Because The United Kingdom?

[urbanoid]

10 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Just a counterfactual to the right wing agitprop on this thread from a few months back.

https://x.com/clairebubblepop/status/1857498532267307466?t=wa7bZ88O59Csx80zROdtIQ&s=19

Are they getting out after half a year or so like those negroes that killed a white teen?

[Stuart Galbraith]

Got a source? No familiar with that one.

[urbanoid]

4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Got a source? No familiar with that one.

https://x.com/MailOnline/status/1820777285198262324

Ok, so you can point out it's just 'one of the killers'.

Edited November 17, 2024 by urbanoid

[Ivanhoe]

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14078105/southport-killer-court-teenager-charged-murdering-children-al-qaeda-material-ricin.html

Quote

Separately, Rudakubana appeared before Westminster Magistrates' Court a fortnight ago on additional counts relating to the alleged discovery of ricin and an Al Qaeda manual at his family home, in Banks, Lancashire - a village five miles north of Southport.

Forgive me for assuming that the plod will studiously avoid looking into Rudakubana's journey from schoolboy to Islamofascist murderer/terrorist.

 

 

[Ssnake]

His motive behind the murdering the children will forever remain a mystery.

[Stuart Galbraith]

5 hours ago, urbanoid said:

https://x.com/MailOnline/status/1820777285198262324

Ok, so you can point out it's just 'one of the killers'.

So it's a bit more complicated than it looks.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-68510380.amp

Carlos Neto and Lawson Natty, both 18, were found guilty of manslaughter. Neto was jailed for nine years two months and Natty for two years eight months.

Gordon's mother Dionne Barrett said his "unnecessary" death was "devastating".

The feud between youths from the Benwell and Elswick areas of Newcastle began in the summer of 2022, with the two vying groups making derogatory rap videos mocking one another.

It escalated into "tit-for-tat violence", and culminated with the fatal attack on Gordon near Elswick Park on 9 November the same year, the trial at Newcastle Crown Court heard.

Members of the Elswick gang, including Gordon who was carrying a baseball bat while riding pillion on a bike, started to chase their rivals away

 

So it's manslaughter, because they could point to the victim having an offensive weapon, and the two of them were minors when it happened.

I'll go with you, it stinks, not least because they didn't show remorse. Otoh, short of reintroducing transportation (which is seriously being considered, believe it or not), for someone with a 2 and a half year sentence, under the present circumstances, with no prison space left, it's inevitable.

[Stuart Galbraith]

5 hours ago, Ivanhoe said:

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14078105/southport-killer-court-teenager-charged-murdering-children-al-qaeda-material-ricin.html

Forgive me for assuming that the plod will studiously avoid looking into Rudakubana's journey from schoolboy to Islamofascist murderer/terrorist.

 

 

https://www.merseyside.police.uk/news/merseyside/news/2024/october/statement-from-chief-constable-serena-kennedy-and-partners-following-further-charges-for-axel-rudakubana/

At this time, Counter Terrorism Policing has not declared the attack on Monday 29 July a terrorist incident.  I recognise that the new charges, may lead to speculation.  The matter for which Axel Rudakubana has been charged with under the Terrorism Act does not require motive to be established. For a matter to be declared a terrorist incident, motivation would need to be established.
 

“We would strongly advise caution against anyone speculating as to motivation in this case. The criminal proceedings against Axel Rudakubana are live and he has a right to a fair trial.

 

Meaning, they can fire terrorist act charges at him because he has ricin and an Al Qaeda manual. It doesn't mean they believe he was necessarily undertaking Terrorism. It's the same logic you can be put away for 5 years for having a sawn off shotgun, but they have no evidence you were planning to hold up a bank with it. And ultimately, he used none of these items, making their significance somewhat moot.

I think I'll wait for the trial before I jump to conclusions.

 

[Ivanhoe]

This is the type of case that, in the US, the feds label as "domestic terrorism." In an attempt to Jedi-Mind-Trick the unwashed masses into subconsciously assuming means Klan/neo-Nazi type stuff.

If Tommy Robinson's flat contained ricin, I assume you would be losing your everlovin' mind.

[DB]

On 11/13/2024 at 3:01 PM, rmgill said:

Jeezus. On a bad day we pay that but thats peak rates at the highest point of summer. Normally its 4 cents per kilowatt hour. Which works out to $40/ mega watt. 
 

40 cents per kilowatt hour is absurd. How can you afford anything? 

