Sunday, June 29, 2008

Hedge Funds are sociopathic and should be banned

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Will Hutton doesn't set out to make a case for this, but I consider it to be the sensible option. He also castigates the Labour government for being shit, which it is. I'm not naive enough to imagine for one second that the Tories would be any better than Labour at reining in this apocalyptic ultra-capitalism, however. Like the multinational corporations which have higher turnovers than many Western governments, these institutions are simply too big to stop by conventional attempts to tweak legislation (don't even start with Brown's 'hands-off' approach to financial regulation whereby such organisations are asked, nicely, to moderate their own market rapine). Such entities can draw upon resources that are orders of magnitude better funded than the dribbling civil servants sat in Whitehall, running rings of financial wizardry around any weakly thought-out attempts to induce them to toe the line of social responsibility. Faced with this sort of threat there is no real option but to prohibit any further activity on their part for the sake of the rest of society.

Saturday, June 28, 2008

Jeremy Leggett for Energy Minister

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

He rules.

Friday, June 27, 2008

petrol prices

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Does anyone have any idea when these are going to be coming back down?

Apparently 60% of the price inflation is down to fear and speculation in the market, as opposed to any problem with supply (fellow peak-oil people, take note!). This is therefore another case of market failure.

I want to know where all that money- $3 trillion, according to Gordon Brown- is going? Because it certainly isn't funding renewable generation capacity or developing alternatives to fossil fuels.

Idealists might consider some sort of action to be imperative at this stage, but what and how? We are the little people. We do not have mega-bucks in the bank to switch to alternative forms of transport or alternative fuels. The phrase "over a barrel" springs to mind.

I suppose all we can do is continue to point out that this is all the product of our government's continued embrace of the neo-classical economic model and neo-liberal politics and hope that at the next general election people are so disaffected that they consider (SHOCK, HORROR!) voting for a real solution.


Addition:

A reminder of how we got here.

Friday, June 20, 2008

Boris Johnson is a cockweasel

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ha haaa! Ken Livingstone is such a legend; he made the fop-haired, Tory moron look exactly like the incompetent twat he is.

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

George Bush or Oliver Kamm- I don't know who I hate more

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yeah, its blatantly Bush- but gods DAMN I hate that little bastard Kamm.

The Chimpomatic is recast as "Bush's verbal infelicity".
Bush's legendary ability to destroy international treaties, the environment and global cooperation gets transformed by this cockweasel into "diplomatic brusqueness".

But most damning of all is Kamm's recasting of torture, murder, genocide and the supreme crime into "negligence in planning for post-Saddam Iraq, and insouciance regarding standards of due process when prosecuting the war on terror".

Plus, only a monster could use the word "insouciance", irrespective of the subject matter.

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

we are fucked, time to riot

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is the most depressing thing I have ever read.

I don't want to face this publically and I would never acknowledge it to any of my colleagues. But I kind of know it already. George has laid similar hard-hitting facts on the table recently too.

So, what now? Run for the hills? Cry? Riot (my favourite)? I have a lot of anger too vent here but I feel far more like doing option 2. I'm not giving up because there's such a thing as damage limitation, but previously I simply felt motivated to try and educate people about the threat facing them. Now I feel like just ignoring people who "don't get it". They are the ones who will be blubbing when they're flooded out for the fifth time in a year. Me, I'll be in Australia with some good friends and our own renewable generation system and a market garden. Fuck everyone else, society didn't want to save itself, depsite the best efforts of the good intentioned. Too busy watching big fucking brother to prevent genocide.



Postscript:

The subject of this article is at least partially responsible and should all be keel-hauled.

science is interesting and if you don't agree you can fuck off

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Word
.


Addition:

I get a lot of hits from people searching for the title phrase of this post on Google. The link above will take you to details of its origin, but while you're here please take the time to browse through some more of my science-related and profanity-related posts. Or just enjoy some amusing political satire if you are that way orientated (i.e. cognizant).

weekly bible quote

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Genesis 38:

8Then Judah said to Onan, ‘Go in to your brother’s wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her; raise up offspring for your brother.’ 9But since Onan knew that the offspring would not be his, he spilled his semen on the ground whenever he went in to his brother’s wife, so that he would not give offspring to his brother. 10What he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also.

Sunday, June 15, 2008

stupid question

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Q: "India's tiger population is in decline, but why should humans suffer in order to preserve it?"

