• Humanity's Eviction Notice
    ↪TheMadFool
    There are many people in the US who think the strategy adopted by Lif3r is appropriate for life in the US in its current state, irrespective of any worries about climate change. It's a symptom of the socio-cultural state of the nation.
  • Humanity's Eviction Notice
    ↪Brett
    Is climate change not happening then? I'm happy to be corrected, indeed it would be great news. I have cut down on flying and heat my house with firewood I grow myself. But if I don't need to do these things it would great?
  • Is halting climate change beyond man's ability?
    ↪frank
    You mention that permafrost release has happened before and that climate change might result in a period of rapid evolution. Both which would develop over longer periods than those in which the affairs of humans typically occur. Or in other words, humanity could easily revert to a Stone Age level of development in which perhaps 99% of the population has died within perhaps 200 years. Whereas these two developments could take thousand, or millions of years to play out.

    I accept that "runaway climate change" is a vague concept with varying definitions. Also that it is unlikely that human activity would result in a permanent runaway state like on Venus, but it could easily become runaway for a few hundred thousand, or millions of years.

    My source is broadcasts by David Attenborough, although I have heard most of these concepts from many sources.
  • Is halting climate change beyond man's ability?
    ↪frank
    Yes I'm aware of the disconnect on timescales. Are you aware of the predictions of tipping points? Where climate change tips a balance in certain systems resulting in extra emissions from sources of greenhouse gasses stored in the ground, or sea.

    If we don't act now, future generations will find themselves in irreversible (in the short term) circumstances. A proportion of humanity would be able to cope with this (although many might die along the way), but if the mass extinction event goes to far, it won't be pleasant.

    Also I don't think we can predict where the line is which we could cross resulting in runaway climate change.

    Without wanting to dampen your cheery mood ( excuse the pun), sea levels are already set to rise between 10 and 50 metres over the next 2-300 years(difficult to estimate the rate of this rise). So most of the large cities around the world will be unliveable. So where are those billions of people going to go, and what will they eat?
  • Is halting climate change beyond man's ability?
    ↪frank
    Many would like to reduce emissions now, but it may prove more difficult for them than it would if everyone did it at the same time. But if the right people don't choose to, that won't happen.
  • Humanity's Eviction Notice
    ↪Athena
    I live about 25 miles from Sizewell B, Sizewell A is there too, it was decommissioned a long time ago and I expect there are some nasty surprises hidden inside. Sizewell C is due to be started about now. I know a number of people doing conservation work on the site. Looking at Chernobyl, nature is getting along just fine in the contaminated areas. I think I heard that some folk have moved back in, but it might just be a rumour.

    And looking to the survivors, Mad Max looks about right, with more gazolene than I would expect. We would be back to a feudal system quite quickly I expect, but with some serious turmoil and blood shed during the intervening years. The question is, just how far we will fall before it bottoms out.

    I am an antique dealer, I have reservations about the market recovering following the recent fall of the market.
  • Humanity's Eviction Notice
    ↪iolo
    I agree in terms of civilisation, but a few humans will survive like they did last time and the time before that etc.. ( we can't say how many times, but I expect more than historians think). The trick is to somehow pass some knowledge on to the survivors to help them along, so they don't have to go right back to the Stone Age and start all over again.
  • Is halting climate change beyond man's ability?
    ↪Tim3003
    I agree, but a rapid change in activity can have a heavy carbon footprint itself through having to change infrastructure etc. But I think it is necessary to do it.
  • Is halting climate change beyond man's ability?
    ↪SophistiCat
    That's encouraging. I fear the very populous countries and South American countries won't change course quickly enough. Many are struggling to cope with their socio economic circumstances already. China is moving in the right way, but they have a reputation for stripping resources and dumping carbon heavy products into the global economy.

    I have high hopes for Australia finally coming on board.
  • Humanity's Eviction Notice
    You might mock Lif3r's solution to the issue, but can you deny his predictions of the climatic conditions, or the human behaviour when it starts to happen?

    Unfortunately his bunker mentality isn't going to help him for long, you only need to watch Mad Max to see that.

    There are two things that interest me here, when will real estate values at sea level begin to drop? And how the super rich think they are going to insulate themselves from the mayhem?

    Firstly, I give the real estate values maybe another 5 years before the penny drops and secondly it would be interesting to know if there are any super rich building bunkers in mountains anywhere yet?
    Perhaps a mountain range somewhere like Hawaii, or New Zealand. I'd give South Georgia a go, but I'm not rich enough, but I have recently moved uphill, I'm now at 56m above sea level.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    ↪Brett
    Apologies, I am a political cartoonist and figures like Trump and Johnson are inviting my response.
  • Brexit
    ↪Tim3003

    Yes Johnson has already called for a charge to see your GP, or call an ambulance. This should be a sharp petard, but it can only become one if the media promote it, most of them won't, it will be "nothing to see here". But sooner or later an event will happen which will pierce the media curtain and they will turn on him.

