"Solar is set to overpower fossil fuels as the dominant electricity source globally by 2050, according to a new study. [...] Solar power is set to dominate global electricity markets within the next few decades, and may have already reached an “irreversible tipping point,” according to a study published this week in Nature Communications. The study finds that solar adoption will continue apace barring any major policy shifts geared at disrupting it." https://twitter.com/patrickc/status/1714988564801519937
In other words it will continue until people stop flinging subsidies at it. That's hardly surprising. Powering the world with blancmange would be winning the energy race if it was subsidised as we do with favoured renewables.
If you borrow £1,000 to put solar panels on your roof in England, they will reduce your electricity bill by about £180-200/year.
And that purchase involves exactly zero subsidies.
That's an 18-20% annual tax free return.
The vast majority of residential and commercial solar installations these days are done without subsidy.
Mm, a whole lot better than fracking as demonstrated on even the most optimal UK sites, too. And the pollution problem is different (original production costs aside). You just clean up the bird crap every now and then.
It has absolutely nothing to do with fracking, God alone knows why you brought that up. Applications like that mentioned above are fine, but they aren't what's driving solar to become the world's biggest form of electricity generation. This piece on the abandonment of solar by India's Greenpeace-installed 'solar village' is a vignette of the whole issue. These things are put in with grand fanfare, but are not great or particularly reliable forms of generation, and when the subsidies stop, people stop using them. https://india.mongabay.com/2021/12/solar-power-station-at-bihars-first-solar-village-is-now-a-makeshift-cattle-shed/?amp=1
Can I ask you a question?
Is there any information or data that might make you change your mind?
So, if - for example - I were to show that 90% of German or Australian solar installations in 2022 were done without any subsidies whatsoever, would that make you change your mind?
I would want to look for the legislative incentives/push/compulsion and I suspect that I would find them.
Historically, you certainly would. Germany had the Feed in Tariff, where they would pay people for the electricity generated. But they've cut and cut and cut it, so that now it is way below the retail cost of electricity.
The result is that no-one doing residential solar in Germany signs up for the feed in tariff any more. Indeed, if you look at the public statements from the CEOs of RWE and other German power companies, they will tell you that they only see solar appearing via demand destruction these days.
Look at my numbers from before (and I appreciate you're in Scotland, and there's a lot less sun there and therefore the economics are different), but if you are in England and you spend £1,000 on solar panels today, and assuming you do not sell any electricity back to the grid, you will reduce your electricity bill by around £190.
Now, for some people that won't make financial sense. But for others it will. And as panel prices continue to fall, and they fall every year, the number of people for whom it makes sense rises.
I'd love to have solar panels, but I'm curious about your Maths. Unless you have an EV, I don't understand how your Maths works.
I haven't had a quotation for my home, but have been looking online as I'm interested and it seems a typical Solar installation today costs about £5-6k including parts and labour. More if you want a battery to go with it.
So based on your theory that £1k = £190 in savings then should expect ~£1k - £1.2k in cost savings.
But my total annual electricity bill is only £1k. So I'd have to have to come in on the low-end of the quote range, and have all my bill wiped out in order to meet the ratio you named.
And since the cost of electricity is due to come back down off its peak, even then a 100% cost reduction wouldn't meet your quoted numbers.
So where are your numbers coming from? Unless you can get an installation done for £1k - in which case great, how?
They quote £7,000 for installation on average (inc labour), and £365* typical saving if out until 4pm.
So that's £52 per £1000 invested, which is rather different to your £190.
If you have a way of getting a solar system for £1k I'd love to see it.
* And that's in London, lower elsewhere, presumably as elsewhere is further North.
I know London is out on the fringes of the UK, more so than Wick or Belfast, but there is life within North Island south of London: Lizard Point is as far as one can get.
LOL I edited the numbers to simplify it as I was looking at with SEG in London which inflated the figure.
The £190 saving @rcs1000 quoted is listed as in Manchester, without SEG . . . but install of a system will set you back £5-7k+ not £1k.
£190 saving off the cheapest possible £5k install is a 3.8% saving which isn't really affordable if you're borrowing with today's interest rates.
TBF it's a sliding scale. A ~£6-7k 4kWp install - return potentially £600-800 (estimate but in the ballpark) will be a return towards approx 10%.
Unless you have a battery and/or an electric car, or are working and running a business from home, I don't see how those numbers work.
Especially since the Energy Savings Trust figures are based on a £7k system and say £190 return without SEG if out until 4pm.
EST worked example.
I don't understand "ignoring the SEG". It's a real number in the calculation.
Post code RG30 2LX, unencumbered 4kWp install on a S-facing 40 degree roof, out until 4pm gives a £360 benefit which is ~£200 plus SEG of ~£160.
SEG pays 5.5p / kWh.
In practice you get 15p / kWh export on the open market (Octopus Outgoing Fixed tariff), which makes it 15/5.5 x £160 ie £440.
£440 + £200 = £640, which is in my range.
In practice benefit could be greater because many of us can work from home, or are at home anyway, or can move loads around to use more generated electricity than assumed by EST,
eg at a simple level we can have a water tank with a timer set to heat it up during the day, or appliances on timers etc.
I suggest that anyone who pays over £6k for a 4kWp solar installation is a possibly a bit of a mug, or not working on getting a best price. I would be aiming to pay £5000 to £5500 for a 3rd party install of such a system.
I excluded SEG because I was responding to Robert saying this: if you are in England and you spend £1,000 on solar panels today, and assuming you do not sell any electricity back to the grid, you will reduce your electricity bill by around £190.
The reality seems to be if you spend £5000-7000 today and assuming you do not sell any electricity back to the grid you will reduce your bill by about £190, which is somewhat different.
Octopus Outgoing Fixed Tariff is only available if you're on an Octopus tariff, if you're not the export rate is 4.1p rather than 15p which is a bit of a difference too.
OK - so I gave a real world answer .
AIUI normal Octopus process is that you switch to their standard tariff, then can switch to any one of the other 10 or so tariffs. Export tariffs require a SMETS2 meter iirc.
I've been on an Octopus Agile Outgoing Tariff for the last year for my exports, which is wholesale-price linked on half hourly segments. That delivered 11p per unit. So yesterday I switched to the 15p fixed tariff with a phone call, which will be worth an extra £100 or so - or more if I get my solar panels jetwashed with an appropriate solution, or persuade the neighbour to deal with their cracking-up horse chestnut tree.
Christie is at least running to loudly criticise Trump despite having no hope - other than hoping Trump has a heart attack what are the others bothering for?
If Trump had a heart attack, Haley/Christie would walk the general election. Trump is the Republicans’ biggest liability.
Chris Christie has as much chance getting GOP 2024 VP nomination, as Mike Smithson. Or Mike Pence.
"Alex Salmond powers through storm to cast imaginary ballot in non-existent independence referendum The former SNP leader aimed to make a point that nothing was supposed to stop Nicola Sturgeon.
"While Mr Salmond determined to show up for the photo stunt today, much of Scotland was hunkered down as Storm Babet battered regions including the north-east.
He said: “October 19th 2023 was designated by the SNP last year as referendum day. But instead of a celebration of democracy to take the country forward, the SNP have abdicated any claim to leadership of the national movement.”
Christie is at least running to loudly criticise Trump despite having no hope - other than hoping Trump has a heart attack what are the others bothering for?
If Trump had a heart attack, Haley/Christie would walk the general election. Trump is the Republicans’ biggest liability.
Chris Christie has as much chance getting GOP 2024 VP nomination, as Mike Smithson. Or Mike Pence.
I think the real electoral fly in Trump's ointment is his lack of appeal to independent voters.
My son and daughter in law got married this year after 12 years of dating. They are both adamant about not having children. Its not to do with tax incentives or anything.
For them its two things
a) There life style would change due to the costs of rearing a child b) They don't think its fair to have children who will end up paying huge amount of tax to fund the spending excesses of today c) They don't regard it as their duty to provide arse wipers for millenials
Er, isn’t that three things?
And (this is meant with the greatest respect) I do suspect that those three might be filtered through their father and father - in- laws somewhat curmudgeonly worldview, rather than being neutrally reported!
On a more serious philosophical note, I think 2 is bonkers. Paying tax is, in my view, quite a few rungs above not existing at all on the great ladder of human existence.
"Solar is set to overpower fossil fuels as the dominant electricity source globally by 2050, according to a new study. [...] Solar power is set to dominate global electricity markets within the next few decades, and may have already reached an “irreversible tipping point,” according to a study published this week in Nature Communications. The study finds that solar adoption will continue apace barring any major policy shifts geared at disrupting it." https://twitter.com/patrickc/status/1714988564801519937
In other words it will continue until people stop flinging subsidies at it. That's hardly surprising. Powering the world with blancmange would be winning the energy race if it was subsidised as we do with favoured renewables.
If you borrow £1,000 to put solar panels on your roof in England, they will reduce your electricity bill by about £180-200/year.
And that purchase involves exactly zero subsidies.
That's an 18-20% annual tax free return.
The vast majority of residential and commercial solar installations these days are done without subsidy.
Mm, a whole lot better than fracking as demonstrated on even the most optimal UK sites, too. And the pollution problem is different (original production costs aside). You just clean up the bird crap every now and then.
It has absolutely nothing to do with fracking, God alone knows why you brought that up. Applications like that mentioned above are fine, but they aren't what's driving solar to become the world's biggest form of electricity generation. This piece on the abandonment of solar by India's Greenpeace-installed 'solar village' is a vignette of the whole issue. These things are put in with grand fanfare, but are not great or particularly reliable forms of generation, and when the subsidies stop, people stop using them. https://india.mongabay.com/2021/12/solar-power-station-at-bihars-first-solar-village-is-now-a-makeshift-cattle-shed/?amp=1
Can I ask you a question?
Is there any information or data that might make you change your mind?
So, if - for example - I were to show that 90% of German or Australian solar installations in 2022 were done without any subsidies whatsoever, would that make you change your mind?
I would want to look for the legislative incentives/push/compulsion and I suspect that I would find them.
Historically, you certainly would. Germany had the Feed in Tariff, where they would pay people for the electricity generated. But they've cut and cut and cut it, so that now it is way below the retail cost of electricity.
The result is that no-one doing residential solar in Germany signs up for the feed in tariff any more. Indeed, if you look at the public statements from the CEOs of RWE and other German power companies, they will tell you that they only see solar appearing via demand destruction these days.
Look at my numbers from before (and I appreciate you're in Scotland, and there's a lot less sun there and therefore the economics are different), but if you are in England and you spend £1,000 on solar panels today, and assuming you do not sell any electricity back to the grid, you will reduce your electricity bill by around £190.
Now, for some people that won't make financial sense. But for others it will. And as panel prices continue to fall, and they fall every year, the number of people for whom it makes sense rises.
I'd love to have solar panels, but I'm curious about your Maths. Unless you have an EV, I don't understand how your Maths works.
I haven't had a quotation for my home, but have been looking online as I'm interested and it seems a typical Solar installation today costs about £5-6k including parts and labour. More if you want a battery to go with it.
So based on your theory that £1k = £190 in savings then should expect ~£1k - £1.2k in cost savings.
But my total annual electricity bill is only £1k. So I'd have to have to come in on the low-end of the quote range, and have all my bill wiped out in order to meet the ratio you named.
And since the cost of electricity is due to come back down off its peak, even then a 100% cost reduction wouldn't meet your quoted numbers.
So where are your numbers coming from? Unless you can get an installation done for £1k - in which case great, how?
They quote £7,000 for installation on average (inc labour), and £365* typical saving if out until 4pm.
So that's £52 per £1000 invested, which is rather different to your £190.
If you have a way of getting a solar system for £1k I'd love to see it.
* And that's in London, lower elsewhere, presumably as elsewhere is further North.
I know London is out on the fringes of the UK, more so than Wick or Belfast, but there is life within North Island south of London: Lizard Point is as far as one can get.
To get a solar system for £1000 you buy the panels secondhand or ex-bankruptcy via ebay, and install it yourself on eg a shed or woodstore. It depends if it is grid-connected or not.
