Mark Serwotka is the General Secretary of the PCS Union and has a solidly socialist background. He wants you to understand he is of the people and wants the best for the working man. Actually, he is none of the above, it is just that words like socialist are nicer, less threatening.
Mark takes about £90K as a salary and a good slug of money for his pension pot; I have no idea what a union boss does to 'earn' this money, it seems that it is a pretty cushy number. What he does do though, is use that position to cause trouble, supporting his true views, which are far Left and intended to bring about a version of the USSR in Britain.
This needs to be clearly understood, because when people such as Serwotka talk they sound reasonable, Left leaning people who want to oppose Tories. But they lie incessantly to further their cause; it must succeed and so any sense of fair play is put aside. We must start challenging the Left not because they are socialists but because they are not. Many socialist ideals are perfectly acceptable and can be subject to rational debate, but these people are hard to find.
Thursday, 3 May 2012
Austin Mitchell's London
Labour arch twit, Austin Mitchell MP has said that London is sucking the life out of the country. This is the bleating of a victim culture weakling, who echoes the Marxist creed of 'somebody do it for me'. Basically, he has it the wrong way around. London is a centre of activity because it tries to be. The North is the way it is because people with the attitude of this small minded gimp hold sway.
He blames Thatcher for destroying manufacturing and focussing on the City. Certainly she could have helped more, but it had to destroy itself. I think the Unions in the Seventies and the Labour governments of the time did most of the work.
Similarly he blames London for the crushing of cities like Manchester and Liverpool. Many Northern cities boomed during early Industrial Revolution manufacturing, but were not adept at moving with the times once established. That was their downfall. Liverpool was crushed, mainly due to its shipping moving to Felixstowe (hardly a city), where the ship owners could be assured of their vessel being unloaded, whereas in Liverpool they had to try to arrive in between strikes, something that became increasingly difficult.
Like Scotland, the North of England has been destroyed by throwing its lot in with Labour. Marxism was never intended to serve the people was it?
He blames Thatcher for destroying manufacturing and focussing on the City. Certainly she could have helped more, but it had to destroy itself. I think the Unions in the Seventies and the Labour governments of the time did most of the work.
Similarly he blames London for the crushing of cities like Manchester and Liverpool. Many Northern cities boomed during early Industrial Revolution manufacturing, but were not adept at moving with the times once established. That was their downfall. Liverpool was crushed, mainly due to its shipping moving to Felixstowe (hardly a city), where the ship owners could be assured of their vessel being unloaded, whereas in Liverpool they had to try to arrive in between strikes, something that became increasingly difficult.
Like Scotland, the North of England has been destroyed by throwing its lot in with Labour. Marxism was never intended to serve the people was it?
Energy
If you follow the logic of the Greens then you must be of the opinion that Man should not use energy. Delingpole says that we should rely on the technical inventiveness of mankind, which has, at least up until now, resolved our looming problems.
It has become clear that the global warming scare turned into a scam long ago and it isn't something to concern anyone. It was definitely right to look into it though, as it is absolutely the case that one thing affects another and we just didn't know what level of harm our activity was having. However, when we realised that we are not having any impact, we should have also said we don't understand the mechanisms either, so we need to keep an eye on things.
Contrarily though, we did the opposite and allowed a bunch of political activists from the Left tell us that they did understand the entirety of global climate and that Man was having a devastating effect on the planet. None of this, not any of it was true and it is very probably the enormity of the lie that caused people to think it might be true. But hey everyone said, in this post intellectual world I'm not going to do anything stupid myself, like try to find out!
Going back to the assertion that technology will save us, it has to be the right technology and again, unbelievably the Left has achieved something incredible. They have sold you technology that cannot possibly do what you need it to do. We know, absolutely and without doubt that our current photovoltaic technology is woefully inadequate for domestic, let alone industrial power applications.
Is your roof plastered with solar panels? And how is that working out for you? Great when the sun shines and you are not at home I would guess, just the fridge and the fish tank drawing a little power. What about when you get home and want to cook dinner, put the kettle on for a cuppa in front of the TV, watching that new Blu ray film through the cinema sound system?