    Thanks for pointing out the climate change thread, I could find one before, I'll give it a look.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    ↪ZzzoneiroCosm
    Capital-P Politicians aren't the only politicians. Con-artists are politicians too: power is their art and their science.

    Trump is the consummate con-artist-politician. A born carnival barker.

    After P. T. Barnum: this is Trump's circus and you - Nosferatu - are its sucker.
    IMG-8965.jpg
  • Is halting climate change beyond man's ability?
    But what are we going to do, just sit back and enjoy the ride?

    Here in the UK we have a solution, just leave. Globalisation is controlling our powers of self determination, so I propose we leave the planet and leave then to sort it out themselves. Just get it done.
  • Brexit
    ↪Tim3003
    What about " there will be no checks in the Irish Sea"? Or a five week prorogation seven weeks before a crash out of the EU is "its business as usual"? I could go on. It's certainly fast and loose while vehemently claiming that its normal behaviour.

    About working cross party, before this administration I would have agreed with you, although Theresa May wouldn't have been much better. But now, no way. The government has demonstrated that they will sell anyone under the bus to keep power. Not simply to remain in No10, but to rubbish the opposition at every opportunity so that they can never be seen as a viable government.

    Regarding the NHS, this is what I was discussing with my son earlier,

    The trouble is if Johnson gets into a pickle while negotiating trade deals with the EU and the US at the same time (which seems inevitable), he will reach a point of desperation where the stakes become so high that his government becomes at risk. When he fears this he will play fast and loose and the hard nosed capitalists in the US will get their foot in the door. We will become a piggy in the middle between the US and the EU. The US will see us as a lever into the EU and the EU will see us as a shield against the US. This is when Johnson and his right wing backers will bring out the populist tactics again. As long as we have the Labour Party up and running again with an outspoken leader, they can be ready to pick up the pieces when it collapses.

    There is an interesting film made by John Pilger on this, I will link it later.
  • Brexit
    ↪Wayfarer
    I hope your wedding goes ok and that it doesn't get much hotter. We are getting large amounts of rain at the moment, it feels like it has been raining for two months, the weather is definitely becoming less stable. I would start a thread on climate change, but I'm no expert on it.
  • Brexit
    ↪Wayfarer
    How are things in Sydney? It looks terrifying on the news.
  • Brexit
    ↪Tim3003
    Unwarranted cynicism at this stage I think. It's a huge problem. At least give Boris the chance to address it before shooting him down..
    Perhaps you are right, although since I wrote that, Eddie Mair was interviewing a political commentator who spelt out what I said. This understanding of the government is already in the political discourse.

    I suggest you need to get on board with what it means for an administration to be lacking in integrity, truth and honesty. Have you noticed that Johnson in the House of Commons and all the government ministers who were on the media today are saying 36 billion for the NHS and that it's a big increase in spending and 40 new hospitals. That it will be easy to negotiate a trade deal with the EU in 11 months, because we are in perfect alignment on tariffs and regulations etc. All which have been proven to be untruthful by analysts and fact checkers. They are not going to let up, they are just getting going.

    Oh and we won't know if he actually addresses it, rather than just claiming to have done so.
  • Brexit
    ↪ssu
    Yes, but if the opposition doesn't agree to cross party talks the government will start shouting that they don't care about social care. Although if the Labour Party gets a good orator he/she should be able to stand their ground, it will be a few years before social care becomes an acute crisis.

    Judging by the Queen's speech today Johnson is not a good orator, he's not over the detail, or the subject even. He's nothing more than a showman, UK Trump.
  • Brexit
    I came here to point out a cynical development. The government is proposing cross party talks to come up with a solution to social care. This is a trap to blame their own failure to deal with it on opposition parties. So if the opposition parties cooperate, then when the government fails, they can blame the opposition. Alternatively if the opposition refuses to cooperate, then they will get the blame for not caring about social care.