When I get around to it I will be getting a car port which just consists of a frame, and solar panels as the roof.
Shit. I paid a hell of a lot more than that and all I got was Saturn and about 3 moons of Jupiter. And not even the big ones!
If you insist on buying in this arm of the galaxy of course you are going to be ripped off.
You can buy one out in the Magellanic cloud for a third of the price. The commute isn't too bad - only 160k years or so.
The Local Group is getting a bit crowded for my liking, wiki says almost 80 galaxies.
Give me the Boötes Void, much more exclusive, and virtually empty - the NIMBY of the universe.
You know there's something really really big in it that eats stars... 😀
If that's the price to pay for uncluttered real estate, so be it.
Overall, slightly more sympathise with Israel than Palestine but with big differences by party. Scotland stands out as being much more pro-Palestine than anywhere else in the UK, as are 18-24 year olds.
London is also more pro Palestine on that poll, as are Labour voters and more narrowly LD voters
Not a good poll for Starmer. He's been far too strident for the taste of his voters and it is an issue that can swing votes.
I think it will be more of a problem for Starmer in government than electorally.
His equivalent of, “We ran for office as New Labour, and we shall govern as New Labour,” will be seen as governing like the Tories to a significant part of his base.
I think he'll drop Blair once he's won.
Being vague and plausible sounding to win has a long, successful pedigree. He won't find himself that bound.
LESKO, who announced she is retiring, told Jordan he should step down if he is supporting the McHenry resolution.
Said if he were not speaker designee, he wouldn’t be supporting it and it seemed self serving to be able to campaign for months, sources tell me and @sarahnferris...
Christie is at least running to loudly criticise Trump despite having no hope - other than hoping Trump has a heart attack what are the others bothering for?
If Trump had a heart attack, Haley/Christie would walk the general election. Trump is the Republicans’ biggest liability.
Chris Christie has as much chance getting GOP 2024 VP nomination, as Mike Smithson. Or Mike Pence.
I don’t think Haley has much chance of getting the GOP Presidential nomination. But I think if the Republicans could lance the Trump boil and put up a vaguely normal-looking candidate, they would sweep the board.
I do think Labour will win in Mid Beds, though being pipped by the LDs to 1st or second would be fun to see the LDs point out they were correct to try hard.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
LESKO, who announced she is retiring, told Jordan he should step down if he is supporting the McHenry resolution.
Said if he were not speaker designee, he wouldn’t be supporting it and it seemed self serving to be able to campaign for months, sources tell me and @sarahnferris...
I do think Labour will win in Mid Beds, though being pipped by the LDs to 1st or second would be fun to see the LDs point out they were correct to try hard.
The funn(i)est result, which I think could happen, is the Tories coming third. Everyone’s all excited about the prospect of the Tories winning and Lab and LD blaming each other, but what if the Tories are 3rd in Mid Beds and lose Tamworth. Does Sunak start to worry about (another) coup?
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
"Jews gag media" screams a thousand websites in that case.
I learnt a long time ago if I didn't have a strong view on a race not to get involved. A win for any of the Conservatives, Labour or Liberal Democrats in Mid Bedfordshire, the 268th most marginal Conservative seat, would come as no surprise, a win for any other candidate would.
As for Tamworth, the 311th most marginal Conservative seat, either Labour or Conservative. I just suspect Labour are going to get close but not close enough.
Overall, slightly more sympathise with Israel than Palestine but with big differences by party. Scotland stands out as being much more pro-Palestine than anywhere else in the UK, as are 18-24 year olds.
London is also more pro Palestine on that poll, as are Labour voters and more narrowly LD voters
Not a good poll for Starmer. He's been far too strident for the taste of his voters and it is an issue that can swing votes.
I think it will be more of a problem for Starmer in government than electorally.
His equivalent of, “We ran for office as New Labour, and we shall govern as New Labour,” will be seen as governing like the Tories to a significant part of his base.
Overall, slightly more sympathise with Israel than Palestine but with big differences by party. Scotland stands out as being much more pro-Palestine than anywhere else in the UK, as are 18-24 year olds.
London is also more pro Palestine on that poll, as are Labour voters and more narrowly LD voters
Not a good poll for Starmer. He's been far too strident for the taste of his voters and it is an issue that can swing votes.
I think it will be more of a problem for Starmer in government than electorally.
His equivalent of, “We ran for office as New Labour, and we shall govern as New Labour,” will be seen as governing like the Tories to a significant part of his base.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
"Jews gag media" screams a thousand websites in that case.
But then that's the Internet for you.
Let them scream. The media should be gagged from blindly repeating Hamas propaganda as the truth.
Christie is at least running to loudly criticise Trump despite having no hope - other than hoping Trump has a heart attack what are the others bothering for?
If Trump had a heart attack, Haley/Christie would walk the general election. Trump is the Republicans’ biggest liability.
Chris Christie has as much chance getting GOP 2024 VP nomination, as Mike Smithson. Or Mike Pence.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
BBC sneaking out not quite an apology. No mention of their headlines or their Twitter post that still says hundreds killed by Israeli strike.
Christie is at least running to loudly criticise Trump despite having no hope - other than hoping Trump has a heart attack what are the others bothering for?
If Trump had a heart attack, Haley/Christie would walk the general election. Trump is the Republicans’ biggest liability.
Not if Trump voters stay home or go for Kennedy Jr if Trump is not nominee
"Solar is set to overpower fossil fuels as the dominant electricity source globally by 2050, according to a new study. [...] Solar power is set to dominate global electricity markets within the next few decades, and may have already reached an “irreversible tipping point,” according to a study published this week in Nature Communications. The study finds that solar adoption will continue apace barring any major policy shifts geared at disrupting it." https://twitter.com/patrickc/status/1714988564801519937
In other words it will continue until people stop flinging subsidies at it. That's hardly surprising. Powering the world with blancmange would be winning the energy race if it was subsidised as we do with favoured renewables.
If you borrow £1,000 to put solar panels on your roof in England, they will reduce your electricity bill by about £180-200/year.
And that purchase involves exactly zero subsidies.
That's an 18-20% annual tax free return.
The vast majority of residential and commercial solar installations these days are done without subsidy.
Mm, a whole lot better than fracking as demonstrated on even the most optimal UK sites, too. And the pollution problem is different (original production costs aside). You just clean up the bird crap every now and then.
It has absolutely nothing to do with fracking, God alone knows why you brought that up. Applications like that mentioned above are fine, but they aren't what's driving solar to become the world's biggest form of electricity generation. This piece on the abandonment of solar by India's Greenpeace-installed 'solar village' is a vignette of the whole issue. These things are put in with grand fanfare, but are not great or particularly reliable forms of generation, and when the subsidies stop, people stop using them. https://india.mongabay.com/2021/12/solar-power-station-at-bihars-first-solar-village-is-now-a-makeshift-cattle-shed/?amp=1
Can I ask you a question?
Is there any information or data that might make you change your mind?
So, if - for example - I were to show that 90% of German or Australian solar installations in 2022 were done without any subsidies whatsoever, would that make you change your mind?
I would want to look for the legislative incentives/push/compulsion and I suspect that I would find them.
Historically, you certainly would. Germany had the Feed in Tariff, where they would pay people for the electricity generated. But they've cut and cut and cut it, so that now it is way below the retail cost of electricity.
The result is that no-one doing residential solar in Germany signs up for the feed in tariff any more. Indeed, if you look at the public statements from the CEOs of RWE and other German power companies, they will tell you that they only see solar appearing via demand destruction these days.
Look at my numbers from before (and I appreciate you're in Scotland, and there's a lot less sun there and therefore the economics are different), but if you are in England and you spend £1,000 on solar panels today, and assuming you do not sell any electricity back to the grid, you will reduce your electricity bill by around £190.
Now, for some people that won't make financial sense. But for others it will. And as panel prices continue to fall, and they fall every year, the number of people for whom it makes sense rises.
I'd love to have solar panels, but I'm curious about your Maths. Unless you have an EV, I don't understand how your Maths works.
I haven't had a quotation for my home, but have been looking online as I'm interested and it seems a typical Solar installation today costs about £5-6k including parts and labour. More if you want a battery to go with it.
So based on your theory that £1k = £190 in savings then should expect ~£1k - £1.2k in cost savings.
But my total annual electricity bill is only £1k. So I'd have to have to come in on the low-end of the quote range, and have all my bill wiped out in order to meet the ratio you named.
And since the cost of electricity is due to come back down off its peak, even then a 100% cost reduction wouldn't meet your quoted numbers.
So where are your numbers coming from? Unless you can get an installation done for £1k - in which case great, how?
They quote £7,000 for installation on average (inc labour), and £365* typical saving if out until 4pm.
So that's £52 per £1000 invested, which is rather different to your £190.
If you have a way of getting a solar system for £1k I'd love to see it.
* And that's in London, lower elsewhere, presumably as elsewhere is further North.
I know London is out on the fringes of the UK, more so than Wick or Belfast, but there is life within North Island south of London: Lizard Point is as far as one can get.
LOL I edited the numbers to simplify it as I was looking at with SEG in London which inflated the figure.
The £190 saving @rcs1000 quoted is listed as in Manchester, without SEG . . . but install of a system will set you back £5-7k+ not £1k.
£190 saving off the cheapest possible £5k install is a 3.8% saving which isn't really affordable if you're borrowing with today's interest rates.
TBF it's a sliding scale. A ~£6-7k 4kWp install - return potentially £600-800 (estimate but in the ballpark) will be a return towards approx 10%.
Unless you have a battery and/or an electric car, or are working and running a business from home, I don't see how those numbers work.
Especially since the Energy Savings Trust figures are based on a £7k system and say £190 return without SEG if out until 4pm.
EST worked example.
I don't understand "ignoring the SEG". It's a real number in the calculation.
Post code RG30 2LX, unencumbered 4kWp install on a S-facing 40 degree roof, out until 4pm gives a £360 benefit which is ~£200 plus SEG of ~£160.
SEG pays 5.5p / kWh.
In practice you get 15p / kWh export on the open market (Octopus Outgoing Fixed tariff), which makes it 15/5.5 x £160 ie £440.
£440 + £200 = £640, which is in my range.
In practice benefit could be greater because many of us can work from home, or are at home anyway, or can move loads around to use more generated electricity than assumed by EST,
eg at a simple level we can have a water tank with a timer set to heat it up during the day, or appliances on timers etc.
I suggest that anyone who pays over £6k for a 4kWp solar installation is a possibly a bit of a mug, or not working on getting a best price. I would be aiming to pay £5000 to £5500 for a 3rd party install of such a system.
I excluded SEG because I was responding to Robert saying this: if you are in England and you spend £1,000 on solar panels today, and assuming you do not sell any electricity back to the grid, you will reduce your electricity bill by around £190.
The reality seems to be if you spend £5000-7000 today and assuming you do not sell any electricity back to the grid you will reduce your bill by about £190, which is somewhat different.
Octopus Outgoing Fixed Tariff is only available if you're on an Octopus tariff, if you're not the export rate is 4.1p rather than 15p which is a bit of a difference too.
OK - so I gave a real world answer .
AIUI normal Octopus process is that you switch to their standard tariff, then can switch to any one of the other 10 or so tariffs. Export tariffs require a SMETS2 meter iirc.
I've been on an Octopus Agile Outgoing Tariff for the last year for my exports, which is wholesale-price linked on half hourly segments. That delivered 11p per unit. So yesterday I switched to the 15p fixed tariff with a phone call, which will be worth an extra £100 or so - or more if I get my solar panels jetwashed with an appropriate solution, or persuade the neighbour to deal with their cracking-up horse chestnut tree.
I started looking at getting solar a few months back - because of our roof layout it isn't worth it - but equally for us Solar makes little sense.
I can buy energy at 7.5p per kwh via Intelligent Octopus so if I just buy 13kwh of batteries I will get 80% of the savings at 50-60% of the total price.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
BBC sneaking out not quite an apology. No mention of their headlines or their Twitter post that still says hundreds killed by Israeli strike.
