Net Zero is starting to now run into economic reality with electric cars and deindustrialisation in a way it wasn't in the 2010s.
To go further, we will have to accept real economic damage being done now, with the hope that our global leadership on it galvanises a faster transition to Net Zero worldwide.
Will we?
To put the actual argument to one side, it was interesting to find that even Reform voters aren't that fussed about Net Zero - only 9% picked it as an issue. It's very much an internet meme.
Yet Farage considers this the "next Brexit". That feels like a fumble to me. They should stick to national identity and immigration.
I'd say that Lincs is the one to watch, again. The new Reform Mayor Andrea Jenkins, and also her boss (?) Zia Yusuf, have been leading with green-bashing, and Lincs is the only place where they have both Mayor and control of the Council.
Yes Lincs is reported to now have 12k green jobs and a green economy worth £1.2bn, according to the Local Enterprise Partnership.
If they want to recreate the 1970s or 1950s, that might not be the place to start.
Apparently net zero costs a bomb, right, so we're going to scrap that woke lefty nonsense, right, and go back to the good old days with British power stations burning British coal, right, who wants wind turbines or pylons anyway, right.
I know that "Net Zero" is completely the wrong messaging, but the goal of energy independence is a good one. The environment needs to be tret as a bonus rather than the objective. Green energy is how we regain our place of power, no longer at the whim of Putin or money markets, we not only generate free energy but we can design build and export the technology.
It should be a no-brainer. But "investment" is seen to be "subsidy" and thus "who will pay for it"
Except that it isn't "free" energy and the panels are largely made in China, so probably not exactly reliable and secure, and quite arguable about how "green" the manufacture of said panels is.
The most obvious self-sufficiency that this government seems to enjoy saying "go fuck yourself" to, is food production. Hopefully unlikely that we would suffer a food blockade as we did in WW2, but if we did we would starve to death pretty quickly. Two Tier Kier seems to be keen to make us starve a lot quicker
Autarky positions like this quickly become absurd. You're arguing for a significant reduction in energy consumption and compulsory veganism.
Solar lasts 25 years+ at 80% efficiency - if China cuts off supply, it will have no material impact on our energy generation for decades, by which time we'll be importing them from someone else. With food, most of our critical imports are from European countries (mainly veg). On gas, most of it comes from Norway.
It isn't an "autarcky position" you pillock, it is common sense critique based on historical fact that being unable to produce a substantial part of our own food is not in any way desirable, quite apart from the environmental cost of importing food that can be grown here, and it's juxtaposition with the attitude of the current government with their much less rational claims on "energy security". As for China cutting off supply of panels, this is highly unlikely, but the point remains that the environmental credentials of these products are highly dubious. Goofy pillocks like Miliband arguing that "energy self-sufficiency" is a main reason for his obsession with randomly covering rural areas in solar panels to line the pockets the greedy is disingenuous in the extreme.
We haven't been self-sufficient on food since about 1805.
If you're moving to an enviornmental position, a massive tax on meat consumption (or at least a reduction in subsidies) would meet both objectives. About 40% of our crops are used to feed animals, and it opens up pastoral land for solar farms and reduces methane emissions.
If memory serves we got close during ww2, but not completely and including the republic of Ireland. It involved a lot of people growing their own food. this was forced by the fact that food imports from Europe shrank to zero and from other countries were endangered by U-boat.
Happy to be corrected if wrong
Nowhere near.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feeding_Britain_in_the_Second_World_War ..In 1939, 12 million acres (4.8 million ha) of land in Britain was cultivated and 17 million acres (7.0 million ha) of land was in grassland. By 1944, 18 million acres were being cultivated (7.6 million ha) and eleven million (4.4 million ha) were in grassland. The acreage planted in potatoes had more than doubled and that in wheat increased by two-thirds.[16] The government programs to effect this change involved the "plough-up" program, guaranteed high prices to farmers for their products, and technological advances in farming practices. As much of the new land was marginal in quality, the results did not make Britain self sufficient in food. At the beginning of the war Britain produced 33 percent of the calories its people consumed; by the end of the war Britain produced 44 percent of the calories consumed..
For the first time in Ukraine’s history, the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) has uncovered a spy network operated by Hungarian military intelligence, targeting national security interests.
The agents focused on gathering intelligence in the Zakarpattia region—assessing military defenses, identifying weaknesses in air and ground security, and analyzing local public sentiment toward a possible Hungarian military presence.
Two operatives have been detained. According to the investigation, both were managed by a Hungarian military intelligence officer whose identity has already been confirmed by the SBU... https://x.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1920735965212991596
Net Zero is starting to now run into economic reality with electric cars and deindustrialisation in a way it wasn't in the 2010s.
To go further, we will have to accept real economic damage being done now, with the hope that our global leadership on it galvanises a faster transition to Net Zero worldwide.
Will we?
To put the actual argument to one side, it was interesting to find that even Reform voters aren't that fussed about Net Zero - only 9% picked it as an issue. It's very much an internet meme.
Yet Farage considers this the "next Brexit". That feels like a fumble to me. They should stick to national identity and immigration.
I'd say that Lincs is the one to watch, again. The new Reform Mayor Andrea Jenkins, and also her boss (?) Zia Yusuf, have been leading with green-bashing, and Lincs is the only place where they have both Mayor and control of the Council.
Yes Lincs is reported to now have 12k green jobs and a green economy worth £1.2bn, according to the Local Enterprise Partnership.
If they want to recreate the 1970s or 1950s, that might not be the place to start.
Apparently net zero costs a bomb, right, so we're going to scrap that woke lefty nonsense, right, and go back to the good old days with British power stations burning British coal, right, who wants wind turbines or pylons anyway, right.
I know that "Net Zero" is completely the wrong messaging, but the goal of energy independence is a good one. The environment needs to be tret as a bonus rather than the objective. Green energy is how we regain our place of power, no longer at the whim of Putin or money markets, we not only generate free energy but we can design build and export the technology.
It should be a no-brainer. But "investment" is seen to be "subsidy" and thus "who will pay for it"
Except that it isn't "free" energy and the panels are largely made in China, so probably not exactly reliable and secure, and quite arguable about how "green" the manufacture of said panels is.
The most obvious self-sufficiency that this government seems to enjoy saying "go fuck yourself" to, is food production. Hopefully unlikely that we would suffer a food blockade as we did in WW2, but if we did we would starve to death pretty quickly. Two Tier Kier seems to be keen to make us starve a lot quicker
Autarky positions like this quickly become absurd. You're arguing for a significant reduction in energy consumption and compulsory veganism.
Solar lasts 25 years+ at 80% efficiency - if China cuts off supply, it will have no material impact on our energy generation for decades, by which time we'll be importing them from someone else. With food, most of our critical imports are from European countries (mainly veg). On gas, most of it comes from Norway.
It isn't an "autarcky position" you pillock, it is common sense critique based on historical fact that being unable to produce a substantial part of our own food is not in any way desirable, quite apart from the environmental cost of importing food that can be grown here, and it's juxtaposition with the attitude of the current government with their much less rational claims on "energy security". As for China cutting off supply of panels, this is highly unlikely, but the point remains that the environmental credentials of these products are highly dubious. Goofy pillocks like Miliband arguing that "energy self-sufficiency" is a main reason for his obsession with randomly covering rural areas in solar panels to line the pockets the greedy is disingenuous in the extreme.
We haven't been self-sufficient on food since about 1805.
If you're moving to an enviornmental position, a massive tax on meat consumption (or at least a reduction in subsidies) would meet both objectives. About 40% of our crops are used to feed animals, and it opens up pastoral land for solar farms and reduces methane emissions.
Lol. Are you a vegan by any chance? This is hyperbolic "enviornmental" (sic) bollox. Sorry to burst your myopic greeny propaganda bubble, but in the real practical rural world (where most lefties and Greens have never ventured) there are large parts of the local ecology and enviornment that require grazing to maintain ecosystems that have evolved over millennia. There is no doubt that a reduction in meat consumption in the west would have some benefits both environmental and health, but the idea that we should move to the fantasy world that many vegans and Greens live in would cause dramatic food shortage and localised environmental damage.
Keep taking the lentils!
I think around 75% (depending on who you believe) of agricultural land is used to raise meat and dairy, either in grazing, pens/ housing or crops to feed the livestock. People want Red Tractor bollocks and "Organic Free Range Grass Fed Barn Raised Humanely Killed" to salve their conscience , but that's not sustainable even over the short term. Given that about 50% of habitable land is used for agriculture, what little animal "welfare" we have will have to go out the window. Eat what you want, but we'll have to find a better way to feed the humans we keep producing.
Net Zero is starting to now run into economic reality with electric cars and deindustrialisation in a way it wasn't in the 2010s.
To go further, we will have to accept real economic damage being done now, with the hope that our global leadership on it galvanises a faster transition to Net Zero worldwide.
Will we?
To put the actual argument to one side, it was interesting to find that even Reform voters aren't that fussed about Net Zero - only 9% picked it as an issue. It's very much an internet meme.
Yet Farage considers this the "next Brexit". That feels like a fumble to me. They should stick to national identity and immigration.
I'd say that Lincs is the one to watch, again. The new Reform Mayor Andrea Jenkins, and also her boss (?) Zia Yusuf, have been leading with green-bashing, and Lincs is the only place where they have both Mayor and control of the Council.
Yes Lincs is reported to now have 12k green jobs and a green economy worth £1.2bn, according to the Local Enterprise Partnership.
If they want to recreate the 1970s or 1950s, that might not be the place to start.
Apparently net zero costs a bomb, right, so we're going to scrap that woke lefty nonsense, right, and go back to the good old days with British power stations burning British coal, right, who wants wind turbines or pylons anyway, right.
I know that "Net Zero" is completely the wrong messaging, but the goal of energy independence is a good one. The environment needs to be tret as a bonus rather than the objective. Green energy is how we regain our place of power, no longer at the whim of Putin or money markets, we not only generate free energy but we can design build and export the technology.
It should be a no-brainer. But "investment" is seen to be "subsidy" and thus "who will pay for it"
Except that it isn't "free" energy and the panels are largely made in China, so probably not exactly reliable and secure, and quite arguable about how "green" the manufacture of said panels is.
The most obvious self-sufficiency that this government seems to enjoy saying "go fuck yourself" to, is food production. Hopefully unlikely that we would suffer a food blockade as we did in WW2, but if we did we would starve to death pretty quickly. Two Tier Kier seems to be keen to make us starve a lot quicker
What has crippled food production and driven price inflation is the cost of energy - and the spikes are all Russian supply related and not net zero...
I’ll still be shopping at Tesco, going swimming sometimes, nibbling nuts in the afternoon, drinking red wine from a sherry glass, I’ll still be doing these same things, but I’ll be doing them in a world that has changed.
This is faintly tragic, and also ever so slightly provincial, and non-U. But, then again, you are a retired accountant.
I agree the post WWII world is now over. VE Day 80 didn't have the spark it should, and it's just moving into history now.
That was my point - and more specifically 'feeling' it as opposed to understanding it in the abstract.
Always a point to my contributions. I'm never just prattling away for the sake of it.
Net Zero is starting to now run into economic reality with electric cars and deindustrialisation in a way it wasn't in the 2010s.
To go further, we will have to accept real economic damage being done now, with the hope that our global leadership on it galvanises a faster transition to Net Zero worldwide.
Will we?
To put the actual argument to one side, it was interesting to find that even Reform voters aren't that fussed about Net Zero - only 9% picked it as an issue. It's very much an internet meme.
Yet Farage considers this the "next Brexit". That feels like a fumble to me. They should stick to national identity and immigration.
I'd say that Lincs is the one to watch, again. The new Reform Mayor Andrea Jenkins, and also her boss (?) Zia Yusuf, have been leading with green-bashing, and Lincs is the only place where they have both Mayor and control of the Council.
Yes Lincs is reported to now have 12k green jobs and a green economy worth £1.2bn, according to the Local Enterprise Partnership.
If they want to recreate the 1970s or 1950s, that might not be the place to start.
Apparently net zero costs a bomb, right, so we're going to scrap that woke lefty nonsense, right, and go back to the good old days with British power stations burning British coal, right, who wants wind turbines or pylons anyway, right.
I know that "Net Zero" is completely the wrong messaging, but the goal of energy independence is a good one. The environment needs to be tret as a bonus rather than the objective. Green energy is how we regain our place of power, no longer at the whim of Putin or money markets, we not only generate free energy but we can design build and export the technology.
