a Brexit stitch up.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Benpointer said:

    rcs1000 said:

    another_richard said:

    For the pension experts, would today's pension age change have been necessary if triple lock pensions had not been introduced ?

    I haven't looked at the numbers in detail, but I would guess it's been a contributory factor, but not the biggest one.
    How much would the country have saved if, instead of the triple lock, a 1% cap had been applied to state pensions? It's not something I'd advocate, I just find it hypocritical that two such different approaches have been taken to two sectors of society, especially when we were supposed to be 'all in it together'.

    Of course, it's a complete coincidence that the favoured sector predominately votes Conservative whilst the other predominantly votes Labour...
    Nail on head.

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,938
    Farage and Moggster show

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVGV2UqSCbU
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,812
    stodge said:

    hunchman said:



    It has also snowed in northern Quebec in recent days, as well as Santiago (very unusual as the residents there will tell you) as well as being incredibly cold across Chile and Argentina generally. Southern Australia has set plenty of record cold temperatures this winter, as well as it being the coldest winter in Perth for many years.

    The evidence is all around you wherever you look of the oncoming Grand Solar Minimum. And people like you will be expecting the government to support you with cold winter fuel payments etc with the oncoming cold weather. I can't help that you like in denial of the obvious, but that's your problem and not mine.

    OTOH, the Spanish temperature record went earlier this week with 47.3C recorded near Cordoba and it has also been very hot in Portugal and Greece this summer.

    It's complicated and, to be honest, I don't know.

    Given the large numbers of humanity living in coastal regions for example, any increase in sea levels and storminess is going to cause problems irrespective of the cause.

    Our numbers and the structure of our civilisation create a hyper-sensitivity to weather and climate changes that didn't exist thousands of years ago.


    http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/temperature/greenland.18kyr.gif
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    FeersumEnjineeya said:



    The folk at the Royal Society know a bit about science, and they seem pretty sure about it:

    How do scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities?

    "Scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities from an understanding of basic physics, comparing observations with models, and fingerprinting the detailed patterns of climate change caused by different human and natural influences."

    LOL, you respond to a post pointing out that the appeal to authority is a fallacy, with an appeal to authority. Yesterday you claimed, quite wrongly, that a piece of writing was riddled with errors, but when you were challenged to identify one such error your internet connection went down.

    Here is a question. There is only one correct answer to it. Consider the nature of the evidence for the claim that smoking causes cancer. In your opinion is the evidence for AGW as strong as that evidence, or stronger, or weaker? And by how much?

    And here is another: consider the circumstances in which professor Holick lost his job for questioning the unanimous scientific view that exposure of the skin to sunlight has only harmful consequences. That unanimity has now been utterly reversed. What makes the AGW consensus any stronger than the sunlight consensus?

    The point is not whether AGW is right or not, it's whether you are equipped to have a useful opinion on the subject. You aren't.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,812
    Ishmael_Z said:

    FeersumEnjineeya said:



    The folk at the Royal Society know a bit about science, and they seem pretty sure about it:

    How do scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities?

    "Scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities from an understanding of basic physics, comparing observations with models, and fingerprinting the detailed patterns of climate change caused by different human and natural influences."

    LOL, you respond to a post pointing out that the appeal to authority is a fallacy, with an appeal to authority. Yesterday you claimed, quite wrongly, that a piece of writing was riddled with errors, but when you were challenged to identify one such error your internet connection went down.

    Here is a question. There is only one correct answer to it. Consider the nature of the evidence for the claim that smoking causes cancer. In your opinion is the evidence for AGW as strong as that evidence, or stronger, or weaker? And by how much?

    And here is another: consider the circumstances in which professor Holick lost his job for questioning the unanimous scientific view that exposure of the skin to sunlight has only harmful consequences. That unanimity has now been utterly reversed. What makes the AGW consensus any stronger than the sunlight consensus?

    The point is not whether AGW is right or not, it's whether you are equipped to have a useful opinion on the subject. You aren't.
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/articlePictures/globalcool3.jpg
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Ishmael_Z said:

    FeersumEnjineeya said:



    The folk at the Royal Society know a bit about science, and they seem pretty sure about it:

    How do scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities?

    "Scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities from an understanding of basic physics, comparing observations with models, and fingerprinting the detailed patterns of climate change caused by different human and natural influences."

    Here is a question. There is only one correct answer to it. Consider the nature of the evidence for the claim that smoking causes cancer. In your opinion is the evidence for AGW as strong as that evidence, or stronger, or weaker? And by how much?

    What a stupid question.

