|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 10, 2023 15:30:56 GMT
Claiming the shortage of housing is the immigrants fault for accepting the invite to come here is just lazy. But I don't blame the immigrants I blame the policy of immigration and people like yourself. You have three or so basic positions. Increased the power the public sector, as a way of dis-empowering the British public (basically trying to turn the UK into a totalitarian communist state) Increased national debt, as a way of dis-empowering the British public Massive third world migration as a way of dis-empowering the British public - here you are trying to pretend we are caught in a dilemma and have to chose at least two of the above. . You blame me for immigration but I didn't vote for it. I have warned time and again that the "cheap labour" moaned about is because we don't want to pay more tax. The increased national debt is because we don't want to pay more tax. The increased public sector is because we want more from it. You have always avoided my question, which bit of the public sector do you want removing and how much would that save. All I ever get is tiny things like rainbow crossings and diversity managers. From you I'll get cut foreign aid, but without any thought of the reason we give foreign aid in the first place. You probably have some small minded bloggers view that's its all about goody goody lefties, without any idea that its about stopping wars and terrorism that cost trillions more than a bit of aid. How about if it was about stopping refugees? Do you think theirs any link between the West cutting foreign aid and the number of countries having civil wars? I don't think you are even capable of looking at the bigger picture, let alone considering it. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 10, 2023 15:35:25 GMT
The arguments been had, the world decided it is AGW. I'm not wasting anymore time arguing that bit. Not a very scientific attitude. The science has been done and discussed, linked, back up. I'm done with rinse repeat on this one. My sources are the CMA, IPCC and NASA. Yours are Whatsupwiththat bloggers. And you say I'm the blind disciple Lol. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 10, 2023 15:46:15 GMT
It's not simply too many people on the planet. It's too many people in developed countries using and wasting too many resources. It isn't places like Africa with its rising populations but very low levels of consumption causing the problems. As Zany points out it's just another way of blaming Johnny Foreigner and avoiding personal responsibility. Well TBF Zany like others probably you too say we in the UK have a major responsibility going back to the dawn of the industrial revolution and we're blaming it all on the here and now but he and I doubt you wont accept that because for all the finger pointing at opposing views you are as bad as you allege they?we are. Facts are not finger pointing. It was us. The industrial revolution put most of that Co2 in the atmosphere or getting rich caused it. We continued to burn coal long after France went Nuclear. We did it, it was us Fact. What you want to do is blame China for wanting to catch us up. They should stop pumping Co2 into the atmosphere because we already put to much in. But as I have said several times to your cloth ears. I think we ALL need to fight climate change regardless of who caused it. Us leading the way is a good thing, it shows other countries it can be done. Us leading the technology is good as it means sales down the line Us producing renewable energy is good because it means a war in Ukraine or Israel does not trash our economy. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 10, 2023 15:50:33 GMT
I am a caring person because I care. I do far more than just put in heart pumps and own a hybrid, but I'm not discussing what I and my company does to help the country I love. Want to increase tax on the wealthy? Sign me up, I've got plenty, I can afford a bit more. Will you sign up? I don't agree that net zero will impoverish Britain, there's loads of money, its just all with too few people. I’m a caring person too. I care about the UK rushing into net zero when they should take a more pragmatic approach. That makes me a very caring person, whereas the ones trying to justify rushing into net zero because of guilt and their skewed sense of history dont care at all. Yes there’s lots of money in the bank ..let’s just unlock the vaults and spend it on heat pumps and hybrid cars. There's lots of money with a very few people. Those who inherited land because daddy got rich stealing from India etc. Just imagine if land prices fell? How much cheaper EVERYTHING would be. Now imagine that against the extra cost of net zero (Have you any idea what that even is or are you just against it because that's what the gang says?) |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Oct 10, 2023 15:59:16 GMT