It should be a no-brainer. But "investment" is seen to be "subsidy" and thus "who will pay for it"
Except that it isn't "free" energy and the panels are largely made in China, so probably not exactly reliable and secure, and quite arguable about how "green" the manufacture of said panels is.
The most obvious self-sufficiency that this government seems to enjoy saying "go fuck yourself" to, is food production. Hopefully unlikely that we would suffer a food blockade as we did in WW2, but if we did we would starve to death pretty quickly. Two Tier Kier seems to be keen to make us starve a lot quicker
Autarky positions like this quickly become absurd. You're arguing for a significant reduction in energy consumption and compulsory veganism.
Solar lasts 25 years+ at 80% efficiency - if China cuts off supply, it will have no material impact on our energy generation for decades, by which time we'll be importing them from someone else. With food, most of our critical imports are from European countries (mainly veg). On gas, most of it comes from Norway.
It isn't an "autarcky position" you pillock, it is common sense critique based on historical fact that being unable to produce a substantial part of our own food is not in any way desirable, quite apart from the environmental cost of importing food that can be grown here, and it's juxtaposition with the attitude of the current government with their much less rational claims on "energy security". As for China cutting off supply of panels, this is highly unlikely, but the point remains that the environmental credentials of these products are highly dubious. Goofy pillocks like Miliband arguing that "energy self-sufficiency" is a main reason for his obsession with randomly covering rural areas in solar panels to line the pockets the greedy is disingenuous in the extreme.
We haven't been self-sufficient on food since about 1805.
If you're moving to an enviornmental position, a massive tax on meat consumption (or at least a reduction in subsidies) would meet both objectives. About 40% of our crops are used to feed animals, and it opens up pastoral land for solar farms and reduces methane emissions.
Lol. Are you a vegan by any chance? This is hyperbolic "enviornmental" (sic) bollox. Sorry to burst your myopic greeny propaganda bubble, but in the real practical rural world (where most lefties and Greens have never ventured) there are large parts of the local ecology and enviornment that require grazing to maintain ecosystems that have evolved over millennia. There is no doubt that a reduction in meat consumption in the west would have some benefits both environmental and health, but the idea that we should move to the fantasy world that many vegans and Greens live in would cause dramatic food shortage and localised environmental damage.
Keep taking the lentils!
I think around 75% (depending on who you believe) of agricultural land is used to raise meat and dairy, either in grazing, pens/ housing or crops to feed the livestock. People want Red Tractor bollocks and "Organic Free Range Grass Fed Barn Raised Humanely Killed" to salve their conscience , but that's not sustainable even over the short term. Given that about 50% of habitable land is used for agriculture, what little animal "welfare" we have will have to go out the window. Eat what you want, but we'll have to find a better way to feed the humans we keep producing.
As you say, depending on whom you believe! The vegetarian and vegan lobbies have claimed this, but it relies on misinformation. More reliable data suggests about 40%, but coming from a farming family, I think even this is exaggerated. Some land uses, say, outdoor pigs or sheep in rotation with veg and cereals. This is simple good husbandry and is also ideal if you are attempting to either use less artificial fertiliser or indeed go fully organic (which requires animal input - a paradox for those who say we should be environmental and vegan!). Some cereals are more suited to animal feed than human consumption so are used for this and the human consumption varieties are imported to balance this. A lot of this is driven by hard economics and a reliance on global imports, that is in turn driven by supermarkets who claim to give the consumer what they want. .
Net Zero is starting to now run into economic reality with electric cars and deindustrialisation in a way it wasn't in the 2010s.
To go further, we will have to accept real economic damage being done now, with the hope that our global leadership on it galvanises a faster transition to Net Zero worldwide.
Will we?
To put the actual argument to one side, it was interesting to find that even Reform voters aren't that fussed about Net Zero - only 9% picked it as an issue. It's very much an internet meme.
Yet Farage considers this the "next Brexit". That feels like a fumble to me. They should stick to national identity and immigration.
I'd say that Lincs is the one to watch, again. The new Reform Mayor Andrea Jenkins, and also her boss (?) Zia Yusuf, have been leading with green-bashing, and Lincs is the only place where they have both Mayor and control of the Council.
Yes Lincs is reported to now have 12k green jobs and a green economy worth £1.2bn, according to the Local Enterprise Partnership.
If they want to recreate the 1970s or 1950s, that might not be the place to start.
Apparently net zero costs a bomb, right, so we're going to scrap that woke lefty nonsense, right, and go back to the good old days with British power stations burning British coal, right, who wants wind turbines or pylons anyway, right.
I know that "Net Zero" is completely the wrong messaging, but the goal of energy independence is a good one. The environment needs to be tret as a bonus rather than the objective. Green energy is how we regain our place of power, no longer at the whim of Putin or money markets, we not only generate free energy but we can design build and export the technology.
It should be a no-brainer. But "investment" is seen to be "subsidy" and thus "who will pay for it"
Except that it isn't "free" energy and the panels are largely made in China, so probably not exactly reliable and secure, and quite arguable about how "green" the manufacture of said panels is.
The most obvious self-sufficiency that this government seems to enjoy saying "go fuck yourself" to, is food production. Hopefully unlikely that we would suffer a food blockade as we did in WW2, but if we did we would starve to death pretty quickly. Two Tier Kier seems to be keen to make us starve a lot quicker
Autarky positions like this quickly become absurd. You're arguing for a significant reduction in energy consumption and compulsory veganism.
Solar lasts 25 years+ at 80% efficiency - if China cuts off supply, it will have no material impact on our energy generation for decades, by which time we'll be importing them from someone else. With food, most of our critical imports are from European countries (mainly veg). On gas, most of it comes from Norway.
It isn't an "autarcky position" you pillock, it is common sense critique based on historical fact that being unable to produce a substantial part of our own food is not in any way desirable, quite apart from the environmental cost of importing food that can be grown here, and it's juxtaposition with the attitude of the current government with their much less rational claims on "energy security". As for China cutting off supply of panels, this is highly unlikely, but the point remains that the environmental credentials of these products are highly dubious. Goofy pillocks like Miliband arguing that "energy self-sufficiency" is a main reason for his obsession with randomly covering rural areas in solar panels to line the pockets the greedy is disingenuous in the extreme.
We haven't been self-sufficient on food since about 1805.
If you're moving to an enviornmental position, a massive tax on meat consumption (or at least a reduction in subsidies) would meet both objectives. About 40% of our crops are used to feed animals, and it opens up pastoral land for solar farms and reduces methane emissions.
If memory serves we got close during ww2, but not completely and including the republic of Ireland. It involved a lot of people growing their own food. this was forced by the fact that food imports from Europe shrank to zero and from other countries were endangered by U-boat.
Happy to be corrected if wrong
Pretty sure though UK internal food supply got much more efficient, despite rationing & shortages we were still nowhere close to being self sufficient. According to Wiki imports made up 50% of Britain’s food supply with 22m tons pa, by war’s end it was 12m tons pa. No doubt there’s an alternative history somewhere where AH flung all Germany’s naval resources at U boats rather than battleships and Sealions.
I don't think there's any scenario in which Nazi Germany could have won the War. Taking on simultaneously, the British Empire and Commonwealth, the Soviet Union, and the USA, could only end one way.
Logistics are not everything, but they're probably about 75% of winning.
Total Unterseeboot Krieg from the fall of France to the middle of 1941 (ie before multiplying enemies) might have been interesting from a strategic pov. Wasn’t Churchill crapping himself over what Britain would do if its addiction to tea was thwarted?
Net Zero is starting to now run into economic reality with electric cars and deindustrialisation in a way it wasn't in the 2010s.
To go further, we will have to accept real economic damage being done now, with the hope that our global leadership on it galvanises a faster transition to Net Zero worldwide.
Will we?
To put the actual argument to one side, it was interesting to find that even Reform voters aren't that fussed about Net Zero - only 9% picked it as an issue. It's very much an internet meme.
Yet Farage considers this the "next Brexit". That feels like a fumble to me. They should stick to national identity and immigration.
I'd say that Lincs is the one to watch, again. The new Reform Mayor Andrea Jenkins, and also her boss (?) Zia Yusuf, have been leading with green-bashing, and Lincs is the only place where they have both Mayor and control of the Council.
Yes Lincs is reported to now have 12k green jobs and a green economy worth £1.2bn, according to the Local Enterprise Partnership.
If they want to recreate the 1970s or 1950s, that might not be the place to start.
Apparently net zero costs a bomb, right, so we're going to scrap that woke lefty nonsense, right, and go back to the good old days with British power stations burning British coal, right, who wants wind turbines or pylons anyway, right.
I know that "Net Zero" is completely the wrong messaging, but the goal of energy independence is a good one. The environment needs to be tret as a bonus rather than the objective. Green energy is how we regain our place of power, no longer at the whim of Putin or money markets, we not only generate free energy but we can design build and export the technology.
It should be a no-brainer. But "investment" is seen to be "subsidy" and thus "who will pay for it"
Except that it isn't "free" energy and the panels are largely made in China, so probably not exactly reliable and secure, and quite arguable about how "green" the manufacture of said panels is.
The most obvious self-sufficiency that this government seems to enjoy saying "go fuck yourself" to, is food production. Hopefully unlikely that we would suffer a food blockade as we did in WW2, but if we did we would starve to death pretty quickly. Two Tier Kier seems to be keen to make us starve a lot quicker
What has crippled food production and driven price inflation is the cost of energy - and the spikes are all Russian supply related and not net zero...
A fair point, but we should be addressing both as security concerns IMO
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Plenty. The Tories have collapsed after over a decade of poor government, so voters on the right are switching to Reform. There is a more general none-of-the-above vote, unhappy with the party in power and the party previously in power, looking to vote elsewhere. Immigration is a potent motivator for some of the electorate, particularly after Brexit and the Tories failed to deliver on what their supporters expected and we saw very high immigration under Johnson and Sunak. Farage is a smooth operator.
We all know this, don't we? It's not rocket science.
Johnson did at least end EU free movement and Sunak raised visa wage requirements for immigrants and reduced the ability to bring dependents in. So if immigration now falls it will be largely down to Sunak and Cleverly
Net Zero is starting to now run into economic reality with electric cars and deindustrialisation in a way it wasn't in the 2010s.
To go further, we will have to accept real economic damage being done now, with the hope that our global leadership on it galvanises a faster transition to Net Zero worldwide.
Will we?
To put the actual argument to one side, it was interesting to find that even Reform voters aren't that fussed about Net Zero - only 9% picked it as an issue. It's very much an internet meme.
Yet Farage considers this the "next Brexit". That feels like a fumble to me. They should stick to national identity and immigration.
I'd say that Lincs is the one to watch, again. The new Reform Mayor Andrea Jenkins, and also her boss (?) Zia Yusuf, have been leading with green-bashing, and Lincs is the only place where they have both Mayor and control of the Council.
Yes Lincs is reported to now have 12k green jobs and a green economy worth £1.2bn, according to the Local Enterprise Partnership.
If they want to recreate the 1970s or 1950s, that might not be the place to start.
Apparently net zero costs a bomb, right, so we're going to scrap that woke lefty nonsense, right, and go back to the good old days with British power stations burning British coal, right, who wants wind turbines or pylons anyway, right.
I know that "Net Zero" is completely the wrong messaging, but the goal of energy independence is a good one. The environment needs to be tret as a bonus rather than the objective. Green energy is how we regain our place of power, no longer at the whim of Putin or money markets, we not only generate free energy but we can design build and export the technology.
It should be a no-brainer. But "investment" is seen to be "subsidy" and thus "who will pay for it"
Except that it isn't "free" energy and the panels are largely made in China, so probably not exactly reliable and secure, and quite arguable about how "green" the manufacture of said panels is.
The most obvious self-sufficiency that this government seems to enjoy saying "go fuck yourself" to, is food production. Hopefully unlikely that we would suffer a food blockade as we did in WW2, but if we did we would starve to death pretty quickly. Two Tier Kier seems to be keen to make us starve a lot quicker
Autarky positions like this quickly become absurd. You're arguing for a significant reduction in energy consumption and compulsory veganism.
Solar lasts 25 years+ at 80% efficiency - if China cuts off supply, it will have no material impact on our energy generation for decades, by which time we'll be importing them from someone else. With food, most of our critical imports are from European countries (mainly veg). On gas, most of it comes from Norway.
