Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

An unpopularity contest – politicalbetting.com

123578

Comments

  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,272

    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I was skim reading the...... altercation............ between CorrectHorseBattery and Barty Roberts last night.

    I must admit I'm somewhat in CHB's favour here.
    Israel has gone far to far with its response to 7th October. Their is no justification to destroying aid convoys and killing aid workers. And I don't believe them when they say it was an accident. It wasn't, and they know it.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we will all agree on.
    No. We all don't.
    OK, a fair point.

    I'll reconfirm.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we all ( except @Dura_Ace ) agree on.
    If must means accepting Barty's half a million dead, then no, we can't.
    Besides. It's perfectly feasible to kill half a million Gazans, and still not destroy Hamas. Partly because (unlike in the olden days) the leadership of Hamas can scatter to the four corners and still do their leadership thing, thanks to modern communications tech. But also because the hatred they feed on is a powerful meme and you can't destroy that by destroying an imaginable number of people.

    It's a shame that life isn't simple any more. But here we are.
    Let's see what happens if, as speculated by some, Iran actively get involved and target Israel in revenge for their bombing of the Iranian consulate in Damascus. Speculated as trying to get Iran fully involved and extend the theatre of conflict.

    So far the only people advocating it, and in some cases wanting it, are more extreme elements in the US or Middle East on Social Media.


    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/israel-boosts-defences-after-iran-revenge-threat/ar-BB1l3X5E?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=fa8ee8869bc4428bbc82c9378a6fedcf&ei=7
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 4,907
    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,518

    Today is the 75th anniversary of the foundation of NATO.

    The world has changed a great deal in that time; the need for NATO has not.

    And I give you Nato Salesman of the Century!!!


    A picture framed in every boardroom of the Military Industrial Complex. Next to their sales chart.
    Happy Days in the Killing Business. Business is Good.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,762
    Of course.
    The early adopter phase is done, and cheaper EVs have yet to hit the market in any volume.

    If something like the Kia Ray EV was on the market in the UK, I'd buy one tomorrow. It isn't, so I'll continue to run my old jalopy.

    Most of the big new battery factories are a year or so later than planned; hence the hiatus. The winners from that will be the Chinese ... and Toyota.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,281
    More laughable FUD from the Trussograph. Lets look at the SMMT release instead:

    https://www.smmt.co.uk/2024/04/march-new-car-market-sustains-growth-as-manufacturers-shore-up-electrified-demand/

    If you want to look only at March in isolation, total sales are +10.4%. Which means that "everyone is buying petrol" isn't true either as that is only +9.2%. What have they sold most of in terms of % growth (the figure they chose an attack line)? Plug-In Hybrids which are +36.7%.

    Or we look at Q1 as a whole. Total market +10.4%, BEV +10.6%, Petrol lagging behind at +9.4%...
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,272

    I was skim reading the...... altercation............ between CorrectHorseBattery and Barty Roberts last night.

    I must admit I'm somewhat in CHB's favour here.
    Israel has gone far to far with its response to 7th October. Their is no justification to destroying aid convoys and killing aid workers. And I don't believe them when they say it was an accident. It wasn't, and they know it.

    What evidence do you have that it wasn't, other than a dislike of Israel, when they're saying it was an accident and they've apologised and said there'll be an investigation.

    Its rather naive to believe wars can be carried out without mistakes being made.

    Under Tony Blair we in NATO managed to bomb a Chinese embassy during a war, did you think that was on purpose? Bombing the wrong car should be a far more plausible accident.
    Look, I like Israel, and was on the Executive of Labour Friends of Israel. But bombing three different cars of the same convoy in succession, as shown by the BBC last night, seems to be pretty deliberate.

    But I'm getting bored with Western governments saying it's all very worrying and Israel should exercise restraint. Either we should stop sending arms to them until they actually do show some restraint, or stop pretending that we care.
    There seems to be a lot of pro Israeli posters saying criticism of them is down to a dislike of Israel rather than the consequences of the actions they are taking.

    As for your post, well said, probably one of the best comments about this whole wretched conflict I have seen. The West really does need to either pee or get off the pot here when it comes to how it views Israel's actions and responds to it. The west seems to want to straddle both camps here. Appease many of its citizens who are appalled at what they see and support Israel as an ally irrespective of what it does.
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,184
    I see that Cameron has ruled out sending footwear to Ukraine. Pretty shocking - they need shells and armaments and the like while we won't even stretch to surplus wellingtons.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,137
    You know Trump is in trouble when Karl Rove - Karl Rove!! - rips Trump a new one over promising to pardon the 6th January rioters.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abWwAkMPpxI
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,760
    Nigelb said:

    Of course.
    The early adopter phase is done, and cheaper EVs have yet to hit the market in any volume.

    If something like the Kia Ray EV was on the market in the UK, I'd buy one tomorrow. It isn't, so I'll continue to run my old jalopy.

    Most of the big new battery factories are a year or so later than planned; hence the hiatus. The winners from that will be the Chinese ... and Toyota.
    Only time will tell. The Germans are pushing hard to slow the whole EV thing down. I suspect we will follow their lead.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,763
    Sandpit said:

    FF43 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "I long to destroy self-checkout machines – and at last, there’s a glimmer of hope
    Coco Khan"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/nov/14/destroy-self-checkout-machines-supermarket-boycott

    Self checkouts are an interesting business question. Customers are divided but more dislike them than like them; staff hate them - more because they don't work very smoothly and staff get the grief from customers than because the machines put them out of a job; they cost more than manned tills when maintenance and increased theft are factored in.

    So why, given they are net negatives for customers, staff and the business itself, do businesses persevere with self checkouts? It seems to be a version of "one final push". Businesses believe a technical solution will be found to make the self checkout system work better.
    The staff cost savings (80-90% compared to manned tills, one person for 5 or 10 unmanned tills in larger stores), make up for the customer inconvenience in the eyes of the bean-counters, and they’re hoping these savings continue to grow as the technology matures.

    Yes they’ll couch it in fluffy language about freeing up till workers for customer service work, but that’s just to avoid headlines about redundancies, and you can bet overall headcount will decrease over time as people leave and aren’t replaced.
    But self checkouts actually cost supermarkets compared with manned tills, when you factor in maintenance costs and increased theft. Which makes them interesting from a business perspective.
  • Options
    anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,578

    CatMan said:

    More Brexit good news:

    Food price fears as Brexit import charges revealed

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68726852

    So our own farmers become more competitive and can increase their incomes and we cut back on food miles.

    Sounds good.
    Slapping charges on imports increases competitiveness?

    No wonder your grasp of economics is so slight.
    It's what the EU has done for the last 50 years. Maybe you hadnt noticed ?
    I had indeed noticed the benefits of being part of the larges single market in the world.

    Still, blue passports, eh. Rejoice!
    Yeah, ducking the point.
    The point being that Brexit has become a total sh*tshow for most people - higher prices, ridiculous passport queues at ports and airports, random customs charges on parcels from abroad, these are the things people experience every day. And the variety and quality of goods available in the UK has declined - the range of cheeses sold in my local supermarket is now much more limited than it was before Brexit, to take one example.

    And for what? What benefits can we see in our everyday lives? Or for the UK on the international stage? There are none.

    You would have higher prices no matter what due to Covid and Putin. Personally I fly via Schipol to Hamburg every month and never face a long wait. As for supermarket stocking policies they change all the time. The selection of cheese at my local Waitrose has got better, lots of local artisan cheese. If cheese is your thing change supermarket.

    Your issue is you are stuck in the past. You lost a vote because you couldnt sell a positive view of the EU.
    I hope you're using a British passport and not cheating with an Irish one!
    I have both. But currently Im travelling on the Blue\black one.
    So Brexit was a win win for you. Foreigners kicked out and you retain your freedom of movement. Happy days!
    I voted for it twice
    How come?

    Did I miss Starmer's proposed rerun?
    Starmer wont re-run, the EUs not interested.
    No that's true, but I think you will find the narrative around Brexit will change completely after the election. There will be no one left in public life who will seek to defend it - at the moment the government machine has to talk it up and look for "benefits" but that will not happen under Labour. The government machine will talk it down and remind people of the cost - as Reeves did in her Mais lecture. And I think you will find opportunists like Farage backing away from it - not because they want to rejoin of course but because they won't want to be associated with what will come to be seen as Johnson's disastrous deal. And any Tory leader who is interested in taking the party back to power will need to attract support from the 60% or so of the electorate who think Brexit was a bad move.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,760
    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Maybe you should get more meaning to your life.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,272
    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    I agree. A friend of my wife's did exactly that. What a shit thing to do.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,961
    edited April 4

    More laughable FUD from the Trussograph. Lets look at the SMMT release instead:

    https://www.smmt.co.uk/2024/04/march-new-car-market-sustains-growth-as-manufacturers-shore-up-electrified-demand/

    If you want to look only at March in isolation, total sales are +10.4%. Which means that "everyone is buying petrol" isn't true either as that is only +9.2%. What have they sold most of in terms of % growth (the figure they chose an attack line)? Plug-In Hybrids which are +36.7%.

    Or we look at Q1 as a whole. Total market +10.4%, BEV +10.6%, Petrol lagging behind at +9.4%...
    One of our directors drives a hybrid electric. His fuel consumption has barely changed since his ICE car.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,760

    CatMan said:

    More Brexit good news:

    Food price fears as Brexit import charges revealed

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68726852

    So our own farmers become more competitive and can increase their incomes and we cut back on food miles.

    Sounds good.
    Slapping charges on imports increases competitiveness?

    No wonder your grasp of economics is so slight.
    It's what the EU has done for the last 50 years. Maybe you hadnt noticed ?
    I had indeed noticed the benefits of being part of the larges single market in the world.

    Still, blue passports, eh. Rejoice!
    Yeah, ducking the point.
    The point being that Brexit has become a total sh*tshow for most people - higher prices, ridiculous passport queues at ports and airports, random customs charges on parcels from abroad, these are the things people experience every day. And the variety and quality of goods available in the UK has declined - the range of cheeses sold in my local supermarket is now much more limited than it was before Brexit, to take one example.

    And for what? What benefits can we see in our everyday lives? Or for the UK on the international stage? There are none.

    You would have higher prices no matter what due to Covid and Putin. Personally I fly via Schipol to Hamburg every month and never face a long wait. As for supermarket stocking policies they change all the time. The selection of cheese at my local Waitrose has got better, lots of local artisan cheese. If cheese is your thing change supermarket.

    Your issue is you are stuck in the past. You lost a vote because you couldnt sell a positive view of the EU.
    I hope you're using a British passport and not cheating with an Irish one!
    I have both. But currently Im travelling on the Blue\black one.
    So Brexit was a win win for you. Foreigners kicked out and you retain your freedom of movement. Happy days!
    I voted for it twice
    How come?

    Did I miss Starmer's proposed rerun?
    Starmer wont re-run, the EUs not interested.
    No that's true, but I think you will find the narrative around Brexit will change completely after the election. There will be no one left in public life who will seek to defend it - at the moment the government machine has to talk it up and look for "benefits" but that will not happen under Labour. The government machine will talk it down and remind people of the cost - as Reeves did in her Mais lecture. And I think you will find opportunists like Farage backing away from it - not because they want to rejoin of course but because they won't want to be associated with what will come to be seen as Johnson's disastrous deal. And any Tory leader who is interested in taking the party back to power will need to attract support from the 60% or so of the electorate who think Brexit was a bad move.
    So no rejoining any time soon,
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,057

    I do have to laugh at the @Alanbrooke position (not personal to you - its the argument). "Just buy local" is fine. If we were self-sufficient in food production. Which we are not.

    I absolutely support people buying British where that is an option. Why not buy fresh lamb from Alanbrooke's local farmer vs one that Barty wants shipped frozen from NZ?

    But what about all the stuff we eat which we don't produce? Or can't produce all year round? Or at a cost people are willing to pay?

    I do remember some nutter interviewed before the referendum saying they would be happy eating grass of it meant leaving the EU. And that "fuck you" mentality is still there. You can't feed your familiy with sovereignty...

    Britain could easily be self-sufficient in food if meat consumption decreased a bit. I look forward to Farage fronting a vegan food campaign to break Britain's reliance on food imports.
    Really? I thought Britain couldn't be self-sufficient during WW2 with rationing and 20 million fewer people.
    This is the abstract from a 1976 paper.

    "Abstract
    The yield of wheat in England has increased more than six-fold during the last 750 years, from 0.5 tonne/ha in the first half of the 13th century to 3.4 tonne/ha in the third quarter of the 20th century. Present yields are nearly 4.5 tonne/ha/year representing a nine-fold increase from beginning to end of the period. ..

    More than three quarters of the increase has occurred in the last 300 years when yields rose almost exponentially, doubling every 150 years. However, most of the increase was in two comparatively short periods, 1820–1860 and post-Second World War. In the last 30 years the national wheat yield has increased at 0.079 tonne/ha/year, twice as fast as in the accelerating phase of the previous century."


    In 2020 the wheat yield was 7 tonnes/hectare.
    It also takes a ridiculously tiny workforce to get that yield, compared to 1940.

    From memory, it was 10-15% of total employment in the 30s and 40s. Less than 2% today.
    And in Russia before WW2, the percentage of people working in agriculture was massively high I forget it, but it was in the order of 70-80%.

    The changes in general are massive:
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/1005657/share-working-population-agriculture-europe-1930-1980/

    The house I was born in was surrounded by fields on three sides, which often grew grain. Recently I said to my dad that I remember walking through the wheat as a young lad and remembering how tall it was. When I see fields of wheat nowadays, they're much shorter. How much I had grown!

    My dad commented that whilst I had grown, wheat had also shrunk. Stalks are essentially 'waste' to the farmers; what they want is grain. And with modern herbicides, there is no reason to have the wheat outgrow the weeds. Therefore heads of what have got larger, and he stalks shorter, That alone must have improved yield.
  • Options
    carnforthcarnforth Posts: 3,230
    Taz said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    I agree. A friend of my wife's did exactly that. What a shit thing to do.
    You think they should have abstained? Or forced themselves into voting for something they didn't believe in? What exactly is the non-shit option?
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 4,907

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Maybe you should get more meaning to your life.
    You voted to deny others FOM and swan around using your EU passport . Shame on you ! If you don’t see why your position might piss people off then you really are deluded .


  • Options
    DonkeysDonkeys Posts: 580
    edited April 4
    FF43 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "I long to destroy self-checkout machines – and at last, there’s a glimmer of hope
    Coco Khan"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/nov/14/destroy-self-checkout-machines-supermarket-boycott

    Self checkouts are an interesting business question. Customers are divided but more dislike them than like them; staff hate them - more because they don't work very smoothly and staff get the grief from customers than because the machines put them out of a job; they cost more than manned tills when maintenance and increased theft are factored in.

    So why, given they are net negatives for customers, staff and the business itself, do businesses persevere with self checkouts? It seems to be a version of "one final push". Businesses believe a technical solution will be found to make the self checkout system work better.
    Haven't Booths heard of the cartel?

    Are you sure the self-checkout tills are a net loss to companies? If that's so, the explanation could be that a supplier has them over a barrel - cf. hotel laundry and cleaning services, or security and protection. Which seems unlikely for an operator as powerful as Tesco. Or perhaps there's no antagonism and it's a way of hoiking profits out.

    Is there a single supplier somewhere to all the supermarket companies?

    Personally I see the technology as transitional to microchip implantation.

    "X is a pain in the arse. Make your life easy. Get chipped."

    That'll hook some early adopters.

    This could also apply to remembering passwords, remembering how to find your way home, putting yourself out by moving your hand that carries a phone, strapping on your smartwatch, wasting time turning keys in locks when you could be watching advertisements, etc., as well as faffing about at the supermarket - either standing in queues or self-checking out.

    Self-checkouts as they currently are have a distinctly transitional feel about them.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,804
    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Selfish and hypocritcal perhaps, but not appalling. A lot of humans are pretty selfish and hypocritcal by default, so hard to be appalled by such behaviour imo.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,518

    I do have to laugh at the @Alanbrooke position (not personal to you - its the argument). "Just buy local" is fine. If we were self-sufficient in food production. Which we are not.

    I absolutely support people buying British where that is an option. Why not buy fresh lamb from Alanbrooke's local farmer vs one that Barty wants shipped frozen from NZ?