Don't tell me, you can't even have a (low energy, low output) light bulb on, because the sun has gone down (which is why you need a light on!). Then there are the wind farms. Fabulous output when the wind is just right, none at all when it is calm or quite windy. So, they require a real power station as back up, just like solar, negating the need for these 'technologies' in the first place.
Gas is a relatively low CO2 output fossil fuel, so should we be building those type of power station? Delingpole again is keen, because the shale gas reserves found around Britain means we would have our own fuel for hundreds of years. But as CO2 output is not causing a thing called global warming or climate change, we don't need to worry about emissions. But you know what, a lot the by products of burning anything are not that pleasant when emitted to the atmosphere.
We may not be looking at the catastrophe the Left tried to make you believe, so they could create the failing system of government they need to seize power, but pollution is still undesirable, so let's try to avoid it. Nuclear of course gets us away from the emissions problem but produces its own problems of radioactive waste. Well, there may be good news here.
The use of Thorium as a fuel for nuclear reactors would have an immediate benefit in that it produces between 10 and 10,000 times less waste than uranium, which is what we currently use. As it uses up all the Thorium rather than the 0.7% in a uranium reactor, meaning we have at least a 1,000 year energy supply at current usage, worldwide.
There are other benefits too. It doesn't need to be used in a pressurised environment so no explosion should a plant be overwhelmed as at Fukushima. Also, it stops reacting if you stop bombarding it with neutrons. As a scientist involved pointed out, if the reactor 'runs away' and gets too hot, a plug in the reactor melts and the thorium drains away, so stopping the reaction process. It saves itself.
Are we developing this technology? No. We are pumping all our money into wind farm and solar array subsidies, into funding Green activists and their useful idiot academics. Nadine Dorries recently suggested that a major failing of the Conservative leadership was that they didn't know the price of milk. It seems more likely that the bigger issue is, they don't appear to know how to find out. The most obvious things escape them.
It has become clear that the global warming scare turned into a scam long ago and it isn't something to concern anyone. It was definitely right to look into it though, as it is absolutely the case that one thing affects another and we just didn't know what level of harm our activity was having. However, when we realised that we are not having any impact, we should have also said we don't understand the mechanisms either, so we need to keep an eye on things.
Contrarily though, we did the opposite and allowed a bunch of political activists from the Left tell us that they did understand the entirety of global climate and that Man was having a devastating effect on the planet. None of this, not any of it was true and it is very probably the enormity of the lie that caused people to think it might be true. But hey everyone said, in this post intellectual world I'm not going to do anything stupid myself, like try to find out!
Going back to the assertion that technology will save us, it has to be the right technology and again, unbelievably the Left has achieved something incredible. They have sold you technology that cannot possibly do what you need it to do. We know, absolutely and without doubt that our current photovoltaic technology is woefully inadequate for domestic, let alone industrial power applications.
Is your roof plastered with solar panels? And how is that working out for you? Great when the sun shines and you are not at home I would guess, just the fridge and the fish tank drawing a little power. What about when you get home and want to cook dinner, put the kettle on for a cuppa in front of the TV, watching that new Blu ray film through the cinema sound system?
Don't tell me, you can't even have a (low energy, low output) light bulb on, because the sun has gone down (which is why you need a light on!). Then there are the wind farms. Fabulous output when the wind is just right, none at all when it is calm or quite windy. So, they require a real power station as back up, just like solar, negating the need for these 'technologies' in the first place.
Gas is a relatively low CO2 output fossil fuel, so should we be building those type of power station? Delingpole again is keen, because the shale gas reserves found around Britain means we would have our own fuel for hundreds of years. But as CO2 output is not causing a thing called global warming or climate change, we don't need to worry about emissions. But you know what, a lot the by products of burning anything are not that pleasant when emitted to the atmosphere.
We may not be looking at the catastrophe the Left tried to make you believe, so they could create the failing system of government they need to seize power, but pollution is still undesirable, so let's try to avoid it. Nuclear of course gets us away from the emissions problem but produces its own problems of radioactive waste. Well, there may be good news here.