It isn't an "autarcky position" you pillock, it is common sense critique based on historical fact that being unable to produce a substantial part of our own food is not in any way desirable, quite apart from the environmental cost of importing food that can be grown here, and it's juxtaposition with the attitude of the current government with their much less rational claims on "energy security". As for China cutting off supply of panels, this is highly unlikely, but the point remains that the environmental credentials of these products are highly dubious. Goofy pillocks like Miliband arguing that "energy self-sufficiency" is a main reason for his obsession with randomly covering rural areas in solar panels to line the pockets the greedy is disingenuous in the extreme.
We haven't been self-sufficient on food since about 1805.
If you're moving to an enviornmental position, a massive tax on meat consumption (or at least a reduction in subsidies) would meet both objectives. About 40% of our crops are used to feed animals, and it opens up pastoral land for solar farms and reduces methane emissions.
If memory serves we got close during ww2, but not completely and including the republic of Ireland. It involved a lot of people growing their own food. this was forced by the fact that food imports from Europe shrank to zero and from other countries were endangered by U-boat.
Happy to be corrected if wrong
Pretty sure though UK internal food supply got much more efficient, despite rationing & shortages we were still nowhere close to being self sufficient. According to Wiki imports made up 50% of Britain’s food supply with 22m tons pa, by war’s end it was 12m tons pa. No doubt there’s an alternative history somewhere where AH flung all Germany’s naval resources at U boats rather than battleships and Sealions.
I don't think there's any scenario in which Nazi Germany could have won the War. Taking on simultaneously, the British Empire and Commonwealth, the Soviet Union, and the USA, could only end one way.
Logistics are not everything, but they're probably about 75% of winning.
Total Unterseeboot Krieg from the fall of France to the middle of 1941 (ie before multiplying enemies) might have been interesting from a strategic pov. Wasn’t Churchill crapping himself over what Britain would do if its addiction to tea was thwarted?
It was Japan's entry which, paradoxically, was the final straw. Brought the US into the war.
Net Zero is starting to now run into economic reality with electric cars and deindustrialisation in a way it wasn't in the 2010s.
To go further, we will have to accept real economic damage being done now, with the hope that our global leadership on it galvanises a faster transition to Net Zero worldwide.
Will we?
To put the actual argument to one side, it was interesting to find that even Reform voters aren't that fussed about Net Zero - only 9% picked it as an issue. It's very much an internet meme.
Yet Farage considers this the "next Brexit". That feels like a fumble to me. They should stick to national identity and immigration.
I'd say that Lincs is the one to watch, again. The new Reform Mayor Andrea Jenkins, and also her boss (?) Zia Yusuf, have been leading with green-bashing, and Lincs is the only place where they have both Mayor and control of the Council.
Yes Lincs is reported to now have 12k green jobs and a green economy worth £1.2bn, according to the Local Enterprise Partnership.
If they want to recreate the 1970s or 1950s, that might not be the place to start.
Apparently net zero costs a bomb, right, so we're going to scrap that woke lefty nonsense, right, and go back to the good old days with British power stations burning British coal, right, who wants wind turbines or pylons anyway, right.
I know that "Net Zero" is completely the wrong messaging, but the goal of energy independence is a good one. The environment needs to be tret as a bonus rather than the objective. Green energy is how we regain our place of power, no longer at the whim of Putin or money markets, we not only generate free energy but we can design build and export the technology.
It should be a no-brainer. But "investment" is seen to be "subsidy" and thus "who will pay for it"
Except that it isn't "free" energy and the panels are largely made in China, so probably not exactly reliable and secure, and quite arguable about how "green" the manufacture of said panels is.
The most obvious self-sufficiency that this government seems to enjoy saying "go fuck yourself" to, is food production. Hopefully unlikely that we would suffer a food blockade as we did in WW2, but if we did we would starve to death pretty quickly. Two Tier Kier seems to be keen to make us starve a lot quicker
Autarky positions like this quickly become absurd. You're arguing for a significant reduction in energy consumption and compulsory veganism.
Solar lasts 25 years+ at 80% efficiency - if China cuts off supply, it will have no material impact on our energy generation for decades, by which time we'll be importing them from someone else. With food, most of our critical imports are from European countries (mainly veg). On gas, most of it comes from Norway.
It isn't an "autarcky position" you pillock, it is common sense critique based on historical fact that being unable to produce a substantial part of our own food is not in any way desirable, quite apart from the environmental cost of importing food that can be grown here, and it's juxtaposition with the attitude of the current government with their much less rational claims on "energy security". As for China cutting off supply of panels, this is highly unlikely, but the point remains that the environmental credentials of these products are highly dubious. Goofy pillocks like Miliband arguing that "energy self-sufficiency" is a main reason for his obsession with randomly covering rural areas in solar panels to line the pockets the greedy is disingenuous in the extreme.
We haven't been self-sufficient on food since about 1805.
If you're moving to an enviornmental position, a massive tax on meat consumption (or at least a reduction in subsidies) would meet both objectives. About 40% of our crops are used to feed animals, and it opens up pastoral land for solar farms and reduces methane emissions.
If memory serves we got close during ww2, but not completely and including the republic of Ireland. It involved a lot of people growing their own food. this was forced by the fact that food imports from Europe shrank to zero and from other countries were endangered by U-boat.
Happy to be corrected if wrong
Pretty sure though UK internal food supply got much more efficient, despite rationing & shortages we were still nowhere close to being self sufficient. According to Wiki imports made up 50% of Britain’s food supply with 22m tons pa, by war’s end it was 12m tons pa. No doubt there’s an alternative history somewhere where AH flung all Germany’s naval resources at U boats rather than battleships and Sealions.
I don't think there's any scenario in which Nazi Germany could have won the War. Taking on simultaneously, the British Empire and Commonwealth, the Soviet Union, and the USA, could only end one way.
Logistics are not everything, but they're probably about 75% of winning.
Total Unterseeboot Krieg from the fall of France to the middle of 1941 (ie before multiplying enemies) might have been interesting from a strategic pov. Wasn’t Churchill crapping himself over what Britain would do if its addiction to tea was thwarted?
Germany was in fact, closer to starvation, and its people had to endure lower rations, than the UK. Nazi "economics" never really took account of the fact that Germany is not a very fertile country, and had long relied upon exports of high value manufactured goods, in order to pay for imports of food. And, this was despite plundering the occupied territories for food, and inflicting starvation on their inhabitants.
Net Zero is starting to now run into economic reality with electric cars and deindustrialisation in a way it wasn't in the 2010s.
To go further, we will have to accept real economic damage being done now, with the hope that our global leadership on it galvanises a faster transition to Net Zero worldwide.
Will we?
To put the actual argument to one side, it was interesting to find that even Reform voters aren't that fussed about Net Zero - only 9% picked it as an issue. It's very much an internet meme.
Yet Farage considers this the "next Brexit". That feels like a fumble to me. They should stick to national identity and immigration.
I'd say that Lincs is the one to watch, again. The new Reform Mayor Andrea Jenkins, and also her boss (?) Zia Yusuf, have been leading with green-bashing, and Lincs is the only place where they have both Mayor and control of the Council.
Yes Lincs is reported to now have 12k green jobs and a green economy worth £1.2bn, according to the Local Enterprise Partnership.
If they want to recreate the 1970s or 1950s, that might not be the place to start.
Apparently net zero costs a bomb, right, so we're going to scrap that woke lefty nonsense, right, and go back to the good old days with British power stations burning British coal, right, who wants wind turbines or pylons anyway, right.
I know that "Net Zero" is completely the wrong messaging, but the goal of energy independence is a good one. The environment needs to be tret as a bonus rather than the objective. Green energy is how we regain our place of power, no longer at the whim of Putin or money markets, we not only generate free energy but we can design build and export the technology.
It should be a no-brainer. But "investment" is seen to be "subsidy" and thus "who will pay for it"
Except that it isn't "free" energy and the panels are largely made in China, so probably not exactly reliable and secure, and quite arguable about how "green" the manufacture of said panels is.
The most obvious self-sufficiency that this government seems to enjoy saying "go fuck yourself" to, is food production. Hopefully unlikely that we would suffer a food blockade as we did in WW2, but if we did we would starve to death pretty quickly. Two Tier Kier seems to be keen to make us starve a lot quicker
Autarky positions like this quickly become absurd. You're arguing for a significant reduction in energy consumption and compulsory veganism.
Solar lasts 25 years+ at 80% efficiency - if China cuts off supply, it will have no material impact on our energy generation for decades, by which time we'll be importing them from someone else. With food, most of our critical imports are from European countries (mainly veg). On gas, most of it comes from Norway.
It isn't an "autarcky position" you pillock, it is common sense critique based on historical fact that being unable to produce a substantial part of our own food is not in any way desirable, quite apart from the environmental cost of importing food that can be grown here, and it's juxtaposition with the attitude of the current government with their much less rational claims on "energy security". As for China cutting off supply of panels, this is highly unlikely, but the point remains that the environmental credentials of these products are highly dubious. Goofy pillocks like Miliband arguing that "energy self-sufficiency" is a main reason for his obsession with randomly covering rural areas in solar panels to line the pockets the greedy is disingenuous in the extreme.
We haven't been self-sufficient on food since about 1805.
If you're moving to an enviornmental position, a massive tax on meat consumption (or at least a reduction in subsidies) would meet both objectives. About 40% of our crops are used to feed animals, and it opens up pastoral land for solar farms and reduces methane emissions.
Lol. Are you a vegan by any chance? This is hyperbolic "enviornmental" (sic) bollox. Sorry to burst your myopic greeny propaganda bubble, but in the real practical rural world (where most lefties and Greens have never ventured) there are large parts of the local ecology and enviornment that require grazing to maintain ecosystems that have evolved over millennia. There is no doubt that a reduction in meat consumption in the west would have some benefits both environmental and health, but the idea that we should move to the fantasy world that many vegans and Greens live in would cause dramatic food shortage and localised environmental damage.
Keep taking the lentils!
I think around 75% (depending on who you believe) of agricultural land is used to raise meat and dairy, either in grazing, pens/ housing or crops to feed the livestock. People want Red Tractor bollocks and "Organic Free Range Grass Fed Barn Raised Humanely Killed" to salve their conscience , but that's not sustainable even over the short term. Given that about 50% of habitable land is used for agriculture, what little animal "welfare" we have will have to go out the window. Eat what you want, but we'll have to find a better way to feed the humans we keep producing.
As you say, depending on whom you believe! The vegetarian and vegan lobbies have claimed this, but it relies on misinformation. More reliable data suggests about 40%, but coming from a farming family, I think even this is exaggerated. Some land uses, say, outdoor pigs or sheep in rotation with veg and cereals. This is simple good husbandry and is also ideal if you are attempting to either use less artificial fertiliser or indeed go fully organic (which requires animal input - a paradox for those who say we should be environmental and vegan!). Some cereals are more suited to animal feed than human consumption so are used for this and the human consumption varieties are imported to balance this. A lot of this is driven by hard economics and a reliance on global imports, that is in turn driven by supermarkets who claim to give the consumer what they want. .
J.D. Vance says Russia won’t get more territory in Ukraine peace talks: “Russia can’t expect to gain land it hasn’t even taken.” He adds, “The U.S. will walk away from talks if Russia doesn’t negotiate in good faith.”
I’ll still be shopping at Tesco, going swimming sometimes, nibbling nuts in the afternoon, drinking red wine from a sherry glass, I’ll still be doing these same things, but I’ll be doing them in a world that has changed.
This is faintly tragic, and also ever so slightly provincial, and non-U. But, then again, you are a retired accountant.
I agree the post WWII world is now over. VE Day 80 didn't have the spark it should, and it's just moving into history now.
That was my point - and more specifically 'feeling' it as opposed to understanding it in the abstract.
Always a point to my contributions. I'm never just prattling away for the sake of it.
I now have a weird image in my head of a not terribly old, but fading fast, retired accountant, with his slippers on, and on a reclining SCS leather armchair, sipping some cheap red plonk out of a sherry glass, whilst watching re-runs of Poirot and a Stennah Stairlift brochure on his lap.
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
In Leicestershire Reform got 59,000 votes. Since the previous County elections Conservative lost 42,000 (from 92,000), Labour 16,000 (from 37,000) and Lib Dems 5,000 (from 33,000).
Grudgingly one thing we have not mentioned, but is clearly true, significant and relevant is that Farage is the best UK political campaigner active at the moment.
Net Zero is starting to now run into economic reality with electric cars and deindustrialisation in a way it wasn't in the 2010s.
To go further, we will have to accept real economic damage being done now, with the hope that our global leadership on it galvanises a faster transition to Net Zero worldwide.
Will we?
