TheCat

🤣🤣🤣 There's that hysterical over exaggeration we all know and love.

If you think things would be any better or much different if the UK were still in the club,, then I'm not sure if you've been paying attention.... In any case, I will miss your ever cheery contributions to my life.

Just this week I've confirmed that for work reasons I will be moving to Australia early next yeat For some reason, now seemed an appropriate juncture to pull the ripcord... Best of luck edf and UK plc.... Things do not look rosey....

If I thought that petitions were in anyway effective (other than giving a signatory a smug, virtuous feeling when they tell their friends that they signed a petition), then I would start a petition to ban petitions....

I don’t know what sex you are but I’m telling you that I don’t know a single woman who wants a biological male in their private spaces or sports categories. Not a single female. None. And none of them is homophobic, in fact some of them are lesbians. If you’re female then you’re an anomaly, if you’re male then you’re an entitled misogynist and the main crux of this heinous problem. And if you only see people “for who they are and not their private parts” then why do you support people changing their pronouns, identifying with stereotypical tropes of what male and female is, and potentially mutilating themselves beyond all repair? Surely the people who are against all this new religion (“transphobes”) are the ones who truly care about who people are and not what’s in their pants? Go figure All of this is textbook GC nonsense that continues to be banded around by a minority of people. If you get out of your echo chamber, the reality is much more neutral. THE amusing part is that this entire quote could be reproduced for the 'other side'... Replace GC with something else is all...

My two cents.... It isn't very helpful (problematic? 😜) when at the first questioning of what others unquestionably accept, some people immediately throw out the 'transphobe' label.... Many social left wingers seem to think that raising a concern about women's sport or women's spaces automatically means that the person complaiming believes that all trans women are predatory perverts.... I would guess that most people asking sensible, practical questions would also likely support trans people being who they want to be.... But the trans community doesnt live in a bubble... Surely society has to discuss legitimate concerns in a constructive way? Just shutting down discussion with 'transphobe' or 'trans women are women' isn't very helpful in my view...

Guess it just depends on whether one wants to feel perpetually outraged and indignant on the Internet, while achieving absolutely nothing. Or whether one wants to engage with a person that they may personally find objectionable, and perhaps end up actually getting some change/improvement.... Whatever floats your boat I guess....

So you have a grievance...fair enough. The target of that grievance has offered to meet and engage. And you refuse to engage until they basically cede to your demands? (top tip: negotiation usually comes BEFORE resolution, not the other way around) Representative of the depressing world we live in... Where engagement, dialogue nuance and compromise has been replaced only by indignant, inflexible outrage....

I purposefully haven't really commented on this issue this week, as there is so much to it, meaning that it doesn't lend itself to simplistic, partisan Internet shouting. Suffice to say the hysteria this week has been OTT That's also not meant to imply I like the mini budget. But.... On a micro point.... I know 100s of people who would fall in the 45p band and none of them have these mystical creative accountants you speak of..... Its easy to Conflate someone who makes, say 200k (with a big mortgage and other commitments) a year with someone that makes millions or more.....

Triple whammy for local house prices.... Rising mortgage rates nationally Loss of over inflated Foxton asking prices An influx of poundland clientelle to our beautiful 'lordship Lane village' I mean how am I expected to push past all those tracksuits while I'm carrying a selection of cheeses from Mons (not to mention the quince paste).....

An extra £1 paid out in bonus generates 40p of revenue for the tax man. If it’s instead retained by the company as profit it will only generate 19p of tax

It may or may not work..... But I love that there's a plan.....

What's fascinating is that all the opponents of austerity wanted this.....

I think you might be confusing me with the other 90 percent of posters on the EDF....

Well... I asked for 'a plan'... And by all reports truss and kawrteng are going to give us one tomorrow.... I like at least that there is some conviction, but no question... It's a gamble.... If they stimulate the growth with their measures history will judge them heroes.... If they don't... Well maybe some choice other descriptors will be used....

I thought the headline was a comment on property prices, rather than retail tenancies....

Does anyone on this thread understand 'load factor'? If not.... Please explore...... Then let's chat about renewables and generation mix......

It is possible for both to be true. If you are a low earner, raising NI rates will hit you much harder as a % of your disposable income than it will for higher earners, even though on the surface higher earners are paying more. Likewise when you cut NI, the higher earners gain far more than lower earners ' Yes....as a maths graduate, I do understand the mathematics.....basically chop and change between proportion and absolute amount as fits whatever narrative you want to embrace..... The entire point is that the narrative of 'tory bad' is the priority it seems, rather than judging things on their merits...... Hence why Joe Lycett is being hailed as a 'genuis' for actually doing something totally 'un-genius'.....ragging on the tories for laughs is so farking easy....as most of DR's 'humourous' posts will attest......:)

Its arguably pretty optimistic to think that much of the crowd on here would even be willing to give her a chance.... We see it on the national scale already....its pretty hard to take some of the Labour MP's and their media outriders seriously given the howling 12 months ago about how the NI increase was regressive and unfair....only to now be howling about a reversal of the NI increase being regressive and unfair....

I would agree that pay the full hourly rate (like a 'call out' fee) of job is less than an hour. Although....for what sounds like quite a small job, I would think it reasonable and preferable (for both parties) to agree on a flat fee for the job. I dont think it would be odd to ask if thats possible...

Fair enough. But I just cant get on board with viewing everything through a brexit lens. No I did not ask about the EU or other countries. As my question was about short termism in politics in the UK. If you want to discuss politics in the EU, then start a thread on that. But since you raise it. I feel there are some rose tinted glasses here about the EU. I'll go out on a limb and say that the powerhouse of the EU, Germany, will suffer a massive economic collapse in the next 12 months.....in which case, we might be glad of a little separation.... Seperatley, I get what you're saying about starmer playing it safe. But keeping one's head down so that you appear "less sh!t" than the other guys is hardly a vision or a plan.....very uninspiring all round to be honest.