    But what about all the stuff we eat which we don't produce? Or can't produce all year round? Or at a cost people are willing to pay?

    I do remember some nutter interviewed before the referendum saying they would be happy eating grass of it meant leaving the EU. And that "fuck you" mentality is still there. You can't feed your familiy with sovereignty...

    Britain could easily be self-sufficient in food if meat consumption decreased a bit. I look forward to Farage fronting a vegan food campaign to break Britain's reliance on food imports.
    Really? I thought Britain couldn't be self-sufficient during WW2 with rationing and 20 million fewer people.
    This is the abstract from a 1976 paper.

    "Abstract
    The yield of wheat in England has increased more than six-fold during the last 750 years, from 0.5 tonne/ha in the first half of the 13th century to 3.4 tonne/ha in the third quarter of the 20th century. Present yields are nearly 4.5 tonne/ha/year representing a nine-fold increase from beginning to end of the period. ..

    More than three quarters of the increase has occurred in the last 300 years when yields rose almost exponentially, doubling every 150 years. However, most of the increase was in two comparatively short periods, 1820–1860 and post-Second World War. In the last 30 years the national wheat yield has increased at 0.079 tonne/ha/year, twice as fast as in the accelerating phase of the previous century."


    In 2020 the wheat yield was 7 tonnes/hectare.
    It also takes a ridiculously tiny workforce to get that yield, compared to 1940.

    From memory, it was 10-15% of total employment in the 30s and 40s. Less than 2% today.
    And in Russia before WW2, the percentage of people working in agriculture was massively high I forget it, but it was in the order of 70-80%.

    The changes in general are massive:
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/1005657/share-working-population-agriculture-europe-1930-1980/

    The house I was born in was surrounded by fields on three sides, which often grew grain. Recently I said to my dad that I remember walking through the wheat as a young lad and remembering how tall it was. When I see fields of wheat nowadays, they're much shorter. How much I had grown!

    My dad commented that whilst I had grown, wheat had also shrunk. Stalks are essentially 'waste' to the farmers; what they want is grain. And with modern herbicides, there is no reason to have the wheat outgrow the weeds. Therefore heads of what have got larger, and he stalks shorter, That alone must have improved yield.
    The shorter, stouter stalks was one of the big things in increasing yield - attempts to increase the size of the heads caused the long stalks to break.
  • Options
    anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,578

    CatMan said:

    More Brexit good news:

    Food price fears as Brexit import charges revealed

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68726852

    So our own farmers become more competitive and can increase their incomes and we cut back on food miles.

    Sounds good.
    Slapping charges on imports increases competitiveness?

    No wonder your grasp of economics is so slight.
    It's what the EU has done for the last 50 years. Maybe you hadnt noticed ?
    I had indeed noticed the benefits of being part of the larges single market in the world.

    Still, blue passports, eh. Rejoice!
    Yeah, ducking the point.
    The point being that Brexit has become a total sh*tshow for most people - higher prices, ridiculous passport queues at ports and airports, random customs charges on parcels from abroad, these are the things people experience every day. And the variety and quality of goods available in the UK has declined - the range of cheeses sold in my local supermarket is now much more limited than it was before Brexit, to take one example.

    And for what? What benefits can we see in our everyday lives? Or for the UK on the international stage? There are none.

    You would have higher prices no matter what due to Covid and Putin. Personally I fly via Schipol to Hamburg every month and never face a long wait. As for supermarket stocking policies they change all the time. The selection of cheese at my local Waitrose has got better, lots of local artisan cheese. If cheese is your thing change supermarket.

    Your issue is you are stuck in the past. You lost a vote because you couldnt sell a positive view of the EU.
    I hope you're using a British passport and not cheating with an Irish one!
    I have both. But currently Im travelling on the Blue\black one.
    So Brexit was a win win for you. Foreigners kicked out and you retain your freedom of movement. Happy days!
    I voted for it twice
    How come?

    Did I miss Starmer's proposed rerun?
    Starmer wont re-run, the EUs not interested.
    No that's true, but I think you will find the narrative around Brexit will change completely after the election. There will be no one left in public life who will seek to defend it - at the moment the government machine has to talk it up and look for "benefits" but that will not happen under Labour. The government machine will talk it down and remind people of the cost - as Reeves did in her Mais lecture. And I think you will find opportunists like Farage backing away from it - not because they want to rejoin of course but because they won't want to be associated with what will come to be seen as Johnson's disastrous deal. And any Tory leader who is interested in taking the party back to power will need to attract support from the 60% or so of the electorate who think Brexit was a bad move.
    So no rejoining any time soon,
    Hard to predict. Certainly not in the next five years but it will come back on to the agenda at some point.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,281
    Pulpstar said:

    More laughable FUD from the Trussograph. Lets look at the SMMT release instead:

    https://www.smmt.co.uk/2024/04/march-new-car-market-sustains-growth-as-manufacturers-shore-up-electrified-demand/

    If you want to look only at March in isolation, total sales are +10.4%. Which means that "everyone is buying petrol" isn't true either as that is only +9.2%. What have they sold most of in terms of % growth (the figure they chose an attack line)? Plug-In Hybrids which are +36.7%.

    Or we look at Q1 as a whole. Total market +10.4%, BEV +10.6%, Petrol lagging behind at +9.4%...
    One of our directors drives a hybrid electric. His fuel consumption has barely changed since his ICE car.
    Define "Hybrid". One with a 16v battery - often branded a "mild hybrid" is not a hybrid. Its just a stop-start system. He probably had one on a previous car, so no wonder there is no difference.

    Why are manufacturers dressing up a petrol engine with existing stop-start technology as a hybrid? Because more people want to buy hybrid cars than they want to make. So they rebrand. Same with "self-charging hybrid".
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,732
    Endillion said:

    Foxy said:

    Endillion said:

    Nigelb said:

    ...

    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I was skim reading the...... altercation............ between CorrectHorseBattery and Barty Roberts last night.

    I must admit I'm somewhat in CHB's favour here.
    Israel has gone far to far with its response to 7th October. Their is no justification to destroying aid convoys and killing aid workers. And I don't believe them when they say it was an accident. It wasn't, and they know it.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we will all agree on.
    No. We all don't.
    OK, a fair point.

    I'll reconfirm.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we all ( except @Dura_Ace ) agree on.
    If must means accepting Barty's half a million dead, then no, we can't.
    This is a statement taken out of context. On my original post I caveated that by questioning Bart's collateral value to achieve his aim. I was specific in that I last night asked Bart for numbers. He declined and simply retorted with "whatever it takes".
    Here's the context.

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4736911/#Comment_4736911
    BartholomewRoberts
    Mexicanpete said:
    » show previous quotes
    1. Bollocks it is!
    2. At what cost in lives, give me a number (whatever it takes isn't a number).
    3. I said pushing bastards out of windows and the like. Have you never seen Munich?
    4.
    1. Yes it is.
    2. Whatever it takes. The death toll of the Iraq War was over a quarter of a million, and this is an order of magnitude more justified than that war, so lets say double that half a million? If that's what it takes?
    3. Real life isn't a James Bond movie. Pushing a few people out of windows won't end Hamas.
    Thank you. I had lost interest after "whatever it takes" and ignored the value figure and gone to bed.

    Half a million is good to know. So we are at circa 10% down so far.

    Life must be cheap on Merseyside.

    Top marks for reading to the end.
    "Official" death toll (possibly exaggerated) is around 32,000, and of that, between a quarter and a half (depending on whether you believe Israel or Hamas - and potentially the difference is who counts as a terrorist and who doesn't) are Hamas members.

    Presumably the half million was meant as civilians, and Hamas members do not count towards it.

    So no, we are nowhere near "10% down so far" - more like 4%. And IDF operational efficiency is getting better as the war goes on - for example, there were no civilian deaths recorded during the recent Shifa hospital operation. And all the heavy bombing has been done for a while - you'll notice the death toll has remained fairly static for some time. There is no way the death toll ends up anywhere near half a million.

    Considering the level of destruction of buildings and of social and health infrastructure that 32 000 deaths is likely to be a significant underestimate.
    Considering the identity of the people providing the number, it's likely to be a significant overestimate. And again, you need to deduct the terrorists, since Hamas is including them in the total.

    The only thing I know for certain about the actual number of civilians dead, is you have no clue.
    The amount of destruction of buildings is well documented. Do you think they were all empty at the time?

    How many functioning hospitals in Gaza are there that can manage a heart attack or diabetic coma? Probably none

    I suspect the indirect casualties, "excess deaths" if you prefer, will far exceed the direct deaths from military action.

    I have not cited Hamas estimates, but the scale of destruction is obvious.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,877
    edited April 4

    I do have to laugh at the @Alanbrooke position (not personal to you - its the argument). "Just buy local" is fine. If we were self-sufficient in food production. Which we are not.

    I absolutely support people buying British where that is an option. Why not buy fresh lamb from Alanbrooke's local farmer vs one that Barty wants shipped frozen from NZ?

    But what about all the stuff we eat which we don't produce? Or can't produce all year round? Or at a cost people are willing to pay?

    I do remember some nutter interviewed before the referendum saying they would be happy eating grass of it meant leaving the EU. And that "fuck you" mentality is still there. You can't feed your familiy with sovereignty...

    Britain could easily be self-sufficient in food if meat consumption decreased a bit. I look forward to Farage fronting a vegan food campaign to break Britain's reliance on food imports.
    Really? I thought Britain couldn't be self-sufficient during WW2 with rationing and 20 million fewer people.
    Agricultural techniques must have advanced since then as well though.
    So has urbanization, too. Interesting thought. But the input of oil etc for fuel and fertiliser has considerablyt increased.
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 4,907

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Selfish and hypocritcal perhaps, but not appalling. A lot of humans are pretty selfish and hypocritcal by default, so hard to be appalled by such behaviour imo.
    Yes I understand people can be selfish . Leave voters should not be allowed an EU passport . If they voted to leave it , then they should lose their FOM rights .

  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,763

    FF43 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "I long to destroy self-checkout machines – and at last, there’s a glimmer of hope
    Coco Khan"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/nov/14/destroy-self-checkout-machines-supermarket-boycott

    Self checkouts are an interesting business question. Customers are divided but more dislike them than like them; staff hate them - more because they don't work very smoothly and staff get the grief from customers than because the machines put them out of a job; they cost more than manned tills when maintenance and increased theft are factored in.

    So why, given they are net negatives for customers, staff and the business itself, do businesses persevere with self checkouts? It seems to be a version of "one final push". Businesses believe a technical solution will be found to make the self checkout system work better.
    Is there more than anecdotal evidence that customers dislike them? I much prefer them (despite twinges of guilt over possible job losses), in the same way that I prefer filling up the car with petrol to the old days when you awaited an attendant. Most customers in the places I shop go for them, or for the scan-as-you-shop option - standing in a queue while the person three places ahead of you chats to the cashier is really irritating. Obviously it does depend on how well the systems work and the number of tills/self-checkouts available.
    It was in some analysis I read. It would be helpful if I could find it again and link to it rather just paraphrasing what it said.

    I'm broadly neutral about self checkouts but as supermarkets try to discourage you from manned tills I play along.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,669
    carnforth said:

    Eabhal said:

    kinabalu said:

    I do have to laugh at the @Alanbrooke position (not personal to you - its the argument). "Just buy local" is fine. If we were self-sufficient in food production. Which we are not.

    I absolutely support people buying British where that is an option. Why not buy fresh lamb from Alanbrooke's local farmer vs one that Barty wants shipped frozen from NZ?

    But what about all the stuff we eat which we don't produce? Or can't produce all year round? Or at a cost people are willing to pay?

    I do remember some nutter interviewed before the referendum saying they would be happy eating grass of it meant leaving the EU. And that "fuck you" mentality is still there. You can't feed your familiy with sovereignty...

    Britain could easily be self-sufficient in food if meat consumption decreased a bit. I look forward to Farage fronting a vegan food campaign to break Britain's reliance on food imports.
    Really? I thought Britain couldn't be self-sufficient during WW2 with rationing and 20 million fewer people.
    Agricultural productivity has increased a lot since WWII, and you have things like Quorn these days to act as a protein-rich meat substitute.

    Livestock are a very inefficient use of land if that land is suitable for use growing grain or vegetables.
    There's also the issue that we waste about 25% of all the food we buy and throw it away.
    Statistics like this always astonish me. Do people not eat everything on their plate and save leftovers? I doubt we throw away more than a few percent of our food in our house.
    Im afraid its true. I normally try to use everything, so any veg looking a little tired gets shoved in to a soup and used up.

    Salad however has the highest disposal rate its something like 45% has a holiday in the fridge and then goes in to the bin.
    It's easier to minimize waste if you adopt a just-in-time daily shopping habit. If you only shop once a week, say, it takes considerable skill and discipline to get just the right amount of everything.
    It also helps if you don't mind eating the same thing for three days in a row, lunch and dinner.

    This is Thai green curry week. Looking forward to some pasta next week. Burritos in May perhaps. Toast for breakfast till the bread runs out, then I'm back to yoghurt and fruit.
    Also helps if you have room for a proper freezer, not just the compartment at the top of the fridge like many in small flats.
    We replaced out freezer with a second fridge with a small freezer compartment. We don't do much in the way of freezing, but eat lots of fresh food (and juice it). Usually it was a case of discovering something that may have been in there for a year or two and then throwing it away. All we have in there at the moment is a bag of frozen peas and some uncooked samosas that someone gave us. We had forgotten about the samosas!
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,877

    Nigelb said:

    Of course.
    The early adopter phase is done, and cheaper EVs have yet to hit the market in any volume.

    If something like the Kia Ray EV was on the market in the UK, I'd buy one tomorrow. It isn't, so I'll continue to run my old jalopy.

    Most of the big new battery factories are a year or so later than planned; hence the hiatus. The winners from that will be the Chinese ... and Toyota.
    Only time will tell. The Germans are pushing hard to slow the whole EV thing down. I suspect we will follow their lead.
    Quite something for a Brexiter to admit.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,590
    Selebian said:

    dixiedean said:

    Selebian said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "I long to destroy self-checkout machines – and at last, there’s a glimmer of hope
    Coco Khan"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/nov/14/destroy-self-checkout-machines-supermarket-boycott

    Somewhere near peak Guardian, that. The only surprise in it is that the Guardian apparently has someone living far enough north to frequent Booths!
    Or indeed far enough south.
    Hang on, you're suggesting they have people north of Boothsland? :open_mouth: In the frozen wasteland where the polar bears, Scots and Geordies roam free?
    The most northerly Booths is at Penrith. You can drive northeasterly from there for 160 miles and still end up in England.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,760
    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Maybe you should get more meaning to your life.
    You voted to deny others FOM and swan around using your EU passport . Shame on you ! If you don’t see why your position might piss people off then you really are deluded .


    People vote to deny me all sorts of things, Its part and parcel of what goes with a democracy. If you feel that strongly move to somewhere in the EU.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,760
    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Of course.
    The early adopter phase is done, and cheaper EVs have yet to hit the market in any volume.

    If something like the Kia Ray EV was on the market in the UK, I'd buy one tomorrow. It isn't, so I'll continue to run my old jalopy.

    Most of the big new battery factories are a year or so later than planned; hence the hiatus. The winners from that will be the Chinese ... and Toyota.
    Only time will tell. The Germans are pushing hard to slow the whole EV thing down. I suspect we will follow their lead.
    Quite something for a Brexiter to admit.
    Our car industry needs the breathing space too. Or cant you understand that ?
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,272
    edited April 4

    CatMan said:

    More Brexit good news:

    Food price fears as Brexit import charges revealed

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68726852

    So our own farmers become more competitive and can increase their incomes and we cut back on food miles.

    Sounds good.
    Slapping charges on imports increases competitiveness?

    No wonder your grasp of economics is so slight.
    It's what the EU has done for the last 50 years. Maybe you hadnt noticed ?
    I had indeed noticed the benefits of being part of the larges single market in the world.

    Still, blue passports, eh. Rejoice!
    Yeah, ducking the point.
    The point being that Brexit has become a total sh*tshow for most people - higher prices, ridiculous passport queues at ports and airports, random customs charges on parcels from abroad, these are the things people experience every day. And the variety and quality of goods available in the UK has declined - the range of cheeses sold in my local supermarket is now much more limited than it was before Brexit, to take one example.

    And for what? What benefits can we see in our everyday lives? Or for the UK on the international stage? There are none.