The use of Thorium as a fuel for nuclear reactors would have an immediate benefit in that it produces between 10 and 10,000 times less waste than uranium, which is what we currently use. As it uses up all the Thorium rather than the 0.7% in a uranium reactor, meaning we have at least a 1,000 year energy supply at current usage, worldwide.
There are other benefits too. It doesn't need to be used in a pressurised environment so no explosion should a plant be overwhelmed as at Fukushima. Also, it stops reacting if you stop bombarding it with neutrons. As a scientist involved pointed out, if the reactor 'runs away' and gets too hot, a plug in the reactor melts and the thorium drains away, so stopping the reaction process. It saves itself.
Are we developing this technology? No. We are pumping all our money into wind farm and solar array subsidies, into funding Green activists and their useful idiot academics. Nadine Dorries recently suggested that a major failing of the Conservative leadership was that they didn't know the price of milk. It seems more likely that the bigger issue is, they don't appear to know how to find out. The most obvious things escape them.
Wednesday, 2 May 2012
How You Doin'?
Traditionally a map of Britain shows a Labour heartland in the North and solidly Conservative in the South. This we are told (and have come to accept), is because working folk live 'up North' and all the snooty, posh types down South. So the division is based on the people that live there.
But as ever, the Left have tried to construct the narrative along lines of their choosing. They have decided for you how you will look at something. If you are a low paid worker living in the South are you a fish out of water? Do you yearn to move Up North?
Do wealthy people (excluding footballers, they are too stupid to count) in the Northern climes always up sticks and relocate Southwards, the day some magical figure of money in the bank is hit? I think not.
Clearly, the divide is more likely that the devastation in Labour regions is because they are Labour regions. Where effort is rewarded and ambition is seen as good, wealth is created and these areas flourish because those traits are Conservative traits.
I mentioned traditional earlier and this should be seen in this context. Needless to say, the current Conservatives are no such thing. Though Labour continues to be mainly a subversive, Marxist party masquerading as something altogether more benign and 'of the people'. Though of course there was the interlude where the spivs of Tony Blair held sway, whilst trying to make themselves rich.
But as ever, the Left have tried to construct the narrative along lines of their choosing. They have decided for you how you will look at something. If you are a low paid worker living in the South are you a fish out of water? Do you yearn to move Up North?
Do wealthy people (excluding footballers, they are too stupid to count) in the Northern climes always up sticks and relocate Southwards, the day some magical figure of money in the bank is hit? I think not.
Clearly, the divide is more likely that the devastation in Labour regions is because they are Labour regions. Where effort is rewarded and ambition is seen as good, wealth is created and these areas flourish because those traits are Conservative traits.
I mentioned traditional earlier and this should be seen in this context. Needless to say, the current Conservatives are no such thing. Though Labour continues to be mainly a subversive, Marxist party masquerading as something altogether more benign and 'of the people'. Though of course there was the interlude where the spivs of Tony Blair held sway, whilst trying to make themselves rich.
Argosit
The retailer struggling for reasons that are palpably obvious to everyone, except its management are in the news again. Bad news. The boss of Argos, who gets paid the big bucks because he takes the big decisions and thinks up grand strategy and is a risk taker, is going to hire consultants. To come up with the grand ideas etc. He also thinks that a bunch of employees ought to pay, with their jobs for this bewildering failure to sell enough.
Maybe close a load of stores, though most are mid-lease. Doh. Argos have an interesting sales concept that they should work harder at making a positive in the eyes of the public. Instead their laxity in getting the goods out and the teeth grindingly annoying 'number 27 please', machine seem designed to drive people away.
By having no goods on shelves, for shop lifters to steal, they have no theft problem. They don't need security on the door and they don't need security tags on products. Are these cost savings passed on? No. The way Argos have decided to present themselves as having cheaper prices is by selling tat. They ought to have a staff uniform based on baggy jogging suits, to make their target audience feel at home.
