“setting off for the fairytale never-never land of buccaneering neo-Elizabethan independence – a Trump-like mirage of “Global Britain” that would rapidly collapse into a putrid reality of being Greater Cyprus with missiles.”
Timothy Garton Ash – Guardian today – or more specifically HERE
Well, there’s a headline – privatise mail, railways, energy firms.
Not sure about the mail thing – unless you can get even more radical and insist nothing is posted unsolicited through a letter box.
Imagine the relief upon rubbish collections.
But to be a little more thoughtful – Energy? Yes, of course – I was banging on about the unimaginably ridiculous need for a UK citizen to “do a deal” on their energy tariff. This is truly ‘market forces’ gone mad – and you still don’t get good value, or a deal that works,or really anything other than hassle and time-wasting with no-one to defend your rights.
Let me be clear.
(Ha – how many times have you heard that particular little device this year from a politician on the radio or TV?) The tariff is the cost of supply, staff (watch the salaries), upkeep, modernisation. Every householder pays the same.
Rail – that’s a bit less easy isn’t it?
In truth – (you’re lucky I didn’t type ‘to be fair’ just there – but then I would have had to kill myself) – where is the logic in different companies running stuff on the same rails? I think this idea needs teaming-up with a conscious push to get freight off of the roads, and again the same truths emerge – in Europe (god! what did I say???) – rail ticket prices are reasonable (they probably reflect true costs and needs) – here? Do profits help to keep ticket prices affordable?
Don’t make me laugh, profits go to shareholders.
I’ve long held the belief (since I was 15 – so for 45 years) that some sort of modern socialism is the only way the planet can get along, share-out stuff – if you will.
There are certain things in this life we need (our hierarchy of needs, incidentally): shelter, food & water, heat. Anything more than that is a bonus.
And I don’t think it’s pandering to reds under the bed to suggest that, yes, such utilities should be run for the good of everyone not shareholders.
Just a thought (air quality/pollution) – as all supermarket home
delivery vehicles run quite light distances, and never far from base before returning – why are not every single one of them electric?
George Monbiot penned a beautifully researched piece << here >> about this.
And further – now the supermarkets have got back into the high street (Tesco express, Sainsburys local etc) we are seeing enormous trucks arrive to re-stock them – how is this progress? Surely out-of-town distribution points should be where the big trucks go no further, then much smaller electric trucks complete the job?
I mean, are we serious about this or not?
You could go further – Taxis, in other words – those that merely
poodle around town all day – electric – why not?
I guess the time will come, no doubt the death rate isn’t high enough yet.
“Rich western countries are now siphoning up the planet’s resources and destroying its ecosystems at an unprecedented rate,” said biologist Paul Ehrlich, of Stanford University in California. “We want to build highways across the Serengeti to get more rare earth minerals for our cellphones. We grab all the fish from the sea, wreck the coral reefs and put carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. We have triggered a major extinction event.
So Teresa May then?
A mixture of good and bad.
The ‘good’ if you can call it that, being such comments as “Under my leadership, the Conservative party will put itself – completely, absolutely, unequivocally – at the service of working people.” Not so good the continuation of – Privatise through the backdoor – policies such as ‘free’ schools, academies, et al.
It hasn’t been suggested yet, so I thought I’d wade-in here – you don’t think, I mean, it’s not possible is it – that such a Monster reformer looms somewhere in the background, in Opposition, that the Tories just HAD to manoeuvre this ever so slightly softer version of their usual true blue stance, as a foil against such a threat?
The Cons can reasonably argue that the public might well, after Brexit, not have the appetite for yet more shocks, so, ‘steady-as-SHE-goes’ – with just enough wiggle room to feel someone might be a bit on their side, is less of a leap of faith than a full-blown political system upheaval?
Definition of the word: manoeuvre carefully guide or manipulate (someone or something) in order to achieve an end. “they were manoeuvring him into betraying his friend” synonyms: intrigue, plot, scheme, plan, lay plans, conspire, pull strings;
And what on earth, WHO on earth could be such a threat as to necessitate such manoeuvres?