16-JUL 2023 : LAB: 46% / CON: 26% / LDEM: 11% / REF: 6%

[steve]

Regime asylum policy.

[Danny]

Aug 8, 2023 9:02:32 GMT athena said:

I suspect that cost of living isn't the only factor at play here. When the 2030 ban was first mooted that date was comfortably distant and it was easy to assume that by then the price of electric cars would have fallen substantially relative to petrol and diesel models and charging infrastructure would be much improved. Now we're a lot closer and electric cars are still out of reach for most people.

Con just threw away 13 years of that available time. After all, one parliament is only max 5 years.

Given that a large majority of people always buy secondhand it's the state of the secondhand market that really matters.

Well no, it isnt just that. Its also that there is no public charging network to speak of. Electric vehicles have range and speed of charging issues. There is no electricity supply core infrastructure improvement plan to cope (transmission network, more generation because demand for electricity must hugely increase). Its that prices for charging are soaring. That the only organisation with an interest in developing this infrastructure is government, and it isnt doing it.

Delay the ban and you delay the availability of secondhand EVs. The ban is just one element of a ratchet on vehicle pollution, alongside things like expansion of ULEZ schemes and other levies on polluting vehicles. In the absence of a flourishing secondhand market in EVs it will be politically impossible to keep tightening that ratchet.

Elelctric vehicle were first sold on cheap motoring. Cheap electricity, less tax. Thats unsustainable because they arent fundamentally cheaper. Resistance explodes when change becomes expensive. Brexit would never have happened had leave told the truth about the costs, and nor would electrification.

Personally I think the bigger problem is going to be with gas boilers. There's a helluva lot of housing that isn't suitable for a heat pump (limited outside space for the unit, lousy insulation, old radiators with narrow pipes). Instal a heat pump in a property that isn't suitable and the residents will be shivering and cursing the electricity bill. They're also a lousy solution for people who like to economise by not heating an empty house, because a corollary of the lower operating temperature is that the response time is much longer. Upgrading insulation and pipes greatly increases the cost of switching to a heat pump, of course.

The recent mini debate on the pm program was interesting. Their first expert who actually installs these things, said they are simply too expensive. You will never recover the installation costs. And I have heard similar personal stories reported before about how they cost ten times as much as a gas system to install, as you are largely starting from scratch because you will have to change all the radiators, etc.

The next day the debate moved to some people reporting how they could save money, arguing a heat pump creates 3x the heat energy of the raw electricity used. Unfortunately it seems electric heating is about x3 more expensive than gas per unit of heat.....so that kinda cancels out. Then they had a woman who said installing a heat pump had saved her 40% on her electric bills. The snag however was she lived somewhere the only possibility for heating was electric, so she was comparing the current cost of electric heating to the cost with a heat pump. Which implies it only saved about 40% of the electricity compared to fully heating electrically. That would make it clearly more expensive than gas wherever this is available.

The only way to make this work economically is to have huge amounts of cheap electricity. Renewables seem to be able to produce this, but only if you built them. We have a policy preventing their being built, and no policy how to bridge when wind doesnt blow. Nuclear is expensive too. It was only ever cheap because by modern standards it was very unsafe. Much of the economic solution to transfer to electric heating seems to rely on hugely improved insulation. Which obviously would save proportionately just as much if still using gas heating. And the government changed building regs no longer requiring new homes to meet the standards expected to be needed when this changeover happened. Utterly insane.

[Mark]

athena said:

Given that a large majority of people always buy secondhand it's the state of the secondhand market that really matters. Delay the ban and you delay the availability of secondhand EVs. The ban is just one element of a ratchet on vehicle pollution, alongside things like expansion of ULEZ schemes and other levies on polluting vehicles. In the absence of a flourishing secondhand market in EVs it will be politically impossible to keep tightening that ratchet.

Sadly, I think that those wanting to buy secondhand will struggle.

The reason is simple - it's emerging technology.

