kaosmark2
-
Posts
20,537 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
42
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by kaosmark2
-
-
52 minutes ago, stuie said:
Sorry to be a woke lefty but I still strongly believe in the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a court of law.
I think refusing to go to the court of law is suspicious.
-
1
-
-
20 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:
Oh it very much is classist to judge like that and I hate it with passion................... was just pointing out red lentils don't need soaking and protein is plentiful away from meat. Stopping home economics at school was a huge huge error.
There are sadly too many people who simply like to judge others whilst not taking any notice of failings they may be making themselves.
Yeah. I don't like bringing my personal choices around these things into arguments like this because it comes from my own opportunities. That said, if I'm in the middle of a 14hr work day and somewhere that knows me as a staff member of a local business offers me a 1/2 price or free burger there's 0 chance I'm turning that down. I try and make decisions but I'm going to be kind for the times circumstances don't allow me them. I also know other people don't even has as much luxury around these choices as I do.
-
1 minute ago, Nobody Interesting said:
Red lentils don't need pre soaking.
I am a veggie of a long time and have no hassles getting more than enough protein, I have more muscle mass now than when I ate meat.I'm not saying that it's impossible, I'm saying that people's circumstances vary and it's often quite classist to try and judge someone's diet and shopping habits.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, stuie said:
I was under the impression the sex offences were a smokescreen and made up to get him extradited?
He and his supporters claim that. This is the effective charge:
Extradition to Sweden for these charges should have happened IMO. I'm not going to presume guilt/innocence but I don't think there's anything to suggest the Swedish courts would be fixed.
Extradition to the USA for wikileaks shouldn't be happening, as I fully believe that'd be torturing him and no fair trial, but everything about Swedish rights/extradition makes it look like he's trying to dodge the sexual offence charges.
-
3 hours ago, lost said:
I see lots of stuff on reducing meat consumption out there. I'm not saying its impossible to get enough protein from nuts and the like but its far more difficult and I would guess the majority don't have the self discipline.
There's also a thing of it often takes more time/knowledge to cook nuts and pulses into a functional meal than it does to cook cheap meat. Certainly if you're relying on the cheaper stuff. Sure, bulk bags of lentils are cheap, but to cook them properly you should be pre-soaking them, then draining then stewing them. Compare that to grilling a few sausages. By contrast, if you look at snacking nuts as your primary protein source, you're going to be paying huge amounts.
I'd generally say that our society largely has meat consumption at extremes - people who have meat in virtually every meal and over-eat it, or veggie/vegans who never touch it.
-
10 minutes ago, lazyred said:
But did you read the article which proposes setting the pension as a proportion of earnings? It's actually a good idea.
Yeah. The headline is sensationalist designed to appeal to Torygraph readers. The article basically talks about linking to earnings, which is what I'm saying is good as well.
-
6 minutes ago, steviewevie said:
I click the link and see:
Carl Emmerson writes about the triple lock in The Telegraph
followed by
Originally published in The Telegraph on 13 December 2023
-
Just now, steviewevie said:
The state pension was considered too low and too many pensioners were effectively living in poverty which is why triple lock thing was introduced, right? Not sure it was just about votes. Now it is being questioned because last few years it has gone up more than wages...and maybe soon they will scrap it and link it to average earnings because it isn't sustainable...or they will just keep increasing the pension age (not exactly a vote winner either).
It was introduced back in 2011 by Gideon Osborne, alongside scrapping a lot of pensioner benefits, including a bunch of means tested ones.
You can argue that there is sense of just having a good state pension scheme instead of means-tested benefits that are more costly to implement, but it was absolutely a vote-chasing giveaway.
-
1 minute ago, fraybentos1 said:
Yeah I agree it is circular. The offering to young people is fairly pitiful. Look at the housing crisis for example, probs what most young people would say is the biggest issue they face and neither party seems serious about tackling it. Labour occasionally talk a good game but you know for a fact they'll drop it like a hot potato to secure the votes of homeowners who just want their property value to keep going up and up.
Starmer visited Bristol recently, and had answers prepared to talk about stabbings (tragic but usually rare), drug use (erm), but was evasive and ran away the moment housing and bus services came up.
The biggest issues here are that people can't afford to live anywhere near the centre, and people can't get into the centre from further out because the buses don't turn up. Every other issue put together isn't as important as either of those two.
-
52 minutes ago, SalviaPlath said:
I'm concerned about Wes Streeting. Over the last few days he's been saying sensible things (citizens assemblies are good and Israel has gone too far in killing civilians) and appearing vaguely likeable. This is very out of character.
Don't worry, I'm sure he'll slag off hope again soon enough.
-
2 hours ago, steviewevie said:
Who's telling the truth, Kemi Badenoch or Henry Staunton?
BET NOW!
You can tell when a Tory Minister lies: Their lips move.
-
4 hours ago, Nobody Interesting said:
If I were to put my cynical hat on I would say that pensions and how they are protected are simply because of the weight of voters it attracts rather than caring or wanting to do good for people - but of course no government or wanna be government would ever have policy based on holding onto part of the electorate now would they!!
If the youth started to vote regularly I wonder how many policies would appear aimed at looking after them more.
Politics, cynical, all about getting re-elected rather than the common good!?!?
NeverIt's also circular. The youth don't vote because even when they do it's just politicians shitting on them. If no party is actually speaking for you, and respecting you, why would you go out of your way to endorse them?
-
4 hours ago, fraybentos1 said:
I’m not talking about getting rid of pensions, I’m just of the view that the triple lock is too generous compared to what working people have got over the last couple decades. Just link it to wage growth.