    You would have higher prices no matter what due to Covid and Putin. Personally I fly via Schipol to Hamburg every month and never face a long wait. As for supermarket stocking policies they change all the time. The selection of cheese at my local Waitrose has got better, lots of local artisan cheese. If cheese is your thing change supermarket.

    Your issue is you are stuck in the past. You lost a vote because you couldnt sell a positive view of the EU.
    I hope you're using a British passport and not cheating with an Irish one!
    I have both. But currently Im travelling on the Blue\black one.
    So Brexit was a win win for you. Foreigners kicked out and you retain your freedom of movement. Happy days!
    I voted for it twice
    How come?

    Did I miss Starmer's proposed rerun?
    @Alanbrooke

    You didn't be answer my question. I need an answer before I write to the Electoral Commissioner demanding a rerun on the grounds of skulduggery.

    No I was wondering whether I missed the EURef2 called by Starmer prior to GE 2019 when he was Shadow Minister for Silly Walks.
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 4,907

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Maybe you should get more meaning to your life.
    You voted to deny others FOM and swan around using your EU passport . Shame on you ! If you don’t see why your position might piss people off then you really are deluded .


    People vote to deny me all sorts of things, Its part and parcel of what goes with a democracy. If you feel that strongly move to somewhere in the EU.
    UK elections tend to effect people domestically . What exactly have you been denied ? I’m a dual national and have an EU passport . I class myself as very lucky . I didn’t vote to screw others who wanted that freedom. If you hated the EU so much to leave why are you taking advantage of an EU benefit ?
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,804
    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Selfish and hypocritcal perhaps, but not appalling. A lot of humans are pretty selfish and hypocritcal by default, so hard to be appalled by such behaviour imo.
    Yes I understand people can be selfish . Leave voters should not be allowed an EU passport . If they voted to leave it , then they should lose their FOM rights .

    Nah, thats the old Labour ministers can't go to a private doctor or use private schools nonsense. There is voting for the rules and adherance to the current rules. Adherance to non existing rules can be used to point out hypocrisy at most, it should not be something society expects.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,877

    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Of course.
    The early adopter phase is done, and cheaper EVs have yet to hit the market in any volume.

    If something like the Kia Ray EV was on the market in the UK, I'd buy one tomorrow. It isn't, so I'll continue to run my old jalopy.

    Most of the big new battery factories are a year or so later than planned; hence the hiatus. The winners from that will be the Chinese ... and Toyota.
    Only time will tell. The Germans are pushing hard to slow the whole EV thing down. I suspect we will follow their lead.
    Quite something for a Brexiter to admit.
    Our car industry needs the breathing space too. Or cant you understand that ?
    You've been lecturing poor RP all morning oin how he - although he is not a farmer - should make the farming industry get off its collective arse at once and start buccaneering - not your word, not that I recall, but certainly a very strong element of marketing Brexit. Now you think the UK car industry should be treated differently? That's what did it in in the first place, whining that it needed a breathjing space while all those Japanese cars were beginning to hog the market.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,590
    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Of course.
    The early adopter phase is done, and cheaper EVs have yet to hit the market in any volume.

    If something like the Kia Ray EV was on the market in the UK, I'd buy one tomorrow. It isn't, so I'll continue to run my old jalopy.

    Most of the big new battery factories are a year or so later than planned; hence the hiatus. The winners from that will be the Chinese ... and Toyota.
    Only time will tell. The Germans are pushing hard to slow the whole EV thing down. I suspect we will follow their lead.
    Quite something for a Brexiter to admit.
    Bloke on R4 Today this morning who sounded like he knew his stuff said:

    1) Legislation fines producers if they don't produce X number of EVs
    2) The market is sluggish. people want petrol etc because of reasons
    3) His figure (not mine, but Google seems to confirm it) for what a new EV costs was £50K.

    Rishi and other billionaires, but not me, are struggling to understand why we haven't all bought two + a spare for the butler to drive on his afternoon off.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,669
    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Selfish and hypocritcal perhaps, but not appalling. A lot of humans are pretty selfish and hypocritcal by default, so hard to be appalled by such behaviour imo.
    Yes I understand people can be selfish . Leave voters should not be allowed an EU passport . If they voted to leave it , then they should lose their FOM rights .

    Who are all of these people who have been denied a job in the EU? I don't know a single person who has.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,763
    edited April 4
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "I long to destroy self-checkout machines – and at last, there’s a glimmer of hope
    Coco Khan"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/nov/14/destroy-self-checkout-machines-supermarket-boycott

    Self checkouts are an interesting business question. Customers are divided but more dislike them than like them; staff hate them - more because they don't work very smoothly and staff get the grief from customers than because the machines put them out of a job; they cost more than manned tills when maintenance and increased theft are factored in.

    So why, given they are net negatives for customers, staff and the business itself, do businesses persevere with self checkouts? It seems to be a version of "one final push". Businesses believe a technical solution will be found to make the self checkout system work better.
    Is there more than anecdotal evidence that customers dislike them? I much prefer them (despite twinges of guilt over possible job losses), in the same way that I prefer filling up the car with petrol to the old days when you awaited an attendant. Most customers in the places I shop go for them, or for the scan-as-you-shop option - standing in a queue while the person three places ahead of you chats to the cashier is really irritating. Obviously it does depend on how well the systems work and the number of tills/self-checkouts available.
    It was in some analysis I read. It would be helpful if I could find it again and link to it rather just paraphrasing what it said.

    I'm broadly neutral about self checkouts but as supermarkets try to discourage you from manned tills I play along.
    Not the analysis I previously read, but covers the same points:
    https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20240111-it-hasnt-delivered-the-spectacular-failure-of-self-checkout-technology


  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,669
    algarkirk said:

    Selebian said:

    dixiedean said:

    Selebian said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "I long to destroy self-checkout machines – and at last, there’s a glimmer of hope
    Coco Khan"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/nov/14/destroy-self-checkout-machines-supermarket-boycott

    Somewhere near peak Guardian, that. The only surprise in it is that the Guardian apparently has someone living far enough north to frequent Booths!
    Or indeed far enough south.
    Hang on, you're suggesting they have people north of Boothsland? :open_mouth: In the frozen wasteland where the polar bears, Scots and Geordies roam free?
    The most northerly Booths is at Penrith. You can drive northeasterly from there for 160 miles and still end up in England.
    Booths is very poor when it comes to organic food.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,760
    DougSeal said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Maybe you should get more meaning to your life.
    You voted to deny others FOM and swan around using your EU passport . Shame on you ! If you don’t see why your position might piss people off then you really are deluded .


    People vote to deny me all sorts of things, Its part and parcel of what goes with a democracy. If you feel that strongly move to somewhere in the EU.
    How? Partly because of your vote many of us can't. But you can. You have to see why that provokes some ire? We can't move to the EU in the same way you can. So we're pissed off at you. Just as you are constantly pissed off at just about everyone.
    Tart yourself up and marry a German or a Pole.

    But I suppose we'll have the usual hurdle that you cant speak anything fluently but english. And in reality you never did want to work abroad it was all daydreaming but it is nice to have a moan.

  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,461
    Taz said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    I agree. A friend of my wife's did exactly that. What a shit thing to do.
    Although in practice it affects only the very wealthy and the retired who want to base themselves in Europe most of the time. And even then they can apply for residency.

    For most people with 4 weeks leave a year a 90 day visa limit - that renews every 180 days anyway- doesn't even feature.

    In general I just chalk this one up to Values and being annoyed at losing to people they despise.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,272
    ...

    Pulpstar said:

    More laughable FUD from the Trussograph. Lets look at the SMMT release instead:

    https://www.smmt.co.uk/2024/04/march-new-car-market-sustains-growth-as-manufacturers-shore-up-electrified-demand/

    If you want to look only at March in isolation, total sales are +10.4%. Which means that "everyone is buying petrol" isn't true either as that is only +9.2%. What have they sold most of in terms of % growth (the figure they chose an attack line)? Plug-In Hybrids which are +36.7%.

    Or we look at Q1 as a whole. Total market +10.4%, BEV +10.6%, Petrol lagging behind at +9.4%...
    One of our directors drives a hybrid electric. His fuel consumption has barely changed since his ICE car.
    Define "Hybrid". One with a 16v battery - often branded a "mild hybrid" is not a hybrid. Its just a stop-start system. He probably had one on a previous car, so no wonder there is no difference.

    Why are manufacturers dressing up a petrol engine with existing stop-start technology as a hybrid? Because more people want to buy hybrid cars than they want to make. So they rebrand. Same with "self-charging hybrid".
    The Venn diagram of "Electric Vehicles bad", "Trump good", "Brexit" and "I love Bibi" would appear to be a circle.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,389
    Not that I've been following it but how can self-service and self-scan not be an unalloyed good thing.

    I was "random checked" the other day having bought quite a few things and I said fine, plonked the bag down and said: go for it. The bloke looked at two things and waved me through.

    I was perfectly charming and it was the first time it has ever happened to me.

    What are people upset about. Does the scanning technology come from Technion or something.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,461

    CatMan said:

    More Brexit good news:

    Food price fears as Brexit import charges revealed

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68726852

    So our own farmers become more competitive and can increase their incomes and we cut back on food miles.

    Sounds good.
    Slapping charges on imports increases competitiveness?

    No wonder your grasp of economics is so slight.
    It's what the EU has done for the last 50 years. Maybe you hadnt noticed ?
    I had indeed noticed the benefits of being part of the larges single market in the world.

    Still, blue passports, eh. Rejoice!
    Yeah, ducking the point.
    The point being that Brexit has become a total sh*tshow for most people - higher prices, ridiculous passport queues at ports and airports, random customs charges on parcels from abroad, these are the things people experience every day. And the variety and quality of goods available in the UK has declined - the range of cheeses sold in my local supermarket is now much more limited than it was before Brexit, to take one example.

    And for what? What benefits can we see in our everyday lives? Or for the UK on the international stage? There are none.

    You would have higher prices no matter what due to Covid and Putin. Personally I fly via Schipol to Hamburg every month and never face a long wait. As for supermarket stocking policies they change all the time. The selection of cheese at my local Waitrose has got better, lots of local artisan cheese. If cheese is your thing change supermarket.

    Your issue is you are stuck in the past. You lost a vote because you couldnt sell a positive view of the EU.
    I hope you're using a British passport and not cheating with an Irish one!
    I have both. But currently Im travelling on the Blue\black one.
    So Brexit was a win win for you. Foreigners kicked out and you retain your freedom of movement. Happy days!
    I voted for it twice
    How come?

    Did I miss Starmer's proposed rerun?
    Starmer wont re-run, the EUs not interested.
    No that's true, but I think you will find the narrative around Brexit will change completely after the election. There will be no one left in public life who will seek to defend it - at the moment the government machine has to talk it up and look for "benefits" but that will not happen under Labour. The government machine will talk it down and remind people of the cost - as Reeves did in her Mais lecture. And I think you will find opportunists like Farage backing away from it - not because they want to rejoin of course but because they won't want to be associated with what will come to be seen as Johnson's disastrous deal. And any Tory leader who is interested in taking the party back to power will need to attract support from the 60% or so of the electorate who think Brexit was a bad move.
    Opening up that can of worms again would be very brave. Public opinion is fickle and unpredictable as several recent referenda have shown.

    I expect Labour to just try and negotiate bits and pieces to supplement the existing deal. They may go for a more extensive regulatory alignment - we shall have to wait and see.
  • Options
    DonkeysDonkeys Posts: 580
    edited April 4
    The Israeli authorities say today they have foiled a conspiracy to murder Itamar Ben-Gvir, the minister of national security. Of all the current Israeli politicians, he is the one who is most likely to reprise Likud leader Ariel Sharon who stomped around in the Haram al-Sharif in 2000, triggering the second intifada. This time the probable theme would be the red heifer.

    I have no idea whether today's story will strengthen Ben-Gvir's position or weaken it. Could be a Mitterand-style "Observatory Affair" for all I know.

    He is said to have taken down his poster of the terrorist Baruch Goldstein from his living room wall. But lest anyone thought this man who has a conviction for supporting terrorism had recanted his idolisation of Goldstein, read this from last year:

    https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-ben-gvir-baruch-goldstein-meir-kahane-memorial-martyrs-


  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,732

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Selfish and hypocritcal perhaps, but not appalling. A lot of humans are pretty selfish and hypocritcal by default, so hard to be appalled by such behaviour imo.
    Yes I understand people can be selfish . Leave voters should not be allowed an EU passport . If they voted to leave it , then they should lose their FOM rights .

    Who are all of these people who have been denied a job in the EU? I don't know a single person who has.
    I have had plenty of patients who have had to change their retirement plans.

    Still, who wouldn't prefer eating Turnips in Skeggy to Paella in Marbella for their retirement?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,518

    ...

    Pulpstar said:

    More laughable FUD from the Trussograph. Lets look at the SMMT release instead:

    https://www.smmt.co.uk/2024/04/march-new-car-market-sustains-growth-as-manufacturers-shore-up-electrified-demand/

    If you want to look only at March in isolation, total sales are +10.4%. Which means that "everyone is buying petrol" isn't true either as that is only +9.2%. What have they sold most of in terms of % growth (the figure they chose an attack line)? Plug-In Hybrids which are +36.7%.

    Or we look at Q1 as a whole. Total market +10.4%, BEV +10.6%, Petrol lagging behind at +9.4%...
    One of our directors drives a hybrid electric. His fuel consumption has barely changed since his ICE car.
    Define "Hybrid". One with a 16v battery - often branded a "mild hybrid" is not a hybrid. Its just a stop-start system. He probably had one on a previous car, so no wonder there is no difference.

    Why are manufacturers dressing up a petrol engine with existing stop-start technology as a hybrid? Because more people want to buy hybrid cars than they want to make. So they rebrand. Same with "self-charging hybrid".
    The Venn diagram of "Electric Vehicles bad", "Trump good", "Brexit" and "I love Bibi" would appear to be a circle.
    Outside the Chinese entrants, there are few good *cheap* EVs

    Expecting people to buy £40k+ cars is a big ask.
  • Options
    EabhalEabhal Posts: 5,914

    Eabhal said:

    kinabalu said:

    I do have to laugh at the @Alanbrooke position (not personal to you - its the argument). "Just buy local" is fine. If we were self-sufficient in food production. Which we are not.

    I absolutely support people buying British where that is an option. Why not buy fresh lamb from Alanbrooke's local farmer vs one that Barty wants shipped frozen from NZ?

    But what about all the stuff we eat which we don't produce? Or can't produce all year round? Or at a cost people are willing to pay?

    I do remember some nutter interviewed before the referendum saying they would be happy eating grass of it meant leaving the EU. And that "fuck you" mentality is still there. You can't feed your familiy with sovereignty...

    Britain could easily be self-sufficient in food if meat consumption decreased a bit. I look forward to Farage fronting a vegan food campaign to break Britain's reliance on food imports.
    Really? I thought Britain couldn't be self-sufficient during WW2 with rationing and 20 million fewer people.
    Agricultural productivity has increased a lot since WWII, and you have things like Quorn these days to act as a protein-rich meat substitute.

    Livestock are a very inefficient use of land if that land is suitable for use growing grain or vegetables.
    There's also the issue that we waste about 25% of all the food we buy and throw it away.
    Statistics like this always astonish me. Do people not eat everything on their plate and save leftovers? I doubt we throw away more than a few percent of our food in our house.
    Im afraid its true. I normally try to use everything, so any veg looking a little tired gets shoved in to a soup and used up.

    Salad however has the highest disposal rate its something like 45% has a holiday in the fridge and then goes in to the bin.
    It's easier to minimize waste if you adopt a just-in-time daily shopping habit. If you only shop once a week, say, it takes considerable skill and discipline to get just the right amount of everything.
    It also helps if you don't mind eating the same thing for three days in a row, lunch and dinner.

    This is Thai green curry week. Looking forward to some pasta next week. Burritos in May perhaps. Toast for breakfast till the bread runs out, then I'm back to yoghurt and fruit.
    Why not have more than one dish on the go, at one time?

    Also freeze stuff - use silicon soap molds to freeze sauces etc in blocks.
    My freezer is full of body parts ice cream
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,804
    edited April 4
    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Of course.
    The early adopter phase is done, and cheaper EVs have yet to hit the market in any volume.

