Show newer

It's just occurred to me

Starmer's "support the government" stance during the pandemic allowed all of the corruption and the PPE scandal etc. to carry on without being challenged

His steamed pudding approach cost lives, because no-one held the corrupt to account and they carried on. Same with the £32bn "moon shot" (more like "arse wipe') project.

He let them get away with it. It's worse than the corruption itself.

He sat on his hands while people died. I think this is far worse.

RT @AyoCaesar
Every week, this government decides to kick off a news story that results in British South Asians getting a deluge of online racist abuse. But I'm delighted that racism was defeated in 2019 along with that nasty man Jeremy Corbyn, well fucking done everyone.

RT @Mattlyall78
@lisanandy Do you know how many houses labour built in Scotland during their last term in office and during the worst housing crisis since ww2 ???
Six (6).
Labour died telling Tory lies 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇪🇺

IIRC when in power last Labour did fuck all too
---
RT @lisanandy
Rishi Sunak has admitted that he ditched housing targets because Tory members told him to.

This is utterly shameful from a weak Prime Minister. twitter.com/labourpress/status
twitter.com/lisanandy/status/1

RT @DauphinRattle
Here is a bot/sock account set up a Labour RWer/Blairite specifically to attack Britain's first black woman MP.
Labour party is a toxic waste dump. twitter.com/DianeCalculator/st

RT @NoirMJ
When he said that on he'd had 1 film role in previous 10 yrs & 4 single episode bit-parts on TV over previous 5 yrs. He didn't have a fucking career. He had opportunities cuz family nepotism but couldn't act! was to actually create his career as a right-wing crank! twitter.com/KevinFr03299496/st

RT @Colin1866
@BrianHTweed "Did I ever tell you about the time I prosecuted people for stealing drinking water? Or the time I let a famous paedophile get away with his crimes?"

RT @Normanjam671
Sir Keir Starmer will constantly submit to the establishment because he's a fully paid-up member.

Republicans don't say they hate gay people.
—They say groomers.
—They say pedophiles.

Republicans don't say they hate Jews.
—They say Soros.
—They say New World Order.

Republicans don't say they hate black people.
—They say thugs.
—They say looters.

Republicans don't say they hate Hispanic people.
—They say illegals.
—They say animals.

Republicans don't say they hate women.
—They say sluts.
—They say femoids.

Republicans don't say they hate democracy.
—They say cancel woke.
—They say radical left.

Be very, very careful of any group deliberately using dehumanizing language. Because eventually, when they do finally come for you and everyone you've ever loved...
They won't say they hate you.
—They won't have to say anything at all.

RT @EthicalRenewal
@peterkyle @UKLabour And Elvis lives on the moon.
Tell me something you can actually do.

RT @helenmallam
Starmer ‘agrees’ that the junior doctors pay demand is too much. Who is he agreeing with? The fecking anti-NHS, austerity-for-the-poor, tax-cuts-for-the-rich Tories, that’s who.

There is no opposition. twitter.com/itvnewspolitics/st

JUNIOR DOCTOR - PAY EXPLAINED

2008 - 24 Tins of beans an hour

2023 - 10 Tins of beans an hour

#juniorDoctors

Below is an excerpt from The Green Growth Delusion, a superb article posted at TruthDig.

Key quote for me is: “The politically acceptable is ecologically disastrous, while the ecologically necessary is politically impossible.”

That sums up the quandary we are in...
___________________________________

The consensus on the need for scaling up renewable energy is rarely disturbed by a disquieting possibility: What if techno-industrial society as currently conceived — based on ever-increasing GDP, global trade and travel, and complex global production and distribution chains designed to satisfy the rich world’s unquenchable appetite for bigger, faster, more of everything — what if that simply cannot function without energy-dense fossil fuels? What if, despite the promises of Green New Deal boosters, it is impossible to make sustainable the current system that provides billions of people sustenance, shelter, goods?

This possibility is not mentioned thanks to the dominance of “green growth.” This is the idea that the organizing principle of our civilization — endless growth of economies and populations — can be decarbonized swiftly in a way that will involve no material disruption. Green Growth holds out the promise of transitioning from fossil fuels directly into something like an earth-friendly utopia without a hitch and without meaningful sacrifice. This is the sales pitch offered by Green New Deal proselytes who bring relentless optimism to the belief — the faith — that renewables can underwrite business-as-usual.

Vaclav Smil, an emeritus at the University of Manitoba and author of more than 40 books on energy, environment and industry, has declared the “rapid-speed transformation narratives” in the renewables field to be so full of “magic prescriptions” that they are “the academic equivalents of science fiction.”

Electricity — for lighting, heating, cooling, ventilation, appliances and electronics, among other end uses — accounts for just 20% of total global energy demand. The other 80% is for hydrocarbons burned for mining, drilling, industry, manufacturing and transport, both passenger and freight. Right out of the gate, this simple fact presents problems for a GND camp whose cri-de-coeur is “electrify everything.” As Smil observes, Green New Dealers provide “no explanation for how the four material pillars of modern civilization” — cement, steel, plastic and ammonia — will be produced with renewable electricity. With current technologies, and for the foreseeable future, you simply cannot make cement, steel, plastic or ammonia absent fossil fuels. Nor do green growth visionaries offer a viable explanation for how flying, shipping and trucking — the beating hearts of the global growth economy — are to be powered without burning enormous amounts of carbon.

Smil acknowledges that rapid decarbonization is possible, but *only* if we vastly reduced demand, a route that would entail “substantial cuts to the standard of living in all affluent countries.” As long as this subject is politically off-limits in every major economy, Smil agrees with sustainability scholar William Rees, who has concluded, “The politically acceptable is ecologically disastrous, while the ecologically necessary is politically impossible.”
________________________

FULL ARTICLE -- truthdig.com/dig/green-tinted-

#Environment #Climate #ClimateChange #ClimateCrisis #ClimateAction #ClimateEmergency #Degrowth

Stolen from FB

Alt text
2 stick figures
1 says "We need to pay bankers more to attract top talent"
Other replies "So shouldn't we pay doctors more to attract top talent?"
First walks off red faced

Show older
Green Plenty

This is the companion community to the Green Plenty substack