Because tigers, as a species, will be gone forever. Sure, in the future we might be able to reconstitute their DNA into something that walks around and eats meat but it is not the same thing. Humans can control their reproduction and land management. They just choose not to. Humans impose suffering upon themselves. Tigers are innocent.

Here's a fucking crazy idea: Why not educate the people of India, abolish their ignorance and superstition and give them the opportunity to cherish and appreciate their environment?


Postscript:

Apparently the author of this astonishingly stupid question is a member of the Living Marxism / Spiked Online insanity clique. That disgusting rabble of climate change deniers, extreme-right-wing fundamentalists and ecocidal maniacs that includes amongst its ranks people as deserving of my ire as Brendan O'Neill and Oliver Kamm.

Saturday, June 14, 2008

Bush's legacy

Great letter. Very poignant. Made me want to cry.

Then I saw a reference to this and laughed again:



More reasons why American's are stoopid here.

more corporate sociopathy

Tesco are the raw manifestation of corporate sociopathy. In response to allegations from The Guardian that it was avoiding £1bn in tax, they had this to say:

"[The Guardian] needs to accept that successful British companies need to plan and manage their investments, including those overseas, in a responsible but efficient manner in order to compete successfully on the world stage with all the wealth creating benefits that brings to Britain."

Responsible to whom, I wonder? Certainly not the population of Britain whose towns are being gutted by their monopoly tactics and the produce suppliers who are being bankrupted by their price fixing. George memorably observed that, on average, every time a new supermarket opens 276 jobs are lost. £50,000 is spent in a small shop to generate one job, it needs £250,000 to be spent in a superstore to create one job.

As for wealth creation, in strict terms I am seeing little or no financial benefit from Tesco's dominance. Most things that are good for you are still expensive. And more generally, wealth is a very subjective term that can encompass a great many things. It might include the convenience of having independent shops a short walk from my house where I can meet people, pass the time of day and generally enjoy life whilst supporting local business. My nearest Tesco (at which I do occasionally shop, I freely admit) is 10 minutes drive away. My local Co-Op is 10 minutes walk away but you simply can't carry a week's shopping so I still drive there. Punk Wiff always wants to go to Tesco because there is more choice- the Co-Op is a quarter of the size and more expensive, generally. So I have no option. What better definition of a monopoly do you need?

corporate sociopathy

Friday, June 13, 2008

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

weekly bible quotation

No, really.


Deut 25:11-12

11 If men get into a fight with one another, and the wife of one intervenes to rescue her husband from the grip of his opponent by reaching out and seizing his genitals, 12you shall cut off her hand; show no pity.

Coldplay suck goat cocks

Andy Gill's review of their latest formulaic shite for the Independent is awesome.

"But for me, it's the band's anguished professions of supposed political concern, while simultaneously indulging the rampant self-pity of the most cosseted, comfortable constituency of music fans the world has ever known – that's the most irritating aspect of Coldplay. Rock'n'roll used to be a rallying cry, a clarion call; now, in their hands, it's just a palliative."

Chris Martin is definitely a candidate for what Motorhead said.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAhahahAHahhahahaha . . . . cough-cough . . .splutter!

Twat.

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Jonathon Porritt makes me reconsider my position on overpopulation

"The additional suffering that all this imposes on some of the world’s most poorest countries is literally incalculable. Continuing population growth is already having a marked impact on the efforts being made to meet the Millennium Development Goals. As the All Party Parliamentary Group on Population, Development & Reproductive Health put it in 2007:
“The evidence is overwhelming: the Millennium Development Goals are difficult or impossible to achieve with the current levels of population growth in the least developed countries and regions.”

It’s still the case that most “progressive” development experts think that “addressing poverty first” remains the best response, and that most environmentalists, in a reprehensibly politically-correct way, think it is exclusively about over-consumption in the rich world, than over-population in the poor world.

But exactly what kind of world are these people living in? Certainly not in a world where water consumption is doubling every 20 years, more than twice the rate of human population growth, where available arable land continues to decline year on year, where many of the world’s biodiversity hotspots are increasingly at risk specifically because of rapid population growth, where oil at $139 a barrel is already having a devastating effect on hundreds of millions of very poor people, and where accelerating climate change and rising sea levels are going to cause havoc over the next 20-30 years. That’s our world – not some make believe cornucopian world that some still dream of, where the number of people on it is of no material significance."


I'd previouslybeen unconcerned about population growth due to this monologue. However, time changes everything and new evidence- such as Jonathon's point about the Millennium Development Goals- leads me to reconsider.