That's such a load of bullshit. The government needs to haul the BBC news controller in front of the select committee and give them a proper grilling on their coverage, especially reporting Hamas claims completely unchallenged.
Christie is at least running to loudly criticise Trump despite having no hope - other than hoping Trump has a heart attack what are the others bothering for?
If Trump had a heart attack, Haley/Christie would walk the general election. Trump is the Republicans’ biggest liability.
I'm on Dems for the WH in part as a hedge for my Big Short on Trump.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
BBC sneaking out not quite an apology. No mention of their headlines or their Twitter post that still says hundreds killed by Israeli strike.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
Preliminary US Intelligence assessments say 100 to 300 deaths:
The US intelligence community assesses that there likely were between 100 to 300 people killed in the blast at the Al-Ahli Baptist Hospital in Gaza, and there was “only light structural damage at the hospital,” according to an unclassified intelligence assessment obtained by CNN that adds more detail to the initial assessment released Wednesday finding Israel was not responsible for the strike.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
If that is confirmed, news source should say that, and correct their past reporting. Reporting in wars is often difficult and numerous early reports turn out to be wrong. I think it would be ludicrous to imagine that Israel could sue over this or that front page retractions are always necessary.
I saw a lot of media sources reporting that Hamas had beheaded 40 babies. That does not appear to have been the case. I’ve not seen any front page retractions over that. I don’t think there needs to be, although I think some media sources should at least correct their earlier reporting.
I think media sources should reflect on their mistakes over reporting the hospital incident. Learning from what happened and not doing it again is more important than front page retractions.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
If that is confirmed, news source should say that, and correct their past reporting. Reporting in wars is often difficult and numerous early reports turn out to be wrong. I think it would be ludicrous to imagine that Israel could sue over this or that front page retractions are always necessary.
I saw a lot of media sources reporting that Hamas had beheaded 40 babies. That does not appear to have been the case. I’ve not seen any front page retractions over that. I don’t think there needs to be, although I think some media sources should at least correct their earlier reporting.
I think media sources should reflect on their mistakes over reporting the hospital incident. Learning from what happened and not doing it again is more important than front page retractions.
"I saw a lot of media sources reporting that Hamas had beheaded 40 babies."
- That was never the claim from any Israeli sources, it was 40 babies had been killed in one Kibbutz, including ones that had been beheaded, burned alive, etc.
Did any UK media organisations run a front page saying 40 beheadings? I don't think they did? It was mostly that is what became the claim on twitter, which was then used to dispute that Israel was telling the truth when they revealed photos of some of the dead babies, as in see, not all beheaded.
I learnt a long time ago if I didn't have a strong view on a race not to get involved. A win for any of the Conservatives, Labour or Liberal Democrats in Mid Bedfordshire, the 268th most marginal Conservative seat, would come as no surprise, a win for any other candidate would.
As for Tamworth, the 311th most marginal Conservative seat, either Labour or Conservative. I just suspect Labour are going to get close but not close enough.
Overall, slightly more sympathise with Israel than Palestine but with big differences by party. Scotland stands out as being much more pro-Palestine than anywhere else in the UK, as are 18-24 year olds.
London is also more pro Palestine on that poll, as are Labour voters and more narrowly LD voters
Not a good poll for Starmer. He's been far too strident for the taste of his voters and it is an issue that can swing votes.
I think it will be more of a problem for Starmer in government than electorally.
His equivalent of, “We ran for office as New Labour, and we shall govern as New Labour,” will be seen as governing like the Tories to a significant part of his base.
I think he'll drop Blair once he's won.
and then hell change his mind
wibble
He's ruthless. You're not getting him.
Is this a new betting tip ? Id be quite happy not to get him but Sunak isnt that much different.
As for ruthless he might be, but he might also be clueless.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
"Jews gag media" screams a thousand websites in that case.
But then that's the Internet for you.
Let them scream. The media should be gagged from blindly repeating Hamas propaganda as the truth.
I agree wholeheartedly with you on this. It's not just that people need to know that Israel did not bomb a hospital and kill 500 people but that the Gazan authorities lied through their teeth? Why does the MSM want to protect Hamas's reputation for honesty?
It's also crucial as it means we should not be taking Gazan claims of deaths at face value anymore.
You are completely correct on my solar numbers. I copy and pasted the figures from my spreadsheet which has tabs for London and for Los Angeles.
And I used the Los Angeles tab. Which (a) has more sun than the UK, and (b) has more expensive power.
Returns in the UK are meaningfully worse, although - as prices continue to fall - they will keep improving.
Just to add: the cost of battery storage is also coming down fast. It means that (a) we'll get to use all the power we generate, and (b) it means we'll have a day or so of backup power for when the inevitable earthquake hits.
Christie is at least running to loudly criticise Trump despite having no hope - other than hoping Trump has a heart attack what are the others bothering for?
If Trump had a heart attack, Haley/Christie would walk the general election. Trump is the Republicans’ biggest liability.
Not if Trump voters stay home or go for Kennedy Jr if Trump is not nominee
Trump voters are not inherently anti-Republican. They absolutely detest Biden. I don’t think a relatively plain Republican candidate will have much trouble getting Trump voters to turn out (if Trump is dead and buried).
Kennedy does not have the charisma, the magic touch, to make many inroads. Fox News will support a generic Republican over Kennedy.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
BBC sneaking out not quite an apology. No mention of their headlines or their Twitter post that still says hundreds killed by Israeli strike.
That's such a load of bullshit. The government needs to haul the BBC news controller in front of the select committee and give them a proper grilling on their coverage, especially reporting Hamas claims completely unchallenged.
Firstly the "Government" isn't in charge of hauling anyone in front of Parliamentary select committees - Parliament is.
Secondly, the BBC and other broadcasters have to abide by a Broadcasting Code set by Ofcom in accordance with a statutory framework. The issue of whether a broadcaster is in breach of the Code is one for Ofcom to determine. If they are in breach, they are likely to be penalised. If they aren't, then it's the job of the Government to consider whether to introduce legislation before Parliament to change the standards required of broadcast news. But it isn't for them to haul news editors of broadcasters over the coals to the extent they are complying with the regulation that has actually been set.
You are completely correct on my solar numbers. I copy and pasted the figures from my spreadsheet which has tabs for London and for Los Angeles.
And I used the Los Angeles tab. Which (a) has more sun than the UK, and (b) has more expensive power.
Returns in the UK are meaningfully worse, although - as prices continue to fall - they will keep improving.
Just to add: the cost of battery storage is also coming down fast. It means that (a) we'll get to use all the power we generate, and (b) it means we'll have a day or so of backup power for when the inevitable earthquake hits.
BiB: I assume this bit is also meant for Los Angeles rather than London.
You are completely correct on my solar numbers. I copy and pasted the figures from my spreadsheet which has tabs for London and for Los Angeles.
And I used the Los Angeles tab. Which (a) has more sun than the UK, and (b) has more expensive power.
Returns in the UK are meaningfully worse, although - as prices continue to fall - they will keep improving.
Not sure at that - I can buy a solar system 8 panels (they are £100 each at the moment) and everything else I need for £2000 - the actual cost comes from supplier markups and labour...
Overall, slightly more sympathise with Israel than Palestine but with big differences by party. Scotland stands out as being much more pro-Palestine than anywhere else in the UK, as are 18-24 year olds.
London is also more pro Palestine on that poll, as are Labour voters and more narrowly LD voters
Not a good poll for Starmer. He's been far too strident for the taste of his voters and it is an issue that can swing votes.
I think it will be more of a problem for Starmer in government than electorally.
His equivalent of, “We ran for office as New Labour, and we shall govern as New Labour,” will be seen as governing like the Tories to a significant part of his base.
I think he'll drop Blair once he's won.
and then hell change his mind
wibble
He's ruthless. You're not getting him.
Are we sleepwalking to a Starmer dictatorship?
Ha. The thought. No, I'm just counselling against underestimating him. The left have him wrong. The right have him wrong. I don't know what PM Starmer will look like but I do know it will surprise.
The Met told a charity campaigning against antisemitism to switch off billboard vans showing child kidnap victims of terrorist group Hamas or they would be “in breach of the peace”, the charity’s chief executive has said.
But wave a terrorist flag, not a problem.
That is so very wrong. The Metropolitan Police are out of control.
You are completely correct on my solar numbers. I copy and pasted the figures from my spreadsheet which has tabs for London and for Los Angeles.
And I used the Los Angeles tab. Which (a) has more sun than the UK, and (b) has more expensive power.
Returns in the UK are meaningfully worse, although - as prices continue to fall - they will keep improving.
Not sure at that - I can buy a solar system 8 panels (they are £100 each at the moment) and everything else I need for £2000 - the actual cost comes from supplier markups and labour...
Yep Labour and scaffolding etc costs aren't going down. Quite the opposite.
Christie is at least running to loudly criticise Trump despite having no hope - other than hoping Trump has a heart attack what are the others bothering for?
If Trump had a heart attack, Haley/Christie would walk the general election. Trump is the Republicans’ biggest liability.
Not if Trump voters stay home or go for Kennedy Jr if Trump is not nominee
Trump voters are not inherently anti-Republican. They absolutely detest Biden. I don’t think a relatively plain Republican candidate will have much trouble getting Trump voters to turn out (if Trump is dead and buried).
Kennedy does not have the charisma, the magic touch, to make many inroads. Fox News will support a generic Republican over Kennedy.
Kennedy seems very weird, and not in the chaotic yet for some reason hypnotic Trump way. When various media was pushing him hard earlier this year doing things like showing him with his shirt off to prove, idk, vitality or something it was baffling.
The situation in the Middle East has become incredibly fluid. These recent years you have had a very defined split between Iran/Syria/Hizbollah/Iraq (backed by Russia), and Saudi Arabia/Qatar/assorted militants (backed by the US/West, and, very quietly, by Israel). Now that's all gone out of the window.
The Met told a charity campaigning against antisemitism to switch off billboard vans showing child kidnap victims of terrorist group Hamas or they would be “in breach of the peace”, the charity’s chief executive has said.
But wave a terrorist flag, not a problem.
That is so very wrong. The Metropolitan Police are out of control.
Well, I'm sure the rank and file are OK at least...
It's not just the Saudi's saying that, here's the Times of Israel:
Meanwhile, Israel has allowed suitcases holding millions in Qatari cash to enter Gaza through its crossings since 2018, in order to maintain its fragile ceasefire with the Hamas rulers of the Strip.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
BBC sneaking out not quite an apology. No mention of their headlines or their Twitter post that still says hundreds killed by Israeli strike.
I love the BBC. For most of my life I’ve loved their children’s programmes, comedy, drama, sports, news. The works. I would pay the licence fee purely for Radio 4. I listen to Today six mornings a week but I get so fucking angry with their de haut en bas decision making about what is partial and impartial and the bizarre ways they work out what “balance” really is.
Jeremy Bowen just could not bring himself to say “we might have jumped the gun” this morning on Today after Tugendhat calmly pointed out the errors over the hospital reporting. It’s a mix of arrogance, confusion, not understanding that the world doesn’t think the way they do. There is a thing called “BBC diversity” which is that the BBC are full of people of every colour and creed so they think they have diverse input but it’s not because those people of diverse colour and creed are largely from a similar social viewpoint or background. The groupthink will kill the bbc. Moving bits to Salford doesn’t make it diverse because they fill it with key people from the bbc in London with the same views so it can never change.
I just find it depressing that they consider themselves educated and superior but cannot also consider if the way they think might just be wrong occasionally.
They aren’t the only ones and it is a symptom of “quick news”. Pretty much every news outlet needs to make it big that they got it wrong over the hospital attack as do Arab governments if they want to lance the boil that’s growing.
Overall, slightly more sympathise with Israel than Palestine but with big differences by party. Scotland stands out as being much more pro-Palestine than anywhere else in the UK, as are 18-24 year olds.
London is also more pro Palestine on that poll, as are Labour voters and more narrowly LD voters
Not a good poll for Starmer. He's been far too strident for the taste of his voters and it is an issue that can swing votes.
