LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!
Comments
-
Not as simple as that. Typical carbon emissions from a home per year 4500kg; emissions per passenger for, say, a return flight to Rome 234kg. If you want multiple international holidays a year you are not really being honest with yourself. But if a return flight is a once or twice a decade thing then it's fairly trivial compared with your other emissions.wallace_and_gromit said:
You cannot claim any interest in "sustainability" beyond virtue signalling if you fly on your jollies. It really is that simple. Doing your recycling and using re-usable coffee cups at Starbucks isn't going to cut it.rick_chasey said:Ah yes, the old "you must wear a hairshirt if you are interested in the sustainability of the human race" argument.
I think vice-signalling is definitely a thing, too. 🙂1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
What - people live in places that aren't LondonFirst.Aspect said:What happens of you want to go between two places that aren't London?
0 -
I think a bit like the debate about car use, will be next to impossible to persuade people to forego the convenience of flying and double journey times. While a short flight from Edin-London barely if at all makes sense time wise compared to the train, you can't create the same interconnectivity by rail.super_davo said:
What - people live in places that aren't LondonFirst.Aspect said:What happens of you want to go between two places that aren't London?
The solution, for short-haul, may actually be electrical. Whether fuel cell or battery, not sure. But Airbus are spending a lot of money on it.0 -
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!1 -
I mean, there’s also sustainability jobs.wallace_and_gromit said:
You cannot claim any interest in "sustainability" beyond virtue signalling if you fly on your jollies. It really is that simple. Doing your recycling and using re-usable coffee cups at Starbucks isn't going to cut it.rick_chasey said:Ah yes, the old "you must wear a hairshirt if you are interested in the sustainability of the human race" argument.
But the corollary argument is if you have no interest you’re happy for them to do whatever they want?0 -
Presumably that means a family holiday in the Caribbean is a decent chunk.rjsterry said:
Not as simple as that. Typical carbon emissions from a home per year 4500kg; emissions per passenger for, say, a return flight to Rome 234kg. If you want multiple international holidays a year you are not really being honest with yourself. But if a return flight is a once or twice a decade thing then it's fairly trivial compared with your other emissions.wallace_and_gromit said:
You cannot claim any interest in "sustainability" beyond virtue signalling if you fly on your jollies. It really is that simple. Doing your recycling and using re-usable coffee cups at Starbucks isn't going to cut it.rick_chasey said:Ah yes, the old "you must wear a hairshirt if you are interested in the sustainability of the human race" argument.
I think vice-signalling is definitely a thing, too. 🙂0 -
You'd be forgiven for forgetting which party she represents.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I think she's positioning for a new run at leader after the election. After all, she knows the membership lap this sort of thing up.rjsterry said:
You'd be forgiven for forgetting which party she represents.
Labour said they would be publicising reminders of the mini budget chaos last year on it's anniversary. She's rendered that completely unnecessary by doing it herself.0 -
She’s clearly got Norfolking idea.rjsterry said:
You'd be forgiven for forgetting which party she represents.1 -
She has to get re-elected first. I have no idea how indoctrinated to vote blue South West Norfolk is though (is anyone else disappointed they have squeezed east into the constituency name?).super_davo said:
I think she's positioning for a new run at leader after the election. After all, she knows the membership lap this sort of thing up.rjsterry said:
You'd be forgiven for forgetting which party she represents.
Labour said they would be publicising reminders of the mini budget chaos last year on it's anniversary. She's rendered that completely unnecessary by doing it herself.0 -
"The Party of which I was (briefly) leader is doing a terrible job and driving people away from the country through high taxation" is certainly an interesting campaign message.
