Chomper Higgot

Yes Jonny, dying embers. Nice strawman try this for scale: https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-investment-2024/overview-and-key-findings

I think you’ve identified the intent.

Innuendo again. How about the possibility that Thunberg is coming under attack with these accusations based on opinions she’s now apparently doing a good job of hiding precisely because of the opinions she’s does express against the war in Gaza and the plight/rights of Palestinians?!

Yet more ill-informed garbage from Trump. https://www.economist.com/europe/2021/06/17/the-eu-made-in-america

“ Thunberg has never come out and said, "I support Hamas," but she has never denied it, either.” The mildest thing I can say about that Orwellian thinking is might pass as ‘the sin of omission’. In another thread I suggested we perhaps need a standardized text condemning Hamas to be appended to any discussion on Gaza, the war in Gaza or the plight/rights of Palestinians. It’s clear we getting to the point when we do.

No communication between computers has ever been in spoken language, English or otherwise. Early adopters of Internet over modem might recall the sound of the communication. This was clearly just a demonstration of a digitized, though audible, communication protocol. Not that I deny there are legitimate concerns over AI, but this isn’t one of them.

Agree. The statement ‘no foul play’ would suggest an accident of some sort. RIP to a great actor and his wife.

That’s a stretch of reasoning plus a very serious claim. In keeping with the instruction on backing claims presented as fact made in this news forum with credible links, can you please provide evidence to substantiate your suggestion that Thunberg wants Hamas to remain in tact: “Why else would she want Hamas to remain intact ?”

That’s a very long way from even seeming to “support Hamas's savage brutal attack on innocent civilians”. It is absolutely not ‘showing support for Hamas” I’ll say again, supporting such heinous savagery would be a very serious matter, therefore suggesting such support needs to be backed by actual evidence. Likewise Hamas are a vile and heinous terrorist organization guilty of the heinous terrorist attack of October 7 for which there is absolutely no excuse or justification. Supporting such a vile heinous terrorist organization is a very serious matter, therefore suggesting such support needs to be backed by actual evidence. Make accusations of such serious matters by all means, but back it up with real evidence.

Can you give examples where “She seems to support Hamas's savage brutal attack on innocent civilians that started the war.” Supporting such heinous savagery would be a very serious matter, therefore suggesting such support needs to be backed by actual evidence. Or is it an allegation of the kind that’s aimed at shutting down opinions you don’t want to hear.

I didn’t post an argument.

“Why break the habit of a lifetime?“ Why indeed Jonny?!

A bit to much upfront it seems: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/hooters-bankruptcy-filing-closed-stores-b2702879.html

I don’t recall saying taxes shouldn’t be increased.

I wonder if you’ve thought through what would happen if the UK were to nationalize the property and businesses owned by some of the world’s most powerfully connected corporations? The UK isn’t going to be buying Russian oil and gas anytime soon.

That’s not how any government spending works.

Economist Richard Murphy has some smart ideas on how to pay for defense spending. Non involve cutting any spending.

The UK had a national oil and gas company, the Tories sold it. Investing vast sums of money in the dying embers of the oil and gas industry and in direct competition with the established oil and gas giants is one of the more bizarre ideas I’ve read on this forum. Even if it did happen, I expect the same party would once again sell it to their chums at the first opportunity. We both know a national oil and gas company isn’t going to happen.

I have nevertheless put the interview back in its context and I did so without resorting to a personal attack or any attempt at bypassing the profanity filter.

How’s that going to work Jonny? The licenses have already been sold to the oil and gas companies, they own the oil and gas that they extract. The technology, expertise, equipment and financial resources to extract oil are all held by the oil and gas companies. If you have any ideas of how to get around that please let us know.

Jonny, I’m sorry to break this to you but this is how it works: The UK issues exploration and exploitation licenses to international oil and gas companies for those companies to find and extract oil and gas from the UK controlled territory. Those companies then own that oil and gas, they sell it to their customers at the international market price. UK consumers don’t get cheaper oil or gas just because it was extracted from UK oil and gas fields. On the other hand, renewable energy generated within the UK is not subject to international market fluctuations.

I would love to hear your thoughts on how this would be achieved: “Then you could lower a lot of prices in the UK” The UK, like the EU states pays the price of oil and gas as dictated by the international market price.

Putting that 2 year old interview in context for you Jonny, the discussion was referring specifically to the then near doubling of energy prices that were at that time delivering energy poverty to UK consumers and vast windfall profits to the oil and gas producers. What it was not, was any promise to fix energy prices beyond the energy crisis that was unfolding at the time the two year old interview was recorded.

Some broader information here including an explanation of who sets the price cap, the fact it will be set sushi. In 3 months and the prediction by EDF of reductions in the cost of energy later in the year: https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/utilities/what-is-the-energy-price-cap/ Perhaps the most troubling issue component of the price cap is the standing charge and the higher charges to people who pay cash; undoubtedly many people on low incomes who don’t have bank accounts or are unable to maintain funds in their accounts.

That’s clear enough.