To partly ilustrate my point, I will make a comparison with computers. A bad one, I'll admit, but, nonetheless, a crude way of getting my point across.

I type this on a Windows 7 desktop.

It does pretty much all I want of it - browse with Firefox, watch videos with VLC Media Player, music the same or sometimes Foobar, pictres with Irfanview, I cn use Skype on here, use Notepad to write lyrics, make notes etc.

Yes, it serves me well, although technically, no longer supported.

Try selling one.

You can get refurbished Windows 10 machines for £50.

Even if someone put a Windows 7 machine up for £20 (sometimes happens, they get put up as 'first PC for kids'), they're a slow sell - even though, technically, such machines with do what most people want of it.

On EVs, early models, while they go, will do less per charge than latest models. Fine if you just want a runaround, but, for anyone who does a lot of driving, not so good.

In 20 years time, when there will likely be plenty of EVs on the secondhand market that will do mileage per charge that most will require, it won't be a problem, but, right now, that is not the case....and those that are will command a 'premium second hand price'.

As well as greatly increasing the charging infrastructure, the next government will also need - that's NEED - to introduce a very generous scrappage scheme to help people switch.

[steve]

"In an interview with the Daily Express, Lee Anderson, the Conservative deputy chairman, delivered a characteristically blunt response. He told the paper:

If they don’t like barges, then they should fuck off back to France …

I think people have just had enough.

These people come across the Channel in small boats. If they don’t like the conditions they are housed in here then they should go back to France or better not come at all in the first place.

Asked on LBC if Anderson was speaking on behalf of the party, Chalk defended what he said, arguing that his Tory colleague was expressing the “righteous indignation of the British people”. Chalk said:

Lee Anderson expresses the righteous indignation of the British people. Yeah, he does it in salty terms and that’s his style. But his indignation is well placed.

People are coming from a safe country. France is a signatory to the European convention on human rights, and people should claim asylum in the first country. It shouldn’t be like a sort of open shopping list of where you want to go. "

Anderson is of course a racist moron however Chalk is actually quite a credible barrister, as such he obviously knows that there is no legal obligation for an asylum seeker to seek asylum in the first country they come to under the terms of the ECHR.
Which makes him in some respects worse than pig ignorance embodied Anderson it makes him a lying scrote a disgrace to his profession and a disgrace to his office.
As such he has a bright future ahead in the Tory party or failing that after the next general election as a presenter on GBeebies.

[kay9]

Aug 8, 2023 10:07:39 GMT graham said:

Westminster Voting Intention:

LAB: 47% (-1)
CON: 26% (+1)
LDM: 12% (+1)
GRN:  4% (-1)
RFM:  4% (-2)
SNP:  3% (=)

Via @deltapolluk, 4-7 Aug.
Changes from 28 - 31 july

Interesting that the combined Green and Reform vote is 8% - rather than the highly unlikely 17% recorded by Opinium.

As I recently did an email which required columns, I used Courier font for the figures. This is a ‘typewriter’ font, which gives each character equal space.
As I did so, I was reflecting that, on this forum, people often supply information in tabular form, which does not come out that way. So as an experiment, I looked for a post in which the original is less than columnar, and selected Courier font for this information. With this in mind, it was easy to present columns by using spaces to line up.

Hope it works when I post this!

EDITED BY MARK TO ADD:

Yes! It works! Thank you for this.

It's one of those things that nobody thought of before, but, when actually done, everyone wonders why nobody thought of it before.

While it's certinly not compulsory, if anyone wants to do this with the basic/quick reply option, simply post the following before any text you want to format in this way :



and this after the text you want to format....

[Mark]

]

pjw1961 said:

As others have suggested it seems to me that voters are not anti-green policies as such but they are anti-paying for them. This applies to ULEZ as well. I think we will only be able to 'go green' by avoiding direct charges to individuals and funding the whole thing through taxation, so people pay indirectly and therefore don't notice as much. Which means higher general taxation and no hypothecated green taxes on the public (you could still on polluting businesses). Not an ideal scenario.

