That their antics actually massively increase the reductions they wail about, is also completely ignored by them and their deluded acolytes. It's akin to protesting about nuclear powerPosh pricks deluding themselves that their actions will change anything.
I'd say it's directly proportional to how pink your face is.Her annoyance level seems to be directly proportional to how old you are.
Of course it is. We have a 'Brickie' who's inherited property that he doesn't give a shit about, retired teachers, retired vicars, and not one black person amongst them.
Defenders of these lunatics give no shits whatsoever about
the helpless woman, ( Sorry Labourites, that thing with a cervix), being rushed to hospital with a stroke, but trapped in a car for 6 hours, and being paralysed because she couldn't get there. If this were one of mine, I'd personally get straight to the mouthpieces of this insane cult, and effect my own protest.
These actions are now virtually guaranteed to be the cause of deaths, or serious injury, this lady may yet be one of them, some clowns leaping in front of cars are going to cause yet more pile ups and the results will be horrific.
We'll discuss their right to protest, in a little more detail then.
This is like someone babbling in an asylum.Tell you what though we only get to protest against the protesters if the govt sort the NHS so that the woman who's had a stroke or the person who fell off the ladder who use the express lane created by arresting the protesters die because on arrival at hospital they are in a queue of ambulances and don't get into A&E for 5 hours.... oh and all traffic lights on junctions leading to A&E are on permanent green in all directions.
Can someone make any sense of this for me?Tell you what though we only get to protest against the protesters if the govt sort the NHS so that the woman who's had a stroke or the person who fell off the ladder who use the express lane created by arresting the protesters die because on arrival at hospital they are in a queue of ambulances and don't get into A&E for 5 hours.... oh and all traffic lights on junctions leading to A&E are on permanent green in all directions.
I will if you answer the questions I asked you a few posts back, or are you just here to carp?Can someone make any sense of this for me?
Can someone make any sense of this for me?
I doubt it.Can someone make any sense of this for me?
Protest is vital to democracy. It shows elected leaders the views of people and how strongly they feel about them.Protest is integral to Democracy. Take away the right to protest and you get authoritarianism.
You will still battle through, day by day, trying to do a fairs day work for a days pay and just keeping your head above water but the people in charge who do less than the protestors will be laughing at you.
Have you asked them? You appear to think you know their aims more than they do.Protest is vital to democracy. It shows elected leaders the views of people and how strongly they feel about them.
However, these kind of events are not protests. They’re not aimed at demonstrating strength of feeling and changing views democratically. These events are a kind of extortion: “Do what we want or we’ll mess your lives up.”
In any event, the demands of these groups are so unrealistic that they call into question the actual motivation of the activists. Stop the use of fossil fuels by 2025? Insulate every property in the UK at taxpayers expense by 2030? No one could seriously think these goals can or should be achieved. As such it is clear that the actual aim of the activists is to force people to provide them with the status and acclaim they crave, rather than to actually do anything positive for wider society.
Have you asked them? You appear to think you know their aims more than they do.
Make unrealistic claims, you may get something, it is how things work. I want the end of nuclear weapons, but the end of the UK having them would suffice.
And even if there demands where free blowjobs every monday morning from Priti Patel it is there right to make such demands.
Insulating every home would be a huge positive for society, cheaper bills for a start, warmer houses, better for the climate, if you dont think that is positive i wonder what you think is.
Yes, maybe Boris should wave his magic wand and make it so. Of course it is a positive (if you ignore the costs and opportunities missed as a result) but it’s not in the least realistic.Insulating every home would be a huge positive for society, cheaper bills for a start, warmer houses, better for the climate, if you dont think that is positive i wonder what you think is.
It's Johnson, he isn't your mate or mine.Yes, maybe Boris should wave his magic wand and make it so. Of course it is a positive (if you ignore the costs and opportunities missed as a result) but it’s not in the least realistic.
Asking for impossible things is a way to get ignored, not a way to get half of what you want.
Apart from anything else we’d end up insulating homes only to tear them down later, or spending money insulating that would do more good being spent on other low carbon projects. Where would all the extra fitters and builders come from and where would they go after 2030? Better insulation makes perfect sense but arbitrary policies with arbitrary deadlines are nonsensical. The real world tends to be a complex place and extreme simplistic solutions aren’t ever a good fit.
Also, the only time nuclear weapons were used in war was when only one country had them. Maybe unilateral disarmament isn’t such a good road to a more peaceful, safer world.
Yes, but I doubt Keynes would expect it to apply beyond the productive capacity of a society, especially when so much effort is directed to a single sector. This isn’t a general works programme to boost demand during a recession. We’re talking about a country that already struggles to build enough houses to meet demand every year. Does it really have the spare capacity to insulate three million homes every year too?It's Johnson, he isn't your mate or mine.
Are you aware of the multiplier effect?
Yes, but I doubt Keynes would expect it to apply beyond the productive capacity of a society, especially when so much effort is directed to a single sector. This isn’t a general works programme to boost demand during a recession. We’re talking about a country that already struggles to build enough houses to meet demand every year. Does it really have the spare capacity to insulate three million homes every year too?
Yes with a Keynesian approach it is perfectly possible, because in reality it is not a single sector, it will create demand and rather than than the supply side nonsense of Hayek and the classical liberal acolytes it might actually create proper jobs and an industry behind it that we could export.the Yes, but I doubt Keynes would expect it to apply beyond the productive capacity of a society, especially when so much effort is directed to a single sector. This isn’t a general works programme to boost demand during a recession. We’re talking about a country that already struggles to build enough houses to meet demand every year. Does it really have the spare capacity to insulate three million homes every year too?
There are other constraints, true, untaxed land banking among them. However, it should be fairly clear following this week’s events that there’s also limits on the available labour.Do you actually believe that we don't build enough homes because of a capacity issue?
If you do, can I interest you in some magic beans?
There are other constraints, true, untaxed land banking among them. However, it should be fairly clear following this week’s events that there’s also limits on the available labour.
My point is I don’t think that every property in the country can be insulated to a high standard by 2030, and I don’t think that’s the best allocation of resources. All societies have limited resources. It isn’t good policy to allocate those limited resources based on arbitrary policy with no reference to reality.
What would be the point of building up a massive insulation industry in a frenzy of activity, only to close it down again nine years later? Does that sound an efficient way to go about things? I suspect it would it lead to massive waste, if it could be achieved.