| It’s so weird 08:11 - Sep 20 with 5288 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 10:29 - Sep 21 with 1397 views | lowhouseblue |
| It’s so weird on 10:07 - Sep 21 by Swansea_Blue |
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. |
"People do have concerns, but they're largely caused by the govt-supporting media and the government themselves feeding them to people."
you seem to be saying that the lack of buy in is down to the media and the government misleading people. i think that's pretty much wrong. even if we have universal agreement that tackling climate change is a priority, what we need to do in practice is hugely controversial. it involves real costs for people, huge inconvenience and major changes to people's life style. a lot of what people currently assume is central to an affluent middle class lifestyle will become unaffordable. people's expectations and aspirations need to adjust. policy needs to recognise that these reservations are real and significant - we can't do the people who disagree with us being thick / misled / lied to / manipulated yet again. it has becomes the left's go to explanation for everything that is inconvenient.
the tories are picking up on widespread worries about climate policy - those worries are real and rational. policy needs to adjust with an emphasis on making the changes affordable and directly addressing the equity issues. we need to win hearts and minds over the change in lifestyle which is required. |  |
| 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 10:32 - Sep 21 with 1386 views | Herbivore |
| It’s so weird on 10:14 - Sep 21 by GlasgowBlue |
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]
|
That's one of a suite of announcements. |  |
| |
| It’s so weird on 10:37 - Sep 21 with 1377 views | Herbivore |
| It’s so weird on 10:29 - Sep 21 by lowhouseblue |
"People do have concerns, but they're largely caused by the govt-supporting media and the government themselves feeding them to people."
you seem to be saying that the lack of buy in is down to the media and the government misleading people. i think that's pretty much wrong. even if we have universal agreement that tackling climate change is a priority, what we need to do in practice is hugely controversial. it involves real costs for people, huge inconvenience and major changes to people's life style. a lot of what people currently assume is central to an affluent middle class lifestyle will become unaffordable. people's expectations and aspirations need to adjust. policy needs to recognise that these reservations are real and significant - we can't do the people who disagree with us being thick / misled / lied to / manipulated yet again. it has becomes the left's go to explanation for everything that is inconvenient.
the tories are picking up on widespread worries about climate policy - those worries are real and rational. policy needs to adjust with an emphasis on making the changes affordable and directly addressing the equity issues. we need to win hearts and minds over the change in lifestyle which is required. |
I'm not sure Sunak promising to reach net zero without people being negatively impacted in any way is really the path to winning hearts and minds though, and it's certainly not engaging in the kind of grown up conversations that need to be had about things like reducing car use and ownership, cutting down on air travel, reducing meat and dairy consumption, and moving to new sources of hearing that will require adjustments to what we're used to. What Sunak is doing is precisely the opposite of what is needed, he's just trying to pander to a section of the crowd to try and win some votes. | |
| |
| It’s so weird on 10:40 - Sep 21 with 1372 views | Pinewoodblue |
| It’s so weird on 10:14 - Sep 21 by GlasgowBlue |
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]
|
You are of course right.
Boris set an unrealistic target, one he had no idea how it could be achieved. Can however understand how the motor industry feels let down. Would have been better if Sunak had set a target that say 75% of new car sales to private individuals would be hybrid by 2030, but 100% of all cars/vans owned by Companies must be hybrid or full electric.
Same with banning new gas boilers, another target set without any consideration as to how it could be achieved.
