Climate Change or Changing Climate

[udderlyoffroad]

18 hours ago, oowee said:

Thats what a vote for the Tories and Brexit gets you.

As opposed to last time Labour was in power, when they took a giant, steaming, dump over civil liberties, repeatedly.

Back to the present, the current labour leader, far from holding the government to account for the most egregious breach of civil liberties ever – lockdown – was egging them on to go further.  Both as bad as each other.  The most depressing thing is, a good number of people are still in absolute denial that this was even a bad thing.

Back on topic, this is going to get worse before it gets better; slowly people are waking up to the restrictions in their freedoms the pursuit of 'net zero' will cause.  Banning short haul flights in France is just the start* of a very long list.

 

*Yes, I know you'd need rocks in your head to take a plane when the same journey on a TGV would take you less than 2.5hrs, that's not the point.  Death by a thousand cuts.

[discobob]

1 hour ago, udderlyoffroad said:

that's not the point.  Death by a thousand cuts.

People don't realise that we have the greatest threat to our liberties and freedom in at least living history - more so I would say than WWII. It is creeping in as you say in a thousand cuts - each tiny cut to the majority is unnoticeable, but eventually you will be drained.

Want to use your car - certainly - £1 per mile (on top of fuel duty etc... and parking), then it will be £2, then £3 and at some point people will not be able to afford to use their car - it will be sat there, scrap. Do you think that they will increase public transport?😂 Not a hope - can't afford to get to your job - not their problem - that's yours - can't afford to pay your mortgage because you couldn't afford to get to your job - not their problem - but here is a UBI for you to exist on (not live on)

There is talk about also modifying Council Tax to take into account the number of cars you can park at your property - not the actual number - so if you have no cars you will still be charged....

Lockdowns were the testing ground and this is why so much is happening now...

And don't forget that you will be getting fined if your property isn't at a certain EPC level - could be a percentage of your house value.

All for a changing climate

I am sure I have posted this before but here goes

 

[oowee]

It must be right that tax increases the further you are from the services provided. Ie those that cost the most should pay the most. Same applies for roads. The more you use it the more you should pay. We have to shift city living to be a lower cost option. 

For too long we have not paid the full cost of the resources we are using. Preferring instead to leave the cost of clean up to our offspring. 

[discobob]

30 minutes ago, oowee said:

We have to shift city living to be a lower cost option. 

So your an advocate of the 15 minute city/20 minute neighbourhood then Grant? What about your boat if your not allowed to go - what about your S.African trips - you can bet that those flights will become eye wateringly expensive - if you carbon credits allow for it

[Rewulf]

35 minutes ago, oowee said:

For too long we have not paid the full cost of the resources we are using.

Really ?
Whos been paying for them then ?

Please dont say the government , the government uses OUR money , taxpayers and costs levied from US.
Unless you know different, maybe labours magic money tree ?

[oowee]

7 minutes ago, discobob said:

So your an advocate of the 15 minute city/20 minute neighbourhood then Grant? What about your boat if your not allowed to go - what about your S.African trips - you can bet that those flights will become eye wateringly expensive - if you carbon credits allow for it

Yes. I should pay the full cost and or offset. How else am I going to control my excess? We are as a species exploitative. 

2 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Really ?
Whos been paying for them then ?

Please dont say the government , the government uses OUR money , taxpayers and costs levied from US.
Unless you know different, maybe labours magic money tree ?

No one has been paying the debt has been rising. Forget climate for a moment and look at pollution. We kick shed loads of carp out all the time. Land fill is closing the seas are full of carp, we have pushed species to extinction. We know nothing of living in harmony with our planet. It could be that science can save us or maybe famine plague or war. 

[12gauge82]

11 minutes ago, oowee said:

Yes. I should pay the full cost and or offset. How else am I going to control my excess? We are as a species exploitative. 

No one has been paying the debt has been rising. Forget climate for a moment and look at pollution. We kick shed loads of carp out all the time. Land fill is closing the seas are full of carp, we have pushed species to extinction. We know nothing of living in harmony with our planet. It could be that science can save us or maybe famine plague or war. 

We don't need more green taxes, we need less people and a good place to start would be stopping illegal migration and controlling legal migration.

 

[discobob]

On 26/05/2023 at 18:19, oowee said:

Yes. I should pay the full cost and or offset. How else am I going to control my excess? We are as a species exploitative. 