If you’re at the point of being wholly reliant on the state pension then you’ll likely be eligible for other financial support too tho. Anyway I’m not saying 10grand a year is a lot on its own, I’m just saying a lot of people who get that are very well off.
This! The triple lock was a huge bribe to lock in the votes of pensioners, even those who don't need it! Noone is saying let pensioners starve!
Either apply the triple lock to all benefits, or get rid of it and link pensions to wage growth.
-
1 minute ago, lazyred said:
Lib Dems strategy to squeeze labour in the south east targetting Surrey Shufflers
Out come the dodgy graphs!
-
5 minutes ago, steviewevie said:
but also those African countries aren't emitting anywhere near the amount that more developed countries are, so have less to do to achieve et zero goals? If you look at graphs China/India emissions have been rapidly rising so they have to halt that and reverse, which is probably why needed more time. USA/Canada were at a high level consistently, and in Europe levels had been coming down since the 90s I guess as many of they're industries moved abroad and they moved away from coal?
Anyway, no one is doing very well...and we won't hit goals..but hopefully what is done will stop us getting above 3C because anything less is unrealistic I expect.
Yeah, although they're not tacking into carbon emissions intentionally, in a way that they could/would do without the threat of climate crisis. You compare to India, where India are making an active choice to industrialise large parts of their country/economy using fossil fuels, and ignoring the state of the globe (and like... anything about their farmers having even a hint of right to food they grow).
-
9 minutes ago, steviewevie said:
Fond this...a few African nations leading the way...US/Europe not so good...China and India even worse...and as for Russia..
Countries | Climate Action Tracker
(not sure how up to date).
You can kinda see the self-interest. Those African countries will suffer a lot from climate catastrophes, so are making a proportionally bigger effort. Norway is interesting, and I suspect is largely to do with the fact they're selling off their remaining Oil reserves instead of burning it themselves - simultaneously creative accounting and good economics. Although they're also at fairly high risk of shifted currents with the ice caps melting etc.
-
7 minutes ago, steviewevie said:
China's net zero goals are later than US/Europe, right? They pushed back on the original goals set at that Glasgow COP, along with India. Maybe they will get there earlier, they are certainly at the forefront of green tech and can think long term and plan accordingly because they don't have to worry about something called democracy, but US/EU are ploughing loads of money into this too. I think just blaming the evil west or evil capitalism is kind of lame, no matter what system a country has they still want to build and have more stuff. The problem is on top of developed countries and their massive carbon spewing economies we have all the developing countries, they want to build, they want to use loads of cement and loads of steel and have all the things that developed countries have, and now we're saying sorry...no can do.
Yes to basically all this.
The "unfairness" of the West benefiting from the industrial revolution and no other countries being "allowed" to is a big part of why negotiations allowed later net zero. That said, China will certainly beat the US and probably beat most EU countries to net zero.
I think it's fair to comment on the problems of capitalism, "replace" over "fix/recycle/refurbish" has been a thing for a long time, and the economics that lead to it being quicker, easier, and usually cheaper to just get a new thing should be called out.
A big big question is going to be what green technology China develops, and then whether they actually choose to share it with the rest of the world. I can very much see a situation where China makes some brilliant advances in non-carbon technology, but declines to share the methods and only sells a sample of the products, leaving the rest of the world playing catch-up to China.
-
25 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:
One day in the not too distant future China will reach 'net zero' (a meaningless thing in reality) and the rest of the developed world will lose their excuse for not acting................................ so will then blame India instead.
This is the depressing thing. Particularly as the developed world will point their fingers, while still buying all those products from India.
-
4 hours ago, Nobody Interesting said:
If the world acts now and acts fast then no it's not too late. We can if we want stop things soon and reverse to a certain extent. Sadly though the world seems lacking in any desire to stop.
I don't even think it's the world lacking desire, it's the industrial capitalist complex that doesn't. Several countries are already seeing disaster and massive climate problems as a result of what's been done, but the rich need to get richer and those of us doing "middling" in wealthy countries aren't willing to reduce our own consumerism.
-
Just now, steviewevie said:
yeah, it is unreasonable...but that is what Israel are doing, using the ultimate threat. What do you do?
Well for a start the UK and US could stop supplying Israel with weapons!
-
6 hours ago, steviewevie said:
Israel saying that unless Hamas releases all hostages in next three weeks they'll invade Rafah...so the ball in Hamas' court I guess.
The thing is, that's an unreasonable demand, framed as a reasonable one. The reason hostage exchange is usually done simultaneously is because there's no trust for the other side to follow-up.
Israel are doing this to attempt to make it look like they're being reasonable, while in fact just manufacturing an excuse to carry on with genocide.
Similarly, Hamas can point to this as unreasonable escalation and threats, instead of a direct hostage exchange, and go "look at them commiting war crimes, see how we're fighting for you against this oppressor!" and keep on with their own terrorism.
-
"Permissive attitudes" is fascist talk.
-
52 minutes ago, Neil said:
yeah just add "mental health" and it is that easy - pays better than pensions as well.
It really isn't that easy. This is Daily Mail level BS.
-
3
-
-
6 minutes ago, thetime said:
When you think where you've been for a decade, 7th is a great season. Think we've discussed before, it's going to be incredibly difficult for Newcastle to do a chelsea/city.
Personally think you are just 10 years to late to have any major impact going for titles. Europa and the occasional top 4, when the likes of Liverpool are off it, is your level.
Off titles yes. I'd like to think winning a cup might be doable before that.
UK Politics
in Discussions
Posted · Edited by kaosmark2
I wonder if this has anything to do with "will of the people" rhetoric and trying to inflame hatred and focus on ad hominem attacks against the opposition, instead of actually.... defending policies?