    Some things cannot be quantified. You can't quantify "by how much" the evidence that smoking causes cancer is stronger or weaker than the evidence for AGW.
  • FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 4,779
    Ishmael_Z said:

    FeersumEnjineeya said:



    The folk at the Royal Society know a bit about science, and they seem pretty sure about it:

    How do scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities?

    "Scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities from an understanding of basic physics, comparing observations with models, and fingerprinting the detailed patterns of climate change caused by different human and natural influences."

    LOL, you respond to a post pointing out that the appeal to authority is a fallacy, with an appeal to authority. Yesterday you claimed, quite wrongly, that a piece of writing was riddled with errors, but when you were challenged to identify one such error your internet connection went down.

    Here is a question. There is only one correct answer to it. Consider the nature of the evidence for the claim that smoking causes cancer. In your opinion is the evidence for AGW as strong as that evidence, or stronger, or weaker? And by how much?

    And here is another: consider the circumstances in which professor Holick lost his job for questioning the unanimous scientific view that exposure of the skin to sunlight has only harmful consequences. That unanimity has now been utterly reversed. What makes the AGW consensus any stronger than the sunlight consensus?

    The point is not whether AGW is right or not, it's whether you are equipped to have a useful opinion on the subject. You aren't.
    An appeal to authority is a fallacy only if you do not have a valid reason for supposing that authority to be knowledgeable about the problem in question. Whenever we take the advice of a professional, such as a doctor or engineer, we are making an implicit appeal to authority.

    In this case, there are good grounds to assume that the members of the Royal Society are likely to be a good source of information with regard to climate change, since they include experts in the field who have the knowledge and ability to understand the problem.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Pong said:

    another_richard said:

    rcs1000 said:

    another_richard said:

    For the pension experts, would today's pension age change have been necessary if triple lock pensions had not been introduced ?

    I haven't looked at the numbers in detail, but I would guess it's been a contributory factor, but not the biggest one.
    I suspect there are few people under the age of 50 and none under the age of 40 who don't expect the state pension age to have risen to 70 by the time they get there.
    Yes.

    The whole point of the current government is to protect the interests, assets and pensions of the tory client vote - older property owners. Under 40's are irrelevant. Even under 50's don't really matter.

    The tories don't give a damn that the system isn't sustainable, long term.

    They listen and nod when David Willetts is in the room, then go back to scraping the barrel for more pork to give to their client vote.
    The other thing to note is that current UK population forecasts are for a stable working age population. This would be shrinking if the government were to meet its immigration target, meaning that retirement will have to be postponed for most of us for both practical and financial reasons. The growth in population currently projected is in the retirement and childhood groups.

    See section 5 for the projections:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationprojections/bulletins/nationalpopulationprojections/2015-10-29#changing-age-structure
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    rcs1000 said:

    AndyJS said:

    O/T

    Discovered this nice Italian place near Euston station this evening.

    https://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Restaurant_Review-g186338-d1043936-Reviews-Brizzi_s-London_England.html

    Normally I go to Diwana on Drummond Street! Appalling service, but very nice food.
    Paper Dosa !
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,451
    Ishmael_Z said:

    murali_s said:

    hunchman said:

    Leadsom was stupid at the time with her comments. She blew it, along with a whole lot of other Tories. Quite right the comments the other day on here that said there are no clever people left in politics any more.

    On another note, NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU caught faking global temperature data. The oncoming grand solar minimum is being increasingly noticed by many people. Just one of the many cogs in the global crisis in confidence in government worldwide:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVLZ2_wxiDI

    LOL! The video is a joke!

    The world is warming, largely through anthropogenic forcing - that's pretty much a fact now. Moronic flat-earthers like you may not agree but quite frankly who gives a fvck!
    That claim makes you moronic, not him. No one with any understanding of how science works would call AGW "pretty much a fact" when the claim is pretty much exclusively based on computer modelling.

    Please feel free to embarrass yourself further by saying something about 97% of scientists, to confirm that you do not understand that the appeal to authority is a fallacy. And you can call me a moron if you want to, but not on the grounds that I dispute the existence of AGW, because I don't. I just don't like self-righteous stupidity.
    Saying that the evidence for AGW is lacking because it's based on computer models is itself a logical fallacy.

    Most people who try to argue against AGW do so because they have significant financial and/or political gains to make from promoting the belief that there is a "debate" in the scientific community.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    Benpointer said:

    rcs1000 said:

    another_richard said:

    For the pension experts, would today's pension age change have been necessary if triple lock pensions had not been introduced ?