Well TBF Zany like others probably you too say we in the UK have a major responsibility going back to the dawn of the industrial revolution and we're blaming it all on the here and now but he and I doubt you wont accept that because for all the finger pointing at opposing views you are as bad as you allege they?we are. Facts are not finger pointing. It was us. The industrial revolution put most of that Co2 in the atmosphere or getting rich caused it. We continued to burn coal long after France went Nuclear. We did it, it was us Fact. What you want to do is blame China for wanting to catch us up. They should stop pumping Co2 into the atmosphere because we already put to much in. But as I have said several times to your cloth ears. And several times despite you saying the UK are the historical cause of the majority of CO2 in the atmosphere and me posting to the contrary not only cloth ears but closed eyes too
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Oct 10, 2023 16:01:23 GMT
I’m a caring person too. I care about the UK rushing into net zero when they should take a more pragmatic approach. That makes me a very caring person, whereas the ones trying to justify rushing into net zero because of guilt and their skewed sense of history dont care at all. Yes there’s lots of money in the bank ..let’s just unlock the vaults and spend it on heat pumps and hybrid cars. There's lots of money with a very few people. Those who inherited land because daddy got rich stealing from India etc. Just imagine if land prices fell? How much cheaper EVERYTHING would be. Now imagine that against the extra cost of net zero (Have you any idea what that even is or are you just against it because that's what the gang says?) This isn’t going to change whether the marxist revolution happens or not . There still will be parasitic elites . They will just be different people …and it certainly wont change without one . As I say let’s take off the guilt specs and look at this pragmatically |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 10, 2023 16:17:23 GMT
Facts are not finger pointing. It was us. The industrial revolution put most of that Co2 in the atmosphere or getting rich caused it. We continued to burn coal long after France went Nuclear. We did it, it was us Fact. What you want to do is blame China for wanting to catch us up. They should stop pumping Co2 into the atmosphere because we already put to much in. But as I have said several times to your cloth ears. And several times despite you saying the UK are the historical cause of the majority of CO2 in the atmosphere and me posting to the contrary not only cloth ears but closed eyes too
. God, this nonsense. When I say us, I mean the West. We populated North America with millions of people and coal powered devices. Farming animals was never counted because in all the years of farming the climate remained in balance. Not only that, but Carbon Brief is repeatedly lambasted for using net figures rather than per person. Yet it is obvious to any moderately intelligent being that cutting emissions is easier if you the individual emit huge amounts. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Oct 10, 2023 16:24:40 GMT
And several times despite you saying the UK are the historical cause of the majority of CO2 in the atmosphere and me posting to the contrary not only cloth ears but closed eyes too
. God, this nonsense. When I say us, I mean the West. We populated North America with millions of people and coal powered devices. Farming animals was never counted because in all the years of farming the climate remained in balance. Not only that, but Carbon Brief is repeatedly lambasted for using net figures rather than per person. Yet it is obvious to any moderately intelligent being that cutting emissions is easier if you the individual emit huge amounts. Oh I see so now you move the goalposts because thats not what you initially said is it? and then you produce evidence which we all have to take as gospel and anything to the contrary is nonsense.
Totally dishonest Zany you moved the goalposts and know it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Oct 10, 2023 16:34:54 GMT
@zany: if you really do come across someone blaming the state of the NHS, roads, the housing shortage and all the rest of the ills you list on illegal migrants then I certainly wouldn't criticise you for taking them to task.
But then what about a complaint that these bad things can be attributed to the unwanted presence of some seventeen million postwar immigrants and their offspring. Unwanted that is by the general population rather the few who benefit financially or emotionally from that presence.
What would be your response be in that case?
