| It’s so weird 08:11 - Sep 20 with 5241 views | chicoazul |
How all these “conservative” leaders are all proclaimed as state shrinking low tax right wingers and yet literally everything they do increases the size of the state and the size of taxation and the size of the nations debt.
Climate politics turbocharged by Sunak leak https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66862498 |  |
| |  |
| It’s so weird on 08:15 - Sep 20 with 3523 views | Swansea_Blue |
And another pivot in style by the BBC. Can you imagine them being as openly critical of the government during the catastrofecks of Brexit and the Covid response? No chance. Yet the last few weeks they’re almost morphing into the Guardian they’re so open with their criticism. |  |
| |
| It’s so weird on 09:16 - Sep 20 with 3420 views | Guthrum |
Almost like it's meaningless rhetoric to bribe the electorate into voting for them. Which it was never intended (or even possible) to be put into practice.
In any case, the state-shrinking is very specific, namely the removal of as much business and financial regulation as possible. It hampers profiteering, don't you know. |  |
| |
| It’s so weird on 09:37 - Sep 20 with 3355 views | BlueBadger |
It's almost like the last 13 years they've been running the country for the benefit of themselves and their mates solely and you've just worked that out. |  |
| |
| It’s so weird on 09:46 - Sep 20 with 3314 views | Darth_Koont |
I don’t get the connection between your post and your link.
Anyway, conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic have always increased the debt (and spending) rather than reducing it. They spend it on their mates and by extension themselves, rather than investing in the wider economy and society. |  |
| |
| It’s so weird on 09:48 - Sep 20 with 3301 views | GeoffSentence |
| It’s so weird on 08:15 - Sep 20 by Swansea_Blue |
And another pivot in style by the BBC. Can you imagine them being as openly critical of the government during the catastrofecks of Brexit and the Covid response? No chance. Yet the last few weeks they’re almost morphing into the Guardian they’re so open with their criticism. |
Probably because even the right wing media is getting more and more critical of the government. |  |
| |
| It’s so weird on 09:58 - Sep 20 with 3271 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
They have pretty much run out of State to shrink, now.
Although Gove has got his eye on selling off Birmingham's Museum and Art Gallery, and the city's Central Library. |  | | |
| It’s so weird on 10:08 - Sep 20 with 3242 views | NthQldITFC |
I don't think that 'hate' is too strong a word for how I feel about the C*nservative Party and many if not most of its constituent parts. What they represent is what, were I religious, I would think of as evil incarnate in their attitude to personal wealth at the expense of planetary health. They are scum and I wish the worst on them.
I don't think that that reflects well on me, but the environmental issues we face are so immense and their actions are so wrong, that I can't help feeling this intense anger. They are scum.
But we know what they are. What almost concerns me more in this article is the following passage:
'Labour said our revelations illustrated "farce" within government - but the party, pointedly, has not committed to restoring any targets Mr Sunak may choose to dilute or ditch.
They too wrestle with being seen to get the balance right, as do trades unions.
Gary Smith of the GMB told Sky News the other day: "The climate emergency is real. It poses an existential threat to the planet.
"We don't want to have dirty air in our cities but we have to listen to the legitimate concerns of ordinary people, many of whom are struggling to get by."
The dilemma captured in three sentences.'
That the opposition are not standing up and being counted immediately on this is disappointing, but even more so to me are the words of Gary Smith, which imply an attitude of thinking that the environmental issues we face are a matter of 'dirty air in our cities'.
Maybe I'm reading too much into a few words, but while people think of the issue as somewhat isolated things that affect certain human beings in nasty ways in some places, those people (very many of us) don't see that what we are facing are catastrophic systemic failures in natural balances which WILL trigger other natural collapses AND the collapse of the food, water, shelter systems that all humans rely on, and will undoubtedly collapse the socio-economic system completely and end any concept of global peace and security.
The policy arguments from all sides of the potential governing classes in this country at the moment are childish and utterly inadequate. We and they have to be brave and face up to the scale of the threat and the absolute necessity of completely rebooting our socio-economic system and our individual value systems.