Would anyone swit support to Green Party and risk Labour not ‘winning’ the next
t election? [Post edited 21 Sep 2023 10:45]
|  |
| |
| It’s so weird on 10:55 - Sep 21 with 1337 views | lowhouseblue |
| It’s so weird on 10:37 - Sep 21 by Herbivore |
I'm not sure Sunak promising to reach net zero without people being negatively impacted in any way is really the path to winning hearts and minds though, and it's certainly not engaging in the kind of grown up conversations that need to be had about things like reducing car use and ownership, cutting down on air travel, reducing meat and dairy consumption, and moving to new sources of hearing that will require adjustments to what we're used to. What Sunak is doing is precisely the opposite of what is needed, he's just trying to pander to a section of the crowd to try and win some votes. |
i agree completely. but he is responding to concerns which are widespread and valid. we mustn't just dismiss those concerns - we need to address them. that actually leads to more radical policies - a focus on bringing the costs down for those who can't afford it, a focus on the distributional consequences, a focus on collective / public provision to replace some of the convenience people are used to, major investment in infrastructure etc
while sunak is trying to exploit concerns for short-term political gain, we mustn't go down the route yet again of belittling those for whom concerns and costs are genuine and valid. | |
| 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 11:00 - Sep 21 with 1325 views | itfcjoe |
| It’s so weird on 10:55 - Sep 21 by lowhouseblue |
i agree completely. but he is responding to concerns which are widespread and valid. we mustn't just dismiss those concerns - we need to address them. that actually leads to more radical policies - a focus on bringing the costs down for those who can't afford it, a focus on the distributional consequences, a focus on collective / public provision to replace some of the convenience people are used to, major investment in infrastructure etc
while sunak is trying to exploit concerns for short-term political gain, we mustn't go down the route yet again of belittling those for whom concerns and costs are genuine and valid. |
But a lot of the 'widespread concerns' aren't that widespread and a lot of it is just pushed by the media when it doesn't effect people.
How many poorer people are buying new cars? Or are they buying second hand cars, which will still be available.
How much is the cost to families? How does that compare to the benefits from bringing in green jobs to help reindustrialise areas? There's no figures, it's just pure politics |  |
| |
| It’s so weird on 11:07 - Sep 21 with 1311 views | ChampionsofInnsbruck |
It's not weird, they are very good at BSing mostly the over 40's into thinking this is true.
Look at the Tories
Promise - Reduce National Debt
Reality - Record national debt
Promise - Reduce borrowing
Reality - Record borrowing
Promise - Reduce immigration and asylum and harder boarder controls
Reality - Record immigration (legal/asylum/illegal)
Promise - Tough on crime
Reality - Record crime rates
But they just go "but Labour..." or "its the woke" and that is enough reason for the 40 and ups to keep voting for them. Neo-Cons, Neo-Liberals, all the same to me, Sir Kier Tory, Red Rishi, just spokesmen, the real law makers are in business lobbying and changing laws through big party donations. We do not matter. We wont get what we want regardless of who we vote for. |  | | |
| It’s so weird on 11:09 - Sep 21 with 1296 views | Herbivore |
| It’s so weird on 10:55 - Sep 21 by lowhouseblue |
i agree completely. but he is responding to concerns which are widespread and valid. we mustn't just dismiss those concerns - we need to address them. that actually leads to more radical policies - a focus on bringing the costs down for those who can't afford it, a focus on the distributional consequences, a focus on collective / public provision to replace some of the convenience people are used to, major investment in infrastructure etc
while sunak is trying to exploit concerns for short-term political gain, we mustn't go down the route yet again of belittling those for whom concerns and costs are genuine and valid. |
I'm not sure he is responding to concerns, I think that's far too generous an interpretation. And even if we accept that's what he's doing, it's entirely the wrong response. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| It’s so weird on 11:10 - Sep 21 with 1294 views | Swansea_Blue |
| It’s so weird on 10:29 - Sep 21 by lowhouseblue |
"People do have concerns, but they're largely caused by the govt-supporting media and the government themselves feeding them to people."
you seem to be saying that the lack of buy in is down to the media and the government misleading people. i think that's pretty much wrong. even if we have universal agreement that tackling climate change is a priority, what we need to do in practice is hugely controversial. it involves real costs for people, huge inconvenience and major changes to people's life style. a lot of what people currently assume is central to an affluent middle class lifestyle will become unaffordable. people's expectations and aspirations need to adjust. policy needs to recognise that these reservations are real and significant - we can't do the people who disagree with us being thick / misled / lied to / manipulated yet again. it has becomes the left's go to explanation for everything that is inconvenient.
the tories are picking up on widespread worries about climate policy - those worries are real and rational. policy needs to adjust with an emphasis on making the changes affordable and directly addressing the equity issues. we need to win hearts and minds over the change in lifestyle which is required. |
It seems to me that quite a lot of the discussion around climate and the environment is now political - the mixed reactions to ULEZ being a good case in point. That's getting in the way of progress. How can we get the public on board when half of them are being told this is a load of nonsense?
You're right of course that there will be costs and behavioral changes needed. I think my point is that the government could be promoting that message positively and providing help with the switch to more sustainable lifestyles. Either through carrots or stick (e.g. we once had the solar panel subsidies before the Tories scrapped them; the French are going down the route of minimising short haul flights, etc). I don't think our government is doing anywhere near enough on behaviour changes needed and support for people to change. And their actions would undermine any messaging anyway - rolling back on policies, taking short hop flights in helicopters, etc.