    If something like the Kia Ray EV was on the market in the UK, I'd buy one tomorrow. It isn't, so I'll continue to run my old jalopy.

    Most of the big new battery factories are a year or so later than planned; hence the hiatus. The winners from that will be the Chinese ... and Toyota.
    Only time will tell. The Germans are pushing hard to slow the whole EV thing down. I suspect we will follow their lead.
    Quite something for a Brexiter to admit.
    Bloke on R4 Today this morning who sounded like he knew his stuff said:

    1) Legislation fines producers if they don't produce X number of EVs
    2) The market is sluggish. people want petrol etc because of reasons
    3) His figure (not mine, but Google seems to confirm it) for what a new EV costs was £50K.

    Rishi and other billionaires, but not me, are struggling to understand why we haven't all bought two + a spare for the butler to drive on his afternoon off.
    Dacia Spring is 15k, probably not great, but its a car, its electric and will get you from a to b. At around 30k starts to be some choice. 40k entry level Tesla. 50k is getting you a pretty nice car.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,031
    Endillion said:

    Foxy said:

    Endillion said:

    Nigelb said:

    ...

    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I was skim reading the...... altercation............ between CorrectHorseBattery and Barty Roberts last night.

    I must admit I'm somewhat in CHB's favour here.
    Israel has gone far to far with its response to 7th October. Their is no justification to destroying aid convoys and killing aid workers. And I don't believe them when they say it was an accident. It wasn't, and they know it.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we will all agree on.
    No. We all don't.
    OK, a fair point.

    I'll reconfirm.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we all ( except @Dura_Ace ) agree on.
    If must means accepting Barty's half a million dead, then no, we can't.
    This is a statement taken out of context. On my original post I caveated that by questioning Bart's collateral value to achieve his aim. I was specific in that I last night asked Bart for numbers. He declined and simply retorted with "whatever it takes".
    Here's the context.

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4736911/#Comment_4736911
    BartholomewRoberts
    Mexicanpete said:
    » show previous quotes
    1. Bollocks it is!
    2. At what cost in lives, give me a number (whatever it takes isn't a number).
    3. I said pushing bastards out of windows and the like. Have you never seen Munich?
    4.
    1. Yes it is.
    2. Whatever it takes. The death toll of the Iraq War was over a quarter of a million, and this is an order of magnitude more justified than that war, so lets say double that half a million? If that's what it takes?
    3. Real life isn't a James Bond movie. Pushing a few people out of windows won't end Hamas.
    Thank you. I had lost interest after "whatever it takes" and ignored the value figure and gone to bed.

    Half a million is good to know. So we are at circa 10% down so far.

    Life must be cheap on Merseyside.

    Top marks for reading to the end.
    "Official" death toll (possibly exaggerated) is around 32,000, and of that, between a quarter and a half (depending on whether you believe Israel or Hamas - and potentially the difference is who counts as a terrorist and who doesn't) are Hamas members.

    Presumably the half million was meant as civilians, and Hamas members do not count towards it.

    So no, we are nowhere near "10% down so far" - more like 4%. And IDF operational efficiency is getting better as the war goes on - for example, there were no civilian deaths recorded during the recent Shifa hospital operation. And all the heavy bombing has been done for a while - you'll notice the death toll has remained fairly static for some time. There is no way the death toll ends up anywhere near half a million.

    Considering the level of destruction of buildings and of social and health infrastructure that 32 000 deaths is likely to be a significant underestimate.
    Considering the identity of the people providing the number, it's likely to be a significant overestimate. And again, you need to deduct the terrorists, since Hamas is including them in the total.

    The only thing I know for certain about the actual number of civilians dead, is you have no clue.
    As someone else has already posted, Hamas’ best recruiting sergeant ATM is Netanyahu!
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,590
    edited April 4
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "I long to destroy self-checkout machines – and at last, there’s a glimmer of hope
    Coco Khan"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/nov/14/destroy-self-checkout-machines-supermarket-boycott

    Self checkouts are an interesting business question. Customers are divided but more dislike them than like them; staff hate them - more because they don't work very smoothly and staff get the grief from customers than because the machines put them out of a job; they cost more than manned tills when maintenance and increased theft are factored in.

    So why, given they are net negatives for customers, staff and the business itself, do businesses persevere with self checkouts? It seems to be a version of "one final push". Businesses believe a technical solution will be found to make the self checkout system work better.
    Is there more than anecdotal evidence that customers dislike them? I much prefer them (despite twinges of guilt over possible job losses), in the same way that I prefer filling up the car with petrol to the old days when you awaited an attendant. Most customers in the places I shop go for them, or for the scan-as-you-shop option - standing in a queue while the person three places ahead of you chats to the cashier is really irritating. Obviously it does depend on how well the systems work and the number of tills/self-checkouts available.
    It was in some analysis I read. It would be helpful if I could find it again and link to it rather just paraphrasing what it said.

    I'm broadly neutral about self checkouts but as supermarkets try to discourage you from manned tills I play along.
    There are busy supermarkets in the stone age north with no self-service check outs and no '5 items or fewer' tills either. You wait in a queue and discuss Elsie's leg operation, pot holes, relegation/promotion issues in Leagues 1 and 2, and Britney's new baby. And they take cash. Don't mess with it.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,760
    edited April 4
    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Maybe you should get more meaning to your life.
    You voted to deny others FOM and swan around using your EU passport . Shame on you ! If you don’t see why your position might piss people off then you really are deluded .


    People vote to deny me all sorts of things, Its part and parcel of what goes with a democracy. If you feel that strongly move to somewhere in the EU.
    UK elections tend to effect people domestically . What exactly have you been denied ? I’m a dual national and have an EU passport . I class myself as very lucky . I didn’t vote to screw others who wanted that freedom. If you hated the EU so much to leave why are you taking advantage of an EU benefit ?
    Ive had an Irish passport for nearly 30 years long before Brexit. As for why I voted out you have just jumped to your own conclusions I dont hate the EU and could have been persuaded to stay in. But seeing how successive governments acted whilst in left me wishing to come out,
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,529
    TOPPING said:

    Not that I've been following it but how can self-service and self-scan not be an unalloyed good thing.

    I was "random checked" the other day having bought quite a few things and I said fine, plonked the bag down and said: go for it. The bloke looked at two things and waved me through.

    I was perfectly charming and it was the first time it has ever happened to me.

    What are people upset about. Does the scanning technology come from Technion or something.

    The curious thing is that the only way that the UK gets out of its current pickle is by becoming more productive - getting more work achieved by fewer workers. We may disagree about how to do that, but I don't think anyone would question that aim.

    Here's an example of an industry doing capital investment, saving on staff, and people still complain.
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 4,907

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Selfish and hypocritcal perhaps, but not appalling. A lot of humans are pretty selfish and hypocritcal by default, so hard to be appalled by such behaviour imo.
    Yes I understand people can be selfish . Leave voters should not be allowed an EU passport . If they voted to leave it , then they should lose their FOM rights .

    Who are all of these people who have been denied a job in the EU? I don't know a single person who has.
    I’m talking about FOM in general , try retiring to the EU without a shed load of money . Voting Leave and then using an EU passport crosses a red line. I understand why some voted to leave even though I was on the other side of the argument. I have zero time though for those who happily voted away the FOM rights of their fellow citizens and then have the gall to swan around Europe with their EU passport .
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,518
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    kinabalu said:

    I do have to laugh at the @Alanbrooke position (not personal to you - its the argument). "Just buy local" is fine. If we were self-sufficient in food production. Which we are not.

    I absolutely support people buying British where that is an option. Why not buy fresh lamb from Alanbrooke's local farmer vs one that Barty wants shipped frozen from NZ?

    But what about all the stuff we eat which we don't produce? Or can't produce all year round? Or at a cost people are willing to pay?

    I do remember some nutter interviewed before the referendum saying they would be happy eating grass of it meant leaving the EU. And that "fuck you" mentality is still there. You can't feed your familiy with sovereignty...

    Britain could easily be self-sufficient in food if meat consumption decreased a bit. I look forward to Farage fronting a vegan food campaign to break Britain's reliance on food imports.
    Really? I thought Britain couldn't be self-sufficient during WW2 with rationing and 20 million fewer people.
    Agricultural productivity has increased a lot since WWII, and you have things like Quorn these days to act as a protein-rich meat substitute.

    Livestock are a very inefficient use of land if that land is suitable for use growing grain or vegetables.
    There's also the issue that we waste about 25% of all the food we buy and throw it away.
    Statistics like this always astonish me. Do people not eat everything on their plate and save leftovers? I doubt we throw away more than a few percent of our food in our house.
    Im afraid its true. I normally try to use everything, so any veg looking a little tired gets shoved in to a soup and used up.

    Salad however has the highest disposal rate its something like 45% has a holiday in the fridge and then goes in to the bin.
    It's easier to minimize waste if you adopt a just-in-time daily shopping habit. If you only shop once a week, say, it takes considerable skill and discipline to get just the right amount of everything.
    It also helps if you don't mind eating the same thing for three days in a row, lunch and dinner.

    This is Thai green curry week. Looking forward to some pasta next week. Burritos in May perhaps. Toast for breakfast till the bread runs out, then I'm back to yoghurt and fruit.
    Why not have more than one dish on the go, at one time?

    Also freeze stuff - use silicon soap molds to freeze sauces etc in blocks.
    My freezer is full of body parts ice cream
    Run a Glasgow Ice-cream Van, eh?
  • Options
    EabhalEabhal Posts: 5,914
    The self-scan at Uniqlo is incredible. Just chuck all your stuff in a bin, contactless payment, all together less than 10 seconds. The kind of productivity growth we've been dreaming of for the last 15 years.
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,668

    Pulpstar said:

    More laughable FUD from the Trussograph. Lets look at the SMMT release instead:

    https://www.smmt.co.uk/2024/04/march-new-car-market-sustains-growth-as-manufacturers-shore-up-electrified-demand/

    If you want to look only at March in isolation, total sales are +10.4%. Which means that "everyone is buying petrol" isn't true either as that is only +9.2%. What have they sold most of in terms of % growth (the figure they chose an attack line)? Plug-In Hybrids which are +36.7%.

    Or we look at Q1 as a whole. Total market +10.4%, BEV +10.6%, Petrol lagging behind at +9.4%...
    One of our directors drives a hybrid electric. His fuel consumption has barely changed since his ICE car.
    Define "Hybrid". One with a 16v battery - often branded a "mild hybrid" is not a hybrid. Its just a stop-start system. He probably had one on a previous car, so no wonder there is no difference.

    Why are manufacturers dressing up a petrol engine with existing stop-start technology as a hybrid? Because more people want to buy hybrid cars than they want to make. So they rebrand. Same with "self-charging hybrid".
    Good point. Before we bought ours it took sometimes to distinguish between the types of hybrids. We have a NON plug in, but NOT mild hybrid either. The fuel consumption is excellent.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,804

    Endillion said:

    Foxy said:

    Endillion said:

    Nigelb said:

    ...

    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I was skim reading the...... altercation............ between CorrectHorseBattery and Barty Roberts last night.

    I must admit I'm somewhat in CHB's favour here.
    Israel has gone far to far with its response to 7th October. Their is no justification to destroying aid convoys and killing aid workers. And I don't believe them when they say it was an accident. It wasn't, and they know it.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we will all agree on.
    No. We all don't.
    OK, a fair point.

    I'll reconfirm.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we all ( except @Dura_Ace ) agree on.
    If must means accepting Barty's half a million dead, then no, we can't.
    This is a statement taken out of context. On my original post I caveated that by questioning Bart's collateral value to achieve his aim. I was specific in that I last night asked Bart for numbers. He declined and simply retorted with "whatever it takes".
    Here's the context.

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4736911/#Comment_4736911
    BartholomewRoberts
    Mexicanpete said:
    » show previous quotes
    1. Bollocks it is!
    2. At what cost in lives, give me a number (whatever it takes isn't a number).
    3. I said pushing bastards out of windows and the like. Have you never seen Munich?
    4.
    1. Yes it is.
    2. Whatever it takes. The death toll of the Iraq War was over a quarter of a million, and this is an order of magnitude more justified than that war, so lets say double that half a million? If that's what it takes?
    3. Real life isn't a James Bond movie. Pushing a few people out of windows won't end Hamas.
    Thank you. I had lost interest after "whatever it takes" and ignored the value figure and gone to bed.

    Half a million is good to know. So we are at circa 10% down so far.

    Life must be cheap on Merseyside.

    Top marks for reading to the end.
    "Official" death toll (possibly exaggerated) is around 32,000, and of that, between a quarter and a half (depending on whether you believe Israel or Hamas - and potentially the difference is who counts as a terrorist and who doesn't) are Hamas members.

    Presumably the half million was meant as civilians, and Hamas members do not count towards it.

    So no, we are nowhere near "10% down so far" - more like 4%. And IDF operational efficiency is getting better as the war goes on - for example, there were no civilian deaths recorded during the recent Shifa hospital operation. And all the heavy bombing has been done for a while - you'll notice the death toll has remained fairly static for some time. There is no way the death toll ends up anywhere near half a million.

    Considering the level of destruction of buildings and of social and health infrastructure that 32 000 deaths is likely to be a significant underestimate.
    Considering the identity of the people providing the number, it's likely to be a significant overestimate. And again, you need to deduct the terrorists, since Hamas is including them in the total.

    The only thing I know for certain about the actual number of civilians dead, is you have no clue.
    As someone else has already posted, Hamas’ best recruiting sergeant ATM is Netanyahu!
    Yes and all very predictable, and the reason for the Hamas attack in the first place.

    Israel of course had (and has) the right to defend itself when attacked. But that is different to it being wise or sensible to have acted as they have done. Just because you have a right to do something doesn't make it right to enforce it.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,272

    ...

    Pulpstar said:

    More laughable FUD from the Trussograph. Lets look at the SMMT release instead:

    https://www.smmt.co.uk/2024/04/march-new-car-market-sustains-growth-as-manufacturers-shore-up-electrified-demand/

    If you want to look only at March in isolation, total sales are +10.4%. Which means that "everyone is buying petrol" isn't true either as that is only +9.2%. What have they sold most of in terms of % growth (the figure they chose an attack line)? Plug-In Hybrids which are +36.7%.

    Or we look at Q1 as a whole. Total market +10.4%, BEV +10.6%, Petrol lagging behind at +9.4%...
    One of our directors drives a hybrid electric. His fuel consumption has barely changed since his ICE car.
    Define "Hybrid". One with a 16v battery - often branded a "mild hybrid" is not a hybrid. Its just a stop-start system. He probably had one on a previous car, so no wonder there is no difference.

    Why are manufacturers dressing up a petrol engine with existing stop-start technology as a hybrid? Because more people want to buy hybrid cars than they want to make. So they rebrand. Same with "self-charging hybrid".
    The Venn diagram of "Electric Vehicles bad", "Trump good", "Brexit" and "I love Bibi" would appear to be a circle.
    Outside the Chinese entrants, there are few good *cheap* EVs

    Expecting people to buy £40k+ cars is a big ask.
    Doesn't everyone except me by their cars on a hire contract? The monthly payment increase from an MG5 to a Tesla S last time I looked was about 200 quid.
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 4,907
    edited April 4

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Maybe you should get more meaning to your life.
    You voted to deny others FOM and swan around using your EU passport . Shame on you ! If you don’t see why your position might piss people off then you really are deluded .


    People vote to deny me all sorts of things, Its part and parcel of what goes with a democracy. If you feel that strongly move to somewhere in the EU.
    UK elections tend to effect people domestically . What exactly have you been denied ? I’m a dual national and have an EU passport . I class myself as very lucky . I didn’t vote to screw others who wanted that freedom. If you hated the EU so much to leave why are you taking advantage of an EU benefit ?
    Ive had an Irish passport for nearly 30 years long before Brexit. As for why I voted out you have just jumped to your own conclusions I dont hate the EU and could have been persuaded to stay in. But seeing how successive governments acted whilst in left me wishing to come out,
    So if Ireland had a referendum you’d vote out then ?
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,461
    TOPPING said:

    Not that I've been following it but how can self-service and self-scan not be an unalloyed good thing.

    I was "random checked" the other day having bought quite a few things and I said fine, plonked the bag down and said: go for it. The bloke looked at two things and waved me through.

    I was perfectly charming and it was the first time it has ever happened to me.

    What are people upset about. Does the scanning technology come from Technion or something.