To put the actual argument to one side, it was interesting to find that even Reform voters aren't that fussed about Net Zero - only 9% picked it as an issue. It's very much an internet meme.
Yet Farage considers this the "next Brexit". That feels like a fumble to me. They should stick to national identity and immigration.
I'd say that Lincs is the one to watch, again. The new Reform Mayor Andrea Jenkins, and also her boss (?) Zia Yusuf, have been leading with green-bashing, and Lincs is the only place where they have both Mayor and control of the Council.
Yes Lincs is reported to now have 12k green jobs and a green economy worth £1.2bn, according to the Local Enterprise Partnership.
If they want to recreate the 1970s or 1950s, that might not be the place to start.
Apparently net zero costs a bomb, right, so we're going to scrap that woke lefty nonsense, right, and go back to the good old days with British power stations burning British coal, right, who wants wind turbines or pylons anyway, right.
I know that "Net Zero" is completely the wrong messaging, but the goal of energy independence is a good one. The environment needs to be tret as a bonus rather than the objective. Green energy is how we regain our place of power, no longer at the whim of Putin or money markets, we not only generate free energy but we can design build and export the technology.
It should be a no-brainer. But "investment" is seen to be "subsidy" and thus "who will pay for it"
Except that it isn't "free" energy and the panels are largely made in China, so probably not exactly reliable and secure, and quite arguable about how "green" the manufacture of said panels is.
The most obvious self-sufficiency that this government seems to enjoy saying "go fuck yourself" to, is food production. Hopefully unlikely that we would suffer a food blockade as we did in WW2, but if we did we would starve to death pretty quickly. Two Tier Kier seems to be keen to make us starve a lot quicker
What has crippled food production and driven price inflation is the cost of energy - and the spikes are all Russian supply related and not net zero...
This is correct, in theory, but won't work as a matter of practical politics, particularly given Starmer's poor communication skills.
I predict that Farage will paint Net Zero as a "Carbon Tax" that is destroying the UK economy, and it will be very effective politically.
Reforms last election manifesto would have led to huge cuts to public services .
So for all those calling the next election as a Reform win they’ll be under a lot more scrutiny next time .
A Reform win is nowhere close to secure. The entire edifice is fragile in the extreme. The UK problem is that the rest of the party edifice is insecure too. Less thoughtful voters are clinging to Reform as a last hope. Thoughtful voters don't have even that straw to cling to.
Reform's plus points are several. Charismatic leader, never in power so can lie easily, they attract people who think problems are easily overcome, the failure of other parties on migration and other areas.
However, to win they have to overcome gigantic obstacles. They haven't much talent, they must move to the social democrat centre where their voters are, and the anti-Reform alliance of voters should be able to manage a tactical voting bloc in enough seats.
And the scrutiny they will get over policy will be immense. Where are they on the tricky bits? Debt, borrowing, deficit, tax, spend, welfare for 'me' as opposed to the wrong sort, climate change?
I’ll still be shopping at Tesco, going swimming sometimes, nibbling nuts in the afternoon, drinking red wine from a sherry glass, I’ll still be doing these same things, but I’ll be doing them in a world that has changed.
This is faintly tragic, and also ever so slightly provincial, and non-U. But, then again, you are a retired accountant.
I agree the post WWII world is now over. VE Day 80 didn't have the spark it should, and it's just moving into history now.
That was my point - and more specifically 'feeling' it as opposed to understanding it in the abstract.
Always a point to my contributions. I'm never just prattling away for the sake of it.
I now have a weird image in my head of a not terribly old, but fading fast, retired accountant, with his slippers on, and on a reclining SCS leather armchair, sipping some cheap red plonk out of a sherry glass, whilst watching re-runs of Poirot and a Stennah Stairlift brochure on his lap.
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Yes. They are offering attractive yet simplistic and unworkable solutions at a time of economic difficulty.
As a non-lefty right of centre one time One Nation Tory who voted Remain (and genuinely loathes Farage), I think I have come to a conclusion as to why some vote Reform. It is simply that they are pissed off. Pissed off with the woke rachet, where they perceive that greater credence is given to immigrants, where statues of historic figures are torn down and those responsible are not prosecuted, where one might be cancelled for stating something that someone else decides is not the modern perspective, where policemen will arrest you for the mildest of "crimes", or perhaps for defending your own property, but real thugs thieves and burglars seem to get off scot-free, because the police claim they do not "have the resources". These are the types of reasons. Mainstream politician need to address them.
The French are such amateurs, not a single duck house in sight.
French MPs suspended for putting drugs and dating app on expenses
Andy Kerbrat allegedly spent €25,000 on drugs while Christine Engrand, who joined a dating site for the over-fifties, says her new assistant is ‘only a friend’
CHINA SHOULD OPEN UP ITS MARKET TO USA — WOULD BE SO GOOD FOR THEM!!! CLOSED MARKETS DON'T WORK ANYMORE!!!
Perhaps you should have a word with the guy who put 150% tariffs on Chinese goods? You know, the deal maker who has reduced freight into the US by 35% this week? The fellow who will empty the shelves in the stores?
Question for the panel. On current form the 2029 election will be mega on the need for tactical voting. Is there a fairly simple formula covering most seats in England (S and W is too hard for me to think about) which guides as to how to vote tactically against Reform, for people who don't have a PhD in psephology?
Eg for starters: In all seats where LDs are first or second, vote LD In all seats where Labour is first vote Labour In all seats where Tory is first and LD not second, just guess at random
Question for the panel. On current form the 2029 election will be mega on the need for tactical voting. Is there a fairly simple formula covering most seats in England (S and W is too hard for me to think about) which guides as to how to vote tactically against Reform, for people who don't have a PhD in psephology?
Eg for starters: In all seats where LDs are first or second, vote LD In all seats where Labour is first vote Labour In all seats where Tory is first and LD not second, just guess at random
Would that be enough?
You are better off waiting until the MRP projection a couple of weeks before the election.
Net Zero is starting to now run into economic reality with electric cars and deindustrialisation in a way it wasn't in the 2010s.
To go further, we will have to accept real economic damage being done now, with the hope that our global leadership on it galvanises a faster transition to Net Zero worldwide.
Will we?
To put the actual argument to one side, it was interesting to find that even Reform voters aren't that fussed about Net Zero - only 9% picked it as an issue. It's very much an internet meme.
Yet Farage considers this the "next Brexit". That feels like a fumble to me. They should stick to national identity and immigration.
I'd say that Lincs is the one to watch, again. The new Reform Mayor Andrea Jenkins, and also her boss (?) Zia Yusuf, have been leading with green-bashing, and Lincs is the only place where they have both Mayor and control of the Council.
Yes Lincs is reported to now have 12k green jobs and a green economy worth £1.2bn, according to the Local Enterprise Partnership.
If they want to recreate the 1970s or 1950s, that might not be the place to start.
Apparently net zero costs a bomb, right, so we're going to scrap that woke lefty nonsense, right, and go back to the good old days with British power stations burning British coal, right, who wants wind turbines or pylons anyway, right.
I know that "Net Zero" is completely the wrong messaging, but the goal of energy independence is a good one. The environment needs to be tret as a bonus rather than the objective. Green energy is how we regain our place of power, no longer at the whim of Putin or money markets, we not only generate free energy but we can design build and export the technology.
It should be a no-brainer. But "investment" is seen to be "subsidy" and thus "who will pay for it"
Except that it isn't "free" energy and the panels are largely made in China, so probably not exactly reliable and secure, and quite arguable about how "green" the manufacture of said panels is.
The most obvious self-sufficiency that this government seems to enjoy saying "go fuck yourself" to, is food production. Hopefully unlikely that we would suffer a food blockade as we did in WW2, but if we did we would starve to death pretty quickly. Two Tier Kier seems to be keen to make us starve a lot quicker
Autarky positions like this quickly become absurd. You're arguing for a significant reduction in energy consumption and compulsory veganism.
Solar lasts 25 years+ at 80% efficiency - if China cuts off supply, it will have no material impact on our energy generation for decades, by which time we'll be importing them from someone else. With food, most of our critical imports are from European countries (mainly veg). On gas, most of it comes from Norway.
It isn't an "autarcky position" you pillock, it is common sense critique based on historical fact that being unable to produce a substantial part of our own food is not in any way desirable, quite apart from the environmental cost of importing food that can be grown here, and it's juxtaposition with the attitude of the current government with their much less rational claims on "energy security". As for China cutting off supply of panels, this is highly unlikely, but the point remains that the environmental credentials of these products are highly dubious. Goofy pillocks like Miliband arguing that "energy self-sufficiency" is a main reason for his obsession with randomly covering rural areas in solar panels to line the pockets the greedy is disingenuous in the extreme.
We haven't been self-sufficient on food since about 1805.
If you're moving to an enviornmental position, a massive tax on meat consumption (or at least a reduction in subsidies) would meet both objectives. About 40% of our crops are used to feed animals, and it opens up pastoral land for solar farms and reduces methane emissions.
If memory serves we got close during ww2, but not completely and including the republic of Ireland. It involved a lot of people growing their own food. this was forced by the fact that food imports from Europe shrank to zero and from other countries were endangered by U-boat.
Happy to be corrected if wrong
Nowhere near.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feeding_Britain_in_the_Second_World_War ..In 1939, 12 million acres (4.8 million ha) of land in Britain was cultivated and 17 million acres (7.0 million ha) of land was in grassland. By 1944, 18 million acres were being cultivated (7.6 million ha) and eleven million (4.4 million ha) were in grassland. The acreage planted in potatoes had more than doubled and that in wheat increased by two-thirds.[16] The government programs to effect this change involved the "plough-up" program, guaranteed high prices to farmers for their products, and technological advances in farming practices. As much of the new land was marginal in quality, the results did not make Britain self sufficient in food. At the beginning of the war Britain produced 33 percent of the calories its people consumed; by the end of the war Britain produced 44 percent of the calories consumed..
That pie looks delicious! I may make it to celebrate VE day belatedly. Also from this article I learned that the popularity of carrot cake dates back to WW2. This is the sort of fun fact you only get through PB.
Question for the panel. On current form the 2029 election will be mega on the need for tactical voting. Is there a fairly simple formula covering most seats in England (S and W is too hard for me to think about) which guides as to how to vote tactically against Reform, for people who don't have a PhD in psephology?
Eg for starters: In all seats where LDs are first or second, vote LD In all seats where Labour is first vote Labour In all seats where Tory is first and LD not second, just guess at random
Would that be enough?
You are better off waiting until the MRP projection a couple of weeks before the election.
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
My favourite car repair story was the time the manager of the body shop, where I'd taken my car after an accident, rang me to say he was very sorry but my car had been stolen from his premises!
Got it back fairly quickly ...... the thieves jumped a red light in front of a police patrol car ..... and after a further week the car was returned to me with immaculate bodywork.
Four decades ago or so, my dad had a digger working in a car showroom Nottingham way on. The 3CX was brand new, on its first job. Thieves broke into the showroom overnight, ignored all the expensive cars, and stole the JCB.
Apparently they were stolen for order; stripped down and placed into containers for transport abroad. Some stolen ones were eventually located in the USA, where they stood out because the rear jack legs are vertical in the UK, but have to angle out in the US...
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they get fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
I actually think there are some easy solutions for the UK.
Lots of housebuilding. Actually building rather than talking about it. Invest in infrastructure. And reduce cost of doing so by relaxing controls. Invest in green tech and university education to pay our way in the world.
I don't think any of that is actually difficult or risky, it is just electorally unpopular.
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
It depends what you mean by a simple solution.
Sometimes simple solutions work, but you have to ask why they've not been done yet if they're so simple.
Simple solutions that are politically unpopular because vested interests oppose them are perfectly legitimate solutions. The difficulty isn't extra complexity, it is the politicians facing backlash from the vested interest.
Simple solutions that are universally popular and will cause no harm to anyone whatsoever are a bad joke.
Net Zero is starting to now run into economic reality with electric cars and deindustrialisation in a way it wasn't in the 2010s.
To go further, we will have to accept real economic damage being done now, with the hope that our global leadership on it galvanises a faster transition to Net Zero worldwide.
Will we?
To put the actual argument to one side, it was interesting to find that even Reform voters aren't that fussed about Net Zero - only 9% picked it as an issue. It's very much an internet meme.
Yet Farage considers this the "next Brexit". That feels like a fumble to me. They should stick to national identity and immigration.
I'd say that Lincs is the one to watch, again. The new Reform Mayor Andrea Jenkins, and also her boss (?) Zia Yusuf, have been leading with green-bashing, and Lincs is the only place where they have both Mayor and control of the Council.