    I haven't looked at the numbers in detail, but I would guess it's been a contributory factor, but not the biggest one.
    How much would the country have saved if, instead of the triple lock, a 1% cap had been applied to state pensions? It's not something I'd advocate, I just find it hypocritical that two such different approaches have been taken to two sectors of society, especially when we were supposed to be 'all in it together'.

    Of course, it's a complete coincidence that the favoured sector predominately votes Conservative whilst the other predominantly votes Labour...
    ....and plan 2 student loans are up to 6.1% interest.

    They're using the state to milk not-tories so they can hand cash to their client vote.

    Austerity for you, prosperity for us.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,812
    foxinsoxuk said:

    stodge said:

    hunchman said:



    It has also snowed in northern Quebec in recent days, as well as Santiago (very unusual as the residents there will tell you) as well as being incredibly cold across Chile and Argentina generally. Southern Australia has set plenty of record cold temperatures this winter, as well as it being the coldest winter in Perth for many years.

    The evidence is all around you wherever you look of the oncoming Grand Solar Minimum. And people like you will be expecting the government to support you with cold winter fuel payments etc with the oncoming cold weather. I can't help that you like in denial of the obvious, but that's your problem and not mine.

    OTOH, the Spanish temperature record went earlier this week with 47.3C recorded near Cordoba and it has also been very hot in Portugal and Greece this summer.

    It's complicated and, to be honest, I don't know.

    Given the large numbers of humanity living in coastal regions for example, any increase in sea levels and storminess is going to cause problems irrespective of the cause.

    Our numbers and the structure of our civilisation create a hyper-sensitivity to weather and climate changes that didn't exist thousands of years ago.


    Here is an interesting set of maps of the world if all the ice melted (I think unlikely for Antartica as sheer volume and mass in the short term) :

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/what-the-world-would-look-like-if-all-the-ice-melted-a7847386.html

    Note to self: to be on the safe side always live above 100 meters...
    https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/gornitz_10/fig1.jpg
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    MarkSenior said:

    If Leadsom is the answer then the Conservative Party and the country are in even deeper sh1t than when the answer was J R-M

    Tories 42%
    LibDems 7%

    Tories 317 seats
    LibDems 12 seats
    Your ripostes are very silly.
  • FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 4,779
    foxinsoxuk said:

    stodge said:

    hunchman said:



    It has also snowed in northern Quebec in recent days, as well as Santiago (very unusual as the residents there will tell you) as well as being incredibly cold across Chile and Argentina generally. Southern Australia has set plenty of record cold temperatures this winter, as well as it being the coldest winter in Perth for many years.

    The evidence is all around you wherever you look of the oncoming Grand Solar Minimum. And people like you will be expecting the government to support you with cold winter fuel payments etc with the oncoming cold weather. I can't help that you like in denial of the obvious, but that's your problem and not mine.

    OTOH, the Spanish temperature record went earlier this week with 47.3C recorded near Cordoba and it has also been very hot in Portugal and Greece this summer.

    It's complicated and, to be honest, I don't know.

    Given the large numbers of humanity living in coastal regions for example, any increase in sea levels and storminess is going to cause problems irrespective of the cause.

    Our numbers and the structure of our civilisation create a hyper-sensitivity to weather and climate changes that didn't exist thousands of years ago.


    Here is an interesting set of maps of the world if all the ice melted (I think unlikely for Antartica as sheer volume and mass in the short term) :

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/what-the-world-would-look-like-if-all-the-ice-melted-a7847386.html

    Note to self: to be on the safe side always live above 100 meters...
    In the short term, no, but in a couple of thousand years, yes, assuming business as normal.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    another_richard said:

    As they say, every President of the fifth Republic has been worse than his predecessor:

    ' The head of the French armed forces has resigned amid a bitter public row with the president, Emmanuel Macron – an unprecedented dispute that has highlighted the strain on the French military, deployed in numerous operations abroad and at home.

    The military chief, Gen Pierre de Villiers, said in a resignation statement on Wednesday that he no longer felt able to command the sort of armed forces “that I think is necessary to guarantee the protection of France and the French people”.

    The row began last week when a government minister revealed in a newspaper interview that – despite assurances that the French military budget would rise – there would be a surprise €850m cut to military finances as Macron seeks to slash public spending. '

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/19/head-of-french-military-quits-after-row-with-emmanuel-macron

    And does anyone still believe that Macron is opposed to austerity ?

    As long as he cuts the military budget with its built-in fat , then its OK. He is probably cutting more then that.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    YBarddCwsc said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    FeersumEnjineeya said:



    The folk at the Royal Society know a bit about science, and they seem pretty sure about it:

    How do scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities?