    I've found it doesn't save me much time. It's rare my age doesn't need to be verified for alcohol by an assistant, or I get the "unexpected item in bagging area" shtick.

    If there's a manned checkout and no queue that's almost always quicker.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,961

    Pulpstar said:

    More laughable FUD from the Trussograph. Lets look at the SMMT release instead:

    https://www.smmt.co.uk/2024/04/march-new-car-market-sustains-growth-as-manufacturers-shore-up-electrified-demand/

    If you want to look only at March in isolation, total sales are +10.4%. Which means that "everyone is buying petrol" isn't true either as that is only +9.2%. What have they sold most of in terms of % growth (the figure they chose an attack line)? Plug-In Hybrids which are +36.7%.

    Or we look at Q1 as a whole. Total market +10.4%, BEV +10.6%, Petrol lagging behind at +9.4%...
    One of our directors drives a hybrid electric. His fuel consumption has barely changed since his ICE car.
    Define "Hybrid". One with a 16v battery - often branded a "mild hybrid" is not a hybrid. Its just a stop-start system. He probably had one on a previous car, so no wonder there is no difference.

    Why are manufacturers dressing up a petrol engine with existing stop-start technology as a hybrid? Because more people want to buy hybrid cars than they want to make. So they rebrand. Same with "self-charging hybrid".
    It's a Kuga yet to do it's first MOT. We've got it him for tax reasons, the electric motor part of it is likely just about showroom fresh.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,281
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Of course.
    The early adopter phase is done, and cheaper EVs have yet to hit the market in any volume.

    If something like the Kia Ray EV was on the market in the UK, I'd buy one tomorrow. It isn't, so I'll continue to run my old jalopy.

    Most of the big new battery factories are a year or so later than planned; hence the hiatus. The winners from that will be the Chinese ... and Toyota.
    Only time will tell. The Germans are pushing hard to slow the whole EV thing down. I suspect we will follow their lead.
    Quite something for a Brexiter to admit.
    Our car industry needs the breathing space too. Or cant you understand that ?
    You've been lecturing poor RP all morning oin how he - although he is not a farmer - should make the farming industry get off its collective arse at once and start buccaneering - not your word, not that I recall, but certainly a very strong element of marketing Brexit. Now you think the UK car industry should be treated differently? That's what did it in in the first place, whining that it needed a breathjing space while all those Japanese cars were beginning to hog the market.
    Which car industry does he think we need to protect? Volkswagen?

    There are two revolutions happening in the car industry. Electrification is the one everyone can see - and UK production is either well equipped (LEVC, Nissan, Rolls Royce) or doomed (JLR).

    The other one which not everyone has yet grasped is gigacasting. Tesla have reimagined what a car is and how it is built - two big casts at either end and a structural battery pack which you assemble the interior onto. Stronger, cheaper and faster than the way most cars are made. China has leapt on this, as have Toyota.

    Look at profitability, in an industry which has been going slowly (and repeatedly) bankrupt for several decades. Legacy manufacturers cling to their lengthy model development processes and vast array of parts construction whilst the new guys develop and bring to market cars which actually make money.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,763

    ...

    Pulpstar said:

    More laughable FUD from the Trussograph. Lets look at the SMMT release instead:

    https://www.smmt.co.uk/2024/04/march-new-car-market-sustains-growth-as-manufacturers-shore-up-electrified-demand/

    If you want to look only at March in isolation, total sales are +10.4%. Which means that "everyone is buying petrol" isn't true either as that is only +9.2%. What have they sold most of in terms of % growth (the figure they chose an attack line)? Plug-In Hybrids which are +36.7%.

    Or we look at Q1 as a whole. Total market +10.4%, BEV +10.6%, Petrol lagging behind at +9.4%...
    One of our directors drives a hybrid electric. His fuel consumption has barely changed since his ICE car.
    Define "Hybrid". One with a 16v battery - often branded a "mild hybrid" is not a hybrid. Its just a stop-start system. He probably had one on a previous car, so no wonder there is no difference.

    Why are manufacturers dressing up a petrol engine with existing stop-start technology as a hybrid? Because more people want to buy hybrid cars than they want to make. So they rebrand. Same with "self-charging hybrid".
    The Venn diagram of "Electric Vehicles bad", "Trump good", "Brexit" and "I love Bibi" would appear to be a circle.
    Outside the Chinese entrants, there are few good *cheap* EVs

    Expecting people to buy £40k+ cars is a big ask.
    An EV is essentially a battery with wheels and seats attached. As the Chinese have the best technology, the scale and so far the subsidies to make the best and cheapest batteries they are cleaning up.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,310

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Maybe you should get more meaning to your life.
    You voted to deny others FOM and swan around using your EU passport . Shame on you ! If you don’t see why your position might piss people off then you really are deluded .


    People vote to deny me all sorts of things, Its part and parcel of what goes with a democracy. If you feel that strongly move to somewhere in the EU.
    UK elections tend to effect people domestically . What exactly have you been denied ? I’m a dual national and have an EU passport . I class myself as very lucky . I didn’t vote to screw others who wanted that freedom. If you hated the EU so much to leave why are you taking advantage of an EU benefit ?
    Ive had an Irish passport for nearly 30 years long before Brexit. As for why I voted out you have just jumped to your own conclusions I dont hate the EU and could have been persuaded to stay in. But seeing how successive governments acted whilst in left me wishing to come out,
    We await that improvement in government behaviour you were looking for. Not spotted as yet.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,760
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Of course.
    The early adopter phase is done, and cheaper EVs have yet to hit the market in any volume.

    If something like the Kia Ray EV was on the market in the UK, I'd buy one tomorrow. It isn't, so I'll continue to run my old jalopy.

    Most of the big new battery factories are a year or so later than planned; hence the hiatus. The winners from that will be the Chinese ... and Toyota.
    Only time will tell. The Germans are pushing hard to slow the whole EV thing down. I suspect we will follow their lead.
    Quite something for a Brexiter to admit.
    Our car industry needs the breathing space too. Or cant you understand that ?
    You've been lecturing poor RP all morning oin how he - although he is not a farmer - should make the farming industry get off its collective arse at once and start buccaneering - not your word, not that I recall, but certainly a very strong element of marketing Brexit. Now you think the UK car industry should be treated differently? That's what did it in in the first place, whining that it needed a breathjing space while all those Japanese cars were beginning to hog the market.
    Hoiw very un communautaire. France and Germany both want a brake put on Chinese EVs as they fear they are being dumped on the world market. The US isnt far behind. Stick with bikes you understand them.
  • Options
    carnforthcarnforth Posts: 3,230
    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Selfish and hypocritcal perhaps, but not appalling. A lot of humans are pretty selfish and hypocritcal by default, so hard to be appalled by such behaviour imo.
    Yes I understand people can be selfish . Leave voters should not be allowed an EU passport . If they voted to leave it , then they should lose their FOM rights .

    Who are all of these people who have been denied a job in the EU? I don't know a single person who has.
    I’m talking about FOM in general , try retiring to the EU without a shed load of money . Voting Leave and then using an EU passport crosses a red line. I understand why some voted to leave even though I was on the other side of the argument. I have zero time though for those who happily voted away the FOM rights of their fellow citizens and then have the gall to swan around Europe with their EU passport .
    If you read the thread back, you'll find AlanBrooke said he was travelling on his UK passport.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,461
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    kinabalu said:

    I do have to laugh at the @Alanbrooke position (not personal to you - its the argument). "Just buy local" is fine. If we were self-sufficient in food production. Which we are not.

    I absolutely support people buying British where that is an option. Why not buy fresh lamb from Alanbrooke's local farmer vs one that Barty wants shipped frozen from NZ?

    But what about all the stuff we eat which we don't produce? Or can't produce all year round? Or at a cost people are willing to pay?

    I do remember some nutter interviewed before the referendum saying they would be happy eating grass of it meant leaving the EU. And that "fuck you" mentality is still there. You can't feed your familiy with sovereignty...

    Britain could easily be self-sufficient in food if meat consumption decreased a bit. I look forward to Farage fronting a vegan food campaign to break Britain's reliance on food imports.
    Really? I thought Britain couldn't be self-sufficient during WW2 with rationing and 20 million fewer people.
    Agricultural productivity has increased a lot since WWII, and you have things like Quorn these days to act as a protein-rich meat substitute.

    Livestock are a very inefficient use of land if that land is suitable for use growing grain or vegetables.
    There's also the issue that we waste about 25% of all the food we buy and throw it away.
    Statistics like this always astonish me. Do people not eat everything on their plate and save leftovers? I doubt we throw away more than a few percent of our food in our house.
    Im afraid its true. I normally try to use everything, so any veg looking a little tired gets shoved in to a soup and used up.

    Salad however has the highest disposal rate its something like 45% has a holiday in the fridge and then goes in to the bin.
    It's easier to minimize waste if you adopt a just-in-time daily shopping habit. If you only shop once a week, say, it takes considerable skill and discipline to get just the right amount of everything.
    It also helps if you don't mind eating the same thing for three days in a row, lunch and dinner.

    This is Thai green curry week. Looking forward to some pasta next week. Burritos in May perhaps. Toast for breakfast till the bread runs out, then I'm back to yoghurt and fruit.
    Why not have more than one dish on the go, at one time?

    Also freeze stuff - use silicon soap molds to freeze sauces etc in blocks.
    My freezer is full of body parts ice cream
    Ah, you're a fan of Ben and Jerry's?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,762

    ...

    Pulpstar said:

    More laughable FUD from the Trussograph. Lets look at the SMMT release instead:

    https://www.smmt.co.uk/2024/04/march-new-car-market-sustains-growth-as-manufacturers-shore-up-electrified-demand/

    If you want to look only at March in isolation, total sales are +10.4%. Which means that "everyone is buying petrol" isn't true either as that is only +9.2%. What have they sold most of in terms of % growth (the figure they chose an attack line)? Plug-In Hybrids which are +36.7%.

    Or we look at Q1 as a whole. Total market +10.4%, BEV +10.6%, Petrol lagging behind at +9.4%...
    One of our directors drives a hybrid electric. His fuel consumption has barely changed since his ICE car.
    Define "Hybrid". One with a 16v battery - often branded a "mild hybrid" is not a hybrid. Its just a stop-start system. He probably had one on a previous car, so no wonder there is no difference.

    Why are manufacturers dressing up a petrol engine with existing stop-start technology as a hybrid? Because more people want to buy hybrid cars than they want to make. So they rebrand. Same with "self-charging hybrid".
    The Venn diagram of "Electric Vehicles bad", "Trump good", "Brexit" and "I love Bibi" would appear to be a circle.
    Outside the Chinese entrants, there are few good *cheap* EVs

    Expecting people to buy £40k+ cars is a big ask.
    Of course.

    In a couple of years it will be different, but for now the factories just aren't there (except for in China).
    And there's a lot more margin in high end cars.

    Alanbrooke's "necessary pause" is just a post hoc rationalisation of our being left behind. It's not as though we have either the plans or the financial might of a Toyota to bring on mass production within two or three years.

    Nissan will keep the UK car industry alive, but we're something of a backwater.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,461
    Foxy said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Selfish and hypocritcal perhaps, but not appalling. A lot of humans are pretty selfish and hypocritcal by default, so hard to be appalled by such behaviour imo.
    Yes I understand people can be selfish . Leave voters should not be allowed an EU passport . If they voted to leave it , then they should lose their FOM rights .

    Who are all of these people who have been denied a job in the EU? I don't know a single person who has.
    I have had plenty of patients who have had to change their retirement plans.

    Still, who wouldn't prefer eating Turnips in Skeggy to Paella in Marbella for their retirement?
    I'd prefer Crab and Mussels in Ventnor, quite frankly, and simply to travel to a variety of places for a few weeks 3-4 times a year.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,760
    carnforth said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Selfish and hypocritcal perhaps, but not appalling. A lot of humans are pretty selfish and hypocritcal by default, so hard to be appalled by such behaviour imo.
    Yes I understand people can be selfish . Leave voters should not be allowed an EU passport . If they voted to leave it , then they should lose their FOM rights .

    Who are all of these people who have been denied a job in the EU? I don't know a single person who has.
    I’m talking about FOM in general , try retiring to the EU without a shed load of money . Voting Leave and then using an EU passport crosses a red line. I understand why some voted to leave even though I was on the other side of the argument. I have zero time though for those who happily voted away the FOM rights of their fellow citizens and then have the gall to swan around Europe with their EU passport .
    If you read the thread back, you'll find AlanBrooke said he was travelling on his UK passport.
    Sort of. I travel to the EU on the UK one and since business occasionally drags me to the Middle East thats when I use the Irish one.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,622
    Nigelb said:

    kinabalu said:

    FF43 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "I long to destroy self-checkout machines – and at last, there’s a glimmer of hope
    Coco Khan"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/nov/14/destroy-self-checkout-machines-supermarket-boycott

    Self checkouts are an interesting business question. Customers are divided but more dislike them than like them; staff hate them - more because they don't work very smoothly and staff get the grief from customers than because the machines put them out of a job; they cost more than manned tills when maintenance and increased theft are factored in.

    So why, given they are net negatives for customers, staff and the business itself, do businesses persevere with self checkouts? It seems to be a version of "one final push". Businesses believe a technical solution will be found to make the self checkout system work better.
    I used to hate them and would approach them full of negativity. They seemed to sense this and react badly since I would never get through the procedure, even with a small shop, without at least one thing, and often several, going wrong. My nuts wouldn't scan, it wouldn't recognise a meal deal, no red pepper on the look-up, my bag in the wrong place, carrots not properly on the scales etc etc. I'd end up almost weeping with frustration.

    But then I changed my mental attitude. I started walking up there with a smile and with confidence. "Hello, clever machine, you're going to zip this straight through, aren't you?" This was now the vibe. Along with that I dropped my tentative way of presenting things to it and instead acted firmly and decisively.

    It worked. They changed their ways and started co-operating with me. I really like them now and have become almost insouciant when using them.
    It does take a certain insouciance to scan your nuts at a checkout, I would imagine.
    Indeed.

    Mr. Peanut (IIRC his middle name is Insouciance)

    https://comicvine.gamespot.com/a/uploads/scale_small/11/111746/4342872-9018668118-adco2.jpg

    Sadly, the less-than-peanut brains at corporate have decided to kill off Mr. Peanut.

    BUT will his many fans allow such a fate to truly transpire?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,518

    ...

    Pulpstar said:

    More laughable FUD from the Trussograph. Lets look at the SMMT release instead:

    https://www.smmt.co.uk/2024/04/march-new-car-market-sustains-growth-as-manufacturers-shore-up-electrified-demand/

    If you want to look only at March in isolation, total sales are +10.4%. Which means that "everyone is buying petrol" isn't true either as that is only +9.2%. What have they sold most of in terms of % growth (the figure they chose an attack line)? Plug-In Hybrids which are +36.7%.

    Or we look at Q1 as a whole. Total market +10.4%, BEV +10.6%, Petrol lagging behind at +9.4%...
    One of our directors drives a hybrid electric. His fuel consumption has barely changed since his ICE car.
    Define "Hybrid". One with a 16v battery - often branded a "mild hybrid" is not a hybrid. Its just a stop-start system. He probably had one on a previous car, so no wonder there is no difference.

    Why are manufacturers dressing up a petrol engine with existing stop-start technology as a hybrid? Because more people want to buy hybrid cars than they want to make. So they rebrand. Same with "self-charging hybrid".
    The Venn diagram of "Electric Vehicles bad", "Trump good", "Brexit" and "I love Bibi" would appear to be a circle.
    Outside the Chinese entrants, there are few good *cheap* EVs

    Expecting people to buy £40k+ cars is a big ask.
    Doesn't everyone except me by their cars on a hire contract? The monthly payment increase from an MG5 to a Tesla S last time I looked was about 200 quid.
    You're on £28K a year. You need a car. What do you buy?

    The whole car HP market is full of scams and bullshit - looks likely to crash in the near future, with some of the more dodgy firms already going down.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,498

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Of course.
    The early adopter phase is done, and cheaper EVs have yet to hit the market in any volume.

    If something like the Kia Ray EV was on the market in the UK, I'd buy one tomorrow. It isn't, so I'll continue to run my old jalopy.