Addition:

George is concerned about overpopulation too
. But not overly.


Polly sees through Cameron as if he was made of glass

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Word.

"He dangled an extraordinary array of un-Conservative ideas. "People haven't understood the scale and depth of the family-friendly reform we want," he said, "getting family finance right" by "redistributing money to poor households", "giving families more time to spend together", "affordable child care" and "taking on the unrelenting commercial influences on childhood". On all of these, the Tories opposed every measure Labour brought in - tax credits, childcare, flexible working and anything the CBI disliked. So is this real change or just a wise acceptance of things already done? Cleverly, there was not one bankable promise."

Clever, but in an evilly calculating way.

Monday, June 09, 2008

today's statistic of interest

The Lazy Environmentalist quoting Phil Woolas MP.

""UK economic activity accounts for 15% emissions worldwide" . . . (note: this is a rarely alluded to fact by our government . . .), "2% of which comes directly from within our shores.""

model corporate sociopathy

"The head of BP said today oil prices are unstable because markets are not well supplied, and attacked higher taxes in oil-producing countries for holding back investment in new output.

"The problem is not below ground, the problem is above ground," Tony Hayward, BP's chief executive, said at an oil and gas conference in Malaysia." (my bold)


BP posted record profits of $16.2 billion in February. That must really hold back investment. Yeah.

Sunday, June 08, 2008

doublespeak

Read this article and see if you can spot it.

Hint: Its a comment about something that Switzerland and Germany have been doing for over a decade . . . .


WRAP sounds alright- I approve of their key objectives- . Its just their executive dirtector talking complete shit, that I object to.

UK government buries head further in sand over climate change

The government refuses to adopt meaningful targets- even the lproposed increase from 60 to 80% emissions reductions by 2050 is useless. They have no power on the international stage to push others to adopt similar emissions becuase they have lost all credibility over Iraq. And the closing paragraph to this article states this:


"Department for the Environment officials said the bill had been 'strengthened quite significantly' by the amendments, but 'remains largely unchanged', both raising and dashing hopes that they have accepted some or all the changes. Some campaigners fear the government, under pressure over rising oil prices not to introduce what are seen as expensive 'green' policies, are not ready to bow to the demands in full."

You see? Head In Sand. The government still fears to take effective action because it might cost a lot. Its as if the Stern Report had never been produced.

Government teams up with Virgin media to disseminate propaganda

I use P2P sites and I love them. It has revitalised music and pulled the rug out from under the mass-produced shite that the industry pumps out. I also advocate supporting local upcoming artists by buying their music wherever possible, preferably at their gigs so that all of the money goes into their pockets and none gets skimmed by Amazon or some other distributor.

For example:

Babyhead
Yes Sir Boss!
Kat Marsh
Albenaza
Circus of Sound
Martin Harley Band
Black Friday
etc.

The industry hates P2P because people get to listen to more music than you get from the radio or the cable music channel- all of which, apart from the Beeb's efforts, are controlled by the same parent companies as the music industry slags.

I don't approve of paying £15 for a CD either. It costs a few pennies to print up a CD and case. I don't want to belittle the creative efforts of bands such as these above. I just feel that there's a massive difference between seeing the band in the flesh and 'doing their thing' and listening to a recording that about two hundred thousand people also own. I think a CD should cost about £3.50 and a ticket to a live gig at least £20. I'm not a tight-arse and I love live music.

Monday, June 02, 2008

DBERR report supports feed-in tariffs for microgeneration

I don't agree with microgeneration- I'm into HVDC and supergrids- but its a step in the right dorection. I can't wait to see the government eat its own words on TV. This report advocates feed-in tariffs, which microgeneration advocates have been screaming for for years.

An interesting point is made clear in the final paragraph of the report:

"The report offers a very different future, as do the Tories, who see microgeneration as central to their philosophy of redirecting power to individuals. David Cameron sees "decentralised energy" as "a key part of our political vision, energy for the post-bureaucratic age". He believes microgeneration could make Britain, and individual communities, "self-sufficient in energy"."

Here we see the Tories passing the buck of energy poverty neatly onto the free market. Those who can't afford electricity through the grid are hardly going to be able to install the several-thousand pounds worth of PV panels, micro-hydro, wind turbines, current inverters and battery arrays necessary to become energy-independent. Instead the rich fuckers are going to be doing this in droves as grid electricity spirals up and up in cost, leaving the rest of us to resort to reducing our own consumption.