Omg 18%

Bobziz

Prism said:

sgx2000 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

sgx2000 said:

Tony Blair was the most successful PM im the last 50 years..

Electorally no more successful than Maggie.

Both succeeded in their time to address the challenges of the era.
Both implemented policies that were unpopular while carrying the populace with them.
Both set a vision and led (rather than managed) the country.

Maggie was only suceeded by, selling off all the family silver.... to the wealthy tory voters ....
We owned all the utilities
Now foreign companies own them

Who wants to own and run the utilities? We already control them pretty well with policy without having to run them. 

I'm guessing you haven't been for a swim in the sea recently?

[Deleted User]

zagfles said:

ComicGeek said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Finally, it was not long ago that the green lobby were saying cheap energy was the work of Mordor and energy needed to be much more expensive to save the planet.  Where are they today?  Pleading for bigger handouts to pay for energy.

I'm not sure how the failure of Government energy policies over the last few decades is the fault of the green lobby. It's not strange to have both lobbied for greater resources for insulation/boiler replacements etc over the years, and also want to financially support the most vulnerable in the short term now.

It's stuff like protests against fracking, against a new coal mine, new gas fields etc. The hypocrisy of trying to prevent us generating our own fossil fuel energy while (directly or indirectly) importing it from abroad.

https://www.greenpeace.org.uk/news/government-coal-mine-robert-jenrick-climate/

…and against new nuclear.

sgx2000

Prism said:

sgx2000 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

sgx2000 said:

Tony Blair was the most successful PM im the last 50 years..

Electorally no more successful than Maggie.

Both succeeded in their time to address the challenges of the era.
Both implemented policies that were unpopular while carrying the populace with them.
Both set a vision and led (rather than managed) the country.

Maggie was only suceeded by, selling off all the family silver.... to the wealthy tory voters ....
We owned all the utilities
Now foreign companies own them

Who wants to own and run the utilities? We already control them pretty well with policy without having to run them. 

We control them?  Hahaha

Before the tories sold them off. 
We all paid the same price per unit......
We had large stockpiles of gas  ... remember all those gas towers?
And utility managememt didnt give themselves bonuses in the millions....

ComicGeek

Prism said:

sgx2000 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

sgx2000 said:

Tony Blair was the most successful PM im the last 50 years..

Electorally no more successful than Maggie.

Both succeeded in their time to address the challenges of the era.
Both implemented policies that were unpopular while carrying the populace with them.
Both set a vision and led (rather than managed) the country.

Maggie was only suceeded by, selling off all the family silver.... to the wealthy tory voters ....
We owned all the utilities
Now foreign companies own them

Who wants to own and run the utilities? We already control them pretty well with policy without having to run them. 

All profits are stripped from the utility companies and paid to executives and shareholders. Very small amount is reinvested into network maintenance and improvements, which is why 20-25% of water is lost through network leaks.

We have an ageing distribution system for all utilities - power outages and water supply issues are more to do with low network investment than anything else. 

ComicGeek

Deleted_User said:

zagfles said:

ComicGeek said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Finally, it was not long ago that the green lobby were saying cheap energy was the work of Mordor and energy needed to be much more expensive to save the planet.  Where are they today?  Pleading for bigger handouts to pay for energy.

I'm not sure how the failure of Government energy policies over the last few decades is the fault of the green lobby. It's not strange to have both lobbied for greater resources for insulation/boiler replacements etc over the years, and also want to financially support the most vulnerable in the short term now.

It's stuff like protests against fracking, against a new coal mine, new gas fields etc. The hypocrisy of trying to prevent us generating our own fossil fuel energy while (directly or indirectly) importing it from abroad.

https://www.greenpeace.org.uk/news/government-coal-mine-robert-jenrick-climate/

…and against new nuclear.

I don't personally have an issue with nuclear, it forms part of a comprehensive national energy strategy. It's the lengthy timescales for building them that's the issue, particularly with successive governments that don't actually do anything. 

Fracking and new coal mines are only discussed because of the monumental failure to implement any coherent energy policy. They should never be needed, fossil fuels are not a long term solution.

[Deleted User]

ComicGeek said:

Deleted_User said:

zagfles said:

ComicGeek said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Finally, it was not long ago that the green lobby were saying cheap energy was the work of Mordor and energy needed to be much more expensive to save the planet.  Where are they today?  Pleading for bigger handouts to pay for energy.

I'm not sure how the failure of Government energy policies over the last few decades is the fault of the green lobby. It's not strange to have both lobbied for greater resources for insulation/boiler replacements etc over the years, and also want to financially support the most vulnerable in the short term now.

