Let's Get Political!

[Bennett]

Because the ideas are just plain stupid.

Could you spell out what ideas are plain stupid pls?

[horlock07]

Could you spell out what ideas are plain stupid pls?

I have big issues personally with some of this govt policies but am under no illusions on how much worse labour would be.

And a follow up question as to why things would invariably be worse under Labour

[The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey]

Personally, I don’t think there is much substantive difference between any of the useless fuckers. They fiddle around the edges but do nothing to address the main issues.

I’m looking forward to a knock on the door from my prospective Tory candidate.

‘You may be the best constituency MP there is but there’s no way on God’s Green Earth I’m voting your corrupt party in’

We need a benign dictator to get things done!

[RobertT]

Could you spell out what ideas are plain stupid pls?

This could be interesting, because I really struggle to find easily available information that really does deliver a clear indication of what anyone stands for these days.  True policy statements.  There is a lot of faff from them all about the shit the other Party gets up to, and some vague promise to be better, but HOW?

I am sure those that read my thoughts would assume I am Left Wing.  So, on that basis, what little I can find on Labours idea for Fair Pay Agreements would worry me.  It sounds like Collective Bargaining for those not Unionised, and I really do not like that one bit if that is what it is.  Government should be there to propose the basic acceptable standards for a society.  If any wage is deemed to be too low, then set a standard for the Country, but I do not like others negotiating for me thank you very much.

That is precisely why Unions exist in the first place - if people want to join them, let them.  My personal experience has never been good - it's riddled with personal self interest, despite some notion of being for the greater good.

On the flip side, I'm fully behind a Government backed scheme to invest in Energy Efficiency and Renewables, which they claim they would deliver, including 6bn on Insulating homes that needs it.  If we wait for the private sector and individuals to work on such items, it will never get done.  Free markets work well for consumerism, not so much for things that take 40-50 years to give a return.

There.  Should be easier than it is to do this though.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey]

You’d presume if any party is all for net zero by 2030, 2035 or whatever they would have an idea of the cost that would involve. Let us know, it’s our money they’ll spend (or pocket).

I notice Rishi has gone all Boris and lost his WhatsApp messages from his time as Chancellor during Covid.

[horlock07]

This could be interesting, because I really struggle to find easily available information that really does deliver a clear indication of what anyone stands for these days.  True policy statements.  There is a lot of faff from them all about the shit the other Party gets up to, and some vague promise to be better, but HOW?

There.  Should be easier than it is to do this though.

Policies, smolicies, that is so 2016. You just get elected now with a decent majority and then fuck it, do what you like.

The present government got elected off the back of a manifesto so limited it could probably have been written on a stamp and have delivered (or even attempted to deliver) very little of it (and where they claim to have the interpretation of the figures are questionable to say the least - 40 new hospitals anyone, likewise Sunak has come out with his own pledges and not sure where if anywhere we are going with that.

What is going to be interesting is post next election if Labour get in (really not convinced they will) and start down the same path of ignoring pledges, making it up as they go along and basically forcing stuff that is dubiously legal through via majority in the house and/or SI's.

Now many of a blue persuasion are going to (entirely correctly) lose their fucking minds if/when this happens, but they are just going to look like prize hypocritical pricks when they do as its the precedents and destructions of parliamentary conventions instigated by the governments of the last 7-8 years which has got us to this state, and they didn't bat an eyelid when that was happening.

I know some on here think that I am a card carrying marxist or something, but my voting record is tied to no one, I just want a government that actually seems to give a shit about the population (all of them!) and making sure we pass on a sustainable planet and society to my daughter and her successors, the colour of their chosen rosette means fuck all to me.  

You’d presume if any party is all for net zero by 2030, 2035 or whatever they would have an idea of the cost that would involve. Let us know, it’s our money they’ll spend (or pocket).

Indeed, but also include details of the cost if we don't, which I suspect will dwarf the cost of net zero!

Oh and show their working after the monumental (but deliberate??) fuck up from the Tufton Street think tank last week! https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/sep/29/how-a-thinktank-got-the-cost-of-net-zero-for-the-uk-wildly-wrong

[RobertT]

It surprises me that those at the front of pushing for more sustainable uses of resources/energy don't just hammer home the cost of alternatives, which includes doing nothing.  As an example, someone should be totalising the cost of more extreme Hurricanes to Florida, or flood defences for New York, or grain prices and so on.  There was something, around the time inflation became the hot topic, about the cost of basic essential vegetables in the UK, and how the changing climate was fucking it up for farmers to the extent it was (reduced crops, cost to produ e a  crop and some crops just becoming impossible to grow with any great effect).  There should be much more of that, and less of the save the planet stuff - people care about themselves, some care about others, but would still save themselves first, very few are altruistic.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey]

Anyone in favour of nuclear? I think France produces about 70% of its electricity through nuclear, UK less than half that.