    This government is showing its colours, integrity, truth, honesty has left the building. They will use any underhand tactics they can to hold on to power. Next we can expect them to mimic the Labour Party so as to move onto Labour political territory, leaving them politically homeless. The fact that it will only be hollow promises and they won't deliver is irrelevant, because they will just bluff and bluster and claim black is white, or white is black.
  • Brexit
    ↪unenlightened

    IOW they don't have a potential partner already in the EU to lobby for them.
    They do have a partner, the EU itself.
  • Brexit
    Quite so, remember Johnson's plans for a bridge between Scotland and Ireland. So that EU citizens can move seamlessly between parts of the EU without having to go via Little England. We wouldn't want pesky EU nationals sneaking in by the back door.
  • Brexit
    ↪unenlightened
    let's see if they make a similar declaration for Scotland.
  • Brexit
    ↪Tim3003
    This article lays it out

    In Brussels yesterday, Blair met Guy Verhofstadt and learnt how Belgium handles freedom of movement for European citizens who want to work and live in Belgium. Measures include identity cards, registration when a European arrives or moves homes, the obligation to leave Belgium after three months without a job, a requirement to take out health care, unemployment and other insurance.

    As a result, although Belgium has about one third more of its population from other EU member states than Britain, there is none of the obsession with other Europeans that was central to the Brexit debate.

    (https://www.euractiv.com/section/uk-europe/opinion/tony-blair-is-right-on-immigration-but-did-nothing-to-control-freedom-of-movement/)

    I agree that ideas like benefit tourism and tight control of immigration are a myth. They don't go on about immigration anymore because it is toxic, they can be accused of racism. They simply reduced all discussion about Brexit to two slogans, "get it done" and "the will of the people". There were more remainers in parliament than leavers and yet no one took the government to task on the issue. There was an open goal, but we required a statesman/woman to lead the opposition. Corbyn failed in this, even though he was also a leaver, he could have taken the initiative and won the argument and given us a Labour deal. I know that his party and support was split down the middle, which left him hamstrung, but that was no excuse for in action.
  • Brexit
    ↪Tim3003
    Yes there are some benefits which are in reality small beer. The fishing rights would benefit only a few hundred boats at most. Those rights in question were granted when we entered the EU, but for some strange reason, the fishermen sold the quoters or rights to the EU fishermen. Effectively they voluntarily gave them away. Also I expect the fishing rights would be one of the first concessions to be thrown under the bus during the negotiations.

    I have never heard of a case where the EU courts caused a problem and a forthright Prime minister would probably be able to demand a change in the rules on live animal exports.

    I've heard that we will get back our Blue passports, but it turns out we don't need to leave the EU to do that. As far as I know all the benefits suggested are not actively prevented by the EU except for divergence on regulation, tariffs and the liberty to have total control of the movement of citizens and their benefits.

    Of all the benefits I have come across, the freedom to control the movement of citizens and their benefits is the greatest and certainly from my experience this is the primary reason for the vote to leave.

    However it has been pointed out following the vote that there were a number of means of controlling these citizens while in the EU, but they were never exercised by the government, during the critical periods of mass immigration. So it was the incompetence of our government which caused the circumstances which lead to the referendum.
  • Brexit
    ↪Hanover
    It's probably as good an idea as the Scots leaving Britain, which is as much based upon their desire for independence and desire to lose their association with England than it is whether they'll actually economically benefit.
    Scotland would gain a great deal of independence, as currently it is almost entirely controlled from Westminster. Britain is already independent of the EU, except for certain treaties of cooperation between a number of independent countries.

    I think independence has value in its own right, even if means a loss of economic benefit. It's entirely possible that Canada, for example, would economically benefit if it ceded certain powers to the US, but I can fully understand why Canada wouldn't do that.
    In the case of Britain about 40% of our trade is through and benefits from the common market, plus the thing I value most, total freedom of movement throughout the European Union, including access to all benefits.
  • Brexit
    ↪Hanover
    Except that didn't happen following the Great Recession.

    Do you think that the financial crisis was a blip and in a year or two the world economy will be booming again?
  • Brexit
    ↪Hanover
    They'll just wait for them to turn 45 years old. Older people are more conservative because they like the way things were, even though things weren't like the way they remembered them. I can say this because I'm over 45 and I remember things being better even though they weren't.
    I gave my reasons for why that won't happen, in my opinion. Although I expect a proportion to switch for financial reasons like, pensions, or inheritance tax relief. But I see a loss of confidence in the usefulness of a free market capitalist model following the global financial crisis.

    Also regarding change, our system is such that now Johnson has lots of power and can do almost anything he wants and no one can stop him for the next five years.
  • Brexit
    ↪ssu
    But this is politics 1.0. It's basically quite arrogant not to understand how the other side will take your views. A mainstream party ought to look at what it says.