    Most of the big new battery factories are a year or so later than planned; hence the hiatus. The winners from that will be the Chinese ... and Toyota.
    Only time will tell. The Germans are pushing hard to slow the whole EV thing down. I suspect we will follow their lead.
    Quite something for a Brexiter to admit.
    Bloke on R4 Today this morning who sounded like he knew his stuff said:

    1) Legislation fines producers if they don't produce X number of EVs
    2) The market is sluggish. people want petrol etc because of reasons
    3) His figure (not mine, but Google seems to confirm it) for what a new EV costs was £50K.

    Rishi and other billionaires, but not me, are struggling to understand why we haven't all bought two + a spare for the butler to drive on his afternoon off.
    Dacia Spring is 15k, probably not great, but its a car, its electric and will get you from a to b. At around 30k starts to be some choice. 40k entry level Tesla. 50k is getting you a pretty nice car.
    It's only relatively recently I learned how a hybrid worked. It seems perfect - a range of 20 miles or so is more than enough for 90% of journeys - and if it isn't, well, your petrol backup kicks in. I don't really understand why we don't push hybrids as the stepping stone to fully electric.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,760
    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Maybe you should get more meaning to your life.
    You voted to deny others FOM and swan around using your EU passport . Shame on you ! If you don’t see why your position might piss people off then you really are deluded .


    People vote to deny me all sorts of things, Its part and parcel of what goes with a democracy. If you feel that strongly move to somewhere in the EU.
    UK elections tend to effect people domestically . What exactly have you been denied ? I’m a dual national and have an EU passport . I class myself as very lucky . I didn’t vote to screw others who wanted that freedom. If you hated the EU so much to leave why are you taking advantage of an EU benefit ?
    Ive had an Irish passport for nearly 30 years long before Brexit. As for why I voted out you have just jumped to your own conclusions I dont hate the EU and could have been persuaded to stay in. But seeing how successive governments acted whilst in left me wishing to come out,
    We await that improvement in government behaviour you were looking for. Not spotted as yet.
    Agreed, we;ll have another round of twattery until the nation gets fed up with it all.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,792
    The problem with self-service checkout machines is that when they were first brought in they were a choice for the customer. Now you're almost expected to use them and staff get annoyed if you stand by the desk where they have to do the job.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,272

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Of course.
    The early adopter phase is done, and cheaper EVs have yet to hit the market in any volume.

    If something like the Kia Ray EV was on the market in the UK, I'd buy one tomorrow. It isn't, so I'll continue to run my old jalopy.

    Most of the big new battery factories are a year or so later than planned; hence the hiatus. The winners from that will be the Chinese ... and Toyota.
    Only time will tell. The Germans are pushing hard to slow the whole EV thing down. I suspect we will follow their lead.
    Quite something for a Brexiter to admit.
    Our car industry needs the breathing space too. Or cant you understand that ?
    You've been lecturing poor RP all morning oin how he - although he is not a farmer - should make the farming industry get off its collective arse at once and start buccaneering - not your word, not that I recall, but certainly a very strong element of marketing Brexit. Now you think the UK car industry should be treated differently? That's what did it in in the first place, whining that it needed a breathjing space while all those Japanese cars were beginning to hog the market.
    Which car industry does he think we need to protect? Volkswagen?

    There are two revolutions happening in the car industry. Electrification is the one everyone can see - and UK production is either well equipped (LEVC, Nissan, Rolls Royce) or doomed (JLR).

    The other one which not everyone has yet grasped is gigacasting. Tesla have reimagined what a car is and how it is built - two big casts at either end and a structural battery pack which you assemble the interior onto. Stronger, cheaper and faster than the way most cars are made. China has leapt on this, as have Toyota.

    Look at profitability, in an industry which has been going slowly (and repeatedly) bankrupt for several decades. Legacy manufacturers cling to their lengthy model development processes and vast array of parts construction whilst the new guys develop and bring to market cars which actually make money.
    I suspect the German car industry will be fine. The Germans own the EU and can act accordingly to keep the wheels rolling. Stellantis worry me though.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,760

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Of course.
    The early adopter phase is done, and cheaper EVs have yet to hit the market in any volume.

    If something like the Kia Ray EV was on the market in the UK, I'd buy one tomorrow. It isn't, so I'll continue to run my old jalopy.

    Most of the big new battery factories are a year or so later than planned; hence the hiatus. The winners from that will be the Chinese ... and Toyota.
    Only time will tell. The Germans are pushing hard to slow the whole EV thing down. I suspect we will follow their lead.
    Quite something for a Brexiter to admit.
    Our car industry needs the breathing space too. Or cant you understand that ?
    You've been lecturing poor RP all morning oin how he - although he is not a farmer - should make the farming industry get off its collective arse at once and start buccaneering - not your word, not that I recall, but certainly a very strong element of marketing Brexit. Now you think the UK car industry should be treated differently? That's what did it in in the first place, whining that it needed a breathjing space while all those Japanese cars were beginning to hog the market.
    Which car industry does he think we need to protect? Volkswagen?

    There are two revolutions happening in the car industry. Electrification is the one everyone can see - and UK production is either well equipped (LEVC, Nissan, Rolls Royce) or doomed (JLR).

    The other one which not everyone has yet grasped is gigacasting. Tesla have reimagined what a car is and how it is built - two big casts at either end and a structural battery pack which you assemble the interior onto. Stronger, cheaper and faster than the way most cars are made. China has leapt on this, as have Toyota.

    Look at profitability, in an industry which has been going slowly (and repeatedly) bankrupt for several decades. Legacy manufacturers cling to their lengthy model development processes and vast array of parts construction whilst the new guys develop and bring to market cars which actually make money.
    Lol says the man working for the high margin supermarkets. Which chain will go bust first ?
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,389

    TOPPING said:

    Not that I've been following it but how can self-service and self-scan not be an unalloyed good thing.

    I was "random checked" the other day having bought quite a few things and I said fine, plonked the bag down and said: go for it. The bloke looked at two things and waved me through.

    I was perfectly charming and it was the first time it has ever happened to me.

    What are people upset about. Does the scanning technology come from Technion or something.

    I've found it doesn't save me much time. It's rare my age doesn't need to be verified for alcohol by an assistant, or I get the "unexpected item in bagging area" shtick.

    If there's a manned checkout and no queue that's almost always quicker.
    I think you have just answered your own question. "if there's no queue". But the whole point is that there are many more scan points than checkouts and hence waiting times are lower all round. By all means free ride and use the now much-reduced queue but the reason you can is because of the scanning. Same with passport control. Or do you queue up for an eagle-eyed Customs bod to look at your passport for a more personal service.

    At the checkout counter most people are buying fags anyway.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,763

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Selfish and hypocritcal perhaps, but not appalling. A lot of humans are pretty selfish and hypocritcal by default, so hard to be appalled by such behaviour imo.
    Yes I understand people can be selfish . Leave voters should not be allowed an EU passport . If they voted to leave it , then they should lose their FOM rights .

    Who are all of these people who have been denied a job in the EU? I don't know a single person who has.
    My company will allow internal transfers to work for a period in Europe, which I would like to do but am prevented due to not having right to work. Nomad visas etc are irrelevant to these opportunities.

    Maybe it's not a huge deal and I would accept it willingly if anyone could point to a clear Brexit advantage that makes my relatively minor loss worth while. Anything at all?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,518
    edited April 4
    Cookie said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Of course.
    The early adopter phase is done, and cheaper EVs have yet to hit the market in any volume.

    If something like the Kia Ray EV was on the market in the UK, I'd buy one tomorrow. It isn't, so I'll continue to run my old jalopy.

    Most of the big new battery factories are a year or so later than planned; hence the hiatus. The winners from that will be the Chinese ... and Toyota.
    Only time will tell. The Germans are pushing hard to slow the whole EV thing down. I suspect we will follow their lead.
    Quite something for a Brexiter to admit.
    Bloke on R4 Today this morning who sounded like he knew his stuff said:

    1) Legislation fines producers if they don't produce X number of EVs
    2) The market is sluggish. people want petrol etc because of reasons
    3) His figure (not mine, but Google seems to confirm it) for what a new EV costs was £50K.

    Rishi and other billionaires, but not me, are struggling to understand why we haven't all bought two + a spare for the butler to drive on his afternoon off.
    Dacia Spring is 15k, probably not great, but its a car, its electric and will get you from a to b. At around 30k starts to be some choice. 40k entry level Tesla. 50k is getting you a pretty nice car.
    It's only relatively recently I learned how a hybrid worked. It seems perfect - a range of 20 miles or so is more than enough for 90% of journeys - and if it isn't, well, your petrol backup kicks in. I don't really understand why we don't push hybrids as the stepping stone to fully electric.
    We do. Hence Prius selling so well, for example.

    If Toyota had offered a full EV Prius, they would have owned the market.
  • Options
    MJWMJW Posts: 1,361

    Endillion said:

    Foxy said:

    Endillion said:

    Nigelb said:

    ...

    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I was skim reading the...... altercation............ between CorrectHorseBattery and Barty Roberts last night.

    I must admit I'm somewhat in CHB's favour here.
    Israel has gone far to far with its response to 7th October. Their is no justification to destroying aid convoys and killing aid workers. And I don't believe them when they say it was an accident. It wasn't, and they know it.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we will all agree on.
    No. We all don't.
    OK, a fair point.

    I'll reconfirm.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we all ( except @Dura_Ace ) agree on.
    If must means accepting Barty's half a million dead, then no, we can't.
    This is a statement taken out of context. On my original post I caveated that by questioning Bart's collateral value to achieve his aim. I was specific in that I last night asked Bart for numbers. He declined and simply retorted with "whatever it takes".
    Here's the context.

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4736911/#Comment_4736911
    BartholomewRoberts
    Mexicanpete said:
    » show previous quotes
    1. Bollocks it is!
    2. At what cost in lives, give me a number (whatever it takes isn't a number).
    3. I said pushing bastards out of windows and the like. Have you never seen Munich?
    4.
    1. Yes it is.
    2. Whatever it takes. The death toll of the Iraq War was over a quarter of a million, and this is an order of magnitude more justified than that war, so lets say double that half a million? If that's what it takes?
    3. Real life isn't a James Bond movie. Pushing a few people out of windows won't end Hamas.
    Thank you. I had lost interest after "whatever it takes" and ignored the value figure and gone to bed.

    Half a million is good to know. So we are at circa 10% down so far.

    Life must be cheap on Merseyside.

    Top marks for reading to the end.
    "Official" death toll (possibly exaggerated) is around 32,000, and of that, between a quarter and a half (depending on whether you believe Israel or Hamas - and potentially the difference is who counts as a terrorist and who doesn't) are Hamas members.

    Presumably the half million was meant as civilians, and Hamas members do not count towards it.

    So no, we are nowhere near "10% down so far" - more like 4%. And IDF operational efficiency is getting better as the war goes on - for example, there were no civilian deaths recorded during the recent Shifa hospital operation. And all the heavy bombing has been done for a while - you'll notice the death toll has remained fairly static for some time. There is no way the death toll ends up anywhere near half a million.

    Considering the level of destruction of buildings and of social and health infrastructure that 32 000 deaths is likely to be a significant underestimate.
    Considering the identity of the people providing the number, it's likely to be a significant overestimate. And again, you need to deduct the terrorists, since Hamas is including them in the total.

    The only thing I know for certain about the actual number of civilians dead, is you have no clue.
    As someone else has already posted, Hamas’ best recruiting sergeant ATM is Netanyahu!
    Yes and all very predictable, and the reason for the Hamas attack in the first place.

    Israel of course had (and has) the right to defend itself when attacked. But that is different to it being wise or sensible to have acted as they have done. Just because you have a right to do something doesn't make it right to enforce it.
    The more interesting question is what would have been wise and sensible? Hamas' clear strategy was to put Israel in Zugzwang such that it only had some pretty terrible options. Either a war Hamas would try and ensure cost as many Palestinian lives as to break any international support or accept a terror state on your border with the express intent of wiping you out, with increasingly sophisticated military capabilities funded by another state that believes the same thing.

    We know what's happening is horrific. But the deeper question is what different paths there are, and what trade-offs a) one can accept yourself and b) Israelis could or should accept.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,760
    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Maybe you should get more meaning to your life.
    You voted to deny others FOM and swan around using your EU passport . Shame on you ! If you don’t see why your position might piss people off then you really are deluded .


    People vote to deny me all sorts of things, Its part and parcel of what goes with a democracy. If you feel that strongly move to somewhere in the EU.
    UK elections tend to effect people domestically . What exactly have you been denied ? I’m a dual national and have an EU passport . I class myself as very lucky . I didn’t vote to screw others who wanted that freedom. If you hated the EU so much to leave why are you taking advantage of an EU benefit ?
    Ive had an Irish passport for nearly 30 years long before Brexit. As for why I voted out you have just jumped to your own conclusions I dont hate the EU and could have been persuaded to stay in. But seeing how successive governments acted whilst in left me wishing to come out,
    So if Ireland had a referendum you’d vote out then ?
    I'm not registered to vote in Ireland since I dont live in RoI
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,113
    kinabalu said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Maybe you should get more meaning to your life.
    You voted to deny others FOM and swan around using your EU passport . Shame on you ! If you don’t see why your position might piss people off then you really are deluded .


    People vote to deny me all sorts of things, Its part and parcel of what goes with a democracy. If you feel that strongly move to somewhere in the EU.
    UK elections tend to effect people domestically . What exactly have you been denied ? I’m a dual national and have an EU passport . I class myself as very lucky . I didn’t vote to screw others who wanted that freedom. If you hated the EU so much to leave why are you taking advantage of an EU benefit ?
    Ive had an Irish passport for nearly 30 years long before Brexit. As for why I voted out you have just jumped to your own conclusions I dont hate the EU and could have been persuaded to stay in. But seeing how successive governments acted whilst in left me wishing to come out,
    We await that improvement in government behaviour you were looking for. Not spotted as yet.
    The incoming Starmer government has been able to form policy without regard to the constraints of EU membership. Does that not have any potential upsides from your perspective?
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,717
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68731273

    Withdraw the whip from Andrea Jenkyns and Liz Truss! They are supporting a rival party.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,804
    MJW said:

    Endillion said:

    Foxy said:

    Endillion said:

    Nigelb said:

    ...

    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I was skim reading the...... altercation............ between CorrectHorseBattery and Barty Roberts last night.

    I must admit I'm somewhat in CHB's favour here.
    Israel has gone far to far with its response to 7th October. Their is no justification to destroying aid convoys and killing aid workers. And I don't believe them when they say it was an accident. It wasn't, and they know it.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we will all agree on.
    No. We all don't.
    OK, a fair point.

    I'll reconfirm.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we all ( except @Dura_Ace ) agree on.
    If must means accepting Barty's half a million dead, then no, we can't.
    This is a statement taken out of context. On my original post I caveated that by questioning Bart's collateral value to achieve his aim. I was specific in that I last night asked Bart for numbers. He declined and simply retorted with "whatever it takes".
    Here's the context.

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4736911/#Comment_4736911
    BartholomewRoberts
    Mexicanpete said:
    » show previous quotes
    1. Bollocks it is!
    2. At what cost in lives, give me a number (whatever it takes isn't a number).
    3. I said pushing bastards out of windows and the like. Have you never seen Munich?
    4.
    1. Yes it is.
    2. Whatever it takes. The death toll of the Iraq War was over a quarter of a million, and this is an order of magnitude more justified than that war, so lets say double that half a million? If that's what it takes?
    3. Real life isn't a James Bond movie. Pushing a few people out of windows won't end Hamas.
    Thank you. I had lost interest after "whatever it takes" and ignored the value figure and gone to bed.

    Half a million is good to know. So we are at circa 10% down so far.

    Life must be cheap on Merseyside.

    Top marks for reading to the end.
    "Official" death toll (possibly exaggerated) is around 32,000, and of that, between a quarter and a half (depending on whether you believe Israel or Hamas - and potentially the difference is who counts as a terrorist and who doesn't) are Hamas members.

    Presumably the half million was meant as civilians, and Hamas members do not count towards it.

    So no, we are nowhere near "10% down so far" - more like 4%. And IDF operational efficiency is getting better as the war goes on - for example, there were no civilian deaths recorded during the recent Shifa hospital operation. And all the heavy bombing has been done for a while - you'll notice the death toll has remained fairly static for some time. There is no way the death toll ends up anywhere near half a million.

