General News Thread

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

It could, but we're not talking about strictly UK-based conservation policies here, and that being a point of argument really shouldn't in any way validate the mindset regarding life on Earth stated by the current US administration above. 

Trump is arsehole in every conceivable way undoubtedly.  That doesn't change my point that projects of all kinds are becoming too hard to deliver due to every possible group whether on land rights, environmental concerns, labour rights etc having the legal ability to challenge every aspect.  Eventually we just grind to a halt and offshore all the messy stuff to countries who happily destroy everything to get the resources, production and capability regardless of such concerns.  Its a great way to worsen the overall environment while appearing to be righteous, all the while handing the next few centuries to China, India and other countries who don't necessarily like us very much. If we don't wake up to this, our economies will be down the pan and we will be ****ed.

[Jon the Hat]

18 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Yes, but how much of that money was actually used for it's construction, as opposed to mates contractor fees and 'planning' costs that just evaporated into the air?

About half generally for any major project in the West.  And about 5% max in China, Africa etc.  We are killing ourselves.

[leicsmac]

42 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Trump is arsehole in every conceivable way undoubtedly.  That doesn't change my point that projects of all kinds are becoming too hard to deliver due to every possible group whether on land rights, environmental concerns, labour rights etc having the legal ability to challenge every aspect.  Eventually we just grind to a halt and offshore all the messy stuff to countries who happily destroy everything to get the resources, production and capability regardless of such concerns.  Its a great way to worsen the overall environment while appearing to be righteous, all the while handing the next few centuries to China, India and other countries who don't necessarily like us very much. If we don't wake up to this, our economies will be down the pan and we will be ****ed.

I don't disagree about the nature of the bureaucracy. Somehow a balance needs to be struck. 

 

The good news is that it won't matter if what you state in the last few lines comes true (or if we let mindsets like Trump's take control as well) because going down that way means no one wins, and the difference between economies then will mean absolutely nothing with much less vital resources on which they can be spent. 

[leicsmac]

46 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

About half generally for any major project in the West.  And about 5% max in China, Africa etc.  We are killing ourselves.

And yet, the Chinese appear to make those infrastructure projects work in spite of all the graft alleged here. 

 

Of course, that does come with a significant cost both socially and environmentally, as discussed above. 

[davieG]

3 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Trump is arsehole in every conceivable way undoubtedly.  That doesn't change my point that projects of all kinds are becoming too hard to deliver due to every possible group whether on land rights, environmental concerns, labour rights etc having the legal ability to challenge every aspect.  Eventually we just grind to a halt and offshore all the messy stuff to countries who happily destroy everything to get the resources, production and capability regardless of such concerns.  Its a great way to worsen the overall environment while appearing to be righteous, all the while handing the next few centuries to China, India and other countries who don't necessarily like us very much. If we don't wake up to this, our economies will be down the pan and we will be ****ed.

If he lived today it would be a case of Isambard Kingdom Brunel - Who?

[Trav Le Bleu]

3 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Trump is arsehole in every conceivable way undoubtedly.  That doesn't change my point that projects of all kinds are becoming too hard to deliver due to every possible group whether on land rights, environmental concerns, labour rights etc having the legal ability to challenge every aspect.  Eventually we just grind to a halt and offshore all the messy stuff to countries who happily destroy everything to get the resources, production and capability regardless of such concerns.  Its a great way to worsen the overall environment while appearing to be righteous, all the while handing the next few centuries to China, India and other countries who don't necessarily like us very much. If we don't wake up to this, our economies will be down the pan and we will be ****ed.

It's kind of how we pride ourselves on getting rid of slavery and huge amounts of products are imported from countries with people working for a pittance in sweat shops.

[st albans fox]

3 hours ago, leicsmac said:

And yet, the Chinese appear to make those infrastructure projects work in spite of all the graft alleged here. 

 

Of course, that does come with a significant cost both socially and environmentally, as discussed above. 

People have few rights if the state want to build something 

there must be a middle ground though 

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

People have few rights if the state want to build something 

there must be a middle ground though 

Yeah, that's what I meant about balance. 

 

It just seems rather difficult to find, particularly when you have the extremes pushing so hard with all the many consequences that entails. 

[st albans fox]

Turkey have joined the Saudi/pakistan defence pact

 

given their position within NATO, doesn’t this present some potential problems for the alliance .??? 

[Lionator]

29 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Turkey have joined the Saudi/pakistan defence pact

 

given their position within NATO, doesn’t this present some potential problems for the alliance .??? 

Such as? Aside from USA, France and UK, Turkey is pretty much the most important NATO ally given where it’s located and defence spending. Saudi is basically a NATO ally, if anything it’ll just help prevent an escalation between India and Pakistan again. 

[st albans fox]

26 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Such as? Aside from USA, France and UK, Turkey is pretty much the most important NATO ally given where it’s located and defence spending. Saudi is basically a NATO ally, if anything it’ll just help prevent an escalation between India and Pakistan again. 

So you think it acts as a brake on India attacking Pakistan ?   What if Pakistan attacks India ?  
 

It extends the possibility that someone will attack turkey which could bring NATO into conflict. 

 

I don’t think it’s been done to act as a brake on India/pakistan tensions 

 

I think it’s main affect is to isolate isr and stop trump’s attempts to get Saudi into the AA. Turkey wants to be the main player in the region. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

Epstein files?