    Yes of course, but I don't know if you were aware, there is an equally pervasive issue with Islamophobia in the Tory party and opposition MPs repeatedly called this out, but it didn't cut through in the media and was repeatedly laughed off by Tory politicians. While the media couldn't stop talking about the media circus they had created around anti semitism in the Labour Party.


    "I'm not sure if he was your best hope. I put my hope on politicians that take extremely seriously and treat with respect the people who oppose them and think differently. Far too often we just dismiss the opposing views and start to believe our own biased views."

    Did you notice that Johnson and his team would say one thing and then the opposite in the next sentence, or the next day. Just repeat meaningless populist slogans constantly, ignore any kind of critical questioning. The problem for people who were opposed to Brexit, is that once article 50 was triggered there was a ticking clock, so all the government needed to do was distract and delay until the clock ran out.

    Talking about views on the Brexit issue, can anyone name a tangible benefit to leaving the EU?
  • Brexit
    ↪I like sushi
    If he’d resigned several months ago, then yeah. If and buts don’t matter now.
    Perhaps if a remain alliance had been formed and they had held back in their manifesto, which was seen as to good to be true. I lay the blame for a failure to do either of these at the door of Corbyn and McDonnell respectively.

    "Labour party complaining about him being too centrist/right-leaning"

    Yes, I regard Blair as Tory light, he just carried the Tory batton for a few years.


    "Personally I don’t think ONLY the popular vote should determine members of parliament but it seems ridiculous to treat a marginal win in this or that county as a victory and shut out half of the population of that constituency."


    Agreed, we need Proportional representation now. The tragic duplicity of this election is that Johnson used it as a solution to the Brexit stalemate, by calling it a Brexit election and campaigning on that ticket. Thus settling the developing questioning of the wisdom of the referendum and its result, as the reality was emerging. But in a way which conflates the issue with other things and disenfranchised millions of voters through the constituency system.

    "I guess commonsense isn’t exactly synonymous with politics though."

    It went out of the window this time.
  • Brexit
    ↪ssu
    Ok, I'm listening, but the original point I was making that you replied to was about a long term (over a 100 year period) stream of anti socialism dogma. I wasn't really referring to recent developments, but rather that recent developments sit on the top of an edifice of anti socialist dogma and prejudice, Comy', Marxist, Trotskyist. They will let the Comy's in by the back door.

    I am aware of Blair's thoughts on this and accept that there is some anti-semitism in the Labour Party, but not as much as claimed by the media. The subtlety of the distinction between "anti-Israeli foreign policy" sentiment and "anti-Israel" sentiment. Has been exploited by critics and sometimes mistakenly blurred by those being criticised. This story is then blown up into some massive crisis by the populist media and lots of their loyal readers take it as read.

    As an aside, the interviewer in the video you linked to, James OBrian, who has worked as a reporter on one of the papers I highlighted ( The Express) agrees with me on the media bias and the ways in which over years it turns their readers in the direction these lead them in. Also that it has effected the result of this election.

    I agree that this was not pivotal in the result and that there were a number of other important factors, which we can look at.

    Actually, I am not partisan, or a supporter of Corbyn particularly. I am actually a supporter of the Green Party. My beef in this is that I am anti-Brexit and Corbyn was our best hope if somehow stopping it.
  • Brexit
    ↪ssu
    Well the evidence is there in print, the bias and attack of any consideration of socialism by the right wing media. I don't see any left wing media generating bias in the other direction which is being fed to the metropolitan socialists and the young. The magazine Socialist Worker, the only populist left wing paper I know of was desolved in April this year. There is one left leaning mainstream newspaper The Gardian, but this paper gives politically balanced intellectual analysis of politics and is only left leaning by contrast to the right wing papers which predominate. It is widely regarded as having the highest standards of reporting in the UK. Here are some of the front pages of high circulation papers in the run up to polling day. There is one tabloid facing the other way politically, the Mirror, but it doesn't criticise right wing politics.
    IMG-8956.jpg
    IMG-8957.jpg
    IMG-8958.jpg
  • Brexit
    We wake up to the exciting (not) news that the cliff edge no deal is back on the table. Johnson is going to legislate to make it illegal to extend beyond December 2020. The idea being to crank up the pressure on the EU to capitulate. Talk about burning your bridges.
  • Brexit
    ↪Baden
    Nice summary, I would add that the drip feeding of anti socialism poison goes right back to the origin of the Labour Party and has become endemic now everywhere except for the metropolitan socialist elite and the younger educated voter.