I think it will be more of a problem for Starmer in government than electorally.
His equivalent of, “We ran for office as New Labour, and we shall govern as New Labour,” will be seen as governing like the Tories to a significant part of his base.
I think he'll drop Blair once he's won.
and then hell change his mind
wibble
He's ruthless. You're not getting him.
Are we sleepwalking to a Starmer dictatorship?
Ha. The thought. No, I'm just counselling against underestimating him. The left have him wrong. The right have him wrong. I don't know what PM Starmer will look like but I do know it will surprise.
I don't think the UK is ready for the shock of having a middle class 60 year old knighted lawyer backed by centrists running the country. That's a recipe for revolution right there.
You are completely correct on my solar numbers. I copy and pasted the figures from my spreadsheet which has tabs for London and for Los Angeles.
And I used the Los Angeles tab. Which (a) has more sun than the UK, and (b) has more expensive power.
Returns in the UK are meaningfully worse, although - as prices continue to fall - they will keep improving.
Another thing.
A very large slice of the cost is now the scaffolding and labour to reteofit panels onto roofs. That's got some relatively easy work rounds.
One is making sure that every new build has panels in an optimal orientation, because that's simpler if you are planning from scratch. Or do it when fixing roofs, ready for then the sun shines. Or put them in places that are easier to reach.
It doesn't even matter if they're not optimally located; the cost-benefit calculations are easy enough if the cost is low enough.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
If that is confirmed, news source should say that, and correct their past reporting. Reporting in wars is often difficult and numerous early reports turn out to be wrong. I think it would be ludicrous to imagine that Israel could sue over this or that front page retractions are always necessary.
I saw a lot of media sources reporting that Hamas had beheaded 40 babies. That does not appear to have been the case. I’ve not seen any front page retractions over that. I don’t think there needs to be, although I think some media sources should at least correct their earlier reporting.
I think media sources should reflect on their mistakes over reporting the hospital incident. Learning from what happened and not doing it again is more important than front page retractions.
"I saw a lot of media sources reporting that Hamas had beheaded 40 babies."
- That was never the claim from any Israeli sources, it was 40 babies had been killed in one Kibbutz, including ones that had been beheaded, burned alive, etc.
Did any UK media organisations run a front page saying 40 beheadings? I don't think they did? It was mostly that is what became the claim on twitter, which was then used to dispute that Israel was telling the truth when they revealed photos of some of the dead babies, as in see, not all beheaded.
It’s a claim many here have repeated. Reviewing UK reporting, claims made often stopped just short. For example:
There was similar in the Telegraph and Express. Metro said beheaded babies, but didn’t give a number.
Then there was this Mail headline: “Read the texts that got ABC journo Tom Joyner in hot water after WhatsApp message in which he called claims Hamas beheaded 40 babies 'bulls***'”, which implies the claim is true.
Elsewhere, the Times of India said 40 beheaded babies in a headline. US sources did. Yahoo did.
I don’t know what was on the front page. I don’t think I’ve seen a physical copy of the Mail or Telegraph in months!
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
If that is confirmed, news source should say that, and correct their past reporting. Reporting in wars is often difficult and numerous early reports turn out to be wrong. I think it would be ludicrous to imagine that Israel could sue over this or that front page retractions are always necessary.
I saw a lot of media sources reporting that Hamas had beheaded 40 babies. That does not appear to have been the case. I’ve not seen any front page retractions over that. I don’t think there needs to be, although I think some media sources should at least correct their earlier reporting.
I think media sources should reflect on their mistakes over reporting the hospital incident. Learning from what happened and not doing it again is more important than front page retractions.
"I saw a lot of media sources reporting that Hamas had beheaded 40 babies."
- That was never the claim from any Israeli sources, it was 40 babies had been killed in one Kibbutz, including ones that had been beheaded, burned alive, etc.
Did any UK media organisations run a front page saying 40 beheadings? I don't think they did? It was mostly that is what became the claim on twitter, which was then used to dispute that Israel was telling the truth when they revealed photos of some of the dead babies, as in see, not all beheaded.
It’s a claim many here have repeated. Reviewing UK reporting, claims made often stopped just short. For example:
So that answer for UK, is no, then...they repeated exactly what the Israeli official said. And then of course with the conspiracy theory in full swing on social media, they showed the receipts. And you quickly descend into the well here is one with its throat slit, that isn't quite beheading, so not all of them were....
Certainly some US outlets did say 40 were beheaded. But what are you expecting from them?
I've been doing some calculations for Tamworth and atm I think it's likely to be Labour 2,000 votes ahead in the town and the Tories 2,000 ahead in the rural areas. So impossible to call.
I've been doing some calculations for Tamworth and atm I think it's likely to be Labour 2,000 votes ahead in the town and the Tories 2,000 ahead in the rural areas. So impossible to call.
This is worth watching just to see the level of anger from the Israeli politician:
Amir Weitmann, a prominent member of Netanyahu’s Likup party, lashes out at Russia live on RT 🔥 “I understand you're on the Russian payroll and I understand this is Russian propaganda, but you have to be very careful because let me tell you, we're going to finish this war. We're going to win because we're stronger. After this, Russia will pay the price. Believe me, Russia will pay the price," he told RT.
Overall, slightly more sympathise with Israel than Palestine but with big differences by party. Scotland stands out as being much more pro-Palestine than anywhere else in the UK, as are 18-24 year olds.
London is also more pro Palestine on that poll, as are Labour voters and more narrowly LD voters
Not a good poll for Starmer. He's been far too strident for the taste of his voters and it is an issue that can swing votes.
I think it will be more of a problem for Starmer in government than electorally.
His equivalent of, “We ran for office as New Labour, and we shall govern as New Labour,” will be seen as governing like the Tories to a significant part of his base.
I think he'll drop Blair once he's won.
Being vague and plausible sounding to win has a long, successful pedigree. He won't find himself that bound.
Assuming Sir K/Labour want to do more than 5 years, the problems start once elected. In the current climate getting elected because you are not the government is the easy bit. It's being reelected as government western democracies are finding hard.
He will centre on key concepts for reelection: Elections are won from the centre, but voters are not averse to incremental progress. The focus will not be on the perfect, or even the good. It will be on demonstrable but actually slight improvements from the present situation in which problems and complaints abound but solutions are lacking.
Discontinuous leftism, or sudden turns in the road will be avoided.
This is worth watching just to see the level of anger from the Israeli MP:
Amir Weitmann, a prominent MP of Netanyahu’s Likup party, lashes out at Russia live on RT 🔥 “I understand you're on the Russian payroll and I understand this is Russian propaganda, but you have to be very careful because let me tell you, we're going to finish this war. We're going to win because we're stronger. After this, Russia will pay the price. Believe me, Russia will pay the price," he told RT.
I learnt a long time ago if I didn't have a strong view on a race not to get involved. A win for any of the Conservatives, Labour or Liberal Democrats in Mid Bedfordshire, the 268th most marginal Conservative seat, would come as no surprise, a win for any other candidate would.
As for Tamworth, the 311th most marginal Conservative seat, either Labour or Conservative. I just suspect Labour are going to get close but not close enough.
Overall, slightly more sympathise with Israel than Palestine but with big differences by party. Scotland stands out as being much more pro-Palestine than anywhere else in the UK, as are 18-24 year olds.
London is also more pro Palestine on that poll, as are Labour voters and more narrowly LD voters
Not a good poll for Starmer. He's been far too strident for the taste of his voters and it is an issue that can swing votes.
I think it will be more of a problem for Starmer in government than electorally.
His equivalent of, “We ran for office as New Labour, and we shall govern as New Labour,” will be seen as governing like the Tories to a significant part of his base.
I think he'll drop Blair once he's won.
and then hell change his mind
wibble
He's ruthless. You're not getting him.
Is this a new betting tip ? Id be quite happy not to get him but Sunak isnt that much different.
As for ruthless he might be, but he might also be clueless.
You're not paying attention to things. Sunak is a lightweight. You might not like Starmer but there's no evidence he isn't a serious proposition. The evidence is that he is.
If I'm wrong and he turns out to be poor or mediocre, I'll apologise to you. Can't say fairer than that. But I don't think I'll have to.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
BBC sneaking out not quite an apology. No mention of their headlines or their Twitter post that still says hundreds killed by Israeli strike.
I love the BBC. For most of my life I’ve loved their children’s programmes, comedy, drama, sports, news. The works. I would pay the licence fee purely for Radio 4. I listen to Today six mornings a week but I get so fucking angry with their de haut en bas decision making about what is partial and impartial and the bizarre ways they work out what “balance” really is.
Jeremy Bowen just could not bring himself to say “we might have jumped the gun” this morning on Today after Tugendhat calmly pointed out the errors over the hospital reporting. It’s a mix of arrogance, confusion, not understanding that the world doesn’t think the way they do. There is a thing called “BBC diversity” which is that the BBC are full of people of every colour and creed so they think they have diverse input but it’s not because those people of diverse colour and creed are largely from a similar social viewpoint or background. The groupthink will kill the bbc. Moving bits to Salford doesn’t make it diverse because they fill it with key people from the bbc in London with the same views so it can never change.
I just find it depressing that they consider themselves educated and superior but cannot also consider if the way they think might just be wrong occasionally.
They aren’t the only ones and it is a symptom of “quick news”. Pretty much every news outlet needs to make it big that they got it wrong over the hospital attack as do Arab governments if they want to lance the boil that’s growing.
Just wanted to add, I admire Jeremy Bowen immensely. He’s been there at the front line of horror for as long as I can remember news coverage of the Middle East. He’s a braver man than I am. He is there on the ground but I cannot get away from the feeling that he is a bit captured by the Palestinian plight, a sort of Stockholm syndrome, where he sees their undoubted suffering as the most important thing and so is somewhat blinded to the other side in this.
I write as a relative moron in knowledge of the Middle East but it’s inevitable on a human level that you will feel for one side over another and maybe they need fresh eyes in the region - his contacts are incredible, his experience is huge but I think he has an understandable bias and the BBC might be better served by having someone report from a more distant perspective.
Christie is at least running to loudly criticise Trump despite having no hope - other than hoping Trump has a heart attack what are the others bothering for?
If Trump had a heart attack, Haley/Christie would walk the general election. Trump is the Republicans’ biggest liability.
Not if Trump voters stay home or go for Kennedy Jr if Trump is not nominee
Trump voters are not inherently anti-Republican. They absolutely detest Biden. I don’t think a relatively plain Republican candidate will have much trouble getting Trump voters to turn out (if Trump is dead and buried).
Kennedy does not have the charisma, the magic touch, to make many inroads. Fox News will support a generic Republican over Kennedy.
Ashcroft's US poll earlier this month had Biden tied with Trump 38% each.
However Biden led DeSantis 39% to 27% with 12% going third party and 11% not voting. Biden led Pence 37% to 23% with 17% third party and 11% not voting.
Biden led Ramaswamy 39% to 23% with 13% third party and 12% not voting and Biden led Haley 37% to 20% with 16% third party and 13% not voting.
People underestimate how Trump appealed to many blue collar Democrats who aren't natural Republicans, they just hate big corporations, immigration and China.
Same as Boris also had a personal appeal to working class Leave voters who aren't natural Tories other Conservative leaders can't replicate
I've been doing some calculations for Tamworth and atm I think it's likely to be Labour 2,000 votes ahead in the town and the Tories 2,000 ahead in the rural areas. So impossible to call.
A second recount likely at 4am? Get the coffee on Andy J it's going to be a long night 😂
Overall, slightly more sympathise with Israel than Palestine but with big differences by party. Scotland stands out as being much more pro-Palestine than anywhere else in the UK, as are 18-24 year olds.
London is also more pro Palestine on that poll, as are Labour voters and more narrowly LD voters
Not a good poll for Starmer. He's been far too strident for the taste of his voters and it is an issue that can swing votes.
I think it will be more of a problem for Starmer in government than electorally.
His equivalent of, “We ran for office as New Labour, and we shall govern as New Labour,” will be seen as governing like the Tories to a significant part of his base.