 

Wars in the Middle East?

 

NATO about to be attacked?

 

Wait... look over there. Is that a flying saucer?

 

Pentagon releases fresh batch of UFO files - BBC News

 

https://share.google/vUa3GZzkYH9i9XesG

 

[Lionator]

6 hours ago, st albans fox said:

So you think it acts as a brake on India attacking Pakistan ?   What if Pakistan attacks India ?  
 

It extends the possibility that someone will attack turkey which could bring NATO into conflict. 

 

I don’t think it’s been done to act as a brake on India/pakistan tensions 

 

I think it’s main affect is to isolate isr and stop trump’s attempts to get Saudi into the AA. Turkey wants to be the main player in the region. 

Who would attack Turkey though? Probably the most likely is Isr and that certainly wouldn’t trigger article 5. Erdogan and Putin are buddies so you can rule Russia out. I also highly doubt Pakistan would make a first move against India given India’s military strength in comparison. 

Edited 7 August by Lionator

[Rubbersoul]

I haven’t really paid much attention to the story but is this Cambridge “professor” just a total fake then? 

[Zear0]

22 minutes ago, Rubbersoul said:

I haven’t really paid much attention to the story but is this Cambridge “professor” just a total fake then? 

He does to be something of a fantasist. Jay from The Inbetweeners springs to mind whenever I read about his extraordinary "achievements".

[st albans fox]

2 hours ago, Rubbersoul said:

I haven’t really paid much attention to the story but is this Cambridge “professor” just a total fake then? 

Tough to know the truth 

clearly there are big questions to answer re his qualifications and suitability to be a Cambridge professor. 
Seems like a Walter Mitty type character which muddies the water even further. 

he’s basically a professor of sociology and yet I read this morning that he’s doesn’t hold any qualifications in sociology - surely that can’t be true ??

hence my first comment 

clealry the right wing press (inc sm) have jumped on this to highlight their disdain of DEI 

[Trav Le Bleu]

1 minute ago, st albans fox said:

Tough to know the truth 

clearly there are big questions to answer re his qualifications and suitability to be a Cambridge professor. 
Seems like a Walter Mitty type character which muddies the water even further. 

he’s basically a professor of sociology and yet I read this morning that he’s doesn’t hold any qualifications in sociology - surely that can’t be true ??

hence my first comment 

clealry the right wing press (inc sm) have jumped on this to highlight their disdain of DEI 

The problem is re: DEI, if true, this is a definitive case of quota box ticking for the D and the I, ignoring the E, which adds ammo to their claims.

 

It could be his wild Munchhausian (sp?) claims be indeed fantasy, but his academic achievements be very real. The two are not mutually inclusive.

 

Having said that, I think he's a nut job.

[Lionator]

Hope this guy becomes senator. 

[Manley Farrington-Brown]

19 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

The problem is re: DEI, if true, this is a definitive case of quota box ticking for the D and the

No, not necessarily at all. A rubbish appointment isn't automatically box ticking just because the bloke's black. Could very easily just be rubbish recruitment practice - universities are rife with it tbh. Loads of white blokes get appointed to jobs they shouldn't have as well.

[Lionator]

2 hours ago, Manley Farrington-Brown said:

No, not necessarily at all. A rubbish appointment isn't automatically box ticking just because the bloke's black. Could very easily just be rubbish recruitment practice - universities are rife with it tbh. Loads of white blokes get appointed to jobs they shouldn't have as well.

Legit! He’s a fraud whichever way you look at it! 

[Free Falling Foxes]

Banksy's artwork costs to the British taxpayer?

 

£150 000

 

 

Edited 9 August by Free Falling Foxes

[leicsmac]

23 minutes ago, Free Falling Foxes said:

Banksy's artwork costs to the British taxpayer?

 

£150 000

 

 

It's a little cute when those talking political heads so in favour of individual freedom of expression get bent out of shape when it's an area they value that's been "vandalised".

 

That being said, there would be something in Banksy offering to pay for at least some of the cleanup to make them look even more whiny and hypocritical than they already are. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

5 hours ago, Manley Farrington-Brown said:

No, not necessarily at all. A rubbish appointment isn't automatically box ticking just because the bloke's black. Could very easily just be rubbish recruitment practice - universities are rife with it tbh. Loads of white blokes get appointed to jobs they shouldn't have as well.

I said definitive, not definite, to say that for someone who wanted to use it for that purpose, could do so and almost certainly will.

[ajthefox]

7 hours ago, Manley Farrington-Brown said:

No, not necessarily at all. A rubbish appointment isn't automatically box ticking just because the bloke's black. Could very easily just be rubbish recruitment practice - universities are rife with it tbh. Loads of white blokes get appointed to jobs they shouldn't have as well.

This is such a good point and something that is oft missed in these types of discussions whether it be academia, sports, media, whatever. 

[DJW1]

9 hours ago, Manley Farrington-Brown said:

No, not necessarily at all. A rubbish appointment isn't automatically box ticking just because the bloke's black. Could very easily just be rubbish recruitment practice - universities are rife with it tbh. Loads of white blokes get appointed to jobs they shouldn't have as well.

For example, Steve Cooper, RvN, Cifuentes, Rowett...