????

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I received no grants. Why do you take it so personally?. I have been banging on about the green tax on our energy bills in the UK inflating fuel prices at the expense of the poor to appease green middle class conscious all over the forum, and yet you seem to think I am having a dig at you, personally. I haven,t a clue what they do in Ireland nor wether you got grants or anything, a bit paranoid if you think this is all somehow personal but to a degree that,s. Problem I,ve always found on this forum and by no means unique to you! The personalisation of these arguments, me I just stick to my own oft repeated societal stereotypes but that seems to be taken personally by many....

And shale gas is a potential electronic cigarette in your analogy. My point, if you read it 4 post up, is all about bridging etc rather than doing nothing. To be frank giving grants to insulate homes and taking the money from green tariffs put on fuel bills is pissing in the wind as well as being regressive.

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So screw the 22nd century climate for the sake of > the 21st centruy economy? Nice. Baby boomer debt > will have nothing on the debt we leave future > generations then. > Those Amazonian loggers gotta make a living too > you know!!! Been on many flights in the last few months? Talking the talk is sooo easy. So we stop aerospace and car manufacturing, say, oh and tablest/smartphones manufacturer etc...do you know how much energy it takes to extract a ton of copper from rock say? fair do's if you really believe that's what we should do, i don't, but screaming about it, global warming, whilst living a 21st Century life is such a fooking cop out. and hypocritical beyond belief. Sounds right on tho, so good for your cred.

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why has that reduced their carbon emissions so > much? Surely it's just another fossil fuel being > burnt? Gas, and in the US shale gas, and gas genertaed electricty creates significantly less emmissions than coal powered electricity. So in the US energy costs and emisisons have fallen actually quite dramatically and in deep contrast to the EU. Personally, I don't want to go back to the stone age, and am favour in doing whatever is both pratical and helps reduce emmission. So i'd like to allow grown ups to actulaly be allowed to do a bit more work on the science (see also GM) without being shouted and screamed up by luddite idiots who make their mind up on these thing on god knows what basis, er maybe the papers they read and website they visit? or what sounds cool uin their circles...cos I don't fooking know. Hopefully we can create some 'bridging' energy (ie less damaging) until technology and science 9and the market) solve the issue. the tokenism efforts of the EU, the last govt and thus far this one are just petty sops to middle class guilt, so don't complain about your bills going up, you know it's just a meal for two in Frankllins with some wine....sod the poor eh

david_carnell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ???? Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > StraferJack Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > USA? > > > > > > Fracking? > > > > > > Correct. 2 points > > And you do understand why just because it works in > the US of A doesn't mean it would or we would want > it to here? > > Unless of course you too believe the North East to > be a desolate waste land that can be exploited? Nope. i believe in trying to get some facts rather than towing out tediouse cliches and screaming at anyone i disagree with on it not being what i read about in *that place*. I presume you and others have made up your mind about it wit no reference to facts or some kind of you know, science (see also Nuclear Power) based on it doesn't fit within your 'Liberal* (stifles laugh) narrative. What exactly are you going to do to power our 21st economy?....becuase manufacturing 1.5 million cars on windfarms is sure not going to work well.

The 3rd picture proves beyond reasonable doubt that they are ALL childsnatchers, burn 'em

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The French has banned fracking so everyone who > invested in the companies who were going to do it > in France are now trying to get them to frack in > the UK. It is successful in the US but then the US > is so large that it is unlikely that the pollution > of the water table would be much of a problem. > When there were less people and less industry > woodland was managed very well to supply energy > needs. I can't believe the totally irresponsible > way that oil has been used without any thought for > the future- madness. Woodland was managed fantastically in Easter Island

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > USA? > > Fracking? Correct. 2 points

Out of intersest anyone know the answer to which of the biggest economies has reduced emmissions the fastest over recent years? (and why? for bonus points) *hint, Guardian readers aren't going to like either answer.

Stop arguing over a comb.... ......Holloway gone.

Good luck in the Stone Age. Typical SJ response.

The problem with people who do this on idealism is that they seem to think that buy just wishing it so it will be true. Renewables are absolutely, absolutely Miles away from creating enough energy for a 21st century economy. The left largely seems to want to take us back to the Stone Age, interestingly at the same time they keep banging on how we need a manufacturing renaissance (try doing that with an energy supply that.s breaking down) nuclear expensive and Fracking (potentially, note SJ) cheaper and less damaging than other carbon sources are the most realistic options, but no, not allowed them so we get idiots who think we can run our economy on wind farms and some tidal barriers: meanwhile carbon offsets give governments revenues (used on green technology development? Behave) are hedged by companies and poor old mug punter consumers get extortionate energy bills, how the US et all must be laughing at us as we burden our industries and people with additional expense for bogus token green efforts. Hampering companies with no control on their prices is really going to help future investment, are going broke states going to step in with tax payers money? All politics no sense because people don,t bother thinking about it just, what's the 'right' position here, fooking idiocy.