Yes, this, for me, is spot on!

In terms of whether it's through ringenced 'green taxes' or through general taxation, I prefer the latter in most cases.

People generally like green stuff, so, whether that be more offshore wind and tidal energy, or the increased charging infrastructure for EVs, for the most part, voters will be happy to see such things.

'Green taxes', particularly on individuals, while sending out the message that we are clear / care about green stuff, also reminds people that they are paying for it far more than general taxation would.

[leftieliberal]

Aug 8, 2023 9:24:35 GMT pjw1961 said:

Aug 8, 2023 1:01:15 GMT mercian said:

I may be wrong, but I seem to remember that most drugs were legal in the UK until the early 1960s.  Then, because the US invented a new form of Prohibition (with predictable results) we followed suit for some reason. 

e.g. Thomas de Quincey - Confessions of an English Opium Eater (which I think I still have somewhere). Sherlock Holmes took cocaine and was found in an opium den in one story. These things were disapproved of, but not illegal I think. Also bargees used to grow marijuana along canal banks, not to mention over-the-counter medicine such as Codeine and the wonderful Dr Collis Browne's Adult Cough Medicine which was brilliant! From memory it contained alcohol and opium and possibly cocaine as well. Really did the trick!      

Laudanum was a big one for the Victorians - used as a painkiller, widely available, opium based and highly addictive. 

Notably by Lizzie Siddall, Dante Gabriel Rosetti's muse. Had it not been for her laudanum addiction she might well have survived long enough to be recognised as a great artist in her own right at the time.

[crossbat11]

Steve don't go.

(Apologies to Nils Lofgren.)

[kay9]

Aug 7, 2023 16:33:03 GMT oldnat said:

Latest YG -

Which of the following do you think would make the best Prime Minister?

Sunak : Eng 25% : Wal 16% : Sco 14%
Starmer : Eng 31% : Wal 36% : Sco 32%
Not Sure : Eng 40% : Wal 44% : Sco 48%

I'm "not sure" that "Not Sure" is the accurate descriptor here. It seems more likely that the doubt is that either of the candidates would be any good.

Sunak:    Eng 25% : Wal 16% : Sco 14%
Starmer:  Eng 31% : Wal 36% : Sco 32%
Not Sure: Eng 40% : Wal 44% : Sco 48%

Another example of using Courier font.

[neilj]

This made me laugh, "we are an open and tolerant country"
If you disagree you can "fuck off back to France"

[leftieliberal]

Aug 8, 2023 10:58:08 GMT Mark said:

athena said:

Given that a large majority of people always buy secondhand it's the state of the secondhand market that really matters. Delay the ban and you delay the availability of secondhand EVs. The ban is just one element of a ratchet on vehicle pollution, alongside things like expansion of ULEZ schemes and other levies on polluting vehicles. In the absence of a flourishing secondhand market in EVs it will be politically impossible to keep tightening that ratchet.

Sadly, I think that those wanting to buy secondhand will struggle.

The reason is simple - it's emerging technology.

To partly ilustrate my point, I will make a comparison with computers. A bad one, I'll admit, but, nonetheless, a crude way of getting my point across.

I type this on a Windows 7 desktop.

It does pretty much all I want of it - browse with Firefox, watch videos with VLC Media Player, music the same or sometimes Foobar, pictres with Irfanview, I cn use Skype on here, use Notepad to write lyrics, make notes etc.

Yes, it serves me well, although technically, no longer supported.

Try selling one.

You can get refurbished Windows 10 machines for £50.

Even if someone put a Windows 7 machine up for £20 (sometimes happens, they get put up as 'first PC for kids'), they're a slow sell - even though, technically, such machines with do what most people want of it.

On EVs, early models, while they go, will do less per charge than latest models. Fine if you just want a runaround, but, for anyone who does a lot of driving, not so good.