Yes Lincs is reported to now have 12k green jobs and a green economy worth £1.2bn, according to the Local Enterprise Partnership.
If they want to recreate the 1970s or 1950s, that might not be the place to start.
Apparently net zero costs a bomb, right, so we're going to scrap that woke lefty nonsense, right, and go back to the good old days with British power stations burning British coal, right, who wants wind turbines or pylons anyway, right.
I know that "Net Zero" is completely the wrong messaging, but the goal of energy independence is a good one. The environment needs to be tret as a bonus rather than the objective. Green energy is how we regain our place of power, no longer at the whim of Putin or money markets, we not only generate free energy but we can design build and export the technology.
It should be a no-brainer. But "investment" is seen to be "subsidy" and thus "who will pay for it"
Except that it isn't "free" energy and the panels are largely made in China, so probably not exactly reliable and secure, and quite arguable about how "green" the manufacture of said panels is.
The most obvious self-sufficiency that this government seems to enjoy saying "go fuck yourself" to, is food production. Hopefully unlikely that we would suffer a food blockade as we did in WW2, but if we did we would starve to death pretty quickly. Two Tier Kier seems to be keen to make us starve a lot quicker
Autarky positions like this quickly become absurd. You're arguing for a significant reduction in energy consumption and compulsory veganism.
Solar lasts 25 years+ at 80% efficiency - if China cuts off supply, it will have no material impact on our energy generation for decades, by which time we'll be importing them from someone else. With food, most of our critical imports are from European countries (mainly veg). On gas, most of it comes from Norway.
It isn't an "autarcky position" you pillock, it is common sense critique based on historical fact that being unable to produce a substantial part of our own food is not in any way desirable, quite apart from the environmental cost of importing food that can be grown here, and it's juxtaposition with the attitude of the current government with their much less rational claims on "energy security". As for China cutting off supply of panels, this is highly unlikely, but the point remains that the environmental credentials of these products are highly dubious. Goofy pillocks like Miliband arguing that "energy self-sufficiency" is a main reason for his obsession with randomly covering rural areas in solar panels to line the pockets the greedy is disingenuous in the extreme.
We haven't been self-sufficient on food since about 1805.
If you're moving to an enviornmental position, a massive tax on meat consumption (or at least a reduction in subsidies) would meet both objectives. About 40% of our crops are used to feed animals, and it opens up pastoral land for solar farms and reduces methane emissions.
If memory serves we got close during ww2, but not completely and including the republic of Ireland. It involved a lot of people growing their own food. this was forced by the fact that food imports from Europe shrank to zero and from other countries were endangered by U-boat.
Happy to be corrected if wrong
Nowhere near.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feeding_Britain_in_the_Second_World_War ..In 1939, 12 million acres (4.8 million ha) of land in Britain was cultivated and 17 million acres (7.0 million ha) of land was in grassland. By 1944, 18 million acres were being cultivated (7.6 million ha) and eleven million (4.4 million ha) were in grassland. The acreage planted in potatoes had more than doubled and that in wheat increased by two-thirds.[16] The government programs to effect this change involved the "plough-up" program, guaranteed high prices to farmers for their products, and technological advances in farming practices. As much of the new land was marginal in quality, the results did not make Britain self sufficient in food. At the beginning of the war Britain produced 33 percent of the calories its people consumed; by the end of the war Britain produced 44 percent of the calories consumed..
That pie looks delicious! I may make it to celebrate VE day belatedly. Also from this article I learned that the popularity of carrot cake dates back to WW2. This is the sort of fun fact you only get through PB.
I think we've done the pie before.
It doesn't appeal to me in the slightest (as with the majority of the WWII public), but I do eat a stir fry with onion, carrot, parsnip and tofu, when on my blood pressure diet, which I suppose isn't wildly dissimilar, excepting the pastry.
(Double fermented soy sauce and culinary yeast flakes are your low salt umami friends.)
Essentially Donald is desperate for a deal - any deal - and we’ve taken advantage of that to avoid the worst of his so-called liberation tariffs.
Kemi just looks like an opportunistic idiot. She’s simply not up to it, as predicted by anyone conscious of her lack of achievements in Cabinet.
The Tories have nothing to offer. The only reason I can think of to vote for them might be that they are not Reforn. In a hypothetical Tory/Reform election, I would hold my nose and vote Tory.
The deal is status is fiddling around plus accepting higher tariffs than previously existed in the US while not raising any of ours.
Not really something to crow about. The only bright spot is reducing the tariff increases in several key U.K. export areas.
It is a nonentity, Starmer licked some BUTT and Trump can trumpet that it is a victory as they gain 5 bucks or so.
CHINA SHOULD OPEN UP ITS MARKET TO USA — WOULD BE SO GOOD FOR THEM!!! CLOSED MARKETS DON'T WORK ANYMORE!!!
Getting desperate ?
Was it on here that I read that Chinese container ships need to start heading towards US ports this weekend or else the US economy goes into meltdown?
Is it wrong to hope there is a bit of a meltdown in the US?
Not enough to cause a global depression, but just enough to cause the sycophants in Congress to lose the midterms.
It'll all be someone else's fault. Biden's, perhaps. Somehow.
I think the American (and, sadly, our) public's capacity to blame others for our own problems is near infinite.
Hence the rise of Reform with their blame the immigrants schtick. A lot of Brits blame strangers for their own weaknesses, instead of pulling themselves together and working it out for themselves.
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they get fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
I actually think there are some easy solutions for the UK.
Lots of housebuilding. Actually building rather than talking about it. Invest in infrastructure. And reduce cost of doing so by relaxing controls. Invest in green tech and university education to pay our way in the world.
I don't think any of that is actually difficult or risky, it is just electorally unpopular.
I think much of that might have proven to be popular with the majority of the electorate, if the government had gone for it full throttle from the beginning of their term.
As it is, they've possibly left it too late and are going too slowly to get useful results.
I’ll still be shopping at Tesco, going swimming sometimes, nibbling nuts in the afternoon, drinking red wine from a sherry glass, I’ll still be doing these same things, but I’ll be doing them in a world that has changed.
This is faintly tragic, and also ever so slightly provincial, and non-U. But, then again, you are a retired accountant.
I agree the post WWII world is now over. VE Day 80 didn't have the spark it should, and it's just moving into history now.
That was my point - and more specifically 'feeling' it as opposed to understanding it in the abstract.
Always a point to my contributions. I'm never just prattling away for the sake of it.
I now have a weird image in my head of a not terribly old, but fading fast, retired accountant, with his slippers on, and on a reclining SCS leather armchair, sipping some cheap red plonk out of a sherry glass, whilst watching re-runs of Poirot and a Stennah Stairlift brochure on his lap.
Lovely image, nothing weird there, but the person you're picturing is now in a world shorn of the old certainties. This is the point.
CHINA SHOULD OPEN UP ITS MARKET TO USA — WOULD BE SO GOOD FOR THEM!!! CLOSED MARKETS DON'T WORK ANYMORE!!!
Perhaps you should have a word with the guy who put 150% tariffs on Chinese goods? You know, the deal maker who has reduced freight into the US by 35% this week? The fellow who will empty the shelves in the stores?
The fellow building a Soviet style Iron curtain around his own country, telling other countries don’t be so daft to do the same. Yes - we have found the ultimate definition of madness.
Let’s be honest, there is an element of Soviet Era Eastern Bloc Trump is turning the USA into. Where Reagan said pull down this wall, Trump is putting one up around America, where they try to become self sufficient in a way is impossible to be in a globalised world. Even if they did build every single bit of metal, widget, circuit board of their products, they would be too pricey for both US consumers and export markets. The Tarrifs either result in US not getting the product, or paying extra for it.
Why don’t EU, China, Starmer and Canada explain this to America, rather than rub hands with glee at chance to rip off all American hard working people and businesses? They’ve been in the Oval Office on live reality TV, why didn’t they explain it there - Starmer and Carney are bastards to keep quiet and look to exploit those MAGA cult people and other hard working Americans. 😕
I've been following this for some time, and it is certainly interesting.
However it is fairly substantially different from a 'usual' tram line. This initial section is really short - 200 metres - and so costs may increase as they try other real-world locations. However IIRC they did build a much longer test line on an old railway trackbed - although that is much easier, installation-wise. Also, the rail car is not standards-compliant.
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they get fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
I actually think there are some easy solutions for the UK.
Lots of housebuilding. Actually building rather than talking about it. Invest in infrastructure. And reduce cost of doing so by relaxing controls. Invest in green tech and university education to pay our way in the world.
I don't think any of that is actually difficult or risky, it is just electorally unpopular.
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they get fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
I actually think there are some easy solutions for the UK.
Lots of housebuilding. Actually building rather than talking about it. Invest in infrastructure. And reduce cost of doing so by relaxing controls. Invest in green tech and university education to pay our way in the world.
I don't think any of that is actually difficult or risky, it is just electorally unpopular.
Is it unpopular? Or is just too difficult for our current crop of SPADstic politicians to engage the voters and bring them along?
Speaking of journalistic failures: I seem to recall the BBC doing an internal study of anti-Semitism some years ago. Was that ever released? If so, where is it?
(Full disclosure: When I had a site of my own, I saw enough anti-Americanism at the BBC that I began to describe it as "routine".)
My favourite car repair story was the time the manager of the body shop, where I'd taken my car after an accident, rang me to say he was very sorry but my car had been stolen from his premises!
Got it back fairly quickly ...... the thieves jumped a red light in front of a police patrol car ..... and after a further week the car was returned to me with immaculate bodywork.
Four decades ago or so, my dad had a digger working in a car showroom Nottingham way on. The 3CX was brand new, on its first job. Thieves broke into the showroom overnight, ignored all the expensive cars, and stole the JCB.
Apparently they were stolen for order; stripped down and placed into containers for transport abroad. Some stolen ones were eventually located in the USA, where they stood out because the rear jack legs are vertical in the UK, but have to angle out in the US...
A friend of mine who worked for JCB finance/leasing told me that all their leased machines are tracked. Inevitably when one is stolen, the tracker goes dark, only to pop up again three or four months later in the 3rd world or Russia where the possibility of getting it back is approximately zero.
These days they have remote kill switches, but I don't think that hinders the theves and their buyers for very long.
The French are such amateurs, not a single duck house in sight.
French MPs suspended for putting drugs and dating app on expenses
Andy Kerbrat allegedly spent €25,000 on drugs while Christine Engrand, who joined a dating site for the over-fifties, says her new assistant is ‘only a friend’
I have a tiny freezer compartment in a small fridge
So all it contains is:
3 plastic trays for making enormous ice cubes 20 sticks of lemongrass (freezes brilliantly) A large packet of deep fried tofu puffs (ditto) Two plastic sleeves for cooling wine
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they get fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
I actually think there are some easy solutions for the UK.
Lots of housebuilding. Actually building rather than talking about it. Invest in infrastructure. And reduce cost of doing so by relaxing controls. Invest in green tech and university education to pay our way in the world.
I don't think any of that is actually difficult or risky, it is just electorally unpopular.
Is it unpopular? Or is just too difficult for our current crop of SPADstic politicians to engage the voters and bring them along?
Housebuilding is quantum in popularity I suppose. Popular nationally in theory, unpopular locally in practice.
Investment generally is kind of unpopular as we have lost confidence as a nation, especially in governments, so investment is seen as spaffing hard earned against the wall.
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they get fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
I actually think there are some easy solutions for the UK.
Lots of housebuilding. Actually building rather than talking about it. Invest in infrastructure. And reduce cost of doing so by relaxing controls. Invest in green tech and university education to pay our way in the world.
I don't think any of that is actually difficult or risky, it is just electorally unpopular.
I get your point. I like those headlines.
I just think to do those things there is an awful lot of heavy lifting below the headlines.
Incentives need to be correct, the related laws, regulations and guidance need changing. If the state needs to borrow to build how much would that cost? If you are not funding through borrowing what tax / spending changes do you make to achieve it? Do we have the necessary human and capital resources to do those things? I could go on and on.
Truth is there is a lot of complexity to these things. Headlines and charisma only get you so far - and there is a lot to be said for simple objectives to drive delivery. But, someone has still got to do the spade work and planning to make the headline a reality.
Net Zero is starting to now run into economic reality with electric cars and deindustrialisation in a way it wasn't in the 2010s.
To go further, we will have to accept real economic damage being done now, with the hope that our global leadership on it galvanises a faster transition to Net Zero worldwide.