Edit: actually having re-read the quote, I see that Gary Smith actually refers to an 'existential threat' just above, so I am being a little unfair on him! But the point still stands in the way that so many people in power, or on the streets acknowledge 'the environment' but see it as isolated systems which we can fix with a bit of recycling or magic science machines. [Post edited 20 Sep 2023 10:11]
|  |
| # WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE # | | Poll: | It's driving me nuts |
| |
| It’s so weird on 10:46 - Sep 20 with 3173 views | Darth_Koont |
| It’s so weird on 10:08 - Sep 20 by NthQldITFC |
I don't think that 'hate' is too strong a word for how I feel about the C*nservative Party and many if not most of its constituent parts. What they represent is what, were I religious, I would think of as evil incarnate in their attitude to personal wealth at the expense of planetary health. They are scum and I wish the worst on them.
I don't think that that reflects well on me, but the environmental issues we face are so immense and their actions are so wrong, that I can't help feeling this intense anger. They are scum.
But we know what they are. What almost concerns me more in this article is the following passage:
'Labour said our revelations illustrated "farce" within government - but the party, pointedly, has not committed to restoring any targets Mr Sunak may choose to dilute or ditch.
They too wrestle with being seen to get the balance right, as do trades unions.
Gary Smith of the GMB told Sky News the other day: "The climate emergency is real. It poses an existential threat to the planet.
"We don't want to have dirty air in our cities but we have to listen to the legitimate concerns of ordinary people, many of whom are struggling to get by."
The dilemma captured in three sentences.'
That the opposition are not standing up and being counted immediately on this is disappointing, but even more so to me are the words of Gary Smith, which imply an attitude of thinking that the environmental issues we face are a matter of 'dirty air in our cities'.
Maybe I'm reading too much into a few words, but while people think of the issue as somewhat isolated things that affect certain human beings in nasty ways in some places, those people (very many of us) don't see that what we are facing are catastrophic systemic failures in natural balances which WILL trigger other natural collapses AND the collapse of the food, water, shelter systems that all humans rely on, and will undoubtedly collapse the socio-economic system completely and end any concept of global peace and security.
The policy arguments from all sides of the potential governing classes in this country at the moment are childish and utterly inadequate. We and they have to be brave and face up to the scale of the threat and the absolute necessity of completely rebooting our socio-economic system and our individual value systems.
Edit: actually having re-read the quote, I see that Gary Smith actually refers to an 'existential threat' just above, so I am being a little unfair on him! But the point still stands in the way that so many people in power, or on the streets acknowledge 'the environment' but see it as isolated systems which we can fix with a bit of recycling or magic science machines. [Post edited 20 Sep 2023 10:11]
|
The backsliding on this is terrible. But to be expected from the right-wingers leading both of the main parties.
It’s literally a game for these people. A game to win power, influence and money rather than address the wider society and economy – and indeed reality itself.
We will get nowhere on global threats like climate change with these people, let alone the UK’s clear socio-economic weaknesses and imbalances. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| It’s so weird on 11:28 - Sep 20 with 3117 views | DJR |
| It’s so weird on 10:08 - Sep 20 by NthQldITFC |
I don't think that 'hate' is too strong a word for how I feel about the C*nservative Party and many if not most of its constituent parts. What they represent is what, were I religious, I would think of as evil incarnate in their attitude to personal wealth at the expense of planetary health. They are scum and I wish the worst on them.
I don't think that that reflects well on me, but the environmental issues we face are so immense and their actions are so wrong, that I can't help feeling this intense anger. They are scum.
But we know what they are. What almost concerns me more in this article is the following passage:
'Labour said our revelations illustrated "farce" within government - but the party, pointedly, has not committed to restoring any targets Mr Sunak may choose to dilute or ditch.
They too wrestle with being seen to get the balance right, as do trades unions.
Gary Smith of the GMB told Sky News the other day: "The climate emergency is real. It poses an existential threat to the planet.
"We don't want to have dirty air in our cities but we have to listen to the legitimate concerns of ordinary people, many of whom are struggling to get by."
The dilemma captured in three sentences.'
That the opposition are not standing up and being counted immediately on this is disappointing, but even more so to me are the words of Gary Smith, which imply an attitude of thinking that the environmental issues we face are a matter of 'dirty air in our cities'.
Maybe I'm reading too much into a few words, but while people think of the issue as somewhat isolated things that affect certain human beings in nasty ways in some places, those people (very many of us) don't see that what we are facing are catastrophic systemic failures in natural balances which WILL trigger other natural collapses AND the collapse of the food, water, shelter systems that all humans rely on, and will undoubtedly collapse the socio-economic system completely and end any concept of global peace and security.
The policy arguments from all sides of the potential governing classes in this country at the moment are childish and utterly inadequate. We and they have to be brave and face up to the scale of the threat and the absolute necessity of completely rebooting our socio-economic system and our individual value systems.