In 20 years time, when there will likely be plenty of EVs on the secondhand market that will do mileage per charge that most will require, it won't be a problem, but, right now, that is not the case....and those that are will command a 'premium second hand price'.

As well as greatly increasing the charging infrastructure, the next government will also need - that's NEED - to introduce a very generous scrappage scheme to help people switch.

There is a simple answer: Install Linux Mint on it. You can still use your favourite apps like Firefox, Irfanview and VLC (Libre Office in place of Microsoft Office) and current versions of Linux include automatic updates. My only excuse for not doing it is laziness (although I do have a desktop that dual-boots into XP and Ubuntu).

The same applies to cars. Don't wait until you can buy a second-hand EV with decent range at a reasonable price, but choose a hybrid like, say, a Vauxhall Ampera which you can charge at home and get at least 30 miles on electric from the battery before the petrol engine cuts in and starts re-charging it. Technically the petrol engine is called a range-extender, but its particular value is that it removes range anxiety in that on long journeys you simply treat it like a petrol car.

[leftieliberal]

Aug 8, 2023 11:57:03 GMT kay9 said:

Aug 8, 2023 10:07:39 GMT graham said:

Westminster Voting Intention:

LAB: 47% (-1)
CON: 26% (+1)
LDM: 12% (+1)
GRN:  4% (-1)
RFM:  4% (-2)
SNP:  3% (=)

Via @deltapolluk, 4-7 Aug.
Changes from 28 - 31 july

Interesting that the combined Green and Reform vote is 8% - rather than the highly unlikely 17% recorded by Opinium.

As I recently did an email which required columns, I used Courier font for the figures. This is a ‘typewriter’ font, which gives each character equal space.
As I did so, I was reflecting that, on this forum, people often supply information in tabular form, which does not come out that way. So as an experiment, I looked for a post in which the original is less than columnar, and selected Courier font for this information. With this in mind, it was easy to present columns by using spaces to line up.

Hope it works when I post this!

EDITED BY MARK TO ADD:

Yes! It works! Thank you for this.

It's one of those things that nobody thought of before, but, when actually done, everyone wonders why nobody thought of it before.

While it's certinly not compulsory, if anyone wants to do this with the basic/quick reply option, simply post the following before any text you want to format in this way :



and this after the text you want to format....

Or,

LAB:	47%	(-1)
CON:	26%	(+1)
LDM:	12%	(+1)
GRN:	4%	(-1)
RFM:	4%	(-2)
SNP:	3%	(=)

By defining a table of the right size in "Reply" at the top of the page and then filling in the boxes. it's a bit slower but the formatting is taken care of for you.

[leftieliberal]

Aug 8, 2023 9:33:45 GMT @isa said:

I received through the post this morning a tabloid-size leaflet from Sarah Dyke, the winning LDEM candidate in the recent Somerton and Frome by-election. The headline is a big 'Thank You'. It includes a bit of understandable crowing about the result and sets out her own priorities, such as reducing waiting times for GP and dental appointments.

Having never directly experienced a parliamentary by-election before, I somewhat cynically expected a post-election wall of silence politically until the GE is called, now that her election has been safely secured. I was therefore pleasantly surprised to receive the leaflet. I wonder if this is a regular occurrence after by-elections?

"Thank you" leaflets are common practice, although sadly not universal, in the Lib Dems.

[Deleted]

Aug 8, 2023 7:25:04 GMT crossbat11 said:

The Ever Popular Crofty

So, that was you annoying the customers in the Richmond station cafe last May, was it? Old Feckless said, just before he left us, "Jeez, it's that foikin Englebert impersonator again. He'll empty this place quicker than a foikin fire alarm, you see." It was at this point that old Feckless took his leave of us to tend to his ailing hounds. Or so he claimed that was the reason.

I have to say I didn't think your version of "Please Release Me" was too bad and I thought the heckling you received was a little uncalled for. That fellow who shouted, just as he was leaving the building, "you're even worse than Humpledink" maybe caught the mood of the remaining audience, but it was a little unkind, nonetheless.

