General News

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

Seems that he decided that it wouldn't be possible to just bat this one away. It will crop up again and again and even those not previously knowing or caring about the Equalities Act 2010 will start to hold an opinion. The law has been clarified and he would be in a seriously damaging position if he didn't nip it in the bud quickly. He at least now knows what a woman is. Shame that it took so long but it doesn't need to he asked again. The Government's position is now aligned with the law.

I guess we'll see what political capital he'll make out if it, if any, in the long run.

[leicsmac]

In other news, Trump putting the world economy at risk of global recession.

 

Quelle surprise.

[Sampson]

nm

Edited 22 April by Sampson

[Lionator]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Starmer removing his ambiguity on trans matters will lose him more votes than it gains, seeing as people who are full-bore for the Supreme Court ruling wouldn't vote for him in any kind of number anyway.

 

It's a mistake.

Can you think of any other topics in the recent past that has so little real world impact but carries so much political weight? It’s so bizarre. 

[Lionator]

It actually seems that something positive (if it can be called that) is on the horizon in Ukraine. Both sides seem to be making moves towards a ceasefire, or at least a slowdown in hostilities https://archive.ph/GJtFD

[Otis]

15 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

Seems that he decided that it wouldn't be possible to just bat this one away. It will crop up again and again and even those not previously knowing or caring about the Equalities Act 2010 will start to hold an opinion. The law has been clarified and he would be in a seriously damaging position if he didn't nip it in the bud quickly. He at least now knows what a woman is. Shame that it took so long but it doesn't need to he asked again. The Government's position is now aligned with the law.

Quite. At least he's telling the truth now, although I don't know why he and others felt the need to lie about it in first place. 

[bovril]

3 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Can you think of any other topics in the recent past that has so little real world impact but carries so much political weight? It’s so bizarre. 

I think because aspects of the topic are so absurd and at times surreal it acts as a kind of totem for wider societal changes that people are uneasy about, even though it has no real impact on 99% of the population.

[Md9]

I don’t know why they do daily briefing form the White House staff none of them answer a question and just blame everyone else for something that’s wrong . All a bunch of strange people 

[Otis]

25 minutes ago, Md9 said:

I don’t know why they do daily briefing form the White House staff none of them answer a question and just blame everyone else for something that’s wrong . All a bunch of strange people 

If that's the sort of thing that floats your boat, you should give PMQs a watch. 

[leicsmac]

18 minutes ago, Sampson said:

“Viewpoint diversity” sounds very Orwellian. It’s a science and medicine journal for record.

 

The funny thing about scientific laws and the Earth that works by them is that they remain true whether a human believes them or not. And their consequences will happen in spite of the ridiculous denial of it.

 

9 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Can you think of any other topics in the recent past that has so little real world impact but carries so much political weight? It’s so bizarre. 

And all the time some very decent people are wondering with more than a little fear about what might happen from here.

[leicsmac]

14 minutes ago, Otis said:

If that's the sort of thing that floats your boat, you should give PMQs a watch. 

At least the policy advocated for at PMQ's doesn't (the vast majority of the time) actually threaten a great many human lives in direct opposition to scientific fact.

 

The same sadly cannot be said of the current US administration.

[Md9]

35 minutes ago, Otis said:

If that's the sort of thing that floats your boat, you should give PMQs a watch. 

I try to avoid watching any of the crap but it’s just every where online and can’t help but check a few bits to see what made up stuff and nonsense  have said each day 

[Trav Le Bleu]

 

"Enclave of free speech"

 

It's good to know some Americans still get it.

 

Unfortunately, you kind of wonder if this might not be eerily prophetic.

[leicsmac]

26 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

 

"Enclave of free speech"

 

It's good to know some Americans still get it.

 

Unfortunately, you kind of wonder if this might not be eerily prophetic.

I'm reasonably sure that people are already being set up for "accidents" if this administration can't get the legal system to do its dirty work for them.

[blabyboy]

12 hours ago, Sampson said:

The issue isn’t the population numbers per se, it’s the population distribution - I.e. that it’s going to be a population of mostly older people who require a lot more help from the state in terms of pension, healthcare costs, disability benefits etc. mixed with much less workers to generate income for the state. 

 

South Korea is already past the point where it can’t reverse the fact it will be a country of majority over 65s in the future. Many of whom end up it cramped old people’s homes which are already well over capacity.

 

Then there’s the issues of democracy. How can you change these things when the majority of voters are all over 65 and crammed in retirement home. They have a right to vote for their own interests in terms of pension, state funded healthcare etc. But you can’t realistically provide these things without large scale immigration from Africa and the Middle East, which is where the majority of young people will come from (which itself is becoming politically impossible because immigration has become so politically weaponsised) or making people work 60+ hour weeks. 
 

“The natural ebb and flow” also usually means brutal world wars, pandemics or inhumane governments trying to change a populations distribution through force I.e. forced deportation or worse of certain demographics. But lots of suffering regardless.