Will we?
To put the actual argument to one side, it was interesting to find that even Reform voters aren't that fussed about Net Zero - only 9% picked it as an issue. It's very much an internet meme.
Yet Farage considers this the "next Brexit". That feels like a fumble to me. They should stick to national identity and immigration.
I'd say that Lincs is the one to watch, again. The new Reform Mayor Andrea Jenkins, and also her boss (?) Zia Yusuf, have been leading with green-bashing, and Lincs is the only place where they have both Mayor and control of the Council.
Yes Lincs is reported to now have 12k green jobs and a green economy worth £1.2bn, according to the Local Enterprise Partnership.
If they want to recreate the 1970s or 1950s, that might not be the place to start.
Apparently net zero costs a bomb, right, so we're going to scrap that woke lefty nonsense, right, and go back to the good old days with British power stations burning British coal, right, who wants wind turbines or pylons anyway, right.
I know that "Net Zero" is completely the wrong messaging, but the goal of energy independence is a good one. The environment needs to be tret as a bonus rather than the objective. Green energy is how we regain our place of power, no longer at the whim of Putin or money markets, we not only generate free energy but we can design build and export the technology.
It should be a no-brainer. But "investment" is seen to be "subsidy" and thus "who will pay for it"
Except that it isn't "free" energy and the panels are largely made in China, so probably not exactly reliable and secure, and quite arguable about how "green" the manufacture of said panels is.
The most obvious self-sufficiency that this government seems to enjoy saying "go fuck yourself" to, is food production. Hopefully unlikely that we would suffer a food blockade as we did in WW2, but if we did we would starve to death pretty quickly. Two Tier Kier seems to be keen to make us starve a lot quicker
What has crippled food production and driven price inflation is the cost of energy - and the spikes are all Russian supply related and not net zero...
This is correct, in theory, but won't work as a matter of practical politics, particularly given Starmer's poor communication skills.
I predict that Farage will paint Net Zero as a "Carbon Tax" that is destroying the UK economy, and it will be very effective politically.
The smart move is to ditch "Net Zero" as a brand and an aim. Its about energy freedom. For all that Farage can brand it a "Carbon Tax" his challenge is what the alternative is. Even if we said fuck the environment we don't have domestic coal as an option and gas is less plentiful than it once was - and is sold on the international market where prices are ramped based on the countries in desperate need.
Nuclear? Built by whom? At what cost? Coming on stream when?
We need a blend of all of these (except coal), but wind and solar will be huge parts of this whether Nigel likes it or not - we just don't have other viable options.
CHINA SHOULD OPEN UP ITS MARKET TO USA — WOULD BE SO GOOD FOR THEM!!! CLOSED MARKETS DON'T WORK ANYMORE!!!
Getting desperate ?
Was it on here that I read that Chinese container ships need to start heading towards US ports this weekend or else the US economy goes into meltdown?
Is it wrong to hope there is a bit of a meltdown in the US?
Not enough to cause a global depression, but just enough to cause the sycophants in Congress to lose the midterms.
It needs to be bad enough that the voters are in a hornery mood not just in two years, but in four as well. America got collective amnesia about Trump before. Hence we are where we are. The world does not need J D Vance replacing Trump.
(It also needs the Democrats to get their shit together on a broadly popular manifesto. People voting for you is a damn site more reliable a route to power than hoping they vote against the other guy.)
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they get fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
I actually think there are some easy solutions for the UK.
Lots of housebuilding. Actually building rather than talking about it. Invest in infrastructure. And reduce cost of doing so by relaxing controls. Invest in green tech and university education to pay our way in the world.
I don't think any of that is actually difficult or risky, it is just electorally unpopular.
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they get fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
I actually think there are some easy solutions for the UK.
Lots of housebuilding. Actually building rather than talking about it. Invest in infrastructure. And reduce cost of doing so by relaxing controls. Invest in green tech and university education to pay our way in the world.
I don't think any of that is actually difficult or risky, it is just electorally unpopular.
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they get fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
I actually think there are some easy solutions for the UK.
Lots of housebuilding. Actually building rather than talking about it. Invest in infrastructure. And reduce cost of doing so by relaxing controls. Invest in green tech and university education to pay our way in the world.
I don't think any of that is actually difficult or risky, it is just electorally unpopular.
Is it unpopular? Or is just too difficult for our current crop of SPADstic politicians to engage the voters and bring them along?
It's promoted nationally then exploited for electoral advantage locally by the Nimby party(s), IME this leads to panic amongst many local party activists who demand that the Nimbies are copied rather than making the case for the policies.
The French are such amateurs, not a single duck house in sight.
French MPs suspended for putting drugs and dating app on expenses
Andy Kerbrat allegedly spent €25,000 on drugs while Christine Engrand, who joined a dating site for the over-fifties, says her new assistant is ‘only a friend’
I have a tiny freezer compartment in a small fridge
So all it contains is:
3 plastic trays for making enormous ice cubes 20 sticks of lemongrass (freezes brilliantly) A large packet of deep fried tofu puffs (ditto) Two plastic sleeves for cooling wine
Culinary matters have improved around here since I bought one of these and hid it behind a chair in the living room:
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they get fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
I actually think there are some easy solutions for the UK.
Lots of housebuilding. Actually building rather than talking about it. Invest in infrastructure. And reduce cost of doing so by relaxing controls. Invest in green tech and university education to pay our way in the world.
I don't think any of that is actually difficult or risky, it is just electorally unpopular.
The TLDR is more housing, so it's cheaper more green energy, so it's cheaper more good non-graduate jobs, by infrastructure investment
This is both sensible and (broadly, with caveats) what the government is seeking to do. Whether it works sufficiently by 2028/9 remains to be seen.
Plenty of good non-graduate (and graduate) jobs in net zero, retro-fit of existing housing, installation, operation and maintenance of solar warms, wind turbines, charging stations and power lines.
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they get fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
I actually think there are some easy solutions for the UK.
Lots of housebuilding. Actually building rather than talking about it. Invest in infrastructure. And reduce cost of doing so by relaxing controls. Invest in green tech and university education to pay our way in the world.
I don't think any of that is actually difficult or risky, it is just electorally unpopular.
The TLDR is more housing, so it's cheaper more green energy, so it's cheaper more good non-graduate jobs, by infrastructure investment
This is both sensible and (broadly, with caveats) what the government is seeking to do. Whether it works sufficiently by 2028/9 remains to be seen.
What is the Government doing to do it though?
Saying we should build houses is one thing. Reforming planning so houses can be cut with less red tape is another.
I see a lot of the former, not much of the latter.
To quote a late philosopher, Mr E. Presley, we need a little less conversation and a little more action please.
They're trying. Just today Sadiq Khan announced building on the greenbelt. But wish it was going faster. We have far too many consultations which ordinary people don't have time to contribute to any way but hold everything up...
Dan Hodges agrees with Kemi. Six weeks ago no tariffs on UK trade to USA, today 10%
Bit harsh to blame Starmer for damage done by the leader of another country.
Yes, Nigel and Kemi should be taking this up with their respective best buddies Donald and JD. I'm no Sir Keir super fan, but he can only deal with the situations others have bequeathed him.
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they get fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
I actually think there are some easy solutions for the UK.
Lots of housebuilding. Actually building rather than talking about it. Invest in infrastructure. And reduce cost of doing so by relaxing controls. Invest in green tech and university education to pay our way in the world.
I don't think any of that is actually difficult or risky, it is just electorally unpopular.
The TLDR is more housing, so it's cheaper more green energy, so it's cheaper more good non-graduate jobs, by infrastructure investment
This is both sensible and (broadly, with caveats) what the government is seeking to do. Whether it works sufficiently by 2028/9 remains to be seen.
What is the Government doing to do it though?
Saying we should build houses is one thing. Reforming planning so houses can be cut with less red tape is another.
I see a lot of the former, not much of the latter.
To quote a late philosopher, Mr E. Presley, we need a little less conversation and a little more action please.
They're trying. Just today Sadiq Khan announced building on the greenbelt. But wish it was going faster. We have far too many consultations which ordinary people don't have time to contribute to any way but hold everything up...
Announced one scheme? That doesn't scratch the surface of what is needed.
Or announced structural reform and a change in the law? That is what is needed.
They know what they need to do, but they're not doing it.
Hmmm. Some Usonian commentators on the Not-a-Trade-Deal seem to be getting Rolls-Royce Motor Cars, with which Mr Chump is obsessed, with Rolls-Royce Holdings.
And not noticing that in their desire for a $5bn beef market in the UK, there's only an additional 13,000 tonne quota in each direction.
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
It depends what you mean by a simple solution.
Sometimes simple solutions work, but you have to ask why they've not been done yet if they're so simple.
Simple solutions that are politically unpopular because vested interests oppose them are perfectly legitimate solutions. The difficulty isn't extra complexity, it is the politicians facing backlash from the vested interest.
Simple solutions that are universally popular and will cause no harm to anyone whatsoever are a bad joke.
This.
E.G. There are a number of "simple solutions" to the small boats problem, which would definitely "work".
We could task the Navy with sinking them all. After the first few hundred people had drowned, I suspect that demand for small boat crossings would drop significantly. Even if it didn't, arrivals by small boats would be pretty close to zero.
Or alternatively, we could establish a migration hub in Calais. Turn up there, we'll put you on a ferry and give you indefinite leave to remain, no questions asked.
Both of these would "solve" the small boat issue - small boat arrivals would very quickly drop to zero. Neither are good or politically acceptable solutions.
But, this said, the reason that Farage is likely to win the next election is simple. He has proposals in some areas which will work, and which everyone knows will work, and which are politically acceptable to half the country's population, but which, crucially, are beyond the pale for our current political class.
Take immigration. He says - and a large chunk of the country thinks - that the asylum system is being abused by economic migrants (and their lawyers) taking the p***. The solution is pretty easy and simple - abolish the current system, come up with a new one that's much more restrictive, deport all the p*** takers, problem solved.
That's politically unacceptable if you're a lefty human rights lawyer, so Starmer can't steal it. It's probably not politically unacceptable if you're a heartless Tory, but after the hopeless performance of the last Tory government, no-one thinks they'll do it,even if they say they will.
Fararge isn't a magician or a hypnotist. He doesn't need to be. All he needs is to do is give the public what they've consistently voted for at every opportunity - lower immigration - and he'll be the most popular prime minister in a very long time.
Shame that's behind a paywall. As far as I'm concerned, Gen X has had the best of it. Brought up in relative luxury compared with boomers and able to get on the property ladder before it went bonkers.
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
It depends what you mean by a simple solution.
Sometimes simple solutions work, but you have to ask why they've not been done yet if they're so simple.
Simple solutions that are politically unpopular because vested interests oppose them are perfectly legitimate solutions. The difficulty isn't extra complexity, it is the politicians facing backlash from the vested interest.
Simple solutions that are universally popular and will cause no harm to anyone whatsoever are a bad joke.
This.
E.G. There are a number of "simple solutions" to the small boats problem, which would definitely "work".
We could task the Navy with sinking them all. After the first few hundred people had drowned, I suspect that demand for small boat crossings would drop significantly. Even if it didn't, arrivals by small boats would be pretty close to zero.
Or alternatively, we could establish a migration hub in Calais. Turn up there, we'll put you on a ferry and give you indefinite leave to remain, no questions asked.
Both of these would "solve" the small boat issue - small boat arrivals would very quickly drop to zero. Neither are good or politically acceptable solutions.
But, this said, the reason that Farage is likely to win the next election is simple. He has proposals in some areas which will work, and which everyone knows will work, and which are politically acceptable to half the country's population, but which, crucially, are beyond the pale for our current political class.
Take immigration. He says - and a large chunk of the country thinks - that the asylum system is being abused by economic migrants (and their lawyers) taking the p***. The solution is pretty easy and simple - abolish the current system, come up with a new one that's much more restrictive, deport all the p*** takers, problem solved.
That's politically unacceptable if you're a lefty human rights lawyer, so Starmer can't steal it. It's probably not politically unacceptable if you're a heartless Tory, but after the hopeless performance of the last Tory government, no-one thinks they'll do it,even if they say they will.
Fararge isn't a magician or a hypnotist. He doesn't need to be. All he needs is to do is give the public what they've consistently voted for at every opportunity - lower immigration - and he'll be the most popular prime minister in a very long time.