We left just as you were asking for a request from the three people left in the cafe. The wag who shouted "The Sound of Silence" wasn't me by the way.

I think you’re making some of this up. 

[pjw1961]

Aug 8, 2023 11:16:48 GMT steve said:

"In an interview with the Daily Express, Lee Anderson, the Conservative deputy chairman, delivered a characteristically blunt response. He told the paper:

If they don’t like barges, then they should fuck off back to France …

"Asked on LBC if Anderson was speaking on behalf of the party, Chalk defended what he said, arguing that his Tory colleague was expressing the “righteous indignation of the British people”. 

This seems like one of those examples I was referring to of ascribing particular views to too wide a group. It seems Chalk believes that the "British people" feel "righteous indignation" about migrants; so all 65m of them presumably. I rather doubt there is a unanimous view on that. Personally I feel righteous indignation that Lee Anderson is an MP and deputy leader of the Conservative Party rather than ranting in the corner of a pub somewhere and being avoided by the other customers, which seems like his natural home. 

[steve]

Laughable clown like ,reality denying, low intellect fantasist seen in the streets of Westminster, accompanied by Steve Bray.

[domjg]

Aug 8, 2023 10:58:08 GMT Mark said:

athena said:

Given that a large majority of people always buy secondhand it's the state of the secondhand market that really matters. Delay the ban and you delay the availability of secondhand EVs. The ban is just one element of a ratchet on vehicle pollution, alongside things like expansion of ULEZ schemes and other levies on polluting vehicles. In the absence of a flourishing secondhand market in EVs it will be politically impossible to keep tightening that ratchet.

Sadly, I think that those wanting to buy secondhand will struggle.

The reason is simple - it's emerging technology.

To partly ilustrate my point, I will make a comparison with computers. A bad one, I'll admit, but, nonetheless, a crude way of getting my point across.

I type this on a Windows 7 desktop.

It does pretty much all I want of it - browse with Firefox, watch videos with VLC Media Player, music the same or sometimes Foobar, pictres with Irfanview, I cn use Skype on here, use Notepad to write lyrics, make notes etc.

Yes, it serves me well, although technically, no longer supported.

Try selling one.

You can get refurbished Windows 10 machines for £50.

Even if someone put a Windows 7 machine up for £20 (sometimes happens, they get put up as 'first PC for kids'), they're a slow sell - even though, technically, such machines with do what most people want of it.

On EVs, early models, while they go, will do less per charge than latest models. Fine if you just want a runaround, but, for anyone who does a lot of driving, not so good.

In 20 years time, when there will likely be plenty of EVs on the secondhand market that will do mileage per charge that most will require, it won't be a problem, but, right now, that is not the case....and those that are will command a 'premium second hand price'.

As well as greatly increasing the charging infrastructure, the next government will also need - that's NEED - to introduce a very generous scrappage scheme to help people switch.

The major issue with no longer supported OS's is security unless you don't want to use the internet. Online banking on Windows 7?

[leftieliberal]

Who is safe when the Electoral Commission itself is hacked by "hostile actors". Unlike commercial companies, they hold the full versions of the electoral register. And we only find out now, two years after it happened: inews.co.uk/news/uk-voters-exposed-cyber-attack-electoral-commission-hacked-2532260 

[steve]

I'm not a Christian but something seems a bit out of place here.

[Mark]

leftieliberal said:

There is a simple answer: Install Linux Mint on it. You can still use your favourite apps like Firefox, Irfanview and VLC (Libre Office in place of Microsoft Office) and current versions of Linux include automatic updates. My only excuse for not doing it is laziness (although I do have a desktop that dual-boots into XP and Ubuntu).