So, as many current 'crises' are making very apparent, it seems Britain has been a victim of endemic short-termism in most of its strategic political decision making over the past 20-odd years. As a result, we seem to lurch from crisis to crisis, as the various governments trying to put out constant fires, and never end up focussing on an industrial and economic vision for the nation. Sure the tories have been in power for the past 12 years, but I dont think post-2000 blair/brown was really much different in this regard. I think to some extent, this lack of political vision is now mirrored in much of how the electorate views the government and its political decisions. But to be fair, thats becuase if there was a well communicated, sensible, coherent plan, then voters would likely be more willing to accept nominally unpopular policies if it was clear it was part of a broader strategy to acheive something long term. A good example being brexit (pls, I dont want another brexit debate), where focus on short term hardships is understandable in the absence of a clear strategy. Similar on broader industrial strategy, industrial relations etc.... At this point, I sort of care less what the plan is (I.e left wing vs right wing), as long as there actually is one. The question is....is there anyone out there on any side of politics with an actual vision for how the country and economy could look....obviously tories are pretty bereft and too focussed on populism to make the hard choices (unless Truss surprises everyone), but is Starmer and Labour actually really any different? Sure, they may have a few random policies that are different from the status quo, plus various press releases which trumpet a few bullet points of vague platitudes about how they will tackle x, y, or z...but dont really say much at all..... Any up and comers who might be able to shake up this short term disease in Uk politics? Plenty of positive chat about Kemi Badenoch from some conservatives (again, you dont have to like every policy or view of hers, but a plan/vision would be nice). Angela Rayner gets plenty of plaudits on the other side? Anyone else?, with a bit of foresight and the gumption to make the hard decisions to make it happen....?

Its becuase the price of electricity in each market is typically set by the marginal cost of generation at any given moment. The generators do not set the price, the market does. There will be a generation cost curve..so if you line up all the available power at anyone time from lowest cost to highest cost, then at that same moment in time, draw a line where the demand for power is at that moment, then where that line cuts the supply cost curve is how much the wholesale power price will be at that moment. Any available power at a higher cost will remain unused, hence why typically higher cost peak generation is only needed at times when when demand is very high (a bit of a simplification, but hopefully makes sense). So, the lower cost generators will make margin, and the higher cost guys will make next to nothing, or will not sell any power to the grid if in excess of demand requirements as per the cost curve. And given changes in demand at different times of day, plus the mix of what power is available (I.e. no low cost solar at night, or low cost wind when not windy enough), the price will move about accordingly. And you're correct, once battery storage becomes cost efficient at large storage capacities, then boom, job done, intermittent generators can store power and it can be despatchable (I.em available at any time on demand). Until then....fossil fuels (or nuclear...which is zero carbon) is what what we need in the mix to ensure security of supply....

Im a strong advocate for the need to decarbonise. I have worked professionally for a leading climate change thinktank. Im in no way an apologist for use of fossil fuels. But I am a pragmatist, and what I said should in no way be controversial. We need to decarbonise, yes, but the truth is that the manner in which this has been delivered by govts of all colours, has been totally reckless...and cheered on all the way by green activisits and 'armchair eco warriors' who have absolutley no idea of the practical complexities of transitioning an entire generation system away from fossil fuels (outside of 'wind good, coal bad'..which is a gross oversimplification and reckless display of ignorance) Blame fossil fuel companies all you want for climate change, sure. But they can in no way be blamed for the current crisis in which we find ourselves....their self-interest would have actually largely averted it, if left unchecked.... Sure our decarbonisation trajectory would have be slower had there been a more sensible trasition strategy.....but we wouldnt have these crisis like price moves, and (even worse) the real possibility of load-shedding come winter..... A reminder of what I said on another thread on here nearly 12 months ago on this exact issue..... "But the UK's reliance on Nat gas peak load style generation (as a result of closure of coal-fired base load and replacement with intermittent renewable capacity) means that the whole system is vulnerable to Nat gas price rises. The cost of Nat gas electricity generation is also far more sensitive to the price of gas, than coal fired generation is to the cost of coal, or nuclear to the cost of U308. So the increases in the cost of coal and uranium we've seen recently would not flow through to the cost of generation in the same way as they have for Nat gas. So, you are quite correct that the changes generation mix hasn't created a gas price spike. And that is in no way what I've said. But the mix of generation that we have has created a system VULNERABLE to that gas price rise..becuase we have low proportion of coal or nuclear baseload (which CANNOT be like for like replaced with intermittent renewable capacity, as battery/storage technology is not developed enough yet to make that a sensible way to transition) which would not have seen the same rise in cost of generation as we have seen with Nat gas, despite the increase in cost of those generation fuels."

Hilarious how i've heard not a peep from the green lobby (or any of the middle-class eco warriors who seem to frequent this forum) who have driven the reckless loss of energy security in the UK over the past 20 years or so. Forced closure of coal generation to be replaced with renewables with no proper storage solutions to ensure its dispatchible energy. Sure...global energy (mostly gas) prices are high, but our extreme level of exposure to those high prices was completley avoidable and forseeable. Im sorry, but there is no way possible that you can now blame global fossil fuel companies....if they had their way over the past 20 years, they would have developed a shedload more production capacity than they currently have. Which would have eased availability, which would have eased prices. But green zealots protested every time they tried to invest in more capacity....and now here we are.... Actually, i'll correct my openeing statement, the only time we now hear from the green lobby is to shriek about how the answer is 'more renewables'.....they remind me of the US gun lobby, where after every gun-based massacre, the answer is always 'more guns'.....