    Considering the level of destruction of buildings and of social and health infrastructure that 32 000 deaths is likely to be a significant underestimate.
    Considering the identity of the people providing the number, it's likely to be a significant overestimate. And again, you need to deduct the terrorists, since Hamas is including them in the total.

    The only thing I know for certain about the actual number of civilians dead, is you have no clue.
    As someone else has already posted, Hamas’ best recruiting sergeant ATM is Netanyahu!
    Yes and all very predictable, and the reason for the Hamas attack in the first place.

    Israel of course had (and has) the right to defend itself when attacked. But that is different to it being wise or sensible to have acted as they have done. Just because you have a right to do something doesn't make it right to enforce it.
    The more interesting question is what would have been wise and sensible? Hamas' clear strategy was to put Israel in Zugzwang such that it only had some pretty terrible options. Either a war Hamas would try and ensure cost as many Palestinian lives as to break any international support or accept a terror state on your border with the express intent of wiping you out, with increasingly sophisticated military capabilities funded by another state that believes the same thing.

    We know what's happening is horrific. But the deeper question is what different paths there are, and what trade-offs a) one can accept yourself and b) Israelis could or should accept.
    They both put each other in zugzwang with predictable and disastrous consequences. It is going to take extraordinary leadership, time and luck to resolve unfortunately. Sooner or later it will improve but not easy to see the path for that happening at the moment.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419

    ...

    Pulpstar said:

    More laughable FUD from the Trussograph. Lets look at the SMMT release instead:

    https://www.smmt.co.uk/2024/04/march-new-car-market-sustains-growth-as-manufacturers-shore-up-electrified-demand/

    If you want to look only at March in isolation, total sales are +10.4%. Which means that "everyone is buying petrol" isn't true either as that is only +9.2%. What have they sold most of in terms of % growth (the figure they chose an attack line)? Plug-In Hybrids which are +36.7%.

    Or we look at Q1 as a whole. Total market +10.4%, BEV +10.6%, Petrol lagging behind at +9.4%...
    One of our directors drives a hybrid electric. His fuel consumption has barely changed since his ICE car.
    Define "Hybrid". One with a 16v battery - often branded a "mild hybrid" is not a hybrid. Its just a stop-start system. He probably had one on a previous car, so no wonder there is no difference.

    Why are manufacturers dressing up a petrol engine with existing stop-start technology as a hybrid? Because more people want to buy hybrid cars than they want to make. So they rebrand. Same with "self-charging hybrid".
    The Venn diagram of "Electric Vehicles bad", "Trump good", "Brexit" and "I love Bibi" would appear to be a circle.
    Outside the Chinese entrants, there are few good *cheap* EVs

    Expecting people to buy £40k+ cars is a big ask.
    Doesn't everyone except me by their cars on a hire contract? The monthly payment increase from an MG5 to a Tesla S last time I looked was about 200 quid.
    I imagine that a lot of people have only ever bought cars second-hand. And indeed, why wouldn't you?
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,272
    edited April 4

    ...

    Pulpstar said:

    More laughable FUD from the Trussograph. Lets look at the SMMT release instead:

    https://www.smmt.co.uk/2024/04/march-new-car-market-sustains-growth-as-manufacturers-shore-up-electrified-demand/

    If you want to look only at March in isolation, total sales are +10.4%. Which means that "everyone is buying petrol" isn't true either as that is only +9.2%. What have they sold most of in terms of % growth (the figure they chose an attack line)? Plug-In Hybrids which are +36.7%.

    Or we look at Q1 as a whole. Total market +10.4%, BEV +10.6%, Petrol lagging behind at +9.4%...
    One of our directors drives a hybrid electric. His fuel consumption has barely changed since his ICE car.
    Define "Hybrid". One with a 16v battery - often branded a "mild hybrid" is not a hybrid. Its just a stop-start system. He probably had one on a previous car, so no wonder there is no difference.

    Why are manufacturers dressing up a petrol engine with existing stop-start technology as a hybrid? Because more people want to buy hybrid cars than they want to make. So they rebrand. Same with "self-charging hybrid".
    The Venn diagram of "Electric Vehicles bad", "Trump good", "Brexit" and "I love Bibi" would appear to be a circle.
    Outside the Chinese entrants, there are few good *cheap* EVs

    Expecting people to buy £40k+ cars is a big ask.
    Doesn't everyone except me by their cars on a hire contract? The monthly payment increase from an MG5 to a Tesla S last time I looked was about 200 quid.
    You're on £28K a year. You need a car. What do you buy?

    The whole car HP market is full of scams and bullshit - looks likely to crash in the near future, with some of the more dodgy firms already going down.
    Thanks for the raise.

    Probably a 60 plate Range Rover or Audi Q8 on a pay as you drive contract.

    Or if you are sensible cash for a high mileage 15 plate Insignia or Mondeo.
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    Foxy said:

    Endillion said:

    Foxy said:

    Endillion said:

    Nigelb said:

    ...

    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I was skim reading the...... altercation............ between CorrectHorseBattery and Barty Roberts last night.

    I must admit I'm somewhat in CHB's favour here.
    Israel has gone far to far with its response to 7th October. Their is no justification to destroying aid convoys and killing aid workers. And I don't believe them when they say it was an accident. It wasn't, and they know it.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we will all agree on.
    No. We all don't.
    OK, a fair point.

    I'll reconfirm.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we all ( except @Dura_Ace ) agree on.
    If must means accepting Barty's half a million dead, then no, we can't.
    This is a statement taken out of context. On my original post I caveated that by questioning Bart's collateral value to achieve his aim. I was specific in that I last night asked Bart for numbers. He declined and simply retorted with "whatever it takes".
    Here's the context.

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4736911/#Comment_4736911
    BartholomewRoberts
    Mexicanpete said:
    » show previous quotes
    1. Bollocks it is!
    2. At what cost in lives, give me a number (whatever it takes isn't a number).
    3. I said pushing bastards out of windows and the like. Have you never seen Munich?
    4.
    1. Yes it is.
    2. Whatever it takes. The death toll of the Iraq War was over a quarter of a million, and this is an order of magnitude more justified than that war, so lets say double that half a million? If that's what it takes?
    3. Real life isn't a James Bond movie. Pushing a few people out of windows won't end Hamas.
    Thank you. I had lost interest after "whatever it takes" and ignored the value figure and gone to bed.

    Half a million is good to know. So we are at circa 10% down so far.

    Life must be cheap on Merseyside.

    Top marks for reading to the end.
    "Official" death toll (possibly exaggerated) is around 32,000, and of that, between a quarter and a half (depending on whether you believe Israel or Hamas - and potentially the difference is who counts as a terrorist and who doesn't) are Hamas members.

    Presumably the half million was meant as civilians, and Hamas members do not count towards it.

    So no, we are nowhere near "10% down so far" - more like 4%. And IDF operational efficiency is getting better as the war goes on - for example, there were no civilian deaths recorded during the recent Shifa hospital operation. And all the heavy bombing has been done for a while - you'll notice the death toll has remained fairly static for some time. There is no way the death toll ends up anywhere near half a million.

    Considering the level of destruction of buildings and of social and health infrastructure that 32 000 deaths is likely to be a significant underestimate.
    Considering the identity of the people providing the number, it's likely to be a significant overestimate. And again, you need to deduct the terrorists, since Hamas is including them in the total.

    The only thing I know for certain about the actual number of civilians dead, is you have no clue.
    The amount of destruction of buildings is well documented. Do you think they were all empty at the time?

    How many functioning hospitals in Gaza are there that can manage a heart attack or diabetic coma? Probably none

    I suspect the indirect casualties, "excess deaths" if you prefer, will far exceed the direct deaths from military action.

    I have not cited Hamas estimates, but the scale of destruction is obvious.
    The IDF has whole divisions of people dedicated to getting people out of buildings before it bombs them. They've also gotten very good at hitting the exact part of the building they need in order to take out the target, whilst doing as little damage to the rest of the building and its occupants as possible.

    Even during the current conflict, there's been a steady stream of patients from Gaza with complex medical conditions being treated in Israeli hospitals, or transferred to Egypt.

    You haven't got a clue what you're talking about.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,717
    MJW said:

    Endillion said:

    Foxy said:

    Endillion said:

    Nigelb said:

    ...

    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I was skim reading the...... altercation............ between CorrectHorseBattery and Barty Roberts last night.

    I must admit I'm somewhat in CHB's favour here.
    Israel has gone far to far with its response to 7th October. Their is no justification to destroying aid convoys and killing aid workers. And I don't believe them when they say it was an accident. It wasn't, and they know it.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we will all agree on.
    No. We all don't.
    OK, a fair point.

    I'll reconfirm.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we all ( except @Dura_Ace ) agree on.
    If must means accepting Barty's half a million dead, then no, we can't.
    This is a statement taken out of context. On my original post I caveated that by questioning Bart's collateral value to achieve his aim. I was specific in that I last night asked Bart for numbers. He declined and simply retorted with "whatever it takes".
    Here's the context.

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4736911/#Comment_4736911
    BartholomewRoberts
    Mexicanpete said:
    » show previous quotes
    1. Bollocks it is!
    2. At what cost in lives, give me a number (whatever it takes isn't a number).
    3. I said pushing bastards out of windows and the like. Have you never seen Munich?
    4.
    1. Yes it is.
    2. Whatever it takes. The death toll of the Iraq War was over a quarter of a million, and this is an order of magnitude more justified than that war, so lets say double that half a million? If that's what it takes?
    3. Real life isn't a James Bond movie. Pushing a few people out of windows won't end Hamas.
    Thank you. I had lost interest after "whatever it takes" and ignored the value figure and gone to bed.

    Half a million is good to know. So we are at circa 10% down so far.

    Life must be cheap on Merseyside.

    Top marks for reading to the end.
    "Official" death toll (possibly exaggerated) is around 32,000, and of that, between a quarter and a half (depending on whether you believe Israel or Hamas - and potentially the difference is who counts as a terrorist and who doesn't) are Hamas members.

    Presumably the half million was meant as civilians, and Hamas members do not count towards it.

    So no, we are nowhere near "10% down so far" - more like 4%. And IDF operational efficiency is getting better as the war goes on - for example, there were no civilian deaths recorded during the recent Shifa hospital operation. And all the heavy bombing has been done for a while - you'll notice the death toll has remained fairly static for some time. There is no way the death toll ends up anywhere near half a million.

    Considering the level of destruction of buildings and of social and health infrastructure that 32 000 deaths is likely to be a significant underestimate.
    Considering the identity of the people providing the number, it's likely to be a significant overestimate. And again, you need to deduct the terrorists, since Hamas is including them in the total.

    The only thing I know for certain about the actual number of civilians dead, is you have no clue.
    As someone else has already posted, Hamas’ best recruiting sergeant ATM is Netanyahu!
    Yes and all very predictable, and the reason for the Hamas attack in the first place.

    Israel of course had (and has) the right to defend itself when attacked. But that is different to it being wise or sensible to have acted as they have done. Just because you have a right to do something doesn't make it right to enforce it.
    The more interesting question is what would have been wise and sensible? Hamas' clear strategy was to put Israel in Zugzwang such that it only had some pretty terrible options. Either a war Hamas would try and ensure cost as many Palestinian lives as to break any international support or accept a terror state on your border with the express intent of wiping you out, with increasingly sophisticated military capabilities funded by another state that believes the same thing.

    We know what's happening is horrific. But the deeper question is what different paths there are, and what trade-offs a) one can accept yourself and b) Israelis could or should accept.
    I think it's unhelpful to paint this in such stark either/or terms. Israel could be occupying Gaza militarily, while being more helpful on aid and less indiscriminate in blowing stuff up. Israel could (and should) stop trying to annex the West Bank bit by bit. Israel could kick politicians who favour ethnic cleansing of Gaza out of government. It's perfectly possible for Israel to respond strongly to Hamas without behaving as they are now.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,310
    Endillion said:

    Foxy said:

    Endillion said:

    Nigelb said:

    ...

    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I was skim reading the...... altercation............ between CorrectHorseBattery and Barty Roberts last night.

    I must admit I'm somewhat in CHB's favour here.
    Israel has gone far to far with its response to 7th October. Their is no justification to destroying aid convoys and killing aid workers. And I don't believe them when they say it was an accident. It wasn't, and they know it.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we will all agree on.
    No. We all don't.
    OK, a fair point.

    I'll reconfirm.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we all ( except @Dura_Ace ) agree on.
    If must means accepting Barty's half a million dead, then no, we can't.
    This is a statement taken out of context. On my original post I caveated that by questioning Bart's collateral value to achieve his aim. I was specific in that I last night asked Bart for numbers. He declined and simply retorted with "whatever it takes".
    Here's the context.

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4736911/#Comment_4736911
    BartholomewRoberts
    Mexicanpete said:
    » show previous quotes
    1. Bollocks it is!
    2. At what cost in lives, give me a number (whatever it takes isn't a number).
    3. I said pushing bastards out of windows and the like. Have you never seen Munich?
    4.
    1. Yes it is.
    2. Whatever it takes. The death toll of the Iraq War was over a quarter of a million, and this is an order of magnitude more justified than that war, so lets say double that half a million? If that's what it takes?
    3. Real life isn't a James Bond movie. Pushing a few people out of windows won't end Hamas.
    Thank you. I had lost interest after "whatever it takes" and ignored the value figure and gone to bed.

    Half a million is good to know. So we are at circa 10% down so far.

    Life must be cheap on Merseyside.

    Top marks for reading to the end.
    "Official" death toll (possibly exaggerated) is around 32,000, and of that, between a quarter and a half (depending on whether you believe Israel or Hamas - and potentially the difference is who counts as a terrorist and who doesn't) are Hamas members.

    Presumably the half million was meant as civilians, and Hamas members do not count towards it.

    So no, we are nowhere near "10% down so far" - more like 4%. And IDF operational efficiency is getting better as the war goes on - for example, there were no civilian deaths recorded during the recent Shifa hospital operation. And all the heavy bombing has been done for a while - you'll notice the death toll has remained fairly static for some time. There is no way the death toll ends up anywhere near half a million.

    Considering the level of destruction of buildings and of social and health infrastructure that 32 000 deaths is likely to be a significant underestimate.
    Considering the identity of the people providing the number, it's likely to be a significant overestimate. And again, you need to deduct the terrorists, since Hamas is including them in the total.

    The only thing I know for certain about the actual number of civilians dead, is you have no clue.
    There's uncertainty but "no clue" is rather over-egging it. There is little doubt that it's many many thousands. On top of that you have the injured and displaced, also the physical carnage. We can debate those loaded labels of 'genocide' and 'ethnic cleansing' and 'collective punishment' and 'war crimes' but just for routine conversational purposes if what Israel is doing in Gaza can't be described as disproportionate and indiscriminate we're losing our grip on language.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,762
    .

    MJW said:

    Endillion said:

    Foxy said:

    Endillion said:

    Nigelb said:

    ...

    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I was skim reading the...... altercation............ between CorrectHorseBattery and Barty Roberts last night.

    I must admit I'm somewhat in CHB's favour here.
    Israel has gone far to far with its response to 7th October. Their is no justification to destroying aid convoys and killing aid workers. And I don't believe them when they say it was an accident. It wasn't, and they know it.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we will all agree on.
    No. We all don't.
    OK, a fair point.

    I'll reconfirm.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we all ( except @Dura_Ace ) agree on.
    If must means accepting Barty's half a million dead, then no, we can't.
    This is a statement taken out of context. On my original post I caveated that by questioning Bart's collateral value to achieve his aim. I was specific in that I last night asked Bart for numbers. He declined and simply retorted with "whatever it takes".
    Here's the context.

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4736911/#Comment_4736911
    BartholomewRoberts
    Mexicanpete said:
    » show previous quotes
    1. Bollocks it is!
    2. At what cost in lives, give me a number (whatever it takes isn't a number).
    3. I said pushing bastards out of windows and the like. Have you never seen Munich?
    4.
    1. Yes it is.
    2. Whatever it takes. The death toll of the Iraq War was over a quarter of a million, and this is an order of magnitude more justified than that war, so lets say double that half a million? If that's what it takes?
    3. Real life isn't a James Bond movie. Pushing a few people out of windows won't end Hamas.
    Thank you. I had lost interest after "whatever it takes" and ignored the value figure and gone to bed.

    Half a million is good to know. So we are at circa 10% down so far.

    Life must be cheap on Merseyside.