The numbers aren't correct - not sure where Bloomberg got them from, or why the FT used them as a source when the Office for National Statistics data is downloadable for free. the rate, with the conversion to USD using the average $1.15/£ for 2023 is closer to $313/MWh, which is broadly comparable to rates in California. Nevertheless, still higher than the others in the chart, but given a 25% error in the UK data, who knows what they made up for the other nations?

Although the kWh rates are similar for domestic users, there is a daily standing charge that amounts to about £160 per year on top of that. I have no idea if industrial users pay a standing charge on top of the figures given - if so and that was included in the Bloomberg figures, then that might explain the difference.

[Stuart Galbraith]

10 hours ago, Ivanhoe said:

This is the type of case that, in the US, the feds label as "domestic terrorism." In an attempt to Jedi-Mind-Trick the unwashed masses into subconsciously assuming means Klan/neo-Nazi type stuff.

If Tommy Robinson's flat contained ricin, I assume you would be losing your everlovin' mind.

It still wouldnt mean Tommy Robinson was planning a terrorist attack. It would just mean he was guilty of a terrorist offence. And you can bet they would make sure that would go on the pile, because, why not?

There has been a lot written about the case already, but I find it notable that comments that he had long term problems with mental health have not made the internet nearly half as much as 'OMG Islamic terrorist!' did. If you have a look at the number of mass killings we have in the UK, invariably with sharp blunt objects, the majority in recent years are people off their meds. The heyday of Jihadist attacks seemed to pass when MI5 and Special Branch finally sorted out whose problem it was.

Personally, I think someone whom murders another, particularly a child, probably isnt right in the head anyway. But you have plenty of examples in your country of people whom clearly were having abberant psychological episodes, that were shoehorned in the box of being terrorists. Lee Harvey Oswald, the Unabomber,the Nashville bombing, the recent attempt on Trumps life, are all examples where the mass media were desperate to portray them as having an underlying political cause, when the reality is more likely they were madder than a box of frogs.

Like I say, Ill reserve judgement. I will say the court sketch's look rather more like what I would expect of a loon than I would a warrior of Islam, but what do I know?

 

[rmgill]

Now, No10 is done!

https://x.com/dontforgetchaos/status/1858494443029938446?fbclid=IwY2xjawGpokZleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHSQ77LqfNY9yHfaViFtARauQ3QGHyb_m4DUDWzF-Ezt8KV-jajw-4eJcAA_aem_5EQ87l6SSFuU3xf71uaQ_Q


Not sure if Sky news did that by mistake or if it's a parody....

[rmgill]

On 11/17/2024 at 5:45 PM, DB said:

The numbers aren't correct - not sure where Bloomberg got them from, or why the FT used them as a source when the Office for National Statistics data is downloadable for free. the rate, with the conversion to USD using the average $1.15/£ for 2023 is closer to $313/MWh, which is broadly comparable to rates in California. Nevertheless, still higher than the others in the chart, but given a 25% error in the UK data, who knows what they made up for the other nations?

Although the kWh rates are similar for domestic users, there is a daily standing charge that amounts to about £160 per year on top of that. I have no idea if industrial users pay a standing charge on top of the figures given - if so and that was included in the Bloomberg figures, then that might explain the difference.

Here in my region we can, as industrial users pay lower than $.05 (that's cents) per kilowatt hour if we adopt real time pricing. This means that we can see charges as high as $.40 (that's 40 cents) per kilowatt hour during peak hours, midday in the high summer. But overall the average is lower for us and so we're good over most of the year. The push is to adopt strategies that reduce use during peak hours. For a data center, that means peak clipping on gas fired chillers, co-generation if you can do it with clean generators and get past the current regulatory hurdles or bank cold water in a giant water tank and use that to get your chilled water from and no run your electrically run chillers. 

Could there be fees and surcharges in that 25%?

[DB]

Yes, there could be - I mentioned what's called the "standing charge", which is essentially a line rental. I have no idea whether that is applied to non-domestic users, though.

I will say that some electricity tariffs are complex for similar reasons that mobile phone tariffs have been historically complex - it's a deliberate tactic to deceive the unwary and/or those who tend to stay loyal to a familiar supplier.

Incidentally, the UK electricity market is very different from the US one in that typically you can pay any one of dozens of suppliers for your kWh, the standing charge goes to one of a small number of infrastructure companies (e.g. UK Power Networks). The infrastructure was denationalised similarly to the rail network infrastructure, and I think Stuart has been mostly accurate with his description of the basket-case that all was.