When replying please bear in mind that as soon as an immigrant arrives from a much poorer country, as the overwhelming majority have done and still do, their material consumption and infrastructure needs change overnight from a third-world level to a western level. As does their impact on the global environment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 10, 2023 17:09:20 GMT
But I don't blame the immigrants I blame the policy of immigration and people like yourself. You have three or so basic positions. Increased the power the public sector, as a way of dis-empowering the British public (basically trying to turn the UK into a totalitarian communist state) Increased national debt, as a way of dis-empowering the British public Massive third world migration as a way of dis-empowering the British public - here you are trying to pretend we are caught in a dilemma and have to chose at least two of the above. . You blame me for immigration but I didn't vote for it. I have warned time and again that the "cheap labour" moaned about is because we don't want to pay more tax. The increased national debt is because we don't want to pay more tax. The increased public sector is because we want more from it. You have always avoided my question, which bit of the public sector do you want removing and how much would that save. All I ever get is tiny things like rainbow crossings and diversity managers. From you I'll get cut foreign aid, but without any thought of the reason we give foreign aid in the first place. You probably have some small minded bloggers view that's its all about goody goody lefties, without any idea that its about stopping wars and terrorism that cost trillions more than a bit of aid. How about if it was about stopping refugees? Do you think theirs any link between the West cutting foreign aid and the number of countries having civil wars? I don't think you are even capable of looking at the bigger picture, let alone considering it. In your example to prove there is no such thing as public sector waste you used the example of the physical cost of installing a street sign. I was so thunderstruck by the total cretinism of your analysis that didn't the pursue the conversation further. The public sector is a waste behemoth - most of the waste is in paying managers to manage things that don't need to be managed (managerial make-work) and buying consultants to give answers to questions that nobody needs the answer for. I would estimate about 40-50% of the managerial activity of the civil service / public sector is not connected in any way to providing anything substantial to anyone. Nobody voted for this immigration and yet here you are, once again, insisting by implication that it is inevitable. You do this typically about twice a day - between bouts of claiming you aren't in favor of immigration. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Oct 10, 2023 17:13:04 GMT
That post could suggest a great deal of virtue signalling in three sentences . The idea that the ones who want the UK to rush blindly into net zero care and the ones who fear that the UK will impoverish itself with very little effect on global emissions do not is really quite sickening . Rush blindly? We've had 40 or 50 years of science warning us about this and still there are people wanting to kick the can down the road for future generations to deal with. We are still wasting time discussing why when we should be discussing how. When is now and we are already too late. Who is all of us. We have actually been doing quite a lot - hardly kicking the can down the road..  |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Oct 10, 2023 17:27:11 GMT
What is a month's worth of rain? Records are 'broken' regularly in rainfall and temp records as we have only got about 100 years of accurate records and what is 'living history'? Do you mean that any living person can remember or do you mean rainfall records. 13 years ago a village of Southwaite Cumbria held the record which was much higher than the Scottish rainfall. Extreme localised weather events are fairly common in the weather record and no doubt the climate is changing, as climate does by the mere fact of being climate. What you did was say it was CO2 to blame and therefore the royal 'we'. I live in SW Scotland and we had heavy rain, go back 15 years and a weather event destroyed our access road. This we call climate an ever changing entity with no 'normal' just probables. Dream on. The arguments been had, the world decided it is AGW. I'm not wasting anymore time arguing that bit. I'm interested in whether we pay to try and reverse AGW or pay for not trying to reverse it. If the CO2 thesis is correct then our current path means we pay to try and reverse it but will also pay for others not trying to reverse it. We will not reverse it no matter what we do unless we go to war with the large emitters which will of course mean that we will lose and pay even more. It is also telling that some are still fighting and arguing and emitting vast quantities, some supplied by us, in the name of freedom etc. The ME seems like the next conflagration that will see emissions soar. JSO should be demonstrating against Israel, the Palestinians, the Russians and the Ukraine rather than everyday folk with their generally mundane lives. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Oct 10, 2023 17:30:54 GMT
Not a very scientific attitude. The science has been done and discussed, linked, back up. I'm done with rinse repeat on this one. My sources are the CMA, IPCC and NASA. Yours are Whatsupwiththat bloggers. And you say I'm the blind disciple Lol. It's like arguing with flat earthers. A total waste of time. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Oct 10, 2023 17:45:53 GMT
Rush blindly? We've had 40 or 50 years of science warning us about this and still there are people wanting to kick the can down the road for future generations to deal with. We are still wasting time discussing why when we should be discussing how. When is now and we are already too late. Who is all of us. We have actually been doing quite a lot - hardly kicking the can down the road.. We have just exported our CO2 output along with our manufacturing to China.  |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Oct 10, 2023 17:55:40 GMT
Not a very scientific attitude. The science has been done and discussed, linked, back up. I'm done with rinse repeat on this one. My sources are the CMA, IPCC and NASA. Yours are Whatsupwiththat bloggers. And you say I'm the blind disciple Lol. This is by your bootstraps stuff. The 'proof' is that these bodies say it, yet there is no report that says it is so which is continuously proven by events, in fact events tend to show that the theory is not as robust as some would like. There are theories both showing it is happening and saying it is not happening there is evidence on both sides. If you go to all the bodies above that you referred to their 'proof' is a reference to the IPCC whose own proof is contested by many in the world of science. For some reason you call scientists who are published in areas other than the 'major' publications 'bloggers'. What you have to remember is that many of these'bloggers' actually crunch the numbers that are supplied through official channels and they tell a tale not in line with the 'consensus'. |
|