So, what if these costs make it so you can't have your boat or do your trips to South Africa. What if these costs means that you can't do any trips (as will happen to a large majority that don't have a gold plated CC pension) and instead are confined to a small area and you can't see family or friends outside of this area?

This has been brought about by successive governments that have destroyed (meaningful) local employment, meaning that people "had to get on their bikes" and either travel or move for work, disjointing peoples support networks. 

I would also say that a large majority of us do pay the costs - through high taxation (direct and indirect) and high council taxes.

[armsid]

For years we have used plastic bottles containers and wrapping etc. and where does it end up? in rivers the sea.Glass bottles as in milk pop beer were all recycled food was not wasted remember EU rules on straight cucumbers?.We have a society that does not or will not work handouts are now nearing equality with those paying. Jobs going to cheaper regions and not just Europe We should all contribute to council tax but when it was suggested all hell broke loose from Labour .I have to pay £112.00 of my council tax to social care budget a lot of council tax goes on council pensions services and shoring up finances for loss of rents / rates for businesses that closed in the lockdown and never reopened These goods sold in these shops are now imported causing more carbon footprints but hey ho the gov. dont care any of them it keeps the masses under control and only those with authority and vast cash reserves will be able to travel  Reminds me of the cult series THE  PRISONER starring Patrick Mcgoohan as no. 6 aired in 1968 All about the society where every one is watched almost like the video discobob showed us 

Edited May 28, 2023 by armsid

[oowee]

7 hours ago, discobob said:

So, what if these costs make it so you can't have your boat or do your trips to South Africa. What if these costs means that you can't do any trips (as will happen to a large majority that don't have a gold plated CC pension) and instead are confined to a small area and you can't see family or friends outside of this area?

This has been brought about by successive governments that have destroyed (meaningful) local employment, meaning that people "had to get on their bikes" and either travel or move for work, disjointing peoples support networks. 

I would also say that a large majority of us do pay the costs - through high taxation (direct and indirect) and high council taxes.

Your mixing a number of positions, and presenting a confused picture of wealth, consumption and mobility. 

Travel be it air or road should be paid in full. It will mean some cannot travel as far and as often as they want. This is the situation now and if the full cost was recovered travel would further reduce and increase efficiency would further increase. It simply cannot be right that its cheaper to fly to Scotland than take the train. 

The ability to travel and the amount of travel would be an economic choice, as it is now. The same should be true of all consumption. Only in this way will we live within the resource constraints our planet provides.

The need to travel for employment is nothing to do with Govt but is a factor of economic mobility of employers and global growth. It has always been the case that labour moves for employment, voluntary or otherwise. The distances have increased but so have the opportunities for people to stay in touch. 

Very few people if any will pay the cost of consumption through tax. Indeed those who pay more tax are currently the ones likely to pay the least of the true costs of their consumption. Those who consume the most will likely pollute the most. In turn they are likely to be the ones that bleat the most about restriction of liberties as the noose tightens on their consumption. 

High Council taxes 🤣 The system is simply laughable. A tapered consumption tax where the size of a house, it's distance from central resources created a multiplier for resource costs (water, fuel, services) to determine tax would be far too complicated but a good starting point. Why not have a system where the first units of fuel (gas water and electricity were at cost after which the price increased. The same principle for Council tax. 

 

[discobob]

2 hours ago, oowee said:

confused picture of wealth, consumption and mobility.

So you are supporting the WEF, Bill Gates et al - only the wealthy will be allowed to travel? The ordinary people are to be contained like cattle??

2 hours ago, oowee said:

It simply cannot be right that its cheaper to fly to Scotland than take the train

It isn't right - But that is more to do with the train franchise structure....

 

2 hours ago, oowee said:

The need to travel for employment is nothing to do with Govt but is a factor of economic mobility of employers and global growth. It has always been the case that labour moves for employment, voluntary or otherwise. The distances have increased but so have the opportunities for people to stay in touch. 

So our future is Facetime with our family once we have got a job and have had to move away for it?? (you can bet that Train Fares will not come down but would vastly increase and to travel by road would be extortionate as well).

Where I grew up, virtually the whole of the next town (walking distance) was taken up by BICC and a large percentage of people in the area worked there - that is now gone. No support from Governments - and indeed it was the Governments decision for move to a Financial Services/Service based economy that moved jobs away from areas for people to be able to work locally

2 hours ago, oowee said:

Very few people if any will pay the cost of consumption through tax

Doesn't feel like that when I see my wage slip...