I think he'll drop Blair once he's won.
Being vague and plausible sounding to win has a long, successful pedigree. He won't find himself that bound.
Assuming Sir K/Labour want to do more than 5 years, the problems start once elected. In the current climate getting elected because you are not the government is the easy bit. It's being reelected as government western democracies are finding hard.
He will centre on key concepts for reelection: Elections are won from the centre, but voters are not averse to incremental progress. The focus will not be on the perfect, or even the good. It will be on demonstrable but actually slight improvements from the present situation in which problems and complaints abound but solutions are lacking.
Discontinuous leftism, or sudden turns in the road will be avoided.
He's a lawyer. He'll pass laws and then say he's done something. But nothing will actually change.
This is worth watching just to see the level of anger from the Israeli politician:
Amir Weitmann, a prominent member of Netanyahu’s Likup party, lashes out at Russia live on RT 🔥 “I understand you're on the Russian payroll and I understand this is Russian propaganda, but you have to be very careful because let me tell you, we're going to finish this war. We're going to win because we're stronger. After this, Russia will pay the price. Believe me, Russia will pay the price," he told RT.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
BBC sneaking out not quite an apology. No mention of their headlines or their Twitter post that still says hundreds killed by Israeli strike.
I love the BBC. For most of my life I’ve loved their children’s programmes, comedy, drama, sports, news. The works. I would pay the licence fee purely for Radio 4. I listen to Today six mornings a week but I get so fucking angry with their de haut en bas decision making about what is partial and impartial and the bizarre ways they work out what “balance” really is.
Jeremy Bowen just could not bring himself to say “we might have jumped the gun” this morning on Today after Tugendhat calmly pointed out the errors over the hospital reporting. It’s a mix of arrogance, confusion, not understanding that the world doesn’t think the way they do. There is a thing called “BBC diversity” which is that the BBC are full of people of every colour and creed so they think they have diverse input but it’s not because those people of diverse colour and creed are largely from a similar social viewpoint or background. The groupthink will kill the bbc. Moving bits to Salford doesn’t make it diverse because they fill it with key people from the bbc in London with the same views so it can never change.
I just find it depressing that they consider themselves educated and superior but cannot also consider if the way they think might just be wrong occasionally.
They aren’t the only ones and it is a symptom of “quick news”. Pretty much every news outlet needs to make it big that they got it wrong over the hospital attack as do Arab governments if they want to lance the boil that’s growing.
Just wanted to add, I admire Jeremy Bowen immensely. He’s been there at the front line of horror for as long as I can remember news coverage of the Middle East. He’s a braver man than I am. He is there on the ground but I cannot get away from the feeling that he is a bit captured by the Palestinian plight, a sort of Stockholm syndrome, where he sees their undoubted suffering as the most important thing and so is somewhat blinded to the other side in this.
I write as a relative moron in knowledge of the Middle East but it’s inevitable on a human level that you will feel for one side over another and maybe they need fresh eyes in the region - his contacts are incredible, his experience is huge but I think he has an understandable bias and the BBC might be better served by having someone report from a more distant perspective.
I don't think he is recently been "captured" by the Palestinian plight. In 2004, the BBC spent £350k on a report into looking into bias in relation to their reporting on the conflict and they wouldn't release it, but it was widely reported that it specifically criticised Jeremy Bowen for one sided reported in their favour. Again in 2009, more issues, and again and again and again...including some very iffy tweets.
"Alex Salmond powers through storm to cast imaginary ballot in non-existent independence referendum The former SNP leader aimed to make a point that nothing was supposed to stop Nicola Sturgeon.
"While Mr Salmond determined to show up for the photo stunt today, much of Scotland was hunkered down as Storm Babet battered regions including the north-east.
He said: “October 19th 2023 was designated by the SNP last year as referendum day. But instead of a celebration of democracy to take the country forward, the SNP have abdicated any claim to leadership of the national movement.”
"Alex Salmond powers through storm to cast imaginary ballot in non-existent independence referendum The former SNP leader aimed to make a point that nothing was supposed to stop Nicola Sturgeon.
"While Mr Salmond determined to show up for the photo stunt today, much of Scotland was hunkered down as Storm Babet battered regions including the north-east.
He said: “October 19th 2023 was designated by the SNP last year as referendum day. But instead of a celebration of democracy to take the country forward, the SNP have abdicated any claim to leadership of the national movement.”
I learnt a long time ago if I didn't have a strong view on a race not to get involved. A win for any of the Conservatives, Labour or Liberal Democrats in Mid Bedfordshire, the 268th most marginal Conservative seat, would come as no surprise, a win for any other candidate would.
As for Tamworth, the 311th most marginal Conservative seat, either Labour or Conservative. I just suspect Labour are going to get close but not close enough.
Overall, slightly more sympathise with Israel than Palestine but with big differences by party. Scotland stands out as being much more pro-Palestine than anywhere else in the UK, as are 18-24 year olds.
London is also more pro Palestine on that poll, as are Labour voters and more narrowly LD voters
Not a good poll for Starmer. He's been far too strident for the taste of his voters and it is an issue that can swing votes.
I think it will be more of a problem for Starmer in government than electorally.
His equivalent of, “We ran for office as New Labour, and we shall govern as New Labour,” will be seen as governing like the Tories to a significant part of his base.
I think he'll drop Blair once he's won.
and then hell change his mind
wibble
He's ruthless. You're not getting him.
Is this a new betting tip ? Id be quite happy not to get him but Sunak isnt that much different.
As for ruthless he might be, but he might also be clueless.
You're not paying attention to things. Sunak is a lightweight. You might not like Starmer but there's no evidence he isn't a serious proposition. The evidence is that he is.
If I'm wrong and he turns out to be poor or mediocre, I'll apologise to you. Can't say fairer than that. But I don't think I'll have to.
There is no evidence to that effect, He hasnt got policies, he changes on the few things he does announce, he stands for nothing.
You are completely correct on my solar numbers. I copy and pasted the figures from my spreadsheet which has tabs for London and for Los Angeles.
And I used the Los Angeles tab. Which (a) has more sun than the UK, and (b) has more expensive power.
Returns in the UK are meaningfully worse, although - as prices continue to fall - they will keep improving.
Not sure at that - I can buy a solar system 8 panels (they are £100 each at the moment) and everything else I need for £2000 - the actual cost comes from supplier markups and labour...
Yep Labour and scaffolding etc costs aren't going down. Quite the opposite.
There is a surprising amount of innovation happening, though, that will move us away from the old panels bolted to the roof world.
Take Tesla's solar roof tiles. These are solar panels that are made in the same size as standard roof tiles and which connect to each other at the edges. If you're redoing your roof (which you will need to do from time-to-time anyway), you just replace the tiles on the sunny side with solar tiles. That dramatically lowers the installation cost.
And where Tesla is leading, another half dozen companies are following.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
Have the BBC corrected their very first BBC Verify podcast series where they did exactly the same. They gave into their own personal biases, took the word of a very unreliable single source who was found to be talking absolutely horseshit and mixed with some of their absolutely comical student journalism level errors....
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
Preliminary US Intelligence assessments say 100 to 300 deaths:
The US intelligence community assesses that there likely were between 100 to 300 people killed in the blast at the Al-Ahli Baptist Hospital in Gaza, and there was “only light structural damage at the hospital,” according to an unclassified intelligence assessment obtained by CNN that adds more detail to the initial assessment released Wednesday finding Israel was not responsible for the strike.
I'm still wondering how they are getting 100 - 300 killed. You'd need a pretty powerful bomb for that. No real building damage, no crater in the ground.
This is worth watching just to see the level of anger from the Israeli politician:
Amir Weitmann, a prominent member of Netanyahu’s Likup party, lashes out at Russia live on RT 🔥 “I understand you're on the Russian payroll and I understand this is Russian propaganda, but you have to be very careful because let me tell you, we're going to finish this war. We're going to win because we're stronger. After this, Russia will pay the price. Believe me, Russia will pay the price," he told RT.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
If that is confirmed, news source should say that, and correct their past reporting. Reporting in wars is often difficult and numerous early reports turn out to be wrong. I think it would be ludicrous to imagine that Israel could sue over this or that front page retractions are always necessary.
I saw a lot of media sources reporting that Hamas had beheaded 40 babies. That does not appear to have been the case. I’ve not seen any front page retractions over that. I don’t think there needs to be, although I think some media sources should at least correct their earlier reporting.
I think media sources should reflect on their mistakes over reporting the hospital incident. Learning from what happened and not doing it again is more important than front page retractions.
"I saw a lot of media sources reporting that Hamas had beheaded 40 babies."
- That was never the claim from any Israeli sources, it was 40 babies had been killed in one Kibbutz, including ones that had been beheaded, burned alive, etc.
Did any UK media organisations run a front page saying 40 beheadings? I don't think they did? It was mostly that is what became the claim on twitter, which was then used to dispute that Israel was telling the truth when they revealed photos of some of the dead babies, as in see, not all beheaded.
It’s a claim many here have repeated. Reviewing UK reporting, claims made often stopped just short. For example:
So that answer for UK, is no, then...they repeated exactly what the Israeli official said. And then of course with the conspiracy theory in full swing on social media, they showed the receipts. And you quickly descend into the well here is one with its throat slit, that isn't quite beheading, so not all of them were....
Certainly some US outlets did say 40 were beheaded. But what are you expecting from them?
I don’t know if any babies were beheaded. Regardless, Hamas definitely killed babies and what has been solidly confirmed is more atrocity than it bears thinking about.
I don’t know what happened outside the Anglican hospital, but it probably wasn’t an Israeli bomb. Regardless, Israeli attacks on Gaza have killed thousands of Palestinian civilians, a tragic loss of life.
I think much of the media do a great job, most of the time, but the Republican Senator who said, “The first casualty, when war comes, is truth” was right. I don’t understand those who think the most important thing to do in any crisis is to criticise the BBC’s reporting of it.
This is worth watching just to see the level of anger from the Israeli politician:
Amir Weitmann, a prominent member of Netanyahu’s Likup party, lashes out at Russia live on RT 🔥 “I understand you're on the Russian payroll and I understand this is Russian propaganda, but you have to be very careful because let me tell you, we're going to finish this war. We're going to win because we're stronger. After this, Russia will pay the price. Believe me, Russia will pay the price," he told RT.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
BBC sneaking out not quite an apology. No mention of their headlines or their Twitter post that still says hundreds killed by Israeli strike.
I love the BBC. For most of my life I’ve loved their children’s programmes, comedy, drama, sports, news. The works. I would pay the licence fee purely for Radio 4. I listen to Today six mornings a week but I get so fucking angry with their de haut en bas decision making about what is partial and impartial and the bizarre ways they work out what “balance” really is.
Jeremy Bowen just could not bring himself to say “we might have jumped the gun” this morning on Today after Tugendhat calmly pointed out the errors over the hospital reporting. It’s a mix of arrogance, confusion, not understanding that the world doesn’t think the way they do. There is a thing called “BBC diversity” which is that the BBC are full of people of every colour and creed so they think they have diverse input but it’s not because those people of diverse colour and creed are largely from a similar social viewpoint or background. The groupthink will kill the bbc. Moving bits to Salford doesn’t make it diverse because they fill it with key people from the bbc in London with the same views so it can never change.
I just find it depressing that they consider themselves educated and superior but cannot also consider if the way they think might just be wrong occasionally.
They aren’t the only ones and it is a symptom of “quick news”. Pretty much every news outlet needs to make it big that they got it wrong over the hospital attack as do Arab governments if they want to lance the boil that’s growing.
I've seen it referred to as 'Power Rangers Diversity". "We have a white! A yellow! A black! We! Are! Diverse!".
I learnt a long time ago if I didn't have a strong view on a race not to get involved. A win for any of the Conservatives, Labour or Liberal Democrats in Mid Bedfordshire, the 268th most marginal Conservative seat, would come as no surprise, a win for any other candidate would.
As for Tamworth, the 311th most marginal Conservative seat, either Labour or Conservative. I just suspect Labour are going to get close but not close enough.