Yup, they've not had the Hammers at home yet

Depressing and one sided dismissal of a fundamental freedom there Keefe. No one is under illusions about the standard of some journalism or even whole newspapers or companies.....but that,s not the point at all. It's just a fundamental freedom that,s being eroded....by politicians and their appointees.

I agree numbers. They are both tossers, but I am not even vaguely considering Milliband In the 80s if Labour had got elected ( and I voted for them every 80s election) they,d have taken us back to the Stone Age, but at least it would have been based on principle; now they are happy to take us back to the Stone Age on the basis of it,ll get them elected.

There,s no halfway house here, it,s a fundamental principle. It was largely politicians fault that Murdoch got so big, they believed it Woz us that won it shite...without a commission, or a regulator, a paper has been shutdown, people are being prosecuted and the power of the press has been shown for what it is, so why the fook are we now accepting it needs more. The law and the punters should make the hold them accountable and that,s it. Interestingly another media monolith that covered up abuse for years, tried to hide stories that exposed it whilst at the same time airing absolute garbage because it was, you know, against the Tories, seems to have escaped with some mild chastising and way above contract redundancies. Trebles all round.

do people this thick tied up in nonsensical dogma really get to be MPs? Depressing ain't it

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/private-eye-front-page-mocks-hugh-grant-and-mps-with-press-regulation-special-8880763.html Applaud this proper liberals....a free press is sacrosanct, I'm appalled how many so called liberals seem to think state interference is ok

you didn't notice "them (us)"then :)

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm not quite sure where you stand on global > warming. Are you saying it's not happening or just > that there's no point trying to do anything about > it? I am saying that what we are doing is ineffective and largely a symbolic gesture to the tortured consciencse of the middle classes, with their cars, and flights, and houses stuffed with electronic gadgets... and whilst increased energy costs are a bit of a pain for them (us) they are a matter of life and death for many less fortunate.

add in 22% for green and various carbon capture costs to appease Middle Class conscious but have F>All impact on global warming. All populists rubbish which will lead to massive underinvestment and incraesing decrepit infrastructure....but it's ok it boost mr Milliband's popularity, don't worry

Two random thoughts for tonight. 1) Even though the market is mad there are some explanations of how people can afford itpeople who bought before 2000 (and didn't remortgage to spend on crap....as a far few did), many of whom are probably just approaching their 40s have tons of equity so can trade up etc) even buyers in 2004 are prett 2)Related 2, the bank of mum and dad, people who bought homes in London (and the South east....(and haven't remortgaged to pay for crap) prior to say 1985 when normal salaries would buy you a place in areas now almost impossible except for the very rich are sitting on fortunes, there are probably 'millions' of these, they are clearly helping their kids/grandfkids to an enourmous degree, although doing bugger all for social mobility. 3) Demographics - the peak of the first post war baby boom was 1947 (Mick Jagger etc) but concentrated around 1945-48, yes guess what happened when the men came home from war!. These people are now hitting late 60s (there's a joke in there somewhere) hence the massive and incraesing pressure on the NHS/Pensions etc etc. They will start to die (some of them) and more will start to downsize and morefamily houses will come onto the market and this will accelerate...increasing supply etc etc er, that's it, and it's three

1) Remove green tarrifs 2) Stop moaning about fracking PS - good luck to the Green Party in their stated aim of 'braodening their appeal' and getting working class support whilst having policies that'll push fuel bills into the stratosphere

Oh walking salsa.....I thought you wrote something else

some random thoughts: in the long run there is too much debt floating about out there - private but especially soveriegn/govt and thus - inflation at a just above(if not there's trouble) targets globally - will slowly eat it, (and the real prices of houses away). This won't be great for us individually or as users of public services as neither real incomes nor govt spending won't keep up with this inflation. That's the only unhorrific way out of 'debt' but won't be at all pleasant, especially for the poorest/unemployed. Gonna a get sh1tter. But at some point the prices won't 'seem' so mad. London property's position as a safe haven for the very riches' and pretty riches' wealth is the main reason behind the bubble (especially as to them, the double digit % fall in the pound against most currencies back in 2008ish maens property prices did fall here) There was in trend terms a bubble in 1999/00. I got out smugly - that cost me ?100k net as I got sheepishly back in in 2004...... don't listen to a word I say.