I think he's given up on the election .... But is trying to make it as narrow a defeat as possible.
-
Half price tho!
-
In summary to Russ, what you say makes theoretical sense but this country is far too broken to ever do any of the things you say!
-
There are of course always going to be a ton of challenges in execution, economics exists as a science to have its theories broken by the collective irrationality of people. But I don't think you can just say "it's too difficult and this country can't do it so let's not try" when it's something as important and frankly unavoidable as this - what it requires is the political courage to actually force change, and then let markets and people find solutions. If we follow the logic of assuming that the government does nothing to support change except maintain the 2030 ban on ICE vehicles i.e. no new investments in transit or charging infrastructure, let's consider what will happen:
- Those people who are open to changing to electric and able to do so will do with minimal fuss
- Those people not able to do so because of cost or an inability to consistently charge their vehicle will keep their ICE vehicles as long as possible, which will mean maintaining them more diligently which is also a net positive contribution towards environmental goals
- Regardless of the renewed focus on maintenance, some ICE vehicles will die or become too expensive to keep running, thus reducing the number of ICE vehicles on the road and driving up the second hand value of those that remain
- At some point the people who have a viable ICE vehicle will decide that the value of selling it more than offsets the cost of alternative services such as rentals, car share clubs, Ubers (all of which will overwhelmingly be electric because ICE will be too expensive to put that kind of mileage and hammer onto) and transit
- As fewer ICE vehicles remain and more households evaluate their ability to purchase and own an electric vehicle, a greater market opportunity will arise for car share clubs and charging/storage depots, and thus they will become more efficient (because of fleet volumes), more local and more competitive
Again, that's just a very simple economic theory. When you're standing in the rain on a chilly November morning waiting for a bus it's not going to be all that comforting when you think back to the warm embrace of your Audi's leather seats and the comforting tones of Zoe Ball, but we've kind of built this rod for our own backs. There isn't an easy way out any more.
I don't have kids to leave this world to so in a way it's not really my problem, but I know the part I've played in it and I'm prepared to do my bit trying to get things going in the right direction. The people who do have kids are the ones who should be really embracing the sacrifices.
-
Too late, already changed to 2035.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-66863110
What's another 5 years hey.
-
Yeah I know, I was just following through the principle of what could/should have happened if they'd stuck to their guns, why it isn't necessarily all that important to have built all the alternatives in advance, and why it probably isn't incumbent upon the government to do that.
-
It's not really a question of literal suitcases of cash. It's setting a regulatory and legislative framework that lasts, and protects the existing suitcases of cash.... and supporting those interests, that will continue to support the existing framework, and protect it from scrutiny. .... and horror of horrors potential prosecution or redress.
I'm pretty sure that sunak did not seek political office to pursue the interests of a wider society, or the ordinary people that he has no idea about. And like the rest of the shiny public faces in the Tory party, I do not think for a moment that they are driving the strategic policy (30p Lee! Truss! Raab! vacuous public popularity contest winners for sale, morality free - don't imagine the ones that hide it better, are actually any better. They wouldn't have been put there if they hadn't already been bought).
Kudos, gongs, immunity from falling foul of real world scrutiny or redress, powered by national establishment power and protection. The best security the rich can buy.
Worth doing your spell in the shop window for, while promoting the wider financial interests that actually drive the world, and what the country is being consumed to service.
I mean, step back. What can you identify that has actually been done to benefit society as a whole, and the strategic and economic future of the country and it's people?
The Tories are the party of business. So not of the people. They told you. That's why they smirk when you refuse to stare the reality of that in the face. They think that you are an idiot, and that you deserve it.
-
I would say the Tories are the party of capitalism, rather than business (which Labour and the Lib Dems would also claim to be, whether convincingly or otherwise). As such, I agree that they will usually act to continue a regulatory and legislative framework that supports existing vested interests, especially 'Big Business'. But Big Business is changing (as it always does) and right now the petrochemical gang are in decline, while Big Tech and Big Pharma are on the rise. As too is innovation in environmentally-friendly technologies. The US is pouring billions into it, as is the EU and the Chinese.