Overall, slightly more sympathise with Israel than Palestine but with big differences by party. Scotland stands out as being much more pro-Palestine than anywhere else in the UK, as are 18-24 year olds.
London is also more pro Palestine on that poll, as are Labour voters and more narrowly LD voters
Not a good poll for Starmer. He's been far too strident for the taste of his voters and it is an issue that can swing votes.
I think it will be more of a problem for Starmer in government than electorally.
His equivalent of, “We ran for office as New Labour, and we shall govern as New Labour,” will be seen as governing like the Tories to a significant part of his base.
I think he'll drop Blair once he's won.
and then hell change his mind
wibble
He's ruthless. You're not getting him.
Is this a new betting tip ? Id be quite happy not to get him but Sunak isnt that much different.
As for ruthless he might be, but he might also be clueless.
You're not paying attention to things. Sunak is a lightweight. You might not like Starmer but there's no evidence he isn't a serious proposition. The evidence is that he is.
If I'm wrong and he turns out to be poor or mediocre, I'll apologise to you. Can't say fairer than that. But I don't think I'll have to.
There is no evidence to that effect, He hasnt got policies, he changes on the few things he does announce, he stands for nothing.
Whar's there to debate ?
At the moment he is all things to all people so everyone can put whatever hopes/expectations they want on to him but as the saying goes to govern is to choose and when he actually has to start making decisions and implementing policies I think the coalition of voters he's putting together now will quickly disintegrate.
As I keep saying this is 1974 not 1997. There's a very good chance this will be a one term Labour government but it depends how the Conservatives react to being in Opposition. If they go off to the nutty far right two or even three terms in government are possible for Labour.
Overall, slightly more sympathise with Israel than Palestine but with big differences by party. Scotland stands out as being much more pro-Palestine than anywhere else in the UK, as are 18-24 year olds.
That doesn't suprise me. Social media is overwhelmingly pro-Palestine, and full of people asking who is Yasser Arafat, who are the PLO, and what is a Hezbollah. 9/11 seems to have erased almost all knowledge of the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians for anyone under the age of about 35. Considering how much this subject was in the news when I was growing up it's amazing how little it is known about now.
"Solar is set to overpower fossil fuels as the dominant electricity source globally by 2050, according to a new study. [...] Solar power is set to dominate global electricity markets within the next few decades, and may have already reached an “irreversible tipping point,” according to a study published this week in Nature Communications. The study finds that solar adoption will continue apace barring any major policy shifts geared at disrupting it." https://twitter.com/patrickc/status/1714988564801519937
In other words it will continue until people stop flinging subsidies at it. That's hardly surprising. Powering the world with blancmange would be winning the energy race if it was subsidised as we do with favoured renewables.
If you borrow £1,000 to put solar panels on your roof in England, they will reduce your electricity bill by about £180-200/year.
And that purchase involves exactly zero subsidies.
That's an 18-20% annual tax free return.
The vast majority of residential and commercial solar installations these days are done without subsidy.
Mm, a whole lot better than fracking as demonstrated on even the most optimal UK sites, too. And the pollution problem is different (original production costs aside). You just clean up the bird crap every now and then.
It has absolutely nothing to do with fracking, God alone knows why you brought that up. Applications like that mentioned above are fine, but they aren't what's driving solar to become the world's biggest form of electricity generation. This piece on the abandonment of solar by India's Greenpeace-installed 'solar village' is a vignette of the whole issue. These things are put in with grand fanfare, but are not great or particularly reliable forms of generation, and when the subsidies stop, people stop using them. https://india.mongabay.com/2021/12/solar-power-station-at-bihars-first-solar-village-is-now-a-makeshift-cattle-shed/?amp=1
Can I ask you a question?
Is there any information or data that might make you change your mind?
So, if - for example - I were to show that 90% of German or Australian solar installations in 2022 were done without any subsidies whatsoever, would that make you change your mind?
I would want to look for the legislative incentives/push/compulsion and I suspect that I would find them.
Historically, you certainly would. Germany had the Feed in Tariff, where they would pay people for the electricity generated. But they've cut and cut and cut it, so that now it is way below the retail cost of electricity.
The result is that no-one doing residential solar in Germany signs up for the feed in tariff any more. Indeed, if you look at the public statements from the CEOs of RWE and other German power companies, they will tell you that they only see solar appearing via demand destruction these days.
Look at my numbers from before (and I appreciate you're in Scotland, and there's a lot less sun there and therefore the economics are different), but if you are in England and you spend £1,000 on solar panels today, and assuming you do not sell any electricity back to the grid, you will reduce your electricity bill by around £190.
Now, for some people that won't make financial sense. But for others it will. And as panel prices continue to fall, and they fall every year, the number of people for whom it makes sense rises.
I'd love to have solar panels, but I'm curious about your Maths. Unless you have an EV, I don't understand how your Maths works.
I haven't had a quotation for my home, but have been looking online as I'm interested and it seems a typical Solar installation today costs about £5-6k including parts and labour. More if you want a battery to go with it.
So based on your theory that £1k = £190 in savings then should expect ~£1k - £1.2k in cost savings.
But my total annual electricity bill is only £1k. So I'd have to have to come in on the low-end of the quote range, and have all my bill wiped out in order to meet the ratio you named.
And since the cost of electricity is due to come back down off its peak, even then a 100% cost reduction wouldn't meet your quoted numbers.
So where are your numbers coming from? Unless you can get an installation done for £1k - in which case great, how?
They quote £7,000 for installation on average (inc labour), and £365* typical saving if out until 4pm.
So that's £52 per £1000 invested, which is rather different to your £190.
If you have a way of getting a solar system for £1k I'd love to see it.
* And that's in London, lower elsewhere, presumably as elsewhere is further North.
I know London is out on the fringes of the UK, more so than Wick or Belfast, but there is life within North Island south of London: Lizard Point is as far as one can get.
To get a solar system for £1000 you buy the panels secondhand or ex-bankruptcy via ebay, and install it yourself on eg a shed or woodstore. It depends if it is grid-connected or not.
When I get around to it I will be getting a car port which just consists of a frame, and solar panels as the roof.
That I would be a lot happier with than monkeying about with a roof several decades old. MY large shed isn't grid connected but if it does become so then panels would be worth looking into.
Christie is at least running to loudly criticise Trump despite having no hope - other than hoping Trump has a heart attack what are the others bothering for?
If Trump had a heart attack, Haley/Christie would walk the general election. Trump is the Republicans’ biggest liability.
Not if Trump voters stay home or go for Kennedy Jr if Trump is not nominee
Trump voters are not inherently anti-Republican. They absolutely detest Biden. I don’t think a relatively plain Republican candidate will have much trouble getting Trump voters to turn out (if Trump is dead and buried).
Kennedy does not have the charisma, the magic touch, to make many inroads. Fox News will support a generic Republican over Kennedy.
Ashcroft's US poll earlier this month had Biden tied with Trump 38% each.
However Biden led DeSantis 39% to 27% with 12% going third party and 11% not voting. Biden led Pence 37% to 23% with 17% third party and 11% not voting.
Biden led Ramaswamy 39% to 23% with 13% third party and 12% not voting and Biden led Haley 37% to 20% with 16% third party and 13% not voting.
People underestimate how Trump appealed to many blue collar Democrats who aren't natural Republicans, they just hate big corporations, immigration and China.
Same as Boris also had a personal appeal to working class Leave voters who aren't natural Tories other Conservative leaders can't replicate
I am not convinced that polling reflects what would actually happen if Trump shuffled off this mortal coil.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
Preliminary US Intelligence assessments say 100 to 300 deaths:
The US intelligence community assesses that there likely were between 100 to 300 people killed in the blast at the Al-Ahli Baptist Hospital in Gaza, and there was “only light structural damage at the hospital,” according to an unclassified intelligence assessment obtained by CNN that adds more detail to the initial assessment released Wednesday finding Israel was not responsible for the strike.
I'm still wondering how they are getting 100 - 300 killed. You'd need a pretty powerful bomb for that. No real building damage, no crater in the ground.
I can picture a few hundred in a crowd trying to get into a hospital. And I can picture a rocket motor + payload + fuel killing them quite easily.
This is worth watching just to see the level of anger from the Israeli politician:
Amir Weitmann, a prominent member of Netanyahu’s Likup party, lashes out at Russia live on RT 🔥 “I understand you're on the Russian payroll and I understand this is Russian propaganda, but you have to be very careful because let me tell you, we're going to finish this war. We're going to win because we're stronger. After this, Russia will pay the price. Believe me, Russia will pay the price," he told RT.
Overall, slightly more sympathise with Israel than Palestine but with big differences by party. Scotland stands out as being much more pro-Palestine than anywhere else in the UK, as are 18-24 year olds.
That doesn't suprise me. Social media is overwhelmingly pro-Palestine, and full of people asking who is Yasser Arafat, who are the PLO, and what is a Hezbollah. 9/11 seems to have erased almost all knowledge of the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians for anyone under the age of about 35. Considering how much this subject was in the news when I was growing up it's amazing how little it is known about now.
I have seen a lot of young people talk as if they was an independent “Jew free” state of Palestine operating until those awful Jews showed up after the war and colonised it.
Have the BBC corrected their very first BBC Verify podcast series where they did exactly the same. They gave into their own personal biases, took the word of a very unreliable single source who was found to be talking absolutely horseshit and mixed with some of their absolutely comical student journalism level errors....
Aside from all the errors and pompousness - it's created several new management roles. So #winning.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
BBC sneaking out not quite an apology. No mention of their headlines or their Twitter post that still says hundreds killed by Israeli strike.
I love the BBC. For most of my life I’ve loved their children’s programmes, comedy, drama, sports, news. The works. I would pay the licence fee purely for Radio 4. I listen to Today six mornings a week but I get so fucking angry with their de haut en bas decision making about what is partial and impartial and the bizarre ways they work out what “balance” really is.
Jeremy Bowen just could not bring himself to say “we might have jumped the gun” this morning on Today after Tugendhat calmly pointed out the errors over the hospital reporting. It’s a mix of arrogance, confusion, not understanding that the world doesn’t think the way they do. There is a thing called “BBC diversity” which is that the BBC are full of people of every colour and creed so they think they have diverse input but it’s not because those people of diverse colour and creed are largely from a similar social viewpoint or background. The groupthink will kill the bbc. Moving bits to Salford doesn’t make it diverse because they fill it with key people from the bbc in London with the same views so it can never change.
I just find it depressing that they consider themselves educated and superior but cannot also consider if the way they think might just be wrong occasionally.
They aren’t the only ones and it is a symptom of “quick news”. Pretty much every news outlet needs to make it big that they got it wrong over the hospital attack as do Arab governments if they want to lance the boil that’s growing.
I've seen it referred to as 'Power Rangers Diversity". "We have a white! A yellow! A black! We! Are! Diverse!".
I forget who said it but "They all look different, and they all think the same".
This is worth watching just to see the level of anger from the Israeli politician:
Amir Weitmann, a prominent member of Netanyahu’s Likup party, lashes out at Russia live on RT 🔥 “I understand you're on the Russian payroll and I understand this is Russian propaganda, but you have to be very careful because let me tell you, we're going to finish this war. We're going to win because we're stronger. After this, Russia will pay the price. Believe me, Russia will pay the price," he told RT.
"Alex Salmond powers through storm to cast imaginary ballot in non-existent independence referendum The former SNP leader aimed to make a point that nothing was supposed to stop Nicola Sturgeon.
"While Mr Salmond determined to show up for the photo stunt today, much of Scotland was hunkered down as Storm Babet battered regions including the north-east.
He said: “October 19th 2023 was designated by the SNP last year as referendum day. But instead of a celebration of democracy to take the country forward, the SNP have abdicated any claim to leadership of the national movement.”
"Alex Salmond powers through storm to cast imaginary ballot in non-existent independence referendum The former SNP leader aimed to make a point that nothing was supposed to stop Nicola Sturgeon.