There's a whole rant in here somewhere about the similarity between nationalised industry being drained by politicians for tax breaks and benefits versus being milked for profit by corporates who maximise short-term profits for "shareholder value" whilst destroying the asset value of the company by failing to reinvest in infrastructure.

Ether way, taxpayers get shafted to fix the problems.

[Stuart Galbraith]

1 hour ago, DB said:

Yes, there could be - I mentioned what's called the "standing charge", which is essentially a line rental. I have no idea whether that is applied to non-domestic users, though.

I will say that some electricity tariffs are complex for similar reasons that mobile phone tariffs have been historically complex - it's a deliberate tactic to deceive the unwary and/or those who tend to stay loyal to a familiar supplier.

Incidentally, the UK electricity market is very different from the US one in that typically you can pay any one of dozens of suppliers for your kWh, the standing charge goes to one of a small number of infrastructure companies (e.g. UK Power Networks). The infrastructure was denationalised similarly to the rail network infrastructure, and I think Stuart has been mostly accurate with his description of the basket-case that all was.

There's a whole rant in here somewhere about the similarity between nationalised industry being drained by politicians for tax breaks and benefits versus being milked for profit by corporates who maximise short-term profits for "shareholder value" whilst destroying the asset value of the company by failing to reinvest in infrastructure.

Ether way, taxpayers get shafted to fix the problems.

If anyone wants to read about how British Rail was privatised, it's worth reading Broken Rails by Christian Wolmar, which was a masterclass of its kind.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Broken-Rails-Christian-Wolmar/dp/1854108573

Not that I'm against a privatised railway (or privatized anything), but the way it was done was madder than a box of frogs. Our energy and water not significantly better. It was all structured to enfranchise banks and investors, not consumers.

[urbanoid]

Is it a sign of the end times?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14086091/gen-z-waging-war-sandwiches-ditching-classic-flavours.html

[Stuart Galbraith]

How can a filling be woke for crisakes? This culture war bollocks is getting insane.

I bet they would be labelling coronation chicken as woke, the daft feckers.

[urbanoid]

3 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

How can a filling be woke for crisakes? This culture war bollocks is getting insane.

I bet they would be labelling coronation chicken as woke, the daft feckers.

Sounds like something a woke-sandwich eater would say.

[DB]

Someone will be claiming that a ham and cheese sandwich is too French next.

[urbanoid]

Especially if the cheese stinks!

[Stuart Galbraith]

'From my Cold, Dead, Bree!'

[rmgill]

18 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

If anyone wants to read about how British Rail was privatised, it's worth reading Broken Rails by Christian Wolmar, which was a masterclass of its kind.

You know, I think your problem was that you nationalized all those assets in the first place. By doing so, you disincentivized any trust that London wasn't going to come back in and take over, AGAIN. London didn't build it, then it took it all, wrung out what it needed, mismanaged it then made it private again and now you complain that the industries aren't as nice? 

Why isn't Jaguar or Daimler or Rolls Royce or Leyland a thing any more? What about SuperMarine? Are any of those businesses able to hold a candle to Lockheed or Boeing or The Southern Company or Norfolk Southern or Ford? Even with all of the issues US industries have, they're not remotely snake bit like British Industries seem to be. Why is that? 

[rmgill]

25 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

'From my Cold, Dead, Bree!'

Brie? 

[TrustMe]

30 minutes ago, rmgill said:

You know, I think your problem was that you nationalized all those assets in the first place. By doing so, you disincentivized any trust that London wasn't going to come back in and take over, AGAIN. London didn't build it, then it took it all, wrung out what it needed, mismanaged it then made it private again and now you complain that the industries aren't as nice? 

Why isn't Jaguar or Daimler or Rolls Royce or Leyland a thing any more? What about SuperMarine? Are any of those businesses able to hold a candle to Lockheed or Boeing or The Southern Company or Norfolk Southern or Ford? Even with all of the issues US industries have, they're not remotely snake bit like British Industries seem to be. Why is that? 

 

I think that the question why British owned company's are so crap is due to managment. Foreign companies like Nissan and Ford subsidiaries in the UK use foreign managment to run things, and it generally works out good.

There's too much of a "us and them" approach to workers and managers in UK owned company's.

 

Edited November 20, 2024 by TrustMe

[bojan]

51 minutes ago, rmgill said:

You know, I think your problem was that you nationalized all those assets in the first place...

Problem with private RRs in Europe is that area is too small to have a healthy competition like US had in the "golden age of RR" (even if there were problems there as well).