I’m unconvinced about wind, solar etc. Where’s all the extra electricity going to come from if electric cars become commonplace? What about the child labour being used to mine the lithium needed for batteries?

A lot of net zero policies seem to be anti environmental which is a bit perverse.

What about the larger vehicles, trucks, buses etc.

[RobertT]

Anyone in favour of nuclear? I think France produces about 70% of its electricity through nuclear, UK less than half that.

I’m unconvinced about wind, solar etc. Where’s all the extra electricity going to come from if electric cars become commonplace? What about the child labour being used to mine the lithium needed for batteries?

A lot of net zero policies seem to be anti environmental which is a bit perverse.

What about the larger vehicles, trucks, buses etc.

You'll be pleased to know that Labour have committed to Nuclear, as in to push it as part of the future mix of energy provision.  At least their policy stuff online suggested as much.

[Jimmy HaveHave]

Too many houses being built across the country isn’t helping our farmers either.

[ThreeDrawsMentality]

Because the ideas are just plain stupid.

I have big issues personally with some of this govt policies but am under no illusions on how much worse labour would be.

Just out of curiousity, what is it about a prospective Labour government that makes you believe it would be much worse than what it currently is?

[Ticker45]

Anyone in favour of nuclear? I think France produces about 70% of its electricity through nuclear, UK less than half that.

I’m unconvinced about wind, solar etc. Where’s all the extra electricity going to come from if electric cars become commonplace? What about the child labour being used to mine the lithium needed for batteries?

A lot of net zero policies seem to be anti environmental which is a bit perverse.

What about the larger vehicles, trucks, buses etc.

Never thought that wind and solar was the entire answer either, Rolls-Royce have a design for small nuclear power stations as opposed to the extremely over costly major ones being built that look a far more preferable solution.

[horlock07]

I’m unconvinced about wind, solar etc. Where’s all the extra electricity going to come from if electric cars become commonplace? What about the child labour being used to mine the lithium needed for batteries?

National grid seem pretty sanguine about the whole thing, I can't find the graphic I found previously so am gonna have to type this...

The highest peak demand in the UK in recent years was 62GW in 2002, since then demand has fallen by c.16% due to improvements in efficiency.

Even if everyone switched to EV's overnight they think demand would go up c.10% so we would still be using less than we did 21 years ago and well within existing grid capacity.

Too many houses being built across the country isn’t helping our farmers either.

Why?

I suspect the government selling them down the river to Australia and New Zealand for a quick headline and JRM wetting his pants about being able to eat hormone injected beef is causing them more sleepless nights. https://x.com/Minette_Batters/status/1708829501055000802

Note Ms Batters is a Wiltshire farmer, and president of that bastion of far left Marxism, the NFU!

[Jimmy HaveHave]

We keep hearing about being a more sustainable country and growing more cereal and crops but on the other hand can’t wait to purchase more green fields to build on.

[RobertT]

Anyone in favour of nuclear? I think France produces about 70% of its electricity through nuclear, UK less than half that.

I’m unconvinced about wind, solar etc. Where’s all the extra electricity going to come from if electric cars become commonplace? What about the child labour being used to mine the lithium needed for batteries?

A lot of net zero policies seem to be anti environmental which is a bit perverse.

What about the larger vehicles, trucks, buses etc.

The EV debate is an interesting one to me - I'm not sold, but then I am also not wed to the combustion engine either.  Fucked if I care how the thing moves (in terms of emotions).

What puzzles me, is why the EV market hasn't been far more innovative in how to change cars, for the better, by the benefits that electric propulsion deliver.  Not least, far less parts - meaning there is an opportunity to get much more creative in the design of the cars interior - more space becomes available.

Now, in terms of environmental.  There are certainly some concerns with being able to fully sell the current EV's as significantly better for the environment.  It's fuzzy, even if generally beneficial.  however, what we do know is that Petroleum is not going to suddenly be environmentally friendly, and developments in efficiency can only do so much when the source of fuel is naturally bad for the climate.  EV transition at least gives us a jumping off point to head somewhere else - the source of energy can be produced in better ways, even if not done so yet.  I'd also wager that EV is staging point to something else in 20/30 years, or it should be.  Just think of the innovation in phone batteries for example.  There is so much that can be done - it should be seen as a way of unlocking innovation.  Cars, and planes and trains for that matter, have not innovated nearly as much as other things in the world of technology, not least because they were constrained by their fuel source.

Lets get creative.