Do the Tories genuinely think carrying on acting as though they are the opposition and haven't been running the country for the last 13 years is going to fool the electorate? The message that 'if you think this is bad just think what it will be like under the other lot' is fairly common but 'look how bad a job we've done, we can only make it better' is a bold policy.0 -
She got 35,000 votes, and the second place got 9,000 in 2019. It was Labour from 1955 to 1964. Only a 4% majority in 1997 which is probably the nearest parallel to 2024.0
-
I suppose the fact that it is a Tory seat despite Truss should have told me all I needed to know about its True Blue credentials.0
-
For me it is interesting as she seems to be the figurehead for some extremist policy wonks. You would normally expect these people to be churning out pamphlets to be read by a few dozen people yet they have a realistic chance of seizing control of a political party.rjsterry said:
You'd be forgiven for forgetting which party she represents.
I assume that she does not believe that inflation is a problem if you index link everything and in a nod to rickonomics it will devalue the debt so allowing them to borrow more and let the accelerator do the rest.0 -
Works fine in Venezuela.surrey_commuter said:
For me it is interesting as she seems to be the figurehead for some extremist policy wonks. You would normally expect these people to be churning out pamphlets to be read by a few dozen people yet they have a realistic chance of seizing control of a political party.rjsterry said:
You'd be forgiven for forgetting which party she represents.
I assume that she does not believe that inflation is a problem if you index link everything and in a nod to rickonomics it will devalue the debt so allowing them to borrow more and let the accelerator do the rest.0 -
It contains Thetford and Swaffham, two places, the latter especially, that even the rest of us in Norfolk look down on as being inbred and places you don't want to go to.Pross said:
She has to get re-elected first. I have no idea how indoctrinated to vote blue South West Norfolk is though (is anyone else disappointed they have squeezed east into the constituency name?).super_davo said:
I think she's positioning for a new run at leader after the election. After all, she knows the membership lap this sort of thing up.rjsterry said:
You'd be forgiven for forgetting which party she represents.
Labour said they would be publicising reminders of the mini budget chaos last year on it's anniversary. She's rendered that completely unnecessary by doing it herself.0 -
my parents used to live 7 miles down the A47 from Swaffham, it is a very strange placeverylonglegs said:
It contains Thetford and Swaffham, two places, the latter especially, that even the rest of us in Norfolk look down on as being inbred and places you don't want to go to.Pross said:
She has to get re-elected first. I have no idea how indoctrinated to vote blue South West Norfolk is though (is anyone else disappointed they have squeezed east into the constituency name?).super_davo said:
I think she's positioning for a new run at leader after the election. After all, she knows the membership lap this sort of thing up.rjsterry said:
You'd be forgiven for forgetting which party she represents.
Labour said they would be publicising reminders of the mini budget chaos last year on it's anniversary. She's rendered that completely unnecessary by doing it herself.0 -
For me it is interesting as she seems to be the figurehead for some extremist policy wonks. You would normally expect these people to be churning out pamphlets to be read by a few dozen people yet they have a realistic chance of seizing control of a political party.
She gets all her ideas from 'The Institute of Economic Affairs'. They class themselves as a Think Tank but they are basic a right wing neoliberal lobbying group who just represent the interests of big business. They don't disclose who funds them, and are somehow registered as a charity to avoid this. The are basically a bunch of ideologues who have managed to become very influential with many prominent Tories (one could argue that under Truss and Kwarteng's mini budget, that they did seize control of mainstream economic policy for a short while). They also have links to lots of other so called Think Tanks, all of which seem hellbent on attacking established institutions. Vague forums like The Restore Trust who seem to have formed to infiltrate the National Trust and attack policies on issues such as rewilding being one other (amongst many) examples.
Basically that last few decades or so has seen a lot of these right wing think tanks pop up, mainly with the aim of attacking liberal institutions, pushing the anti 'woke' agenda and trying to import neoliberal conservatism from the US.0 -
The definition of "charity" in the UK is troubling broad.
Seems to be capable of being used by profit making institutions to non profitably fund endeavours intended to increase profit.0 -
Yes, I worked in the charity sector for years. Whilst there are many charities doing lots of great work, it is far too broad and the Charity Commission are incredibly averse to removing charitable status from an organisation once granted, even when it is demonstrably shown that the organisation is not operating with the CC regulatory framework.