There is also a problem of private ownership chasing short term profits, and not giving a fuck for an overall value of the utility that RR provides, enabling myriad of the other businesses. When local (state owned) RR started chasing profits (because "it is pointless if it does not makes profit" mantra of the local liberals* of the early 2000s) only they shot down number of local lines, which did reduce RR's loses, but overall economic impact was negative, since that cut cheap and easy connection from a living place to a workplace for a lot of people.

Like, local Belgrade-Novi Sad high speed** rail does not have to make a profit by ticket sales (it does, but margins are pretty thin), but it has enabled a number of areas down the route to improve economically, because now people have 20-30 minutes instead of 1.5-2h transit times (at ~2-3 times lower cost than they would pay for gas to use cars) to the work in the one of those cities. If it was private it is very doubtful it would be funded, yet it provides incredible value for a whole area that is a net benefit for a people, area and a whole country after all.

*Yes, locally "liberals" were all for profits and fuck the workers and everyone else...

** well... high speed for a Balkans, 200km/h top speed, but it still enables 80km to be transferred in something like 30 minutes.

[Stuart Galbraith]

35 minutes ago, rmgill said:

You know, I think your problem was that you nationalized all those assets in the first place. By doing so, you disincentivized any trust that London wasn't going to come back in and take over, AGAIN. London didn't build it, then it took it all, wrung out what it needed, mismanaged it then made it private again and now you complain that the industries aren't as nice? 

Why isn't Jaguar or Daimler or Rolls Royce or Leyland a thing any more? What about SuperMarine? Are any of those businesses able to hold a candle to Lockheed or Boeing or The Southern Company or Norfolk Southern or Ford? Even with all of the issues US industries have, they're not remotely snake bit like British Industries seem to be. Why is that? 

Ok, some facts of life here that you have clearly overlooked.

WHY did they nationalise the railways? For two reasons. Firstly it was labour party ideology, and most of its members, particularly the rail unions backed it. Secondly, they had been under strategic bomardment for 6 years. They were broken, bucked, occasionally even had delayed action bombs under them that had to be renewed. And that was just the tracks. The rolling stock was prewar and had a hard life. No new designs had entered service since 1939.

And what was to be done about this? There was no new money. There was no investment from foreigners to be had, certainly not from Europe. The US wasnt going to invest in us. The shareholders had no new money to put all this right. So the Government had to take control of it (had already taken control of it in 1939 in fact), and just created reality to what was already defacto the case.

The fly in the ointment here is the Great Western. They owned coal mines that were exporting coal to the US. In fact, among the 4 railway companies, the Great western was still posting a profit for its shareholders. I think they alone could have dug themselves out. Maybe the LMS. Southern carried relatively little trade compared to the other 3, and would have had a job. And LNER was effectively bankrupt. In short, 3 of the companies there was a fairly reasonable case for nationalisation. The 4th? Should have left it alone. In fact I suspect they took it over, largely because they wanted access to those coal concerns which they could then flog abroad. the Irony is that having done all this, there was no money left to rebuild the railways, and the first concerted effort wasnt even made till nearly 10 yars after the war.

we were not alone. Germany had nationalised railways. Franch had nationalised railways, even before ww2. Even sodding Switzerland had nationalised railways. And even YOUR country by the 1970's nationalised all passenger traffic. Fairly clearly in a world where increasing freight is going on the roads, not rail, and it was freight where the railways made their money, then clearly it nationalisation or bust.

In truth, the railways in Britain were never really privatized at all. Tried iwth the trackbed, then when the sharp bastards in charge caused multiple rail accidents because they saw no value in maintaining it, the Government effectively nationalised it again. The rest are private outfits, propped by massive subsidy. More subsidy in fact than it cost the country in the days of British rail, all to create the fig leaf of private ownership. In reality, it was all bank subsidy, since they were the ones making the money.

 

I dont know why I wrote that, because I know you wont read it. And i also know you will disregard the bits you did. Nonetheless, it is free of my political bias's, and its about as accurate an account you will find of what happened. I have no love for BR, but it was good value for money. I love the great western and it should never have gone. What can I say, politicians have a habit of making bad decisions in Britain, and they languish for decades.

 

Jaguar still exist you know. They are privately owned by TATA motors, so I dont know where you got the idea they disappeared from. They are also talking about relaunching Daimler. Tell me, what happened to Plymouth, Pontiac, Packard, Dusenberg, McCord? Supermarine is arguably still going. Its called BAE.