    Top marks for reading to the end.
    "Official" death toll (possibly exaggerated) is around 32,000, and of that, between a quarter and a half (depending on whether you believe Israel or Hamas - and potentially the difference is who counts as a terrorist and who doesn't) are Hamas members.

    Presumably the half million was meant as civilians, and Hamas members do not count towards it.

    So no, we are nowhere near "10% down so far" - more like 4%. And IDF operational efficiency is getting better as the war goes on - for example, there were no civilian deaths recorded during the recent Shifa hospital operation. And all the heavy bombing has been done for a while - you'll notice the death toll has remained fairly static for some time. There is no way the death toll ends up anywhere near half a million.

    Considering the level of destruction of buildings and of social and health infrastructure that 32 000 deaths is likely to be a significant underestimate.
    Considering the identity of the people providing the number, it's likely to be a significant overestimate. And again, you need to deduct the terrorists, since Hamas is including them in the total.

    The only thing I know for certain about the actual number of civilians dead, is you have no clue.
    As someone else has already posted, Hamas’ best recruiting sergeant ATM is Netanyahu!
    Yes and all very predictable, and the reason for the Hamas attack in the first place.

    Israel of course had (and has) the right to defend itself when attacked. But that is different to it being wise or sensible to have acted as they have done. Just because you have a right to do something doesn't make it right to enforce it.
    The more interesting question is what would have been wise and sensible? Hamas' clear strategy was to put Israel in Zugzwang such that it only had some pretty terrible options. Either a war Hamas would try and ensure cost as many Palestinian lives as to break any international support or accept a terror state on your border with the express intent of wiping you out, with increasingly sophisticated military capabilities funded by another state that believes the same thing.

    We know what's happening is horrific. But the deeper question is what different paths there are, and what trade-offs a) one can accept yourself and b) Israelis could or should accept.
    They both put each other in zugzwang with predictable and disastrous consequences. It is going to take extraordinary leadership, time and luck to resolve unfortunately. Sooner or later it will improve but not easy to see the path for that happening at the moment.
    Instead, both Israel and the Palestinians have appalling leadership.
    Nothing's likely to get much better any time soon.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,717
    Cookie said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Of course.
    The early adopter phase is done, and cheaper EVs have yet to hit the market in any volume.

    If something like the Kia Ray EV was on the market in the UK, I'd buy one tomorrow. It isn't, so I'll continue to run my old jalopy.

    Most of the big new battery factories are a year or so later than planned; hence the hiatus. The winners from that will be the Chinese ... and Toyota.
    Only time will tell. The Germans are pushing hard to slow the whole EV thing down. I suspect we will follow their lead.
    Quite something for a Brexiter to admit.
    Bloke on R4 Today this morning who sounded like he knew his stuff said:

    1) Legislation fines producers if they don't produce X number of EVs
    2) The market is sluggish. people want petrol etc because of reasons
    3) His figure (not mine, but Google seems to confirm it) for what a new EV costs was £50K.

    Rishi and other billionaires, but not me, are struggling to understand why we haven't all bought two + a spare for the butler to drive on his afternoon off.
    Dacia Spring is 15k, probably not great, but its a car, its electric and will get you from a to b. At around 30k starts to be some choice. 40k entry level Tesla. 50k is getting you a pretty nice car.
    It's only relatively recently I learned how a hybrid worked. It seems perfect - a range of 20 miles or so is more than enough for 90% of journeys - and if it isn't, well, your petrol backup kicks in. I don't really understand why we don't push hybrids as the stepping stone to fully electric.
    Building a car with two engines is complicated and expensive.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,717
    Nigelb said:

    .

    MJW said:

    Endillion said:

    Foxy said:

    Endillion said:

    Nigelb said:

    ...

    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I was skim reading the...... altercation............ between CorrectHorseBattery and Barty Roberts last night.

    I must admit I'm somewhat in CHB's favour here.
    Israel has gone far to far with its response to 7th October. Their is no justification to destroying aid convoys and killing aid workers. And I don't believe them when they say it was an accident. It wasn't, and they know it.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we will all agree on.
    No. We all don't.
    OK, a fair point.

    I'll reconfirm.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we all ( except @Dura_Ace ) agree on.
    If must means accepting Barty's half a million dead, then no, we can't.
    This is a statement taken out of context. On my original post I caveated that by questioning Bart's collateral value to achieve his aim. I was specific in that I last night asked Bart for numbers. He declined and simply retorted with "whatever it takes".
    Here's the context.

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4736911/#Comment_4736911
    BartholomewRoberts
    Mexicanpete said:
    » show previous quotes
    1. Bollocks it is!
    2. At what cost in lives, give me a number (whatever it takes isn't a number).
    3. I said pushing bastards out of windows and the like. Have you never seen Munich?
    4.
    1. Yes it is.
    2. Whatever it takes. The death toll of the Iraq War was over a quarter of a million, and this is an order of magnitude more justified than that war, so lets say double that half a million? If that's what it takes?
    3. Real life isn't a James Bond movie. Pushing a few people out of windows won't end Hamas.
    Thank you. I had lost interest after "whatever it takes" and ignored the value figure and gone to bed.

    Half a million is good to know. So we are at circa 10% down so far.

    Life must be cheap on Merseyside.

    Top marks for reading to the end.
    "Official" death toll (possibly exaggerated) is around 32,000, and of that, between a quarter and a half (depending on whether you believe Israel or Hamas - and potentially the difference is who counts as a terrorist and who doesn't) are Hamas members.

    Presumably the half million was meant as civilians, and Hamas members do not count towards it.

    So no, we are nowhere near "10% down so far" - more like 4%. And IDF operational efficiency is getting better as the war goes on - for example, there were no civilian deaths recorded during the recent Shifa hospital operation. And all the heavy bombing has been done for a while - you'll notice the death toll has remained fairly static for some time. There is no way the death toll ends up anywhere near half a million.

    Considering the level of destruction of buildings and of social and health infrastructure that 32 000 deaths is likely to be a significant underestimate.
    Considering the identity of the people providing the number, it's likely to be a significant overestimate. And again, you need to deduct the terrorists, since Hamas is including them in the total.

    The only thing I know for certain about the actual number of civilians dead, is you have no clue.
    As someone else has already posted, Hamas’ best recruiting sergeant ATM is Netanyahu!
    Yes and all very predictable, and the reason for the Hamas attack in the first place.

    Israel of course had (and has) the right to defend itself when attacked. But that is different to it being wise or sensible to have acted as they have done. Just because you have a right to do something doesn't make it right to enforce it.
    The more interesting question is what would have been wise and sensible? Hamas' clear strategy was to put Israel in Zugzwang such that it only had some pretty terrible options. Either a war Hamas would try and ensure cost as many Palestinian lives as to break any international support or accept a terror state on your border with the express intent of wiping you out, with increasingly sophisticated military capabilities funded by another state that believes the same thing.

    We know what's happening is horrific. But the deeper question is what different paths there are, and what trade-offs a) one can accept yourself and b) Israelis could or should accept.
    They both put each other in zugzwang with predictable and disastrous consequences. It is going to take extraordinary leadership, time and luck to resolve unfortunately. Sooner or later it will improve but not easy to see the path for that happening at the moment.
    Instead, both Israel and the Palestinians have appalling leadership.
    Nothing's likely to get much better any time soon.
    I don't know about that. There's a fair chance Bibi's government will fall.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,762
    To briefly drag the thread back on topic.
    These are worrying numbers.

    https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/04/04/robert-f-kennedy-jr-joe-biden-00150465
    ..Kennedy’s popularity appears to be a function of name recognition and a general lack of enthusiasm for President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump, not to mention voters brushing their views onto the somewhat empty canvas of his candidacy. The poll of 2,010 registered Latino voters found Kennedy winning one in five young Latino voters, and also reported him capturing a sizable 17 percent Latino support in Arizona and an even more robust 21 percent in Nevada— the highest number among the battleground states polled. The drag on Biden’s Latino support was so great in the survey that Trump was winning among Hispanics overall in 12 battleground states, 41 percent to Biden’s 34 percent.

    If those numbers held in November, it would represent a seismic break in the Democratic coalition and a remaking of the electoral map, leading Democrats to likely lose Nevada and Arizona. In the wake of Trump’s 2020 gains with Hispanics from South Florida to the Rio Grande Valley in south Texas, and even in parts of New Jersey and California, Democrats could still rest easy because the entire Southwest held. But if Nevada and Arizona fall to Trump as a result of erosion in the Latino vote, it would mean Biden is likely suffering similar losses across the country, presaging an election loss...
  • Options
    carnforthcarnforth Posts: 3,230
    Foxy said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    I think it’s appalling to vote Leave and keep your FOM rights by using a second EU passport .

    You voted to deny that freedom to others . Many were devastated to lose those rights.

    Selfish and hypocritcal perhaps, but not appalling. A lot of humans are pretty selfish and hypocritcal by default, so hard to be appalled by such behaviour imo.
    Yes I understand people can be selfish . Leave voters should not be allowed an EU passport . If they voted to leave it , then they should lose their FOM rights .

    Who are all of these people who have been denied a job in the EU? I don't know a single person who has.
    I have had plenty of patients who have had to change their retirement plans.

    Still, who wouldn't prefer eating Turnips in Skeggy to Paella in Marbella for their retirement?
    Presumably the Spanish set their income thresholds so that retirees are not a burden on the Spanish people. Since we’re calling people selfish on this thread, dumping yourself on a country in retirement knowing you’re likely to be a net cost to them would be an example of selfishness.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,389
    kinabalu said:

    Endillion said:

    Foxy said:

    Endillion said:

    Nigelb said:

    ...

    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I was skim reading the...... altercation............ between CorrectHorseBattery and Barty Roberts last night.

    I must admit I'm somewhat in CHB's favour here.
    Israel has gone far to far with its response to 7th October. Their is no justification to destroying aid convoys and killing aid workers. And I don't believe them when they say it was an accident. It wasn't, and they know it.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we will all agree on.
    No. We all don't.
    OK, a fair point.

    I'll reconfirm.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we all ( except @Dura_Ace ) agree on.
    If must means accepting Barty's half a million dead, then no, we can't.
    This is a statement taken out of context. On my original post I caveated that by questioning Bart's collateral value to achieve his aim. I was specific in that I last night asked Bart for numbers. He declined and simply retorted with "whatever it takes".
    Here's the context.

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4736911/#Comment_4736911
    BartholomewRoberts
    Mexicanpete said:
    » show previous quotes
    1. Bollocks it is!
    2. At what cost in lives, give me a number (whatever it takes isn't a number).
    3. I said pushing bastards out of windows and the like. Have you never seen Munich?
    4.
    1. Yes it is.
    2. Whatever it takes. The death toll of the Iraq War was over a quarter of a million, and this is an order of magnitude more justified than that war, so lets say double that half a million? If that's what it takes?
    3. Real life isn't a James Bond movie. Pushing a few people out of windows won't end Hamas.
    Thank you. I had lost interest after "whatever it takes" and ignored the value figure and gone to bed.

    Half a million is good to know. So we are at circa 10% down so far.

    Life must be cheap on Merseyside.

    Top marks for reading to the end.
    "Official" death toll (possibly exaggerated) is around 32,000, and of that, between a quarter and a half (depending on whether you believe Israel or Hamas - and potentially the difference is who counts as a terrorist and who doesn't) are Hamas members.

    Presumably the half million was meant as civilians, and Hamas members do not count towards it.

    So no, we are nowhere near "10% down so far" - more like 4%. And IDF operational efficiency is getting better as the war goes on - for example, there were no civilian deaths recorded during the recent Shifa hospital operation. And all the heavy bombing has been done for a while - you'll notice the death toll has remained fairly static for some time. There is no way the death toll ends up anywhere near half a million.

    Considering the level of destruction of buildings and of social and health infrastructure that 32 000 deaths is likely to be a significant underestimate.
    Considering the identity of the people providing the number, it's likely to be a significant overestimate. And again, you need to deduct the terrorists, since Hamas is including them in the total.

    The only thing I know for certain about the actual number of civilians dead, is you have no clue.
    There's uncertainty but "no clue" is rather over-egging it. There is little doubt that it's many many thousands. On top of that you have the injured and displaced, also the physical carnage. We can debate those loaded labels of 'genocide' and 'ethnic cleansing' and 'collective punishment' and 'war crimes' but just for routine conversational purposes if what Israel is doing in Gaza can't be described as disproportionate and indiscriminate we're losing our grip on language.
    I'm not sure what proportionate would look like and I suspect no one else does either. Would it have been 100 or 1,000 or 10,000 or 100,000. I'm not sure I know beyond gut feel and that's no basis for international law, much as I think my stomach rumblings ought to be.

    Then you have the indiscriminate. One thing we have seen from the WCK tragedy, and also the Al Shifa hospital just recently (no civilians killed only Hamas customer service agents), is that whatever is going on it isn't indiscriminate.

    So we are back to loaded labels one way or the other. And arguing the toss about it.
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    kinabalu said:

    Endillion said:

    Foxy said:

    Endillion said:

    Nigelb said:

    ...

    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I was skim reading the...... altercation............ between CorrectHorseBattery and Barty Roberts last night.

    I must admit I'm somewhat in CHB's favour here.
    Israel has gone far to far with its response to 7th October. Their is no justification to destroying aid convoys and killing aid workers. And I don't believe them when they say it was an accident. It wasn't, and they know it.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we will all agree on.
    No. We all don't.
    OK, a fair point.

    I'll reconfirm.

    Barty's point is that Hamas must be destroyed, which I think we all ( except @Dura_Ace ) agree on.
    If must means accepting Barty's half a million dead, then no, we can't.
    This is a statement taken out of context. On my original post I caveated that by questioning Bart's collateral value to achieve his aim. I was specific in that I last night asked Bart for numbers. He declined and simply retorted with "whatever it takes".
    Here's the context.

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4736911/#Comment_4736911
    BartholomewRoberts
    Mexicanpete said:
    » show previous quotes
    1. Bollocks it is!
    2. At what cost in lives, give me a number (whatever it takes isn't a number).
    3. I said pushing bastards out of windows and the like. Have you never seen Munich?
    4.
    1. Yes it is.
    2. Whatever it takes. The death toll of the Iraq War was over a quarter of a million, and this is an order of magnitude more justified than that war, so lets say double that half a million? If that's what it takes?
    3. Real life isn't a James Bond movie. Pushing a few people out of windows won't end Hamas.
    Thank you. I had lost interest after "whatever it takes" and ignored the value figure and gone to bed.

    Half a million is good to know. So we are at circa 10% down so far.

    Life must be cheap on Merseyside.

    Top marks for reading to the end.
    "Official" death toll (possibly exaggerated) is around 32,000, and of that, between a quarter and a half (depending on whether you believe Israel or Hamas - and potentially the difference is who counts as a terrorist and who doesn't) are Hamas members.

    Presumably the half million was meant as civilians, and Hamas members do not count towards it.

    So no, we are nowhere near "10% down so far" - more like 4%. And IDF operational efficiency is getting better as the war goes on - for example, there were no civilian deaths recorded during the recent Shifa hospital operation. And all the heavy bombing has been done for a while - you'll notice the death toll has remained fairly static for some time. There is no way the death toll ends up anywhere near half a million.

    Considering the level of destruction of buildings and of social and health infrastructure that 32 000 deaths is likely to be a significant underestimate.
    Considering the identity of the people providing the number, it's likely to be a significant overestimate. And again, you need to deduct the terrorists, since Hamas is including them in the total.

    The only thing I know for certain about the actual number of civilians dead, is you have no clue.
    There's uncertainty but "no clue" is rather over-egging it. There is little doubt that it's many many thousands. On top of that you have the injured and displaced, also the physical carnage. We can debate those loaded labels of 'genocide' and 'ethnic cleansing' and 'collective punishment' and 'war crimes' but just for routine conversational purposes if what Israel is doing in Gaza can't be described as disproportionate and indiscriminate we're losing our grip on language.
    "Disproportionate" is as much a technical term as the others you've mentioned. And "indiscriminate" is flat out nonsensical: even if you accept Hamas' numbers, the IDF has killed maybe three civilians for every combatant. If you accept Israel's, it's more like one for one. Given Hamas comprised maybe 1-2% of the total population at the start of the war, if they comprise 25-50% of casualties, then clearly Israel is not being indiscriminate.
This discussion has been closed.