Edit: actually having re-read the quote, I see that Gary Smith actually refers to an 'existential threat' just above, so I am being a little unfair on him! But the point still stands in the way that so many people in power, or on the streets acknowledge 'the environment' but see it as isolated systems which we can fix with a bit of recycling or magic science machines. [Post edited 20 Sep 2023 10:11]
|
Part of the problem it seems to me is that Johnson was happy to supposedly lead on issues like net zero because promising something by 2050 played well at the time politically but isn't a real promise unless the necessary measures are put in place to give effect to it. In effect, it's like him promising the earth but knowing he would never be held to account because 2050 is relatively far away.
From my own point of view, the promise on banning petrol and diesel cars is a case in point because it needs to be accompanied by thought being given to how we will generate enough electricity to charge those cars, and how those who do not have access to off-street parking will be able to charge their cars. It is also to be borne in mind that we appear to be falling way behind in providing enough public charging points.
What I am not sure with the Labour Green proposals is how they intend to solve issues like this.
EDIT: this is as much detail as I've managed to find on the Labour proposals but there is no mention of charging points.
https://labour.org.uk/stronger-together/a-fairer-greener-future/green-and-digita
[Post edited 20 Sep 2023 11:43]
|  | | |
| It’s so weird on 11:38 - Sep 20 with 3066 views | lowhouseblue |
| It’s so weird on 11:28 - Sep 20 by DJR |
Part of the problem it seems to me is that Johnson was happy to supposedly lead on issues like net zero because promising something by 2050 played well at the time politically but isn't a real promise unless the necessary measures are put in place to give effect to it. In effect, it's like him promising the earth but knowing he would never be held to account because 2050 is relatively far away.
From my own point of view, the promise on banning petrol and diesel cars is a case in point because it needs to be accompanied by thought being given to how we will generate enough electricity to charge those cars, and how those who do not have access to off-street parking will be able to charge their cars. It is also to be borne in mind that we appear to be falling way behind in providing enough public charging points.
What I am not sure with the Labour Green proposals is how they intend to solve issues like this.
EDIT: this is as much detail as I've managed to find on the Labour proposals but there is no mention of charging points.
https://labour.org.uk/stronger-together/a-fairer-greener-future/green-and-digita
[Post edited 20 Sep 2023 11:43]
|
as with your point about the realities of electric cars (new electricity infra-structure and generation, charging facilities etc) all of these changes come at a significant cost (money, reduced convenience, changes in lifestyle). these changes are critically important, but no politicians are discussing the costs and therefore they aren't addressing the practicalities of how, despite these costs, you get all communities to buy into them. it's as if these targets once set will happen by magic. no one wants to face up to the full (and rightly unavoidable) consequences. it's the current version of "technical change will solve it all for us". |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| It’s so weird on 11:46 - Sep 20 with 3026 views | DJR |
| It’s so weird on 11:38 - Sep 20 by lowhouseblue |
as with your point about the realities of electric cars (new electricity infra-structure and generation, charging facilities etc) all of these changes come at a significant cost (money, reduced convenience, changes in lifestyle). these changes are critically important, but no politicians are discussing the costs and therefore they aren't addressing the practicalities of how, despite these costs, you get all communities to buy into them. it's as if these targets once set will happen by magic. no one wants to face up to the full (and rightly unavoidable) consequences. it's the current version of "technical change will solve it all for us". |
I tend to agree with your comment about magic.
Having said that, the current Tory argument against the ban on petrol and diesel cars is their cost but that may well come down by the time of the ban, and there will presumably be a second hand market to boot. And government subsidies could also be put in place to ease the burden.
But there is no point everyone having an electric car if not everyone has the ability to charge them with ease.
And what about the road transport of goods by electric vehicles? Is this something that is even feasible? [Post edited 20 Sep 2023 11:50]
| | | |
| It’s so weird on 11:52 - Sep 20 with 2992 views | lowhouseblue |
| It’s so weird on 11:46 - Sep 20 by DJR |
I tend to agree with your comment about magic.
Having said that, the current Tory argument against the ban on petrol and diesel cars is their cost but that may well come down by the time of the ban, and there will presumably be a second hand market to boot. And government subsidies could also be put in place to ease the burden.
But there is no point everyone having an electric car if not everyone has the ability to charge them with ease.