But it is not just that. It is their product range. Choice is nice, don't get me wrong but what you stock defines who you are. You employ people to understand the market sector they cover and buy according to a strategy, maybe one the CEO came up with, when he wasn't looking for consultants to ask what he should have for lunch. But what kind of strategy produces this result;
Mice. A fairly simple device, that tends to be seen with almost every computer. So maybe an item that sells well. So how many different models do you think Argos have available? One hundred and thirty, that's how many. Yes, you read that right 130. And there are fully 25 priced below £12.50.
Mr. Moron met Mrs. Moron and they had a child. They called it Argos. Don't sack the staff, sack the management. Do what entrepreneurs do and innovate. Look at your market, spot the opportunities and work them. Be a motivator not a dumbed down, run down, disrespected shop, with a sense of entitlement.
If you look at job ads for roles at Argos such as Buyer and Category Manager they say exactly the right thing. They want people who 'think outside the box' (I hate that phrase, but everyone knows what it means), who can bring new ideas. But they don't hire those people! Or if they do they stifle them into conformity once on board.
Don't hire cloned graduates, because your sure that sociology degree will prove useful at some point. Hire them because they have a spark, or hire a kid off a park bench who, when you talked to him was oozing natural talent. Go and find these people. It is clear this isn't happening, because on an effort versus return basis the lack of return points clearly to a lack of effort.
Maybe close a load of stores, though most are mid-lease. Doh. Argos have an interesting sales concept that they should work harder at making a positive in the eyes of the public. Instead their laxity in getting the goods out and the teeth grindingly annoying 'number 27 please', machine seem designed to drive people away.
By having no goods on shelves, for shop lifters to steal, they have no theft problem. They don't need security on the door and they don't need security tags on products. Are these cost savings passed on? No. The way Argos have decided to present themselves as having cheaper prices is by selling tat. They ought to have a staff uniform based on baggy jogging suits, to make their target audience feel at home.
But it is not just that. It is their product range. Choice is nice, don't get me wrong but what you stock defines who you are. You employ people to understand the market sector they cover and buy according to a strategy, maybe one the CEO came up with, when he wasn't looking for consultants to ask what he should have for lunch. But what kind of strategy produces this result;
Mice. A fairly simple device, that tends to be seen with almost every computer. So maybe an item that sells well. So how many different models do you think Argos have available? One hundred and thirty, that's how many. Yes, you read that right 130. And there are fully 25 priced below £12.50.
Mr. Moron met Mrs. Moron and they had a child. They called it Argos. Don't sack the staff, sack the management. Do what entrepreneurs do and innovate. Look at your market, spot the opportunities and work them. Be a motivator not a dumbed down, run down, disrespected shop, with a sense of entitlement.
If you look at job ads for roles at Argos such as Buyer and Category Manager they say exactly the right thing. They want people who 'think outside the box' (I hate that phrase, but everyone knows what it means), who can bring new ideas. But they don't hire those people! Or if they do they stifle them into conformity once on board.
Don't hire cloned graduates, because your sure that sociology degree will prove useful at some point. Hire them because they have a spark, or hire a kid off a park bench who, when you talked to him was oozing natural talent. Go and find these people. It is clear this isn't happening, because on an effort versus return basis the lack of return points clearly to a lack of effort.
Pointlessness
A parliamentary committee decided yesterday was the day to show just how pointless this Left inspired Salem witch hunt is. They announced that in their opinion the Murdoch's were not fit and proper people to run an international company, even though they have no business making that assertion. It is the role of a regulator.
The opinion though, just appeared to be the malicious dribbling of the Labour bloc doing as they are told, so not even a hint of a real inquiry process. But I suppose the real point was to try to set the direction the regulator should take. It would be a brave bureaucrat who found differently from a Parliamentary committee wouldn't it?
This inquiry, like the Leveson one is yet another example of how the Left so completely dominate our lives through corrupt politics. It has no point and barely touches things that are the proper interest of government and yet as a tool to attack capitalists, both in the flesh and politicians of that hue, it is unimpeachable. The constant complaints and shrill exhortations of the Left really are becoming tiresome.