"While Mr Salmond determined to show up for the photo stunt today, much of Scotland was hunkered down as Storm Babet battered regions including the north-east.
He said: “October 19th 2023 was designated by the SNP last year as referendum day. But instead of a celebration of democracy to take the country forward, the SNP have abdicated any claim to leadership of the national movement.”
I learnt a long time ago if I didn't have a strong view on a race not to get involved. A win for any of the Conservatives, Labour or Liberal Democrats in Mid Bedfordshire, the 268th most marginal Conservative seat, would come as no surprise, a win for any other candidate would.
As for Tamworth, the 311th most marginal Conservative seat, either Labour or Conservative. I just suspect Labour are going to get close but not close enough.
Overall, slightly more sympathise with Israel than Palestine but with big differences by party. Scotland stands out as being much more pro-Palestine than anywhere else in the UK, as are 18-24 year olds.
London is also more pro Palestine on that poll, as are Labour voters and more narrowly LD voters
Not a good poll for Starmer. He's been far too strident for the taste of his voters and it is an issue that can swing votes.
I think it will be more of a problem for Starmer in government than electorally.
His equivalent of, “We ran for office as New Labour, and we shall govern as New Labour,” will be seen as governing like the Tories to a significant part of his base.
I think he'll drop Blair once he's won.
and then hell change his mind
wibble
He's ruthless. You're not getting him.
Is this a new betting tip ? Id be quite happy not to get him but Sunak isnt that much different.
As for ruthless he might be, but he might also be clueless.
You're not paying attention to things. Sunak is a lightweight. You might not like Starmer but there's no evidence he isn't a serious proposition. The evidence is that he is.
If I'm wrong and he turns out to be poor or mediocre, I'll apologise to you. Can't say fairer than that. But I don't think I'll have to.
There is no evidence to that effect, He hasnt got policies, he changes on the few things he does announce, he stands for nothing.
Whar's there to debate ?
At the moment he is all things to all people so everyone can put whatever hopes/expectations they want on to him but as the saying goes to govern is to choose and when he actually has to start making decisions and implementing policies I think the coalition of voters he's putting together now will quickly disintegrate.
As I keep saying this is 1974 not 1997. There's a very good chance this will be a one term Labour government but it depends how the Conservatives react to being in Opposition. If they go off to the nutty far right two or even three terms in government are possible for Labour.
As Lynton Crosby says you cant fatten a pig on market day, and not telling people what you believe just makes him look weak.
I fully supported his statement that he would bulldoze through the planning system to get houses built, it's the right thing to do.
But then like lots of others I thought he just wont do it, he'll get caught up in the legalities and back off or hold independent enquiries and BS stuff like that and another five years will tick by.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
If that is confirmed, news source should say that, and correct their past reporting. Reporting in wars is often difficult and numerous early reports turn out to be wrong. I think it would be ludicrous to imagine that Israel could sue over this or that front page retractions are always necessary.
I saw a lot of media sources reporting that Hamas had beheaded 40 babies. That does not appear to have been the case. I’ve not seen any front page retractions over that. I don’t think there needs to be, although I think some media sources should at least correct their earlier reporting.At the same ratio of reporting,
I think media sources should reflect on their mistakes over reporting the hospital incident. Learning from what happened and not doing it again is more important than front page retractions.
"I saw a lot of media sources reporting that Hamas had beheaded 40 babies."
- That was never the claim from any Israeli sources, it was 40 babies had been killed in one Kibbutz, including ones that had been beheaded, burned alive, etc.
Did any UK media organisations run a front page saying 40 beheadings? I don't think they did? It was mostly that is what became the claim on twitter, which was then used to dispute that Israel was telling the truth when they revealed photos of some of the dead babies, as in see, not all beheaded.
It’s a claim many here have repeated. Reviewing UK reporting, claims made often stopped just short. For example:
So that answer for UK, is no, then...they repeated exactly what the Israeli official said. And then of course with the conspiracy theory in full swing on social media, they showed the receipts. And you quickly descend into the well here is one with its throat slit, that isn't quite beheading, so not all of them were....
Certainly some US outlets did say 40 were beheaded. But what are you expecting from them?
I don’t know if any babies were beheaded. Regardless, Hamas definitely killed babies and what has been solidly confirmed is more atrocity than it bears thinking about.
I don’t know what happened outside the Anglican hospital, but it probably wasn’t an Israeli bomb. Regardless, Israeli attacks on Gaza have killed thousands of Palestinian civilians, a tragic loss of life.
I think much of the media do a great job, most of the time, but the Republican Senator who said, “The first casualty, when war comes, is truth” was right. I don’t understand those who think the most important thing to do in any crisis is to criticise the BBC’s reporting of it.
I'm not sure I even believe the 'thousands of civilians killed' in Gaza now. Clearly there have been many casualties, but where do the precise numbers come from? The same source as the 500?
Edit: Not that it should particularly be a numbers game, but still...
I have seen a lot of young people talk as if they was an independent “Jew free” state of Palestine operating until those awful Jews showed up after the war and colonised it.
There is a level of ignorance that is honestly perplexing, because it used to be in the news all the time; bombings, hijackings, assassinations, Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank, various summits and deals, on and on. As I say I think 9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq, and GWOT seems to have completely filled that particular box of general knowledge for anyone below 35.
So it turns out that somewhere between 10 and 50 died or were injured during the hospital incident and independent European intelligence sources confirm that it was a rocket launched from within Gaza that failed and broke up near the hospital and then the debris which included the payload landed in the car park and exploded.
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
If that is confirmed, news source should say that, and correct their past reporting. Reporting in wars is often difficult and numerous early reports turn out to be wrong. I think it would be ludicrous to imagine that Israel could sue over this or that front page retractions are always necessary.
I saw a lot of media sources reporting that Hamas had beheaded 40 babies. That does not appear to have been the case. I’ve not seen any front page retractions over that. I don’t think there needs to be, although I think some media sources should at least correct their earlier reporting.At the same ratio of reporting,
I think media sources should reflect on their mistakes over reporting the hospital incident. Learning from what happened and not doing it again is more important than front page retractions.
"I saw a lot of media sources reporting that Hamas had beheaded 40 babies."
- That was never the claim from any Israeli sources, it was 40 babies had been killed in one Kibbutz, including ones that had been beheaded, burned alive, etc.
Did any UK media organisations run a front page saying 40 beheadings? I don't think they did? It was mostly that is what became the claim on twitter, which was then used to dispute that Israel was telling the truth when they revealed photos of some of the dead babies, as in see, not all beheaded.
It’s a claim many here have repeated. Reviewing UK reporting, claims made often stopped just short. For example:
So that answer for UK, is no, then...they repeated exactly what the Israeli official said. And then of course with the conspiracy theory in full swing on social media, they showed the receipts. And you quickly descend into the well here is one with its throat slit, that isn't quite beheading, so not all of them were....
Certainly some US outlets did say 40 were beheaded. But what are you expecting from them?
I don’t know if any babies were beheaded. Regardless, Hamas definitely killed babies and what has been solidly confirmed is more atrocity than it bears thinking about.
I don’t know what happened outside the Anglican hospital, but it probably wasn’t an Israeli bomb. Regardless, Israeli attacks on Gaza have killed thousands of Palestinian civilians, a tragic loss of life.
I think much of the media do a great job, most of the time, but the Republican Senator who said, “The first casualty, when war comes, is truth” was right. I don’t understand those who think the most important thing to do in any crisis is to criticise the BBC’s reporting of it.
I'm not sure I even believe the 'thousands of civilians killed' in Gaza now. Clearly there have been many casualties, but where do the precise numbers come from? The same source as the 500?
I can believe 1000s have been killed, but all death numbers come via Hamas run department and that department have been caught in the past stating to those putting together the figures that every death is to be called a civilian (regardless of if they are active in Hamas or not).
"Solar is set to overpower fossil fuels as the dominant electricity source globally by 2050, according to a new study. [...] Solar power is set to dominate global electricity markets within the next few decades, and may have already reached an “irreversible tipping point,” according to a study published this week in Nature Communications. The study finds that solar adoption will continue apace barring any major policy shifts geared at disrupting it." https://twitter.com/patrickc/status/1714988564801519937
In other words it will continue until people stop flinging subsidies at it. That's hardly surprising. Powering the world with blancmange would be winning the energy race if it was subsidised as we do with favoured renewables.
If you borrow £1,000 to put solar panels on your roof in England, they will reduce your electricity bill by about £180-200/year.
And that purchase involves exactly zero subsidies.
That's an 18-20% annual tax free return.
The vast majority of residential and commercial solar installations these days are done without subsidy.
Mm, a whole lot better than fracking as demonstrated on even the most optimal UK sites, too. And the pollution problem is different (original production costs aside). You just clean up the bird crap every now and then.
It has absolutely nothing to do with fracking, God alone knows why you brought that up. Applications like that mentioned above are fine, but they aren't what's driving solar to become the world's biggest form of electricity generation. This piece on the abandonment of solar by India's Greenpeace-installed 'solar village' is a vignette of the whole issue. These things are put in with grand fanfare, but are not great or particularly reliable forms of generation, and when the subsidies stop, people stop using them. https://india.mongabay.com/2021/12/solar-power-station-at-bihars-first-solar-village-is-now-a-makeshift-cattle-shed/?amp=1
Can I ask you a question?
Is there any information or data that might make you change your mind?
So, if - for example - I were to show that 90% of German or Australian solar installations in 2022 were done without any subsidies whatsoever, would that make you change your mind?
I would want to look for the legislative incentives/push/compulsion and I suspect that I would find them.
Historically, you certainly would. Germany had the Feed in Tariff, where they would pay people for the electricity generated. But they've cut and cut and cut it, so that now it is way below the retail cost of electricity.
The result is that no-one doing residential solar in Germany signs up for the feed in tariff any more. Indeed, if you look at the public statements from the CEOs of RWE and other German power companies, they will tell you that they only see solar appearing via demand destruction these days.
Look at my numbers from before (and I appreciate you're in Scotland, and there's a lot less sun there and therefore the economics are different), but if you are in England and you spend £1,000 on solar panels today, and assuming you do not sell any electricity back to the grid, you will reduce your electricity bill by around £190.
Now, for some people that won't make financial sense. But for others it will. And as panel prices continue to fall, and they fall every year, the number of people for whom it makes sense rises.
I'd love to have solar panels, but I'm curious about your Maths. Unless you have an EV, I don't understand how your Maths works.
I haven't had a quotation for my home, but have been looking online as I'm interested and it seems a typical Solar installation today costs about £5-6k including parts and labour. More if you want a battery to go with it.
So based on your theory that £1k = £190 in savings then should expect ~£1k - £1.2k in cost savings.
But my total annual electricity bill is only £1k. So I'd have to have to come in on the low-end of the quote range, and have all my bill wiped out in order to meet the ratio you named.
And since the cost of electricity is due to come back down off its peak, even then a 100% cost reduction wouldn't meet your quoted numbers.
So where are your numbers coming from? Unless you can get an installation done for £1k - in which case great, how?
They quote £7,000 for installation on average (inc labour), and £365* typical saving if out until 4pm.
So that's £52 per £1000 invested, which is rather different to your £190.
If you have a way of getting a solar system for £1k I'd love to see it.
* And that's in London, lower elsewhere, presumably as elsewhere is further North.
I know London is out on the fringes of the UK, more so than Wick or Belfast, but there is life within North Island south of London: Lizard Point is as far as one can get.
To get a solar system for £1000 you buy the panels secondhand or ex-bankruptcy via ebay, and install it yourself on eg a shed or woodstore. It depends if it is grid-connected or not.
When I get around to it I will be getting a car port which just consists of a frame, and solar panels as the roof.
That I would be a lot happier with than monkeying about with a roof several decades old. MY large shed isn't grid connected but if it does become so then panels would be worth looking into.
When you put power in, be sure to install a couple of spare plastic ducts with drawstrings.
Just in case you may need a second or third run, data and so on.
(Make sure you know how big any cables may end up, and bear in mind that grid connected can include a lot of extra gubbins, isolation stuff to avoid shocking engineers repairing the grid, and paperwork.)