And what about the road transport of goods by electric vehicles? Is this something that is even feasible? [Post edited 20 Sep 2023 11:50]
|
but if we all have as many cars as we do now, and use them in the same way as we do now, and developing parts of the world move up to our model of car ownership and car use, the environmental impact of making all those batteries (ignoring the steel etc) will be colossal. electric cars are part of the answer, but owning fewer cars (public transport, hiring, sharing) and driving less are critical parts of what we need to do. people currently don't want that. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| It’s so weird on 11:57 - Sep 20 with 2967 views | DJR |
| It’s so weird on 11:52 - Sep 20 by lowhouseblue |
but if we all have as many cars as we do now, and use them in the same way as we do now, and developing parts of the world move up to our model of car ownership and car use, the environmental impact of making all those batteries (ignoring the steel etc) will be colossal. electric cars are part of the answer, but owning fewer cars (public transport, hiring, sharing) and driving less are critical parts of what we need to do. people currently don't want that. |
Very good points. | | | |
| It’s so weird on 12:00 - Sep 20 with 2947 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| It’s so weird on 11:46 - Sep 20 by DJR |
I tend to agree with your comment about magic.
Having said that, the current Tory argument against the ban on petrol and diesel cars is their cost but that may well come down by the time of the ban, and there will presumably be a second hand market to boot. And government subsidies could also be put in place to ease the burden.
But there is no point everyone having an electric car if not everyone has the ability to charge them with ease.
And what about the road transport of goods by electric vehicles? Is this something that is even feasible? [Post edited 20 Sep 2023 11:50]
|
“the ban on petrol and diesel”
It’s only a ban on the sale of new ones - millions of ICE cars will be on the road for years after that. As you rightly say there is no joined up plan on charging infrastructure- expect a huge uptick in ICE vehicle sales in 2028 and 2029 (as with gas boilers). | | | |
| It’s so weird on 13:06 - Sep 20 with 2887 views | NthQldITFC |
| It’s so weird on 11:52 - Sep 20 by lowhouseblue |
but if we all have as many cars as we do now, and use them in the same way as we do now, and developing parts of the world move up to our model of car ownership and car use, the environmental impact of making all those batteries (ignoring the steel etc) will be colossal. electric cars are part of the answer, but owning fewer cars (public transport, hiring, sharing) and driving less are critical parts of what we need to do. people currently don't want that. |
Hear, hear!
So many of us who talk a good game, still think that we can essentially go on using as much energy as we use now in the 'West', do the same in the developing world, and "it will all be OK cos it's electric, innit". | |
| # WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE # | | Poll: | It's driving me nuts |
| |
| It’s so weird on 07:41 - Sep 21 with 2736 views | chicoazul |
| It’s so weird on 09:46 - Sep 20 by Darth_Koont |
I don’t get the connection between your post and your link.
Anyway, conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic have always increased the debt (and spending) rather than reducing it. They spend it on their mates and by extension themselves, rather than investing in the wider economy and society. |
Yes I’m sorry I didn’t explain this properly.
There’s a line at the bottom by Mason going in about how Sunak in the actualite is a small state low tax Tory despite all the spending and debt. | |
| |
| It’s so weird on 08:22 - Sep 21 with 2674 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| It’s so weird on 11:52 - Sep 20 by lowhouseblue |
but if we all have as many cars as we do now, and use them in the same way as we do now, and developing parts of the world move up to our model of car ownership and car use, the environmental impact of making all those batteries (ignoring the steel etc) will be colossal. electric cars are part of the answer, but owning fewer cars (public transport, hiring, sharing) and driving less are critical parts of what we need to do. people currently don't want that. |
....and heat pumps will not adequately heat most of our existing housing stock. |  |
| |
| It’s so weird on 09:22 - Sep 21 with 2559 views | GlasgowBlue |
If I have this right, haven’t the government brought the new date in line with our progressive and enlightened friends in the EU of 2035 rather than the date of 2030 that was plucked out of the air by the evil Boris Johnston because it sounded good? |  |
| |
| It’s so weird on 09:24 - Sep 21 with 2555 views | itfcjoe |
| It’s so weird on 09:22 - Sep 21 by GlasgowBlue |
If I have this right, haven’t the government brought the new date in line with our progressive and enlightened friends in the EU of 2035 rather than the date of 2030 that was plucked out of the air by the evil Boris Johnston because it sounded good? |
That's one way of trying to look at it - Rishi has done well to manage to effectively unite everyone in the same opinion from eco-warriors through to the biggest businesses in the country |  |
| |
| It’s so weird on 09:29 - Sep 21 with 2529 views | Leaky |