Asylum seekers are a small proportion of immigration. Those winning asylum with no real claim but good lawyers is a small proportion of those given asylum. Sure, you could fiddle around with the asylum system and reduce the proportion granted asylum a bit, but this would have a negligible impact on total immigration. So, no, that’s not an example of a Farage proposal that would work. It’s fantasy politics.
Does the centre-left have any explanations for why Ref is doing so well atm, (other than they're a bunch of thickos, bigots, etc)?
Its not a great mystery is it?
Conservatives are not just rubbish but discredited and out of ideas. Labour are a fraction better but also out of both ideas and courage. Workers are unhappy their share of the economy goes to the retired. The retired are unhappy with immigration and the pace of social change.
Not sure what it has to do with the centre left, anymore than the far left, centre right, centre or far right.
That accords with my view on Reform’s rise (also note the Farage phenomenon - although i would argue he puts off as many as he pleases).
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
It depends what you mean by a simple solution.
Sometimes simple solutions work, but you have to ask why they've not been done yet if they're so simple.
Simple solutions that are politically unpopular because vested interests oppose them are perfectly legitimate solutions. The difficulty isn't extra complexity, it is the politicians facing backlash from the vested interest.
Simple solutions that are universally popular and will cause no harm to anyone whatsoever are a bad joke.
This.
E.G. There are a number of "simple solutions" to the small boats problem, which would definitely "work".
We could task the Navy with sinking them all. After the first few hundred people had drowned, I suspect that demand for small boat crossings would drop significantly. Even if it didn't, arrivals by small boats would be pretty close to zero.
Or alternatively, we could establish a migration hub in Calais. Turn up there, we'll put you on a ferry and give you indefinite leave to remain, no questions asked.
Both of these would "solve" the small boat issue - small boat arrivals would very quickly drop to zero. Neither are good or politically acceptable solutions.
But, this said, the reason that Farage is likely to win the next election is simple. He has proposals in some areas which will work, and which everyone knows will work, and which are politically acceptable to half the country's population, but which, crucially, are beyond the pale for our current political class.
Take immigration. He says - and a large chunk of the country thinks - that the asylum system is being abused by economic migrants (and their lawyers) taking the p***. The solution is pretty easy and simple - abolish the current system, come up with a new one that's much more restrictive, deport all the p*** takers, problem solved.
That's politically unacceptable if you're a lefty human rights lawyer, so Starmer can't steal it. It's probably not politically unacceptable if you're a heartless Tory, but after the hopeless performance of the last Tory government, no-one thinks they'll do it,even if they say they will.
Fararge isn't a magician or a hypnotist. He doesn't need to be. All he needs is to do is give the public what they've consistently voted for at every opportunity - lower immigration - and he'll be the most popular prime minister in a very long time.
My suggestion is to go after the criminals and shysters profiting off immigrants. Also the black market for labour.
As part of it, remove the "protection" that employers have by hiring people as "independent contractors"
All of that should sell well to a progressive base.
Hmmm. Some Usonian commentators on the Not-a-Trade-Deal seem to be getting Rolls-Royce Motor Cars, with which Mr Chump is obsessed, with Rolls-Royce Holdings.
And not noticing that in their desire for a $5bn beef market in the UK, there's only an additional 13,000 tonne quota in each direction.
The question - from me pastoral farmer - to UK government, if you say no watering down on food standards on imported meats, how is this policed?
The beef produced using same rules and standards in UK? How’s that proved? “Hey. These chickens not washed in Chlorine were they? “No of course not. “Oh. Soz. Okay then.”
Truth is, when you eat chlorinated food you wouldn’t notice a difference. When you buy salad in bags from supermarkets, you know that’s been chlorine washed same as US chickens, don’t you? EU didn’t ban that practice.
Nor is the chlorine harmful. When we were in EU it was banned to use chlorine for poultry, and (US would say conveniently) imports banned from countries who do it. But Chlorine washed salad isn’t banned, because EU didn’t ban because chlorine washing isn’t safe, they banned it because it can be used to cover up other production values not being followed properly, meaning no fair playing field in doing right thing by covering up when you skipped corners to save money. The banning of US chicken is food standards proving political position, nothing to do with taste, or science saying chlorine washing is very bad.
In Britain Gen Xers are less likely than members of any other age group to know the generation to which they belong.
Almost as though that generation had very little to worry about.
I would have thought that's a huge bonus. I find this obsession with generation names to be utterly ghastly. Who cares? Do things your own way, not based on what so-called generation you belong to.
Question for the panel. On current form the 2029 election will be mega on the need for tactical voting. Is there a fairly simple formula covering most seats in England (S and W is too hard for me to think about) which guides as to how to vote tactically against Reform, for people who don't have a PhD in psephology?
Eg for starters: In all seats where LDs are first or second, vote LD In all seats where Labour is first vote Labour In all seats where Tory is first and LD not second, just guess at random
Would that be enough?
You are better off waiting until the MRP projection a couple of weeks before the election.
At this stage, I think I'd expect something like the Canadian result at the next election. Voters will converge on the main left wing party (probably Labour) and the main right wing party (probably Reform). At this point, I'd expect Labour to finish narrowly ahead.
Hmmm. To be ultra pedantic, he has resigned as National Statistician: a different and far higher position. I assume he was head of the ONS ex officio.
If I have time and PB really annoys me, I will go over the structure of the UK statistical system, which incorporates the UK Statistics Authority and its Board, the Office for Statistics Regulation, the Office for National Statistics, and the Government Statistical Service.
Hmmm. To be ultra pedantic, he has resigned as National Statistician: a different and far higher position. I assume he was head of the ONS ex officio.
If I have time and PB really annoys me, I will go over the structure of the UK statistical system, which incorporates the UK Statistics Authority and its Board, the Office for Statistics Regulation, the Office for National Statistics, and the Government Statistical Service.
Hmmm. Some Usonian commentators on the Not-a-Trade-Deal seem to be getting Rolls-Royce Motor Cars, with which Mr Chump is obsessed, with Rolls-Royce Holdings.
And not noticing that in their desire for a $5bn beef market in the UK, there's only an additional 13,000 tonne quota in each direction.
Though worth pointing out that, according to the representative from the US beef exporters organisation last night, 13,000 tonnes is equal to the entire yearly US beef export to the EU.
Hmmm. Some Usonian commentators on the Not-a-Trade-Deal seem to be getting Rolls-Royce Motor Cars, with which Mr Chump is obsessed, with Rolls-Royce Holdings.
And not noticing that in their desire for a $5bn beef market in the UK, there's only an additional 13,000 tonne quota in each direction.
The question - from me pastoral farmer - to UK government, if you say no watering down on food standards on imported meats, how is this policed?
The beef produced using same rules and standards in UK? How’s that proved? “Hey. These chickens not washed in Chlorine were they? “No of course not. “Oh. Soz. Okay then.”
Truth is, when you eat chlorinated food you wouldn’t notice a difference. When you buy salad in bags from supermarkets, you know that’s been chlorine washed same as US chickens, don’t you? EU didn’t ban that practice.
Nor is the chlorine harmful. When we were in EU it was banned to use chlorine for poultry, and (US would say conveniently) imports banned from countries who do it. But Chlorine washed salad isn’t banned, because EU didn’t ban because chlorine washing isn’t safe, they banned it because it can be used to cover up other production values not being followed properly, meaning no fair playing field in doing right thing by covering up when you skipped corners to save money. The banning of US chicken is food standards proving political position, nothing to do with taste, or science saying chlorine washing is very bad.
In the same way as it is policed by the EU - who have the same rules we have. There are specialist beef producers in the US who demand a premium price for non hormone treated beef and whose whole business model is based on that condition.
Hmmm. To be ultra pedantic, he has resigned as National Statistician: a different and far higher position. I assume he was head of the ONS ex officio.
If I have time and PB really annoys me, I will go over the structure of the UK statistical system, which incorporates the UK Statistics Authority and its Board, the Office for Statistics Regulation, the Office for National Statistics, and the Government Statistical Service.
Hmmm. Some Usonian commentators on the Not-a-Trade-Deal seem to be getting Rolls-Royce Motor Cars, with which Mr Chump is obsessed, with Rolls-Royce Holdings.
And not noticing that in their desire for a $5bn beef market in the UK, there's only an additional 13,000 tonne quota in each direction.
Though worth pointing out that, according to the representative from the US beef exporters organisation last night, 13,000 tonnes is equal to the entire yearly US beef export to the EU.
It is.
But 13,000 tons of beef is worth around £26 million at £2000 per tonne.
It's an increase, but still a rounding error in the beef industry.
And even with that, they only fill half of the existing US beef imports to EU quota they have available - which is within a category called "High Quality Beef".
Hmmm. To be ultra pedantic, he has resigned as National Statistician: a different and far higher position. I assume he was head of the ONS ex officio.
If I have time and PB really annoys me, I will go over the structure of the UK statistical system, which incorporates the UK Statistics Authority and its Board, the Office for Statistics Regulation, the Office for National Statistics, and the Government Statistical Service.
Looks like a paper candidate unexpectedly being elected. This always happens after big swings to a party, so I have a modicum of sympathy for him compared to the other two (a Rupertite and someone who wasn't allowed to stand in the first place).
It was a shame he beat perhaps the only decent Tory on Nottinghamshire CC - Keith Girling. A man for whome the phrase 'public servant' in its true sense was probably created.
The question is what happens now: will the competent Tory run again, and be defeated again by a no-name candidate?
No idea. I am not sure Keith will be that interested in rerunning. Much of what he does with pensioners and veterans is now independent of anything to do with the council so he might feel his time is better spent on that rather than the politics again.
Hmmm. To be ultra pedantic, he has resigned as National Statistician: a different and far higher position. I assume he was head of the ONS ex officio.
If I have time and PB really annoys me, I will go over the structure of the UK statistical system, which incorporates the UK Statistics Authority and its Board, the Office for Statistics Regulation, the Office for National Statistics, and the Government Statistical Service.
Hmmm. To be ultra pedantic, he has resigned as National Statistician: a different and far higher position. I assume he was head of the ONS ex officio.
If I have time and PB really annoys me, I will go over the structure of the UK statistical system, which incorporates the UK Statistics Authority and its Board, the Office for Statistics Regulation, the Office for National Statistics, and the Government Statistical Service.
Net Zero is starting to now run into economic reality with electric cars and deindustrialisation in a way it wasn't in the 2010s.
To go further, we will have to accept real economic damage being done now, with the hope that our global leadership on it galvanises a faster transition to Net Zero worldwide.
Will we?
To put the actual argument to one side, it was interesting to find that even Reform voters aren't that fussed about Net Zero - only 9% picked it as an issue. It's very much an internet meme.
Yet Farage considers this the "next Brexit". That feels like a fumble to me. They should stick to national identity and immigration.
I'd say that Lincs is the one to watch, again. The new Reform Mayor Andrea Jenkins, and also her boss (?) Zia Yusuf, have been leading with green-bashing, and Lincs is the only place where they have both Mayor and control of the Council.
Yes Lincs is reported to now have 12k green jobs and a green economy worth £1.2bn, according to the Local Enterprise Partnership.
If they want to recreate the 1970s or 1950s, that might not be the place to start.
Apparently net zero costs a bomb, right, so we're going to scrap that woke lefty nonsense, right, and go back to the good old days with British power stations burning British coal, right, who wants wind turbines or pylons anyway, right.
I know that "Net Zero" is completely the wrong messaging, but the goal of energy independence is a good one. The environment needs to be tret as a bonus rather than the objective. Green energy is how we regain our place of power, no longer at the whim of Putin or money markets, we not only generate free energy but we can design build and export the technology.
It should be a no-brainer. But "investment" is seen to be "subsidy" and thus "who will pay for it"
Except that it isn't "free" energy and the panels are largely made in China, so probably not exactly reliable and secure, and quite arguable about how "green" the manufacture of said panels is.
The most obvious self-sufficiency that this government seems to enjoy saying "go fuck yourself" to, is food production. Hopefully unlikely that we would suffer a food blockade as we did in WW2, but if we did we would starve to death pretty quickly. Two Tier Kier seems to be keen to make us starve a lot quicker
Autarky positions like this quickly become absurd. You're arguing for a significant reduction in energy consumption and compulsory veganism.
Solar lasts 25 years+ at 80% efficiency - if China cuts off supply, it will have no material impact on our energy generation for decades, by which time we'll be importing them from someone else. With food, most of our critical imports are from European countries (mainly veg). On gas, most of it comes from Norway.