2 hours ago, oowee said:

Indeed those who pay more tax are currently the ones likely to pay the least of the true costs of their consumption. Those who consume the most will likely pollute the most.

Speak for yourself - We have quite a light impact. 

2 hours ago, oowee said:

High Council taxes 🤣 

It isn't funny - £3k now....

 

2 hours ago, oowee said:

Why not have a system where the first units of fuel (gas water and electricity were at cost after which the price increased.

We could have had a system where it was at cost - and should have now due to the fact that the Tax Payer is subsidising a lot of the "green" facilities being delivered now - that is why most if not all are owned by Investment Firms....

[oowee]

23 minutes ago, discobob said:

So you are supporting the WEF, Bill Gates et al - only the wealthy will be allowed to travel? The ordinary people are to be contained like cattle??

travel is now proportionate to wealth. We just need to alter the tax to reflect the true cost. Not sure where the cattle comes in. 

It isn't right - But that is more to do with the train franchise structure....

The air fare should be taxed to reflect the environmental cost rather than subsidised. 

 

So our future is Facetime with our family once we have got a job and have had to move away for it?? (you can bet that Train Fares will not come down but would vastly increase and to travel by road would be extortionate as well).

As it should be personal travel in cars needs to be fully paid for. We dont think twice to pop to the shops to pick up bread or even take the dog for a walk. 

Where I grew up, virtually the whole of the next town (walking distance) was taken up by BICC and a large percentage of people in the area worked there - that is now gone. No support from Governments - and indeed it was the Governments decision for move to a Financial Services/Service based economy that moved jobs away from areas for people to be able to work locally

It would be great to imagine that the Govt could make and deliver such a move. Unfortunately we lack such imagination or the structures to deliver such change. More a reflection of a mature economy where we price ourselves out of manufacturing into a knowledge economy. Hence the disaster of Brexit that seeks to push against the favourable positions Britain has in the market. 

Doesn't feel like that when I see my wage slip...

 

Speak for yourself - We have quite a light impact. 

If you lived off the land i would agree with you. If you drive a car, travel for holidays, eat meat then I suspect not. 

It isn't funny - £3k now....

But we are still not paying for social care, rural transport infrastructure, youth facilities, sports and recreation...... the list is endless. 

 

We could have had a system where it was at cost - and should have now due to the fact that the Tax Payer is subsidising a lot of the "green" facilities being delivered now - that is why most if not all are owned by Investment Firms....

Its right that those who consume the most pay the most. The transition to green has barely started. I would rather delivery was in the hands of the private sector. Public delivery particularly of new tech is unlikely to be beneficial. The Govt's role through the regulator should be setting the strategy and direction of travel. 

 

[discobob]

47 minutes ago, oowee said:

 

But - as this post thread goes - Global Warming is just a mechanism to tax and control the population- Al Gore is one of the most successful salesmen of all time and sits on many panels at Davos, somewhere I think that you may have visited during your career from your viewpoint on everything .

It is absolute hubris of the PTB  to believe that they have the power to “save us all” and people who believe them I feel are deluded. Protect the environment I agree with - but not this quasi-science that is being paid for.  What next? Are they going to try and stop the tide or the poles from shifting
 

go back 50 years and look at what London was like with smog and compare it now (and I await your ULEZ retort). But yet we are in a worse situation than any other time in history

[12gauge82]

23 hours ago, oowee said:

 

The UK contributes just 1% of co2 gas and yet you want the UK population to become an enslaved race to 'save the planet'.

The world needs less people, it's the elephant in the room,that no one speaks of.

The UK could literally stop all pollution and greenhouse gasses over night and it make no difference.

[oowee]

20 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

The UK contributes just 1% of co2 gas and yet you want the UK population to become an enslaved race to 'save the planet'.

The world needs less people, it's the elephant in the room,that no one speaks of.

The UK could literally stop all pollution and greenhouse gasses over night and it make no difference.

We could all throw litter in the streets because others do. We don;t because we have more respect for ourselves and others. Discipline begins at home. 

[Gordon R]

India and China will be laughing at the west.

An American congressman asked what the USA would see in terms of climate change if they agreed to trillions of dollars for green policies. He couldn't get an answer. No-one can say how much better things would be - all we get are warnings of impending doom. It's insulting.