So I don't think it's credible that Sunak is ditching various green policies to please his petrochemical chums. There's much more money in Tech, Pharma and Green technologies. More likely, to my mind, that he's the technocrat, pragmatic 'bean counter' that his enemies always portrayed him as. He disliked Johnson's green commitments from the outset. The ULEZ byelection gave him the excuse to argue in cabinet that 'the people' want to slow down. He thinks he has Mondeo Man and Worcester Woman on his side.
I think there are plenty of Tories who are indeed cynical, smirking shits who are laughing at the chavs. Rees-Mogg, Shapps and Johnson leap to mind. But others genuinely believe that Adam Smith was right and a free, capitalist economy will bring greater wealth and happiness to the people. Others want to keep out the foreigners, get Brexit done, protect the monarchy and the Church of England etc. For Sunak I suspect it's the simple allure of political power.
-
There are a range of the public facing idiots, that have been co-opted for a range of reasons. No doubt. Venality, greed, and yes, possibly even ideology. But be in no doubt it's the funding and think tanks, that control the funding, that drive policy.
The tories have taken money from airport authorities, as it signals it's support for airport expansion - against the climate committee advice. Sunak is expected to announce the scrapping of a requirement for landlords to improve energy efficiency, after lobbying from landlords - a further torpedoing of the net zero plan (on the back of new oil and gas licences, the continued commitment to fracking, and the news that the pumping of shit into our waterways is being done illegally, but nobody is doing anything about it). It is expected that the next NHS data contract worth £480 million will shortly be awarded, again, to Palantir (the unpleasant US company with links to the security services, and owned by right wing Billionaire Peter Theil - a funder of Trump in america) - for further monetisation of patient data - in conjunction with a bill passing through parliament reducing the safeguards on such personal health data.
Meeting net zero is expected to cost 6% on GDP. Not meeting it is expected to cost 13%. Both figures in a government report that the right wing propaganda project selectively quote from.
That's just September, and what we know.
There's a lot of very detailed work, requiring meticulous planning and a long run up, going on here....it's not political vacillation chasing votes. It's a consistent and well applied plan. There is only some on the hoof opportunism in what misdirection is waved in your face.
The farming sector is decimated, the Science and technology sector isolated and starved of funding, small businesses are being regulated against, and driven out with increasing costs - including massive hurdles to trade, recruitment, and funding investment. Individuals are seeing decreasing standards of living, with increasing costs, and reducing rights, protections, recourse to law, health provision, and a safety net for the hungry who can't afford shelter. People are desperate, and motivated to take poorly paying jobs that don't provide a living. I said it was going to happen. It's happened, and is happening.
There isn't much left.
If you think that is an accident, you have both a cavalier attitude to coincidence, and an overdeveloped tolerance of incompetence.
The sharp political operatives on your telly are not driving this. It's the teams behind them, that come from the funding. The politicians themselves couldn't even organise a secret rave when they have the fuzz in their pocket.
-
Yep, a lot of it is controlled by those at 55 Tufton Street
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/55_Tufton_Street#:~:text=55%20Tufton%20Street%20is%20a,other%20fossil%2Dfuel%20lobby%20groups.
-
Have an annoying fly in my office. Can't seem to shepherd it out of the window. Can't seem to kill it.
-
Windolene is the best way to kill flies. Give it a squirt and it will be unable to fly, allowing you to squish it with a kleenex.
-
Aged approx 8, I would catch flies and pull their wings off, then call them walks before leaving them to fend for themselves outside. We lived opposite a farm. I hated flies.
-
Do you have a tabard?
-
Am doing some work on a possible dual-stack container server. So it's possible that talkback will become available on ipv6 as well as ipv4.
-
You sir are a serial killer.
I have taken the attitude that all animals serve a purpose and I will do my very level best not to kill them. People on the other hand….
Chicago: Man of conscious.