It isn't an "autarcky position" you pillock, it is common sense critique based on historical fact that being unable to produce a substantial part of our own food is not in any way desirable, quite apart from the environmental cost of importing food that can be grown here, and it's juxtaposition with the attitude of the current government with their much less rational claims on "energy security". As for China cutting off supply of panels, this is highly unlikely, but the point remains that the environmental credentials of these products are highly dubious. Goofy pillocks like Miliband arguing that "energy self-sufficiency" is a main reason for his obsession with randomly covering rural areas in solar panels to line the pockets the greedy is disingenuous in the extreme.
We haven't been self-sufficient on food since about 1805.
If you're moving to an enviornmental position, a massive tax on meat consumption (or at least a reduction in subsidies) would meet both objectives. About 40% of our crops are used to feed animals, and it opens up pastoral land for solar farms and reduces methane emissions.
If memory serves we got close during ww2, but not completely and including the republic of Ireland. It involved a lot of people growing their own food. this was forced by the fact that food imports from Europe shrank to zero and from other countries were endangered by U-boat.
Happy to be corrected if wrong
Nowhere near.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feeding_Britain_in_the_Second_World_War ..In 1939, 12 million acres (4.8 million ha) of land in Britain was cultivated and 17 million acres (7.0 million ha) of land was in grassland. By 1944, 18 million acres were being cultivated (7.6 million ha) and eleven million (4.4 million ha) were in grassland. The acreage planted in potatoes had more than doubled and that in wheat increased by two-thirds.[16] The government programs to effect this change involved the "plough-up" program, guaranteed high prices to farmers for their products, and technological advances in farming practices. As much of the new land was marginal in quality, the results did not make Britain self sufficient in food. At the beginning of the war Britain produced 33 percent of the calories its people consumed; by the end of the war Britain produced 44 percent of the calories consumed..
Comments
"He's eating the dogs.."
The agents focused on gathering intelligence in the Zakarpattia region—assessing military defenses, identifying weaknesses in air and ground security, and analyzing local public sentiment toward a possible Hungarian military presence.
Two operatives have been detained. According to the investigation, both were managed by a Hungarian military intelligence officer whose identity has already been confirmed by the SBU...
https://x.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1920735965212991596
https://ourworldindata.org/agricultural-land-by-global-diets.
Always a point to my contributions. I'm never just prattling away for the sake of it.
So for all those calling the next election as a Reform win they’ll be under a lot more scrutiny next time .
Strong from Vance.
They are offering attractive yet simplistic and unworkable solutions at a time of economic difficulty.
I predict that Farage will paint Net Zero as a "Carbon Tax" that is destroying the UK economy, and it will be very effective politically.
https://x.com/trump_repost/status/1920802887535652998
80% Tariff on China seems right! Up to Scott B.
Reform's plus points are several. Charismatic leader, never in power so can lie easily, they attract people who think problems are easily overcome, the failure of other parties on migration and other areas.
However, to win they have to overcome gigantic obstacles. They haven't much talent, they must move to the social democrat centre where their voters are, and the anti-Reform alliance of voters should be able to manage a tactical voting bloc in enough seats.
And the scrutiny they will get over policy will be immense. Where are they on the tricky bits? Debt, borrowing, deficit, tax, spend, welfare for 'me' as opposed to the wrong sort, climate change?
It will be interesting.
https://x.com/trump_repost/status/1920801747037286617
CHINA SHOULD OPEN UP ITS MARKET TO USA — WOULD BE SO GOOD FOR THEM!!! CLOSED MARKETS DON'T WORK ANYMORE!!!
Eg for starters:
In all seats where LDs are first or second, vote LD
In all seats where Labour is first vote Labour
In all seats where Tory is first and LD not second, just guess at random
Would that be enough?
Also from this article I learned that the popularity of carrot cake dates back to WW2. This is the sort of fun fact you only get through PB.
To a certain extent this has been the case since Brexit. A lot of people feel left behind or out of time. Farage (and indeed Johnson before him) suggest that there are simple answers to these questions and folk believe them. Is it populism? Probably. Will they fail if they ever achieve office? Almost certainly. Although like those types always do there will be a scapegoat - whether that be foreigners, the deep state or some other nonsense.
I wish there was sn accepted view in society that if someone suggests that there is an easy solution to a hard protracted issue everyone realises straight away that they are full of it and they can be safely ignored.
Not enough to cause a global depression, but just enough to cause the sycophants in Congress to lose the midterms.
Apparently they were stolen for order; stripped down and placed into containers for transport abroad. Some stolen ones were eventually located in the USA, where they stood out because the rear jack legs are vertical in the UK, but have to angle out in the US...
Lots of housebuilding. Actually building rather than talking about it.
Invest in infrastructure. And reduce cost of doing so by relaxing controls.
Invest in green tech and university education to pay our way in the world.
I don't think any of that is actually difficult or risky, it is just electorally unpopular.
I think the American (and, sadly, our) public's capacity to blame others for our own problems is near infinite.
Sometimes simple solutions work, but you have to ask why they've not been done yet if they're so simple.
Simple solutions that are politically unpopular because vested interests oppose them are perfectly legitimate solutions. The difficulty isn't extra complexity, it is the politicians facing backlash from the vested interest.
Simple solutions that are universally popular and will cause no harm to anyone whatsoever are a bad joke.
It doesn't appeal to me in the slightest (as with the majority of the WWII public), but I do eat a stir fry with onion, carrot, parsnip and tofu, when on my blood pressure diet, which I suppose isn't wildly dissimilar, excepting the pastry.
(Double fermented soy sauce and culinary yeast flakes are your low salt umami friends.)
Don’t cry for millennials or Gen Z. Save your pity for those in their 50s" (£)
https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/05/08/why-gen-x-is-the-real-loser-generation
As it is, they've possibly left it too late and are going too slowly to get useful results.
Let’s be honest, there is an element of Soviet Era Eastern Bloc Trump is turning the USA into. Where Reagan said pull down this wall, Trump is putting one up around America, where they try to become self sufficient in a way is impossible to be in a globalised world. Even if they did build every single bit of metal, widget, circuit board of their products, they would be too pricey for both US consumers and export markets. The Tarrifs either result in US not getting the product, or paying extra for it.
Why don’t EU, China, Starmer and Canada explain this to America, rather than rub hands with glee at chance to rip off all American hard working people and businesses? They’ve been in the Oval Office on live reality TV, why didn’t they explain it there - Starmer and Carney are bastards to keep quiet and look to exploit those MAGA cult people and other hard working Americans. 😕
However it is fairly substantially different from a 'usual' tram line. This initial section is really short - 200 metres - and so costs may increase as they try other real-world locations. However IIRC they did build a much longer test line on an old railway trackbed - although that is much easier, installation-wise. Also, the rail car is not standards-compliant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coventry_Very_Light_Rail
https://substack.com/home/post/p-162979594
The TLDR is
more housing, so it's cheaper
more green energy, so it's cheaper
more good non-graduate jobs, by infrastructure investment
This is both sensible and (broadly, with caveats) what the government is seeking to do. Whether it works sufficiently by 2028/9 remains to be seen.
(Full disclosure: When I had a site of my own, I saw enough anti-Americanism at the BBC that I began to describe it as "routine".)
These days they have remote kill switches, but I don't think that hinders the theves and their buyers for very long.
So all it contains is:
3 plastic trays for making enormous ice cubes
20 sticks of lemongrass (freezes brilliantly)
A large packet of deep fried tofu puffs (ditto)
Two plastic sleeves for cooling wine
Investment generally is kind of unpopular as we have lost confidence as a nation, especially in governments, so investment is seen as spaffing hard earned against the wall.
I just think to do those things there is an awful lot of heavy lifting below the headlines.
Incentives need to be correct, the related laws, regulations and guidance need changing. If the state needs to borrow to build how much would that cost? If you are not funding through borrowing what tax / spending changes do you make to achieve it? Do we have the necessary human and capital resources to do those things? I could go on and on.
Truth is there is a lot of complexity to these things. Headlines and charisma only get you so far - and there is a lot to be said for simple objectives to drive delivery. But, someone has still got to do the spade work and planning to make the headline a reality.
Nuclear? Built by whom? At what cost? Coming on stream when?
We need a blend of all of these (except coal), but wind and solar will be huge parts of this whether Nigel likes it or not - we just don't have other viable options.
(It also needs the Democrats to get their shit together on a broadly popular manifesto. People voting for you is a damn site more reliable a route to power than hoping they vote against the other guy.)
Saying we should build houses is one thing.
Reforming planning so houses can be cut with less red tape is another.
I see a lot of the former, not much of the latter.
To quote a late philosopher, Mr E. Presley, we need a little less conversation and a little more action please.
https://www.currys.co.uk/products/logik-ltf33w23-mini-freezer-white-10248717.html
But wish it was going faster. We have far too many consultations which ordinary people don't have time to contribute to any way but hold everything up...
Or announced structural reform and a change in the law? That is what is needed.
They know what they need to do, but they're not doing it.
And not noticing that in their desire for a $5bn beef market in the UK, there's only an additional 13,000 tonne quota in each direction.
https://x.com/ft/status/1920810401056399479
E.G. There are a number of "simple solutions" to the small boats problem, which would definitely "work".
We could task the Navy with sinking them all. After the first few hundred people had drowned, I suspect that demand for small boat crossings would drop significantly. Even if it didn't, arrivals by small boats would be pretty close to zero.
Or alternatively, we could establish a migration hub in Calais. Turn up there, we'll put you on a ferry and give you indefinite leave to remain, no questions asked.
Both of these would "solve" the small boat issue - small boat arrivals would very quickly drop to zero. Neither are good or politically acceptable solutions.
But, this said, the reason that Farage is likely to win the next election is simple. He has proposals in some areas which will work, and which everyone knows will work, and which are politically acceptable to half the country's population, but which, crucially, are beyond the pale for our current political class.
Take immigration. He says - and a large chunk of the country thinks - that the asylum system is being abused by economic migrants (and their lawyers) taking the p***. The solution is pretty easy and simple - abolish the current system, come up with a new one that's much more restrictive, deport all the p*** takers, problem solved.
That's politically unacceptable if you're a lefty human rights lawyer, so Starmer can't steal it. It's probably not politically unacceptable if you're a heartless Tory, but after the hopeless performance of the last Tory government, no-one thinks they'll do it,even if they say they will.
Fararge isn't a magician or a hypnotist. He doesn't need to be. All he needs is to do is give the public what they've consistently voted for at every opportunity - lower immigration - and he'll be the most popular prime minister in a very long time.
Only question is, will they get their pensions?
In Britain Gen Xers are less likely than members of any other age group to know the generation to which they belong.
Almost as though that generation had very little to worry about.
As part of it, remove the "protection" that employers have by hiring people as "independent contractors"
All of that should sell well to a progressive base.
The beef produced using same rules and standards in UK? How’s that proved?
“Hey. These chickens not washed in Chlorine were they? “No of course not. “Oh. Soz. Okay then.”
Truth is, when you eat chlorinated food you wouldn’t notice a difference.
When you buy salad in bags from supermarkets, you know that’s been chlorine washed same as US chickens, don’t you? EU didn’t ban that practice.
Nor is the chlorine harmful. When we were in EU it was banned to use chlorine for poultry, and (US would say conveniently) imports banned from countries who do it. But Chlorine washed salad isn’t banned, because EU didn’t ban because chlorine washing isn’t safe, they banned it because it can be used to cover up other production values not being followed properly, meaning no fair playing field in doing right thing by covering up when you skipped corners to save money. The banning of US chicken is food standards proving political position, nothing to do with taste, or science saying chlorine washing is very bad.
If I have time and PB really annoys me, I will go over the structure of the UK statistical system, which incorporates the UK Statistics Authority and its Board, the Office for Statistics Regulation, the Office for National Statistics, and the Government Statistical Service.
- https://www.gov.uk/government/people/ian-diamond (https://archive.is/9Bv6D)
- https://uksa.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/about-the-authority/uk-statistical-system/
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Statistician
Incidentally I met two of his predecessors, and possibly three.I am on the borderline, September 65. And only been retired a few months.
“You have to understand that we won a massive majority and we have absolute, ultimate control.”
Answer: the new Reform UK leader of Kent county council.
https://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/news/new-kcc-reform-uk-leader-reveals-plan-for-council-324062
But 13,000 tons of beef is worth around £26 million at £2000 per tonne.
It's an increase, but still a rounding error in the beef industry.
And even with that, they only fill half of the existing US beef imports to EU quota they have available - which is within a category called "High Quality Beef".
https://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/news/new-kcc-reform-uk-leader-reveals-plan-for-council-324062/