It's stuff like protests against fracking, against a new coal mine, new gas fields etc. The hypocrisy of trying to prevent us generating our own fossil fuel energy while (directly or indirectly) importing it from abroad.

https://www.greenpeace.org.uk/news/government-coal-mine-robert-jenrick-climate/

…and against new nuclear.

I don't personally have an issue with nuclear, it forms part of a comprehensive national energy strategy. It's the lengthy timescales for building them that's the issue, particularly with successive governments that don't actually do anything. 

Fracking and new coal mines are only discussed because of the monumental failure to implement any coherent energy policy. They should never be needed, fossil fuels are not a long term solution.

Quite right. Who needs hydrocarbons and the energy we all depend on back in the real world? Just warm yourself with hot air and “strategies”. 

[Deleted User]

ComicGeek said:

Prism said:

sgx2000 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

sgx2000 said:

Tony Blair was the most successful PM im the last 50 years..

Electorally no more successful than Maggie.

Both succeeded in their time to address the challenges of the era.
Both implemented policies that were unpopular while carrying the populace with them.
Both set a vision and led (rather than managed) the country.

Maggie was only suceeded by, selling off all the family silver.... to the wealthy tory voters ....
We owned all the utilities
Now foreign companies own them

Who wants to own and run the utilities? We already control them pretty well with policy without having to run them. 

All profits are stripped from the utility companies and paid to executives and shareholders. Very small amount is reinvested into network maintenance and improvements, which is why 20-25% of water is lost through network leaks.

We have an ageing distribution system for all utilities - power outages and water supply issues are more to do with low network investment than anything else. 

I am always curious why people would be visiting a retirement/investment forum if they are  ideologically opposed to profits and shareholders.  

Bimbly

sgx2000 said:

Maggie was only suceeded by, selling off all the family silver.... to the wealthy tory voters ....

My understanding is that it was North sea gas which gave the country an economic boost and helped pull the country out of a bit of a hole during Maggie's time.

zagfles

Deleted_User said:

ComicGeek said:

Deleted_User said:

zagfles said:

ComicGeek said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Finally, it was not long ago that the green lobby were saying cheap energy was the work of Mordor and energy needed to be much more expensive to save the planet.  Where are they today?  Pleading for bigger handouts to pay for energy.

I'm not sure how the failure of Government energy policies over the last few decades is the fault of the green lobby. It's not strange to have both lobbied for greater resources for insulation/boiler replacements etc over the years, and also want to financially support the most vulnerable in the short term now.

It's stuff like protests against fracking, against a new coal mine, new gas fields etc. The hypocrisy of trying to prevent us generating our own fossil fuel energy while (directly or indirectly) importing it from abroad.

https://www.greenpeace.org.uk/news/government-coal-mine-robert-jenrick-climate/

…and against new nuclear.

I don't personally have an issue with nuclear, it forms part of a comprehensive national energy strategy. It's the lengthy timescales for building them that's the issue, particularly with successive governments that don't actually do anything. 

Fracking and new coal mines are only discussed because of the monumental failure to implement any coherent energy policy. They should never be needed, fossil fuels are not a long term solution.

Quite right. Who needs hydrocarbons and the energy we all depend on back in the real world? Just warm yourself with hot air and “strategies”. 

We mustn't produce any ourselves, but it's fine to import from Russia...

zagfles

ComicGeek said:

Deleted_User said:

zagfles said:

ComicGeek said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Finally, it was not long ago that the green lobby were saying cheap energy was the work of Mordor and energy needed to be much more expensive to save the planet.  Where are they today?  Pleading for bigger handouts to pay for energy.

I'm not sure how the failure of Government energy policies over the last few decades is the fault of the green lobby. It's not strange to have both lobbied for greater resources for insulation/boiler replacements etc over the years, and also want to financially support the most vulnerable in the short term now.

It's stuff like protests against fracking, against a new coal mine, new gas fields etc. The hypocrisy of trying to prevent us generating our own fossil fuel energy while (directly or indirectly) importing it from abroad.

https://www.greenpeace.org.uk/news/government-coal-mine-robert-jenrick-climate/

…and against new nuclear.

I don't personally have an issue with nuclear, it forms part of a comprehensive national energy strategy. It's the lengthy timescales for building them that's the issue, particularly with successive governments that don't actually do anything. 

Fracking and new coal mines are only discussed because of the monumental failure to implement any coherent energy policy. They should never be needed, fossil fuels are not a long term solution.

Which countries have? Other countries were even worse eg Germany moving away from nuclear because too many people were whinging about it, so instead they rely on Russian gas. But apparently high energy prices are a good thing according to some in the "green lobby"