The process has revealed something of importance though, that is of real and proper interest to MP's and something that requires action. Tom Watson MP (Labour), a member of the anti-Murdoch brigade brought in to do harm, has released privileged information from within the inquiry, before its own report was published and in a book written for financial gain. Watson disclosed that the report would say Murdoch misled Parliament.
Surely this exposes Watson as at least not a fit and proper person to be on the committee, casting its whole validity into doubt, but also raises the question as to whether he should be a Member of Parliament at all. It is surely correct that he be released from his position as an MP and barred from the House for at least 5 years, meaning he cannot stand again for election to that House, within that time frame.
Naturally, as you would expect of such an unattractive character, Watson has form. He has leaked information before, though his buddies on the Leveson inquiry somehow managed to blame Guido Fawkes blog. They said that Watson had copied the information released from the blog, making Paul Staines (aka Guido) the source of the leak. Quite how the redacted version he published became un-redacted in Watson's hands, no-one felt at liberty to say. This meant an important matter was dropped.
So, the actual lessons learnt are, that we should listen less to and be more aware of the Left and its persistent tactics to modify the way you think. And that we should act against the Left, holding them to account every time they corrupt democratic process and break the law. No more should they be able to escape common justice, as it applies to others. This is not party politics, or differing opinions. We have to weed out these dangerous people from within our midst.
The opinion though, just appeared to be the malicious dribbling of the Labour bloc doing as they are told, so not even a hint of a real inquiry process. But I suppose the real point was to try to set the direction the regulator should take. It would be a brave bureaucrat who found differently from a Parliamentary committee wouldn't it?
This inquiry, like the Leveson one is yet another example of how the Left so completely dominate our lives through corrupt politics. It has no point and barely touches things that are the proper interest of government and yet as a tool to attack capitalists, both in the flesh and politicians of that hue, it is unimpeachable. The constant complaints and shrill exhortations of the Left really are becoming tiresome.
The process has revealed something of importance though, that is of real and proper interest to MP's and something that requires action. Tom Watson MP (Labour), a member of the anti-Murdoch brigade brought in to do harm, has released privileged information from within the inquiry, before its own report was published and in a book written for financial gain. Watson disclosed that the report would say Murdoch misled Parliament.
Surely this exposes Watson as at least not a fit and proper person to be on the committee, casting its whole validity into doubt, but also raises the question as to whether he should be a Member of Parliament at all. It is surely correct that he be released from his position as an MP and barred from the House for at least 5 years, meaning he cannot stand again for election to that House, within that time frame.
Naturally, as you would expect of such an unattractive character, Watson has form. He has leaked information before, though his buddies on the Leveson inquiry somehow managed to blame Guido Fawkes blog. They said that Watson had copied the information released from the blog, making Paul Staines (aka Guido) the source of the leak. Quite how the redacted version he published became un-redacted in Watson's hands, no-one felt at liberty to say. This meant an important matter was dropped.
So, the actual lessons learnt are, that we should listen less to and be more aware of the Left and its persistent tactics to modify the way you think. And that we should act against the Left, holding them to account every time they corrupt democratic process and break the law. No more should they be able to escape common justice, as it applies to others. This is not party politics, or differing opinions. We have to weed out these dangerous people from within our midst.
Tuesday, 1 May 2012
On Being Fed Up
I am heartily sick of hearing about the Leveson inquiry. I know it has such a high profile because it is beloved of the Left and so the BBC major on every nuance, but really what is the point? So journalists hacked phones; that is a criminal matter for the police, lawsuits by those affected are a civil matter. Government collusion is a concern but, excuse me, I haven't actually heard much of substance there. We really must stop letting the shrieking of the Left affect our view of the world.
When New Labour came to power it was widely held that it was the support of the Sun that swung it and now we hear that Cameron and others had personal contact. This must come as a major shock to the country, close to a bear's activity in the woods, I should imagine. What we haven't heard is anything of substance. The Jeremy Hunt affair looks dodgy, but probably because it is.