While that is certainly good advice, it's all very well saying it to me, someone that is computer literate and already uses programmes that don't come pre-installed (I recently bought a laptop with Win 10 on it, which is WAY too naggy - join up to this, sign in to that, Microsoft popups all over the place, One Drive, Teams, god knows what else, putting Linux on it is exactly what I'm going to do), BUT, when it comes to buying and selling, hardly anyone is going to do that (try selling a 'Linux machine' and see how far it gets you)....and most people want out of the box convenience and miniml faffing around.

Likewise with cars, without a decent scrappage scheme, most people will sell when they have to...and as the transition to diesel hasn't been the golden egg that it was sold as, I suspect some will be reluctant to buy a hybrid in case that also becomes at least partly obselete in the near future.

As has already been said upthread, it's not green initiatives that some are objecting to, it's paying for them. This is where government has to step in, firstly for the cost, secondly for an easy, convenient transition, as opposed to, essentially 'do it this way if you want to mitigate'.

[leftieliberal]

Aug 8, 2023 13:36:42 GMT steve said:

I'm not a Christian but something seems a bit out of place here.
View Attachment

Perhaps it is his post-resurrection appearance in John's Gospel Chapter 21.  

[neilj]

I have thought for a while Sunak was making a mistake in highlighting immigration/asylum problems
All it does is highlight his failure

[steve]

leftieliberal

Was that in part two :" the messiah strikes back" or part three where he gets to find out that God was really his father all along.

[domjg]

Aug 8, 2023 13:32:44 GMT pjw1961 said:

Aug 8, 2023 11:16:48 GMT steve said:

"In an interview with the Daily Express, Lee Anderson, the Conservative deputy chairman, delivered a characteristically blunt response. He told the paper:

If they don’t like barges, then they should fuck off back to France …

"Asked on LBC if Anderson was speaking on behalf of the party, Chalk defended what he said, arguing that his Tory colleague was expressing the “righteous indignation of the British people”. 

This seems like one of those examples I was referring to of ascribing particular views to too wide a group. It seems Chalk believes that the "British people" feel "righteous indignation" about migrants; so all 65m of them presumably. I rather doubt there is a unanimous view on that. Personally I feel righteous indignation that Lee Anderson is an MP and deputy leader of the Conservative Party rather than ranting in the corner of a pub somewhere and being avoided by the other customers, which seems like his natural home. 

I feel extremely strong 'righteous indignation' against the british people who feel 'righteous indignation' of the sort espoused by Anderson. I feel extreme 'righteous indignation' that I live in a country governed by a party and government that panders to cretins like Anderson. 

[Mr Poppy]

Aug 8, 2023 7:36:22 GMT colin said:

"Public support for banning the sale of new petrol and diesel cars has fallen by almost a third in two years, new polling shows, as consumers turn against the policies needed to meet the government’s net-zero targets.
In a sign of increased concern about the cost of the UK’s climate change ambitions during the cost of living crisis, a YouGov poll for The Times shows that only 36 per cent of voters back the 2030 ban. This compares with more than half (51 per cent) of voters who backed the move in the run-up to the COP26 climate change conference in Glasgow in 2021.
The fall is particularly acute among potential Tory voters. While the policy was supported by 41 per cent of Tory voters in 2019, support has since dropped to 19 per cent. "

Times

Incredibly disappointing but sadly not surprising given the press and both main parties have moved to 'pro-motorist' positions inferring the cost of tackling climate change will hit people in the pocket.

There are also some 'technical' issues with being ready for 2030 (eg lack of EV charging infrastructure, the 'cliff-edge' for car manufacturers) but with a sense of urgency those issues could be addressed. 