Bit like being in the EU - UK stuck to the rules, whilst others ignored them. We really are naive.

The thought that the UK can affect the world climate is delusional.

[12gauge82]

7 hours ago, oowee said:

We could all throw litter in the streets because others do. We don;t because we have more respect for ourselves and others. Discipline begins at home. 

Your analogy doesn't stack up, we're forcing people into poverty for no reason at all. When the real problem is a world population that is too big and other countrys that have no intention of changing.

[oowee]

3 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

Your analogy doesn't stack up, we're forcing people into poverty for no reason at all. When the real problem is a world population that is too big and other countrys that have no intention of changing.

That makes doing nothing alright then. 

[Gordon R]

Quote

That makes doing nothing alright then. 

Morally it isn't alright, but it is the reality. Standards of living will fall whilst the rest of the world improves.

I pose the same question as the US Congressman. If we sink every pound in the country into green policies, what will be the effect on world temperatures?

[Penelope]

On 26/05/2023 at 18:19, oowee said:

Yes. I should pay the full cost and or offset. How else am I going to control my excess? We are as a species exploitative. 

No one has been paying the debt has been rising. Forget climate for a moment and look at pollution. We kick shed loads of carp out all the time. Land fill is closing the seas are full of carp, we have pushed species to extinction. We know nothing of living in harmony with our planet. It could be that science can save us or maybe famine plague or war. 

 

[udderlyoffroad]

39 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

If we sink every pound in the country into green policies, what will be the effect on world temperatures?

You won't get an answer.  You won't even get an answer to "how do we measure when we've achieved net zero" - In other words, we're sacrificing everything pursuing a goal we won't ever know whether we've hit it or not.

In any case, the biggest CO2 emitters in Europe, by far, are the lignite-coal fired power stations in Germany.  Talk of banning domestic air travel in the UK is yelling into the wind by comparison. 

Of course, those Just Stop Progress ejiots aren't protesting outside the German embassy, much less the Chinese one...

[discobob]

An inconsequential truth!!

[Penelope]

8 minutes ago, discobob said:

An inconsequential truth!!

A nice regular pattern.

[12gauge82]

3 hours ago, oowee said:

That makes doing nothing alright then. 

There's a happy medium between doing nothing and forcing the UK population into a very costly pipe dream which would be ultimately futile anyway.

[Rewulf]

On 28/05/2023 at 18:15, oowee said:

Your mixing a number of positions, and presenting a confused picture of wealth, consumption and mobility. 

I dont think its confusing at all, your model of 'full cost' means only the very wealthy will be able to afford excessive consumption and high mobility ?
This will lead to further divides between the haves and have nots in society, a social divide with the base of the pyramid shrinking, a popular  WEF aim.....

On 28/05/2023 at 18:15, oowee said:

Travel be it air or road should be paid in full. It will mean some cannot travel as far and as often as they want.

As above , the 'some' being the ordinary man/woman.
Forget about our kids travelling to learn and enrich their lives , they simply wont be able to afford it , unless of course daddy is exceptionally well healed.

On 28/05/2023 at 18:15, oowee said:

This is the situation now and if the full cost was recovered travel would further reduce and increase efficiency would further increase.

If travel is 'further reduced' as you put it, do not prices go up , as less people use it , an even further divide ?

On 28/05/2023 at 18:15, oowee said:

Very few people if any will pay the cost of consumption through tax. Indeed those who pay more tax are currently the ones likely to pay the least of the true costs of their consumption. Those who consume the most will likely pollute the most. In turn they are likely to be the ones that bleat the most about restriction of liberties as the noose tightens on their consumption. 

So if thats correct , the richer you are , the more you consume, and the less likely to pay the 'correct' taxation.
But are more likely to 'bleat' about freedoms and liberties ?

I dont believe thats the case , if the poorer are the ones to reliquish those freedoms to travel first.

Think about this , if we all consume less , food, travel, household goods , cars even , what happens to those industries ?
Less consumption will put even more people in this country out of work, what will they do to pay the green taxes then ?

On 28/05/2023 at 15:47, armsid said:

For years we have used plastic bottles containers and wrapping etc. and where does it end up? in rivers the sea.Glass bottles as in milk pop beer were all recycled

Dont worry about that , there is a plan being trialled in Scotland soon, where bottles and plastic containers will be taxed , and a return policy implemented.

https://depositreturnscheme.zerowastescotland.org.uk/