The beahviour change aspect is huge. You've hit the crux of it there, but it's an area where there is very little work being done. Traditionally all the research and policy has been around either understanding the drivers of climate change or looking at technological solutions (sustainable energy production, cleaner fuels, scrubbers and the like on factories, cleaner engines, etc). There's a lot more that needs to be done on the behavioral side, but I see no evidence of leadership in that area (presumably because it won't make profit). |  |
| |
| It’s so weird on 11:34 - Sep 21 with 1273 views | DJR |
| 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]
|
The head of Ford UK yesterday spoke about an immature infrastructure, and no doubt the change to 2035 will kick the "electric charging issue" tin further down the road. [Post edited 21 Sep 2023 11:35]
|  | | |
| It’s so weird on 11:40 - Sep 21 with 1255 views | chicoazul |
Lads where is HARRY10 this is fertile ground for him | |
| |
| It’s so weird on 11:41 - Sep 21 with 1255 views | DJR |
| It’s so weird on 11:07 - Sep 21 by ChampionsofInnsbruck |
It's not weird, they are very good at BSing mostly the over 40's into thinking this is true.
Look at the Tories
Promise - Reduce National Debt
Reality - Record national debt
Promise - Reduce borrowing
Reality - Record borrowing
Promise - Reduce immigration and asylum and harder boarder controls
Reality - Record immigration (legal/asylum/illegal)
Promise - Tough on crime
Reality - Record crime rates
But they just go "but Labour..." or "its the woke" and that is enough reason for the 40 and ups to keep voting for them. Neo-Cons, Neo-Liberals, all the same to me, Sir Kier Tory, Red Rishi, just spokesmen, the real law makers are in business lobbying and changing laws through big party donations. We do not matter. We wont get what we want regardless of who we vote for. |
As Sunak has promised further announcements, no doubt one of them will be to do with inheritance tax.
There was discussion in one of the Tory newspapers about increasing it to £1 million (which it can be potentially even now if the family home is left to direct descendants).
This is the just sort of thing that gets many older people salivating, even though very few of them will ever actually get anywhere near inheritance tax limits.
[Post edited 21 Sep 2023 11:42]
| | | |
| It’s so weird on 12:27 - Sep 21 with 1223 views | CoachRob |
| It’s so weird on 10:29 - Sep 21 by lowhouseblue |
"People do have concerns, but they're largely caused by the govt-supporting media and the government themselves feeding them to people."
you seem to be saying that the lack of buy in is down to the media and the government misleading people. i think that's pretty much wrong. even if we have universal agreement that tackling climate change is a priority, what we need to do in practice is hugely controversial. it involves real costs for people, huge inconvenience and major changes to people's life style. a lot of what people currently assume is central to an affluent middle class lifestyle will become unaffordable. people's expectations and aspirations need to adjust. policy needs to recognise that these reservations are real and significant - we can't do the people who disagree with us being thick / misled / lied to / manipulated yet again. it has becomes the left's go to explanation for everything that is inconvenient.
the tories are picking up on widespread worries about climate policy - those worries are real and rational. policy needs to adjust with an emphasis on making the changes affordable and directly addressing the equity issues. we need to win hearts and minds over the change in lifestyle which is required. |
I remember some chap who had just gain his PhD in economics presented this sort of behavioural economics as a solution to a room of scientists and engineers. It completely lacks the application of the scientific method, is detached from the physical systems of Earth and our civilisation, and as a field, economics is totally discredited in the climate realm (Nordhaus, Tol, etc.). In a field in which incivility is a hallmark, I'm not sure economists are the people to be winning hearts and minds.
I agree with your point about people being misled, but then you don't apply this systems thinking to the rest of your post. There isn't any science in your post, just lots of unsupported assumptions. Why will the system evolve this way? Is there any evidence to support this? Most analysts see energy consumption continuing to rise well into this century and so our ability to do useful work should head in what direction? What might act as a balancing feedback on this? Environmental economics sees the global economy being many times its current size by 2100 and with limited damages from climate change (~3%). Why is this complete BS?