    "Scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities from an understanding of basic physics, comparing observations with models, and fingerprinting the detailed patterns of climate change caused by different human and natural influences."

    Here is a question. There is only one correct answer to it. Consider the nature of the evidence for the claim that smoking causes cancer. In your opinion is the evidence for AGW as strong as that evidence, or stronger, or weaker? And by how much?

    What a stupid question.

    Some things cannot be quantified. You can't quantify "by how much" the evidence that smoking causes cancer is stronger or weaker than the evidence for AGW.
    I think you can, by producing probability measures, though one wonders if there is a real practical difference between a 99% risk vs a 99.99% one.

    How certain should you be to take action to avoid catastrophe? 95% or just 50%? perhaps just 10% when we consider the apocalyptic possibilities?

    The real question is what is the best action? sea defences or reduced CO2?
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited July 2017
    foxinsoxuk said:

    YBarddCwsc said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    FeersumEnjineeya said:



    The folk at the Royal Society know a bit about science, and they seem pretty sure about it:

    How do scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities?

    "Scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities from an understanding of basic physics, comparing observations with models, and fingerprinting the detailed patterns of climate change caused by different human and natural influences."

    Here is a question. There is only one correct answer to it. Consider the nature of the evidence for the claim that smoking causes cancer. In your opinion is the evidence for AGW as strong as that evidence, or stronger, or weaker? And by how much?

    What a stupid question.

    Some things cannot be quantified. You can't quantify "by how much" the evidence that smoking causes cancer is stronger or weaker than the evidence for AGW.
    I think you can, by producing probability measures, though one wonders if there is a real practical difference between a 99% risk vs a 99.99% one.

    How certain should you be to take action to avoid catastrophe? 95% or just 50%? perhaps just 10% when we consider the apocalyptic possibilities?

    The real question is what is the best action? sea defences or reduced CO2?
    Those numbers cannot be meaningful unless you have made a large number of predictions in which you claim a similar degree of confidence, and found that 99% of them (or 99.99 %) are correct.

    Some things cannot be quantified, and attempts to do so only mislead.

    In the case of AGW, it is better to explain the physical reasoning why we expect such a causal connection, and to stop there.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,159
    The two basic facts of climate change are that CO2 levels have increased in a linear (ie not cyclical) fashion over the past couple hundred years and that higher CO2 levels in the atrmosphere result in higher surface temperatures due to a greenhouse effect. The only sensible explanation of the increasing CO2 levels is human activity. That's accepted by serious scientists in the same way as, say, the competitive evolution of species is accepted.

    There is a lot we still don't know about the science. We can debate policy. There is plenty to be sceptical about. I just don't think it's useful to challenge the basic fact of human generated climate change and to dismiss it all as a big plot.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Some Inconvenient Truths on Global Warming

    1. Global warming is real and much of it is anthropogenic.

    2 Nothing serious will be done about it.

    3 It may be good for humanity by lengthening growing seasons; it may be bad for humanity if weather patterns, rainfall, sea-levels change for the worse. We don't know.

    4. Man conquered the globe because he adapted, in prehistoric times, to climates from the Arctic to the Sahara.

    5. We will adapt to a warmer Earth.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited July 2017
    foxinsoxuk said:

    Pong said:

    another_richard said:

    rcs1000 said:

    another_richard said:

    For the pension experts, would today's pension age change have been necessary if triple lock pensions had not been introduced ?

    I haven't looked at the numbers in detail, but I would guess it's been a contributory factor, but not the biggest one.
    I suspect there are few people under the age of 50 and none under the age of 40 who don't expect the state pension age to have risen to 70 by the time they get there.
    Yes.

    The whole point of the current government is to protect the interests, assets and pensions of the tory client vote - older property owners. Under 40's are irrelevant. Even under 50's don't really matter.

    The tories don't give a damn that the system isn't sustainable, long term.

    They listen and nod when David Willetts is in the room, then go back to scraping the barrel for more pork to give to their client vote.
    The other thing to note is that current UK population forecasts are for a stable working age population. This would be shrinking if the government were to meet its immigration target, meaning that retirement will have to be postponed for most of us for both practical and financial reasons. The growth in population currently projected is in the retirement and childhood groups.

    See section 5 for the projections:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationprojections/bulletins/nationalpopulationprojections/2015-10-29#changing-age-structure
    It doesn't look good. Still, could be worse;

    http://www.viewsoftheworld.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/EuropePopulationPyramids.jpg
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,022
    another_richard said:

    As they say, every President of the fifth Republic has been worse than his predecessor

    Perhaps Macron wants to prepare the ground to force the top brass into accepting something big on European defence.
This discussion has been closed.