Sadly it seems inevitable that UK HMG will push 2030 back to maybe 2035 or 'fudge' the issue. Just a matter of whether CON formerly scrap the 2030 date before GE'24 or leave it to LAB to do so afterwards. With the shift in polling and Rishi looking desperate for 'populist' policies then I'm leaning towards CON using the technical issues as an excuse for delay and announcing that before GE'24 (and Starmer-LAB then saying "no money left" so keeping the CON change in policy) 

PS Link for current info regarding 2030 and note it was 'gradual': "Between 2030 and 2035, new cars and vans can be sold if they have the capability to drive a significant distance with zero emissions (for example, plug-in hybrids or full hybrids), and this will be defined through consultation"

www.gov.uk/government/news/government-takes-historic-step-towards-net-zero-with-end-of-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-by-2030

[crossbat11]

Aug 8, 2023 13:44:45 GMT domjg said:

Aug 8, 2023 13:32:44 GMT pjw1961 said:

"Asked on LBC if Anderson was speaking on behalf of the party, Chalk defended what he said, arguing that his Tory colleague was expressing the “righteous indignation of the British people”. 

This seems like one of those examples I was referring to of ascribing particular views to too wide a group. It seems Chalk believes that the "British people" feel "righteous indignation" about migrants; so all 65m of them presumably. I rather doubt there is a unanimous view on that. Personally I feel righteous indignation that Lee Anderson is an MP and deputy leader of the Conservative Party rather than ranting in the corner of a pub somewhere and being avoided by the other customers, which seems like his natural home. 

I feel extremely strong 'righteous indignation' against the british people who feel 'righteous indignation' of the sort espoused by Anderson. I feel extreme 'righteous indignation' that I live in a country governed by a party and government that panders to cretins like Anderson. 

Symptoms of a party that's losing.

And they know it too. Shoring up the base the only show in town now.

Lifeboats to boardrooms near you soon to be launched, I expect

Oh, and eking out as many more months of feather bedded taxpayer-funded ministerial largesse as they can. Bitter end in 12 months time, I think. The trough still giveth for now.

That's a lot of helicopter flights and Chequers garden parties. Powers of patronage to enjoy too.

Some last juice to be squeezed before it's time to say goodbye to all that.

[oldnat]

Aug 8, 2023 9:36:40 GMT Danny said:

Aug 7, 2023 23:29:35 GMT oldnat said:

I have no problem with higher excise duty on products with a higher alcohol content - ensuring that government income from alcohol sales at least matches the cost to health services of treating the damage caused by alcohol consumption is a no-brainer.

Thats an interesting point, but what is the cost to the NHS of illness due to alcohol consumption, and what is the amount raised by alcohol taxes? (I recall that with tobacco tax revenues and savings on pensions etc. far exceeded costs to government. A very perverse victory then to cut tobacco consumption because it made the illness/funding balance worse)

"Public Health England estimates that alcohol costs the UK at least £27 billion a year. Over the past five years, alcohol duty has raised just £10.5-£12.1 billion annually. This is simply not enough to cover the cost of the damage alcohol causes."

ahauk.org/what-we-do/our-priorities/alcohol-duty-reform/

The Alcohol Health Alliance have a number of well researched documents on the problems caused by alcohol. On pricing, they recommend that England follows Scotland and Wales by introducing MUP. Both pricing strategies are needed.

"If implemented well, alcohol duty can be used as a way to reduce alcohol harm. The World Health Organization has identified alcohol duty as being one of the most effective ways of tackling alcohol-related harm.

Despite this, since 2012 alcohol duty has been cut or frozen every year in the Budget. This has had a huge impact on revenue. Treasury estimates indicate that it has lost around £1.8 billion in revenue every year due to duty changes since 2012 – this lost revenue could have paid for 59,000 nurses."

[Mr Poppy]

Aug 8, 2023 1:21:12 GMT mercian said:

Aug 7, 2023 19:30:52 GMT Rafwan said:

*** APPEAL TO ADMIN (Mark ) ***

I write to ask you to reconsider and reverse your judgment against steve deeming that his post about mercian was 'flaming'.