It is rather discourteous to the millions of people who have made lifestyle changes and only seen an upwards trajectory of the Keeling curve. Why have these changes not made any difference? |  | | |
| It’s so weird on 12:34 - Sep 21 with 1215 views | ChampionsofInnsbruck |
| It’s so weird on 11:41 - Sep 21 by DJR |
As Sunak has promised further announcements, no doubt one of them will be to do with inheritance tax.
There was discussion in one of the Tory newspapers about increasing it to £1 million (which it can be potentially even now if the family home is left to direct descendants).
This is the just sort of thing that gets many older people salivating, even though very few of them will ever actually get anywhere near inheritance tax limits.
[Post edited 21 Sep 2023 11:42]
|
If Sunak was a Labour PM they'd be spilling racist bile about him, but because he has a suit on, posh accent, and is a Tory, he can get away with being a shambles of a PM with that mob, despite him causing all the chaos to get their beloved Boris removed in order to get the top job. An evil, self centred, little, rat. | | | |
| It’s so weird on 12:48 - Sep 21 with 1198 views | lowhouseblue |
| It’s so weird on 12:27 - Sep 21 by CoachRob |
I remember some chap who had just gain his PhD in economics presented this sort of behavioural economics as a solution to a room of scientists and engineers. It completely lacks the application of the scientific method, is detached from the physical systems of Earth and our civilisation, and as a field, economics is totally discredited in the climate realm (Nordhaus, Tol, etc.). In a field in which incivility is a hallmark, I'm not sure economists are the people to be winning hearts and minds.
I agree with your point about people being misled, but then you don't apply this systems thinking to the rest of your post. There isn't any science in your post, just lots of unsupported assumptions. Why will the system evolve this way? Is there any evidence to support this? Most analysts see energy consumption continuing to rise well into this century and so our ability to do useful work should head in what direction? What might act as a balancing feedback on this? Environmental economics sees the global economy being many times its current size by 2100 and with limited damages from climate change (~3%). Why is this complete BS?
It is rather discourteous to the millions of people who have made lifestyle changes and only seen an upwards trajectory of the Keeling curve. Why have these changes not made any difference? |
i'm not really sure what point you're making - it seems to just be your standard tired shtick about economics. i wasn't making any reference to behavioural economics.
so if you have something to say about the direction that climate policy should take or the politics behind the policy then say it. the anti-economics obsession and the cryptic questions is a bit weird. | |
| 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 12:50 - Sep 21 with 1196 views | Herbivore |
On the plus side, I've just had my final heat pump quote through and it's £2500 less than it would have been two days ago. I'll be voting Rishi in 2024. | |
| |
| It’s so weird on 13:29 - Sep 21 with 1140 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| It’s so weird on 11:40 - Sep 21 by chicoazul |
Lads where is HARRY10 this is fertile ground for him |
His decent into hatred was completed with the ‘sl*t shaming’ of Brand’s alleged victim’s, before he was unplugged by Moscow and sent to the Pinkun. |  | | |
| It’s so weird on 13:32 - Sep 21 with 1131 views | Herbivore |
| It’s so weird on 13:29 - Sep 21 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
His decent into hatred was completed with the ‘sl*t shaming’ of Brand’s alleged victim’s, before he was unplugged by Moscow and sent to the Pinkun. |
I missed that. What a nasty piece of work. | |
| |
| It’s so weird on 13:41 - Sep 21 with 1116 views | Ewan_Oozami |
| It’s so weird on 11:07 - Sep 21 by ChampionsofInnsbruck |
It's not weird, they are very good at BSing mostly the over 40's into thinking this is true.
Look at the Tories
Promise - Reduce National Debt
Reality - Record national debt
Promise - Reduce borrowing
Reality - Record borrowing
Promise - Reduce immigration and asylum and harder boarder controls
Reality - Record immigration (legal/asylum/illegal)
Promise - Tough on crime
Reality - Record crime rates
But they just go "but Labour..." or "its the woke" and that is enough reason for the 40 and ups to keep voting for them. Neo-Cons, Neo-Liberals, all the same to me, Sir Kier Tory, Red Rishi, just spokesmen, the real law makers are in business lobbying and changing laws through big party donations. We do not matter. We wont get what we want regardless of who we vote for. |
I'm over 60 and I've never voted Tory in any election and never will.... |  |
| |
| It’s so weird on 13:55 - Sep 21 with 1086 views | DJR |
| It’s so weird on 13:41 - Sep 21 by Ewan_Oozami |
I'm over 60 and I've never voted Tory in any election and never will.... |
You're not alone (I'm 63) but if the 2019 election is anything to go by, you and I are in a minority.