Hunt has a guilty look that does his conscience, if not his integrity, a great service. The torturous way Cameron talks about it also suggests there is more to it, but we'll see. It might make some small point to the whole, expensive shebang.
Look, let us get this straight. If a Prime Minister can lie, openly and blatantly to Parliament and the country and in doing so take this country to war and we do absolutely nothing about it, why would we be concerned about a Prime Minister knowing a media tycoon? We haven't even locked Campbell up, for goodness sake!
Actually, on a separate note, is the vast amount of money Blair is getting paid and his 'Middle East' mission, based on him continuing to search Iraq for WMD's? You know, the ones he is certain are there? Here is what is apparent today though, with the benefit of hindsight and a better view of what, in any other country would be called criminal activity. In the Middle East there is a real threat from the very slightly unhinged regime in Iran.
This stands them apart from a long list of grasping malcontents who seem to run much of the area. They actively want to cause harm and want powerful weapons. So we invade the country next door which, whilst having a nasty, tinpot dictator in charge, was otherwise none of the above.
A constant stream of news emerges that ends with the word Pakistan, as in 'terrorists trained in', 'went to a camp in', 'assisted in terrorism by the security services of', 'bombers came from' and 'Osama Bin Laden found in'. So, once again, we invaded the country next door. Due to this new policy, all I can say, with one eye on the Eurozone situation, is that if the Germans kick off again, boy are Denmark in trouble.
Global Warming stopped in 1998. CO2 continues to go up, but the temperature doesn't. It's been warmer before. CO2 rises after the temperature does, not the other way around. Clearly we do not understand climate to any significant degree. So why are we still taxing and regulating and pumping money into Green activities and giving a mountain of cash to Green activists and academics?
(On the basis that there are obviously a lot of really stupid people out there; I have a few jars of Moonbeams for sale, at £1 million each. I collect them from cucumbers).
When New Labour came to power it was widely held that it was the support of the Sun that swung it and now we hear that Cameron and others had personal contact. This must come as a major shock to the country, close to a bear's activity in the woods, I should imagine. What we haven't heard is anything of substance. The Jeremy Hunt affair looks dodgy, but probably because it is.
Hunt has a guilty look that does his conscience, if not his integrity, a great service. The torturous way Cameron talks about it also suggests there is more to it, but we'll see. It might make some small point to the whole, expensive shebang.
Look, let us get this straight. If a Prime Minister can lie, openly and blatantly to Parliament and the country and in doing so take this country to war and we do absolutely nothing about it, why would we be concerned about a Prime Minister knowing a media tycoon? We haven't even locked Campbell up, for goodness sake!
Actually, on a separate note, is the vast amount of money Blair is getting paid and his 'Middle East' mission, based on him continuing to search Iraq for WMD's? You know, the ones he is certain are there? Here is what is apparent today though, with the benefit of hindsight and a better view of what, in any other country would be called criminal activity. In the Middle East there is a real threat from the very slightly unhinged regime in Iran.
This stands them apart from a long list of grasping malcontents who seem to run much of the area. They actively want to cause harm and want powerful weapons. So we invade the country next door which, whilst having a nasty, tinpot dictator in charge, was otherwise none of the above.
A constant stream of news emerges that ends with the word Pakistan, as in 'terrorists trained in', 'went to a camp in', 'assisted in terrorism by the security services of', 'bombers came from' and 'Osama Bin Laden found in'. So, once again, we invaded the country next door. Due to this new policy, all I can say, with one eye on the Eurozone situation, is that if the Germans kick off again, boy are Denmark in trouble.
Global Warming stopped in 1998. CO2 continues to go up, but the temperature doesn't. It's been warmer before. CO2 rises after the temperature does, not the other way around. Clearly we do not understand climate to any significant degree. So why are we still taxing and regulating and pumping money into Green activities and giving a mountain of cash to Green activists and academics?
(On the basis that there are obviously a lot of really stupid people out there; I have a few jars of Moonbeams for sale, at £1 million each. I collect them from cucumbers).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)