    I predict a shift to the left as the demographic changes
    IMG-8881.png
    I can't see the likelihood that the Tory's can recruit sufficient numbers from anyone under 45 years old, due to the fallout and rise of personal debt, and poor economic prospects amongst the young since the credit crunch. Also the gradual failing of the real economy and inexorable rise in the national debt. This is the existential crisis which the party faces and why I keep saying that the Tory's are struggling to save their party. Brexit was their latest effort, which has worked in that it brought an extra layer of support for them in the election from leavers who wanted to "get it done" and castrated UKIP/Brexit party. The next stage, although probably not intended, is the break up of the union, purging the SNP, leaving a strongly Tory little England.
  • Brexit
    ↪Hanover
    but I do think there's some denial in this thread that perhaps the voters actually voted exactly as they wanted, as they believed, and they did it with their eyes wide open
    You may be right, as I am clearly on one side of the argument. I would like to debate it with someone on the other side but they haven't turned up. I don't think that you would be able to say that I don't understand the arguments though, or don't rehearse them.

    I would point out that there are probably as many different forms of Brexit as there are leave voters. The referendum was perhaps too simple a proposition and one which Cameron assumed would vote to remain. He didn't consider that it would go the other way and was intending to use it as a way to silence UKIP which was poaching his support. There was no detail about what Leave would mean, which resulted in 2 years of squabbling about what leaving meant in terms of future trade, legal and citizen circumstances that we would get.

    Now we have an election which Johnson called "the Brexit election", surely the impasse should have been broken by a confirmatory referendum. But it is widely acknowledged among commentators that the result would probably go the other way. This means of deciding the way forward on Brexit confuses the vote with other election issues and disenfranchises many voters who would like their vote to indicate the view on the issue of Brexit. For example, nearly everyone I know of my own age voted remain and all of them, except two, live in safe Tory seats, so they were disenfranchised in the decision on "the Brexit election". Also, now that Johnson has a large majority, he is at liberty to bring on any kind of Brexit he likes with no redress to the electorate, or effective opposition in Parliament.
  • Brexit
    ↪Tim3003
    Yes, Johnson might deliver, I'm sure he has the talent, unlike Trump. However he has a large and difficult brief with some quite excruciating tensions built in. So when push comes to shove, I expect he will put party before country again and push his new converts under the bus. But these people might be the very people he needs to keep onside if he is to save the party. So here is the first tension. Between his traditional support which is privelidged, inward looking, wealth and business oriented and his new support which is crying out for investment, welfare and a wholesale reconstruction of deprived areas. There is more to this tension, but I will leave it at that for now.

    Secondly, the issue of the Union, Johnson will be desperate to retain Scotland in the Union, he doesn't give a toss about Northern Ireland, which he said before the election. But in reality the only way he can keep Scotland is to deliver a soft Brexit. While his backers and base want a hard Brexit. If however Northern Ireland unifies with Ireland, that in itself might make keeping Scotland impossible.

    Historians still might say that it was the infighting of the Conservative party which broke up the Union.
  • Brexit
    ↪ssu
    Next its Scotland, would that be Sexit, I wonder.
  • Brexit
    ↪Tim3003
    Would Heseltine have done that?
  • Brexit
    ↪Tim3003

    I suggest you listen to the Peter Hennessy interview with Heseltine, you can see his vision for the country there.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07m5gwm

    Johnson has already said that he wants to model his vision on Heseltine, somehow I don't think he is up to it, but he might well surprise us.

    I thought it despicable that Johnson's first celebratory visit was to Sedgfield, Blair's seat. Rubbing salt into the wound like that is not Heseltine's style.
  • Brexit
    ↪Tim3003
    They disliked Corbyn as a leader, also seeing him as a possible security risk and not a good ambassador for the UK internationally.
    They did not believe Labour's huge spending promises could ever be paid for.
    I agree with this. I was discussing a slower long term shift of the traditional Labour heartlands away from traditional socialism.

    Yes I heard Heseltine, I agree with him and have already moved on. For me I will benefit from continued Conservative government to the extent of a six figure sum, from a heafty inheritance. Which I would almost certainly not have had if Corbyn had got in and removed the tax free allowance. But for me it was worth the sacrifice if the health of the society were to be restored. I am not all that concerned about Brexit provided a sensible approach is adopted*. I was expecting it to happen at some point, perhaps in another 10 or 15 years. But I still think it is a mistake and a poor strategy for our long term future. I agree with the your assessment of the Labour front bench, but I don't see them as any worse than the Tory front bench, just the opposite side of the political divide.

    * I will be entitled to a Scottish passport, so I expect to get an EU passport when Scotland leaves the UK.

    As an aside I believe that if Heseltine had become PM the world would be a different place now. The best prime minister we never had.
Home » Punshhh