No, I meant natural ebb and flow as in starvation, dehydration, disease. Not the man-made wars, governments and forced deportation, they are not natural, more interventional in act.

 

SK may well be over, but there will come a point where the pendulum will swing back the other way and the population will balance out there, perhaps arriving at a smaller number.

 

I still think the population as a whole will decline, there will be a 'great die off' that will be identified by historians many years after it occurs.

 

The Earth's population is circa 8.1 billions (2023) and the UN scientific consensus from 2012/3 had the carrying number at 8 billions, lower depending upon resources allocation and which scientist you asked. So, we're overpopulated and the gap is increasing.

 

Technology or better resource management and sharing are the areas identified as being able to increase the carrying number. The first is taking its time to appear, the other two are very optimistic. The logical action would be to reduce the population gently over time through education and support, both in countries where the birth rate is high, but also in countries where it is low, but more affluent so that they would be open to sharing some of that affluence understanding that it benefits us all in the long term.

Edited 22 April by blabyboy

[blabyboy]

2 hours ago, Lionator said:

It actually seems that something positive (if it can be called that) is on the horizon in Ukraine. Both sides seem to be making moves towards a ceasefire, or at least a slowdown in hostilities https://archive.ph/GJtFD

If you think that is positive, do not post on a 'bad' day.

[Parafox]

2 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

 

"Enclave of free speech"

 

It's good to know some Americans still get it.

 

Unfortunately, you kind of wonder if this might not be eerily prophetic.

 

Scarily though, redneck MAGA supporters will watch this and think it's real and be like, yeah go Donald, in you we trust.

Edited 22 April by Parafox

[Jon the Hat]

14 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Population/demographic pressure is an issue that's coming up more and more often both here and out in the world.

 

It's such a bloody difficult problem because there don't appear to be any good options - you accept that there's going to be a period of time where agree demographics are badly lopsided while populations stabilise, with all the social problems that entails, or you try to boost the birth rate/population to compensate in a world where inequality is rampant and finite resources may already be diminishing past the point of no return, with all the dire consequences that entails.

 

If there's a third option that doesn't result in a lot of problems down the line, I wouldn't mind knowing what it is.

We will have to normalise in home care or our elderly parents.  Which inevitably mostly falls on women. Its going to be tricky.

[Jon the Hat]

Trump gets more nuts doesn't he?  I think he cannot believe what he can get away with while he is making massive economic headlines to cover it all.  

Edited 23 April by Jon the Hat

[leicsmac]

5 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

We will have to normalise in home care or our elderly parents.  Which inevitably mostly falls on women. Its going to be tricky.

And/or utilise more advanced tech for the job, which carries its own attendant worries and problems.

 

As you say, it's tricky.

4 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Trump gets more nuts doesn't he?  I think he cannot believe what he can get away with while he is making massive economic headlines to cover it all.  

It's just rather unfortunate that those who saw and pointed out exactly what he was a long time ago weren't listened to. Now almost everyone is paying the price, and I fear that price has only just begun to come due.

[Trav Le Bleu]

The other day I was watching a video about why USA chose to nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki (2 medium size cities) rather than the likes of Tokyo or Osaka (the reasons are quite obvious).

 

I can't help but think if Trump had been in charge, Japan would be a wasteland to this day.

[leicsmac]

15 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

The other day I was watching a video about why USA chose to nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki (2 medium size cities) rather than the likes of Tokyo or Osaka (the reasons are quite obvious).

 

I can't help but think if Trump had been in charge, Japan would be a wasteland to this day.

I remember reading that Kyoto (Japan's ancient capital) was only spared from the target list because a high ranking US politician had spent his honeymoon there. Also, if a third bomb had been used, the likely target would indeed have been Tokyo.

 

And it's not even the spectacular method of wrecking people's lives that's the only, or even the biggest problem with Trump - it's the everyday little things that he's done, is doing and will do that make the world a worse place for everyone except himself and a very small demographic.

[leicsmac]

13 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Starmer removing his ambiguity on trans matters will lose him more votes than it gains, seeing as people who are full-bore for the Supreme Court ruling wouldn't vote for him in any kind of number anyway.

 

It's a mistake.

*Looks at today's front pages*

 

Yep. It was a mistake.

[Free Falling Foxes]

Listening to BBCR4 this morning and I thought what an absolute bizarre world we are living in.

Politician after Politician being asked for their definition of what makes a women and all dodging an answer.

Secondly, the police would like to be able to sack officers who fail background checks.

Satire has become reality.

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, Free Falling Foxes said:

Listening to BBCR4 this morning and I thought what an absolute bizarre world we are living in.

Politician after Politician being asked for their definition of what makes a women and all dodging an answer.

Secondly, the police would like to be able to sack officers who fail background checks.

Satire has become reality.

Perhaps because they can see rather clearly that picking a side on this highly charged matter doesn't actually give them anything politically.

 

And all the time social inequality is getting larger, biodiversity is dropping, and vital resources are becoming more scarce.