It is also a handy means of hiding who funds you, gain charitable status, seek funding from private donors and you don't have to declare who they are to protect their anonymity.0 -
Telegraph opinion pieces now going full on with "Truss was right".
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/18/sunak-is-half-the-pm-truss-would-have-been/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/18/truss-right-but-must-she-stand-alone-in-fight-for-freedom/0 -
Opinion pieces. Meh, who cares?
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
They're the voice of the party - she could actually make a comeback.0
-
Luckily as leader of the opposition she'll be less dangerous and could fulfill the role that Stevo wanted Corbyn to do for Labour i.e. make them unelectable.kingstongraham said:They're the voice of the party - she could actually make a comeback.
1 -
As Pross says.kingstongraham said:They're the voice of the party - she could actually make a comeback.
What a state this country is in that it is even a consideration.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
You can only conclude that the whole political system is broken.pblakeney said:
As Pross says.kingstongraham said:They're the voice of the party - she could actually make a comeback.
What a state this country is in that it is even a consideration.
Do those articles have any ideas for how they can get those lefties in the Bond market onside?0 -
I think Corbyn as leader of the opposition is a great example as to why you do not want a completely unelectable opposition.Pross said:
Luckily as leader of the opposition she'll be less dangerous and could fulfill the role that Stevo wanted Corbyn to do for Labour i.e. make them unelectable.kingstongraham said:They're the voice of the party - she could actually make a comeback.
It didn't do the Tories any favours as it emboldened their own nutcases, and they are still living with the consequences of that.
It didn't do the country any favours... I remember seeing the Corbyn "I'm 6/10 on the EU" interview on the Last Leg and thinking what a complete waste of space; how different things could have been with an opposition leader able to harness the anti-incumbent government vibe.
0 -
I'll issue a disclaimer that my knowledge of the under 30s is largely limited to those working in professional jobs, or those who are Uni contemporaries of my offspring, but their holidaying habits extend way beyond a couple of return flights to Europe every decade. (And of course your figure for a "house" will be for the most extreme version of a family house containing 4 or 5 people, whereas your flight figure is for a single person.)rjsterry said:But if a return flight is a once or twice a decade thing then it's fairly trivial compared with your other emissions.
For example, Elder Daughter - cough cough - had five last year and four so far this year. And she's not unusual in the demographic I refer to in my disclaimer. And that's before you throw in any long haul flights, which are ruinous to any sustainable "carbon budget". So I think the question to those under 30s "demanding" a CEO interested in sustainability about their personal carbon-burning habits (of which flying is obviously just one) is a legitimate one.
To be fair to Elder Daughter, we've discussed at some length over the years the potential incompatibility between espousing a sustainable lifestyle and enjoying doing what she enjoys doing, and she has now adopted my view - keep doing it until it's banned or too expensive. (Not very eco-friendly, but avoids charges of hypocrisy!)
0 -
Absolutely. It's just that flying on holiday is the ultimate discretionary carbon-intensive activity that any one of us can stop doing but generally don't unless forced, and so is a good, concise example. I could have referred to buying imported clothes for reasons of style rather than reasons of being worn out etc.super_davo said:
With respect.... flying may be horrendous for the environment, but it's far from the only thing we do that is.wallace_and_gromit said:
You cannot claim any interest in "sustainability" beyond virtue signalling if you fly on your jollies. It really is that simple. Doing your recycling and using re-usable coffee cups at Starbucks isn't going to cut it.rick_chasey said:Ah yes, the old "you must wear a hairshirt if you are interested in the sustainability of the human race" argument.
0 -
Re London to Edinburgh, I once raced a colleague on that route on the train. I got to the client first, and got 4+ hours of work done on the train whilst he got stressed in the airport! I never asked him about the return journey, as it felt like it would be like "kicking a puppy"!super_davo said:Flying from London to Edinburgh may be bonkers, but flying from London to New York isn't; there is no viable time / cost / practical alternative if you need to make that journey.
Re London to NY, as you observe, the issue is "need". Who really needs to go to New York from the UK? Very few, yet demand is pretty much insatiable, even during the cost of living crisis.
0