According to YouGov, 57% of those aged 60-69 voted Tory, and 67% of those 70 or over.
But from recollection of an article I read a few years ago, those of my recently deceased mother's age (90 plus) were less likely to vote for the Tories and Brexit, maybe because they could actually remember the 30s, the war and the good the Attlee government did. [Post edited 21 Sep 2023 13:57]
| | | |
| It’s so weird on 15:04 - Sep 21 with 1028 views | DJR |
| It’s so weird on 11:41 - Sep 21 by DJR |
As Sunak has promised further announcements, no doubt one of them will be to do with inheritance tax.
There was discussion in one of the Tory newspapers about increasing it to £1 million (which it can be potentially even now if the family home is left to direct descendants).
This is the just sort of thing that gets many older people salivating, even though very few of them will ever actually get anywhere near inheritance tax limits.
[Post edited 21 Sep 2023 11:42]
|
Maybe Sunak will also announce something draconian on the transgender front, if this about the British Social Attitudes Survey is anything to go by, although interesting to note, perhaps counter-intuitively, that women are less prejudiced than men.
The proportion of the British public describing themselves as “not prejudiced” towards transgender people fell from 82% to 64% between 2021 and 2022, when the latest survey took place.
Similarly, while 58% of the British public agreed in 2016 that transgender people should be able to have the sex on their birth certificate changed if they wanted, that figure had dropped to 30% by 2022, suggesting “an overall gradual erosion in support towards transgender rights” since 2018.
This change may reflect the “intense political debate and media discussion” of the topic and increasing public “ambivalence or uncertainty”, the study suggests. Women were more likely to express liberal views on transgender people – 71% said they were “not prejudiced” against 57% of men. Among people aged 18 to 34, the figure was 69%, compared with 51% among the over-70s. [Post edited 21 Sep 2023 15:08]
| | | |
| It’s so weird on 15:26 - Sep 21 with 981 views | Herbivore |
| It’s so weird on 15:04 - Sep 21 by DJR |
Maybe Sunak will also announce something draconian on the transgender front, if this about the British Social Attitudes Survey is anything to go by, although interesting to note, perhaps counter-intuitively, that women are less prejudiced than men.
The proportion of the British public describing themselves as “not prejudiced” towards transgender people fell from 82% to 64% between 2021 and 2022, when the latest survey took place.
Similarly, while 58% of the British public agreed in 2016 that transgender people should be able to have the sex on their birth certificate changed if they wanted, that figure had dropped to 30% by 2022, suggesting “an overall gradual erosion in support towards transgender rights” since 2018.
This change may reflect the “intense political debate and media discussion” of the topic and increasing public “ambivalence or uncertainty”, the study suggests. Women were more likely to express liberal views on transgender people – 71% said they were “not prejudiced” against 57% of men. Among people aged 18 to 34, the figure was 69%, compared with 51% among the over-70s. [Post edited 21 Sep 2023 15:08]
|
Imagine openly declaring yourself to be prejudiced against a minority group. What a state this country has got itself into. | |
| |
| It’s so weird on 15:34 - Sep 21 with 961 views | DJR |
| It’s so weird on 15:26 - Sep 21 by Herbivore |
Imagine openly declaring yourself to be prejudiced against a minority group. What a state this country has got itself into. |
The dramatic change in attitudes from 2021 to 2022 shows just how much effect powerful right wing political and media campaigns have. All rather sad, as this issue is just part of the culture wars we have imported from the States. [Post edited 21 Sep 2023 15:34]
| | | |
| It’s so weird on 16:08 - Sep 21 with 916 views | ChampionsofInnsbruck |
| It’s so weird on 13:41 - Sep 21 by Ewan_Oozami |
I'm over 60 and I've never voted Tory in any election and never will.... |
If you voted NuLaber you as good as!
Joking aside, I find anyone over 40 so entrenched and brainwashed into the Lab-Con mindset it's painful to even talk politics, those two parties have run this country exclusively, bar one coalition, since WW2, I don't think either mob can claim moral or political superiority over the other. They have both shamelessly wrecked this country while lining their own pockets and those of their financial backers. Until we break free of the the Con-Lab conflab nothing will ever change in this country.
At least the Scots worked this out years ago. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