The difference is that large parts of Europe's housing was destroyed during WW2. They rebuilt old buildings with new. We in the UK have hundreds of thousands of houses built in the 19th early 20th century, it would probably be cheaper to pull the down than insulate them. However where do people live while there house is being rebuilt. No simple solution. |  | | |
| It’s so weird on 09:35 - Sep 21 with 2506 views | lowhouseblue |
| It’s so weird on 08:22 - Sep 21 by BanksterDebtSlave |
....and heat pumps will not adequately heat most of our existing housing stock. |
not without major refurb costs to bring the building envelope up to a proper standard. and people have to accept that even then they won't replicate what they've been used to - they won't get high north american style internal temperatures, they're not instant, and they're not as flexible as gas. so other than in new builds they don't compare cost wise with gas and they involve people accepting a life style change. unless the tech improves it is stupid politically to pretend that getting universal buy in will be easy. and the electricity network can't currently support it along with electric cars on a large scale. but domestic heating is one of our biggest carbon emitters and it is absolutely critical that we do it. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| It’s so weird on 09:56 - Sep 21 with 2466 views | Herbivore |
| It’s so weird on 09:22 - Sep 21 by GlasgowBlue |
If I have this right, haven’t the government brought the new date in line with our progressive and enlightened friends in the EU of 2035 rather than the date of 2030 that was plucked out of the air by the evil Boris Johnston because it sounded good? |
That's one take. The other is that this is knee jerk populist nonsense off the back of an unexpected narrow by election victory. It's not just the moving of dates, it's the magical thinking of us sticking to our net zero targets whilst not expecting people to have to make any significant changes. We've seen where the promises of unicorns and sunlit uplands have taken us, let's not go there again. |  |
| |
| It’s so weird on 10:07 - Sep 21 with 2451 views | Swansea_Blue |
| It’s so weird on 11:28 - Sep 20 by DJR |
Part of the problem it seems to me is that Johnson was happy to supposedly lead on issues like net zero because promising something by 2050 played well at the time politically but isn't a real promise unless the necessary measures are put in place to give effect to it. In effect, it's like him promising the earth but knowing he would never be held to account because 2050 is relatively far away.
From my own point of view, the promise on banning petrol and diesel cars is a case in point because it needs to be accompanied by thought being given to how we will generate enough electricity to charge those cars, and how those who do not have access to off-street parking will be able to charge their cars. It is also to be borne in mind that we appear to be falling way behind in providing enough public charging points.
What I am not sure with the Labour Green proposals is how they intend to solve issues like this.
EDIT: this is as much detail as I've managed to find on the Labour proposals but there is no mention of charging points.
https://labour.org.uk/stronger-together/a-fairer-greener-future/green-and-digita
[Post edited 20 Sep 2023 11:43]
|
I think the problem is less about needing time to plan, but that they're not actually interested in putting in the hard graft to implement a plan. We've know about the urgent need for a couple of decades at least now and after a bit of a push at the start have retreated into a state of apathy. It's not helped by this government kowtowing to the fossil fuel industry and their financiers.
The 'legitimate concerns' line is a load of bollox too - just an excuse. People do have concerns, but they're largely caused by the govt-supporting media and the government themselves feeding them to people. The govt can create the conditions that gives them a justification to go slow, whilst simultaneously ministers and ex MPs take kickbacks (sorry, payments for 'consultancy advice' and board duties) from fossil fuel companies and the banks funding them.
What I don't understand is why MPs don't act corruptly on behalf of the environment industry. There's huge profits to be made across the sector and they can also prop up the industries with subsidies to create the conditions to profiteer, just as they do with the fossil fuel sector. Maybe that's too much work though as they'd need to put in effort to grow the sector more quickly. The kickbacks form the fossil fuel industry are on a plate for them. | |
| |
| It’s so weird on 10:14 - Sep 21 with 2400 views | GlasgowBlue |
| It’s so weird on 09:56 - Sep 21 by Herbivore |
That's one take. The other is that this is knee jerk populist nonsense off the back of an unexpected narrow by election victory. It's not just the moving of dates, it's the magical thinking of us sticking to our net zero targets whilst not expecting people to have to make any significant changes. We've seen where the promises of unicorns and sunlit uplands have taken us, let's not go there again. |
I haven't passed comments on Sunak's motives or given a "take" on it.
I'm simply asking if the decision, regardless of the motive behind it, now bring the UK into line with the EU on the banning of petrol and diesel cars? [Post edited 21 Sep 2023 10:26]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
