Francis 🇾🇪 🏳️‍🌈 🏳️‍⚧️ @francis@greenplenty.social

I see rich 'non doms' are angry at Jeremey Hunt stealing Labour's policy to end the tax break... and some are now threatening to leave the county.

To my mind this is a bit like squatters complaining to a landlord that the imposition of rent means they will leave & find somewhere else to live...

I say good riddance to them if they don't want to contribute taxes to the maintenance of a country that due to their malign influence is falling apart.

#taxes #JeremyHunt

If seeing Biden both facilitating genocide in Gaza and destroy public health, allowing Covid to cause a mass disabling event, isn't enough to show how dangerous Vote Blue No Matter Who is, I don't know what will convince them. Right wingers are dangerous regardless of whether they have an R or a D after their name.

#US is showing clear signs of pulling out of #ProjectUkraine and this has panicked all #EU puppets to an unprecedented degree.
#LePetitRoi is suffering Napoleonic Syndrome and dreams of wars with Russia, and #FrauGenocide, as she crosses the boundaries of paranoia, wants to develop new weapons systems overnight.

All US puppets in #Europe have become dangerous for peace.

"transgender people are going to destroy Christianity and the traditional American family"

yes, and we need to make faster work of it. chop, chop, everybody!

#climatechange #climatedenial

How much money do you think the United States has spent since 1945 on the Cold War? Sometimes they ask this question then from the back of the audience comes in answer ‘billions and billions‘. A huge underestimate – billions and billions. The amount of money that the United States has spent on the Cold War since 1945 is approximately 10 trillion dollars. Trillion, that’s the big one with the ‘T’. What could you buy with 10 trillion dollars? The answer is: You could buy everything in the United States except the land. Everything. Every building, truck, bus, car, boat, plane, pencil, baby’s diaper. Everything in the United States except the land, that’s what we have spent on the Cold War.

So, now let me ask: How certain was it that the Russians were going to invade? Was it 100% certain? Guess not since they never invaded. What if it was only let say 10% certain? What would advocates of big military buildup have said? We must be prudent. It’s not enough to count on only the most likely circumstance. If the worst happens and it’s really extremely dangerous for us we have to prepare for that. Remote contingencies if there is serious enough have the prepared for. It’s classic military thinking – you prepare for the worst case.

And so now, I ask my friends who are comfortable with that argument, including the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal, why doesn’t that same argument apply to Global Warming. You don’t think it’s 100% likely? Fine. You are entitled to think that. If it’s only a small probability of it happening since the consequences are so serious, don’t you have to make some serious investment to prevent it or mitigate it? I think there’s a double standard of argument working and I don’t think we should permit it.

— Carl Sagan, An excerpt of a speech given on the 2nd of September in 1990 at the 5th Emerging Issues Forum at NCSU

The #Tories have been caught trying to ensure that the UK's #climatechange reposes is potentially hobbled....

They know they're heading into (potential) electoral oblivion & want to ensure their toxic climate denial can be actioned via other means.

Luckily the devolved leaders spotted what they were doing.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/mar/01/devolved-leaders-reject-shortlist-for-climate-watchdog-chair-over-tory-links

It never does, Angry.

Via Angry Staffer:

Make it make sense

Rick Lenzie:

Republicans are actively investigating Joe #Biden while claiming the president has total immunity.

Yasmine Ahmed, (Human Rights Watch) on #RishiSunak joining a #farmers demo. while complaining of 'mob rule':

'The idea that politicians are celebrating one set of protesters while cracking down on others is chilling. A country that only allows you to demonstrate on issues it agrees with is the very definition of authoritarian. For a government that prides itself as a defender of free speech, it seems this defence is conditional on you agreeing with the government'

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/mar/01/tories-accused-of-hypocrisy-farmers-protests-crackdown-climate-gaza

Anything that the Australian, UK or US government wants that is available for purchase or fund in its own currency THEY CAN AFFORD to purchase

Anything that is available for them to purchase that they do not purchase or fund is because THEY DO NOT WANT IT.

National Health etc.