Your judgment was made on the grounds that he was attacking the poster, not his words, and he did not reference any of mercian 's posts as a basis for this. steve 's post showed an image of a mock-up of an imaginary magazine called 'The Racist Nan', and suggested that mercian properly belonged on its centrefold, offering no further immediate explanation. Looking back over the preceding posts (about a similarly imaginary magazine), you could be forgiven for thinking steve had plucked his suggestion out of thin air and that it was indeed 'flaming'.

Nothing could be further from the truth. If you go back to, say, p99, Aug 3rd, 5.26pm, mercian describes the 'great replacement' theory (widely recognised as the flagship of extreme right-wing racist groups here and elsewhere) as "blatantly, obviously true". This is followed by a lengthy, intermittent exchange with several posters, including me, steve and pjw1961 , attempting to explain the racist nature of mercian 's posts. This had no effect, with him going on to brand Muslims as anti-gays who endorse FGM, forced marriage, female oppression, honour killings, some weird version of sharia 'law' and much else. When pjw1961 put up a valiant and carefully-reasoned, evidence-based repudiation of this, mercian dismissed this as from the "lalaland of leftist orthodoxy". mercian 's posts were, by any standard, racist. It was against this backdrop that steve 's post came and it becomes very clear which of mercian 's posts it refers to.

This is the basis of my appeal to you.

Thank you, Mark. I realise you have an impossibly difficult job here,

I thought you were one of the reasonably sensible leftists on here so I'm disappointed. I actually 'liked' steve 's post about the magazine because I found it amusing. I think you'll find that I was always saying that it was a section of muslims who had those sort of views, which is undeniable. If you can give a full quote showing otherwise I'll happily re-examine it and retract or amend it if necessary.

 I also said that I'd never heard of the "great replacement theory" but Wikipedia says

"The original theory states that, with the complicity or cooperation of "replacist" elites,[5][8] the ethnic French and white European populations at large are being demographically and culturally replaced with non-white peoples—especially from Muslim-majority countries—through mass migration, demographic growth and a drop in the birth rate of white Europeans."

That is obviously true. There is mass migration, and there is a drop in the birth rate of white Europeans. From memory I also said that it doesn't mean that there is some sort of conspiracy going on. 

I am happy to discuss this further but don't wish to clog up the main thread. Perhaps start a new sub-thread? You could call it "Bash Mercian for not being a lefty". I'd be more than happy to debate in there.

Ironically then starting a new thread where the troll-ee is fine with the troll-ers conducting their trolling (ie no enforcement of rule2) will get you banned!

IIRC I called the new thread something like "Place for people to continue their petty personal vendettas from UKPR" before I was banned and the thread was deleted. 

Perhaps I needed to be more inclusive as some of the trolling is from people who weren't on UKPR 

It would be useful to keep the trolling off the main thread, given it is quite clearly an ongoing problem.  

NB Above is IMO, "light hearted banter", but given that is vague and subjective then Mark can perhaps clarify what breaks his rule2 and what is 'banter'. 

[Deleted]

Aug 8, 2023 14:24:55 GMT Mr Poppy said:

Aug 8, 2023 1:21:12 GMT mercian said:

NB Above is IMO, "light hearted banter", but given that is vague and subjective then Mark can perhaps clarify what breaks his rule2 and what is 'banter'. 

In fairness to Mark he very recently did :-

"challenging a member on their views/posts is perfectly acceptable, but, accusations made against a member without referencing something they have posted is not.
On a more general point, as also said upthread, several members have engaged in low level 'banter' against other members.I have to remind said members to "play the ball, not the man" and that what is sometimes meant as humour can easily be mis-interpreted, so please think before you post."


simplifying it later to :-

"simply calling * (or anyone else) a name without referencing his posts/views amounts to flaming."


I thought that was fair and left room for individual responsibility .

[oldnat]

Latest YG 6 poll Scots average, with changes from 2019 GE (done as a kay9 experiment)

SNP: 34% (-11)
SGP: 7% (+6)
SLab: 34% (+16)
SCon: 13% (-12)
REFUK: 3% (+2)
SLD: 8% (-2)

EDIT : Didn't work