I have seen a lot of young people talk as if they was an independent “Jew free” state of Palestine operating until those awful Jews showed up after the war and colonised it.
There is a level of ignorance that is honestly perplexing, because it used to be in the news all the time; bombings, hijackings, assassinations, Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank, various summits and deals, on and on. As I say I think 9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq, and GWOT seems to have completely filled that particular box of general knowledge for anyone below 35.
Agree. Through to 2005 or so, the soap opera of the peace deal following the Oslo Accords was on the news a lot, and then it died. I think the world suffered more than we can know from Sharon dying (he really seemed intent on doing a Nixon/China thing), Arafat having no vision, and foolishly allowing free elections in Gaza.
Comments
AIUI normal Octopus process is that you switch to their standard tariff, then can switch to any one of the other 10 or so tariffs. Export tariffs require a SMETS2 meter iirc.
I've been on an Octopus Agile Outgoing Tariff for the last year for my exports, which is wholesale-price linked on half hourly segments. That delivered 11p per unit. So yesterday I switched to the 15p fixed tariff with a phone call, which will be worth an extra £100 or so - or more if I get my solar panels jetwashed with an appropriate solution, or persuade the neighbour to deal with their cracking-up horse chestnut tree.
The former SNP leader aimed to make a point that nothing was supposed to stop Nicola Sturgeon.
"While Mr Salmond determined to show up for the photo stunt today, much of Scotland was hunkered down as Storm Babet battered regions including the north-east.
He said: “October 19th 2023 was designated by the SNP last year as referendum day. But instead of a celebration of democracy to take the country forward, the SNP have abdicated any claim to leadership of the national movement.”
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/politics/6226411/alex-salmond-independence-referendum/
Tamworth: Too close to call.
Mid Beds: Narrow Con hold, Lab 2nd.
And (this is meant with the greatest respect) I do suspect that those three might be filtered through their father and father - in- laws somewhat curmudgeonly worldview, rather than being neutrally reported!
On a more serious philosophical note, I think 2 is bonkers. Paying tax is, in my view, quite a few rungs above not existing at all on the great ladder of human existence.
In more recent national polls Biden is actually leading Trump more often than not. Whether he's had a small bounce because of Israel I don't know.
But in fairness polls do seem to be all over the place - if the GE is Biden v Trump it appears a complete 50:50 toss-up at the moment.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/
supporting the McHenry resolution.
Said if he were not speaker designee, he wouldn’t be supporting it and it seemed self serving to be able to campaign for months, sources tell me and @sarahnferris...
..Told Rep. Gooden (R-Texas) made a similar point
Members are quite angry how this is going down
https://twitter.com/Olivia_Beavers/status/1715040044526809396
Every single media outlet that ran with the Hamas version of 500 dead in an Israeli air strike on a hospital needs to put out a front page retraction immediately. Israel should sue and force them into it so they learn their lesson and stop parroting Hamas.
But then that's the Internet for you.
Is this… is this the BBC apologising a little tiny bit for how it reported the hospital explosion?
https://twitter.com/JakeWSimons/status/1715047356645720453
Labour were value whatever happens though.
I can buy energy at 7.5p per kwh via Intelligent Octopus so if I just buy 13kwh of batteries I will get 80% of the savings at 50-60% of the total price.
It's an explanation, that's all. "We said Z because it was a confused situation and we said other stuff too"
The US intelligence community assesses that there likely were between 100 to 300 people killed in the blast at the Al-Ahli Baptist Hospital in Gaza, and there was “only light structural damage at the hospital,” according to an unclassified intelligence assessment obtained by CNN that adds more detail to the initial assessment released Wednesday finding Israel was not responsible for the strike.
The unclassified assessment sent to Capitol Hill by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence adds more detail to the US intelligence community’s initial assessment released Wednesday that Israel was not responsible for the strike on the hospital.
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/19/politics/us-intelligence-assessment-gaza-hospital-blast/index.html
I saw a lot of media sources reporting that Hamas had beheaded 40 babies. That does not appear to have been the case. I’ve not seen any front page retractions over that. I don’t think there needs to be, although I think some media sources should at least correct their earlier reporting.
I think media sources should reflect on their mistakes over reporting the hospital incident. Learning from what happened and not doing it again is more important than front page retractions.
You are completely correct on my solar numbers. I copy and pasted the figures from my spreadsheet which has tabs for London and for Los Angeles.
And I used the Los Angeles tab. Which (a) has more sun than the UK, and (b) has more expensive power.
Returns in the UK are meaningfully worse, although - as prices continue to fall - they will keep improving.
- That was never the claim from any Israeli sources, it was 40 babies had been killed in one Kibbutz, including ones that had been beheaded, burned alive, etc.
Did any UK media organisations run a front page saying 40 beheadings? I don't think they did? It was mostly that is what became the claim on twitter, which was then used to dispute that Israel was telling the truth when they revealed photos of some of the dead babies, as in see, not all beheaded.
As for ruthless he might be, but he might also be clueless.
It's also crucial as it means we should not be taking Gazan claims of deaths at face value anymore.
Kennedy does not have the charisma, the magic touch, to make many inroads. Fox News will support a generic Republican over Kennedy.
Secondly, the BBC and other broadcasters have to abide by a Broadcasting Code set by Ofcom in accordance with a statutory framework. The issue of whether a broadcaster is in breach of the Code is one for Ofcom to determine. If they are in breach, they are likely to be penalised. If they aren't, then it's the job of the Government to consider whether to introduce legislation before Parliament to change the standards required of broadcast news. But it isn't for them to haul news editors of broadcasters over the coals to the extent they are complying with the regulation that has actually been set.
Oh dear.
I'm just on Go Compare looking for some cheaper quotes and then I shall be calling my insurance company to cancel the policy!
Jeremy Bowen just could not bring himself to say “we might have jumped the gun” this morning on Today after Tugendhat calmly pointed out the errors over the hospital reporting. It’s a mix of arrogance, confusion, not understanding that the world doesn’t think the way they do. There is a thing called “BBC diversity” which is that the BBC are full of people of every colour and creed so they think they have diverse input but it’s not because those people of diverse colour and creed are largely from a similar social viewpoint or background. The groupthink will kill the bbc. Moving bits to Salford doesn’t make it diverse because they fill it with key people from the bbc in London with the same views so it can never change.
I just find it depressing that they consider themselves educated and superior but cannot also consider if the way they think might just be wrong occasionally.
They aren’t the only ones and it is a symptom of “quick news”. Pretty much every news outlet needs to make it big that they got it wrong over the hospital attack as do Arab governments if they want to lance the boil that’s growing.
A very large slice of the cost is now the scaffolding and labour to reteofit panels onto roofs. That's got some relatively easy work rounds.
One is making sure that every new build has panels in an optimal orientation, because that's simpler if you are planning from scratch. Or do it when fixing roofs, ready for then the sun shines. Or put them in places that are easier to reach.
It doesn't even matter if they're not optimally located; the cost-benefit calculations are easy enough if the cost is low enough.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12615031/Hamas-terrorists-beheaded-babies-kibbutz-slaughter-IDF-soldiers-reveal-horrific-scenes-carnage-discovered-site-scores-people-massacred.html Daily Mail said, “massacred at least 40 babies and young children before beheading some of them”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12616463/holocaust-Babies-beheaded-40-children-shot-dead-families-burnt-alive.html Again, 40 and beheaded, but not quite saying 40 beheaded.
There was similar in the Telegraph and Express. Metro said beheaded babies, but didn’t give a number.
Then there was this Mail headline: “Read the texts that got ABC journo Tom Joyner in hot water after WhatsApp message in which he called claims Hamas beheaded 40 babies 'bulls***'”, which implies the claim is true.
Elsewhere, the Times of India said 40 beheaded babies in a headline. US sources did. Yahoo did.
I don’t know what was on the front page. I don’t think I’ve seen a physical copy of the Mail or Telegraph in months!
Certainly some US outlets did say 40 were beheaded. But what are you expecting from them?
Amir Weitmann, a prominent member of Netanyahu’s Likup party, lashes out at Russia live on RT 🔥
“I understand you're on the Russian payroll and I understand this is Russian propaganda, but you have to be very careful because let me tell you, we're going to finish this war. We're going to win because we're stronger. After this, Russia will pay the price. Believe me, Russia will pay the price," he told RT.
https://twitter.com/PStyle0ne1/status/1715058886007312552
He will centre on key concepts for reelection: Elections are won from the centre, but voters are not averse to incremental progress. The focus will not be on the perfect, or even the good. It will be on demonstrable but actually slight improvements from the present situation in which problems and complaints abound but solutions are lacking.
Discontinuous leftism, or sudden turns in the road will be avoided.
And as usual, it's the wrong one.
This is another extension of the civilised world against fascist barbarism. Same with Hamas as with Russia.
If I'm wrong and he turns out to be poor or mediocre, I'll apologise to you. Can't say fairer than that. But I don't think I'll have to.
I write as a relative moron in knowledge of the Middle East but it’s inevitable on a human level that you will feel for one side over another and maybe they need fresh eyes in the region - his contacts are incredible, his experience is huge but I think he has an understandable bias and the BBC might be better served by having someone report from a more distant perspective.
However Biden led DeSantis 39% to 27% with 12% going third party and 11% not voting. Biden led Pence 37% to 23% with 17% third party and 11% not voting.
Biden led Ramaswamy 39% to 23% with 13% third party and 12% not voting and Biden led Haley 37% to 20% with 16% third party and 13% not voting.
Biden also led Christie 36% to 15% with a massive 21% going 3rd party and 14% not voting.
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2023/10/biden-v-trump-why-is-america-heading-for-the-rematch-no-one-seems-to-want/
People underestimate how Trump appealed to many blue collar Democrats who aren't natural Republicans, they just hate big corporations, immigration and China.
Same as Boris also had a personal appeal to working class Leave voters who aren't natural Tories other Conservative leaders can't replicate
Whar's there to debate ?
Take Tesla's solar roof tiles. These are solar panels that are made in the same size as standard roof tiles and which connect to each other at the edges. If you're redoing your roof (which you will need to do from time-to-time anyway), you just replace the tiles on the sunny side with solar tiles. That dramatically lowers the installation cost.
And where Tesla is leading, another half dozen companies are following.
I don’t know what happened outside the Anglican hospital, but it probably wasn’t an Israeli bomb. Regardless, Israeli attacks on Gaza have killed thousands of Palestinian civilians, a tragic loss of life.
I think much of the media do a great job, most of the time, but the Republican Senator who said, “The first casualty, when war comes, is truth” was right. I don’t understand those who think the most important thing to do in any crisis is to criticise the BBC’s reporting of it.
Likup people’s worst inclinations and support from the political crazies and voila, a governing party.
As I keep saying this is 1974 not 1997. There's a very good chance this will be a one term Labour government but it depends how the Conservatives react to being in Opposition. If they go off to the nutty far right two or even three terms in government are possible for Labour.
I fully supported his statement that he would bulldoze through the planning system to get houses built, it's the right thing to do.
But then like lots of others I thought he just wont do it, he'll get caught up in the legalities and back off or hold independent enquiries and BS stuff like that and another five years will tick by.
Edit: Not that it should particularly be a numbers game, but still...
https://news.gallup.com/poll/116500/presidential-approval-ratings-george-bush.aspx
They were mostly net positive during 2004, and the first months of 2005. (Which probably caused fits of depression at the Guardian, and in some Seattle neighborhoods.)
UK commenters may want to compare them to Rishi Sunak's current ratings, just for fun.
BREAKING:
Incoming reports of a mass stabbing attack at a shopping mall in Rouen, France.
Multiple people wounded, 1 killed and the suspect still on the run
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1715089157356200000
Just in case you may need a second or third run, data and so on.
(Make sure you know how big any cables may end up, and bear in mind that grid connected can include a lot of extra gubbins, isolation stuff to avoid shocking engineers repairing the grid, and paperwork.)
https://wingsoverscotland.com/now-the-traffic-lights-change/