Our troubles are gaining international attention:
Britain Is Heading Into a Nightmarish Winter
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/01/opin ... hnson.html
alternative link
Opinion from New York Times
Moderator: Peak Moderation
-
adam2
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10892
- Joined: 02 Jul 2007, 17:49
- Location: North Somerset, twinned with Atlantis
Re: Opinion from New York Times
Sounds interesting but I can not access the article without registration.
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
Re: Opinion from New York Times
Note the alternative link!
-
adam2
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10892
- Joined: 02 Jul 2007, 17:49
- Location: North Somerset, twinned with Atlantis
Re: Opinion from New York Times
Thanks for that, yes an interesting read with which I partially agree.
It is however another report that concentrates on the petrol shortage which is probably short term and is arguably driven by panic buying rather than by any underlying issues. Obtaining extra delivery capacity is not that hard, and is underway.
Less mention of the astounding natural gas price which is in my view far more serious. Not much that the government can do about that except make soothing noises and hope that the problem will go away.
Food shortages are IME much less of an issue than implied in that report. I have noticed a reduction in choice, but not any general shortage.
Shortage of burgers ? eat sausages instead !
Shortage of sliced white bread ? Eat non sliced or brown instead ! Or "let them eat cake"
I also view the shortage of LPG with considerable concern, not very newsworthy as only a small minority of households or small businesses use this fuel. The situation is however becoming serious for the minority who DO use LPG as their main energy source.
I forecast that by Christmas that the petrol panic will be over and largely forgotten about.
And that food shortage will be no worse than now, though newsworthy if turkeys are scarce as is probable.
I forecast that natural gas prices will still be over 100 pence a therm, possibly twice that, and that government will face increasing calls to "DO SOMETHING"
And that at least two of the major energy suppliers, and at least another dozen small ones will have bust.
It is however another report that concentrates on the petrol shortage which is probably short term and is arguably driven by panic buying rather than by any underlying issues. Obtaining extra delivery capacity is not that hard, and is underway.
Less mention of the astounding natural gas price which is in my view far more serious. Not much that the government can do about that except make soothing noises and hope that the problem will go away.
Food shortages are IME much less of an issue than implied in that report. I have noticed a reduction in choice, but not any general shortage.
Shortage of burgers ? eat sausages instead !
Shortage of sliced white bread ? Eat non sliced or brown instead ! Or "let them eat cake"
I also view the shortage of LPG with considerable concern, not very newsworthy as only a small minority of households or small businesses use this fuel. The situation is however becoming serious for the minority who DO use LPG as their main energy source.
I forecast that by Christmas that the petrol panic will be over and largely forgotten about.
And that food shortage will be no worse than now, though newsworthy if turkeys are scarce as is probable.
I forecast that natural gas prices will still be over 100 pence a therm, possibly twice that, and that government will face increasing calls to "DO SOMETHING"
And that at least two of the major energy suppliers, and at least another dozen small ones will have bust.
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
-
UndercoverElephant
- Posts: 13496
- Joined: 10 Mar 2008, 00:00
- Location: UK
Re: Opinion from New York Times
Yeah, I am not convinced the UK's problems are that much more serious than those anywhere else in the western world. The details may vary, but the general story is pretty much the same everywhere. The underlying drivers are the limits to growth and grotesquely irresponsible monetary policy, which are combining to produce a form of stagflation from which there appears to be no escape route.
"We fail to mandate economic sanity because our brains are addled by....compassion." (Garrett Hardin)
-
BritDownUnder
- Posts: 2481
- Joined: 21 Sep 2011, 12:02
- Location: Hunter Valley, NSW, Australia
Re: Opinion from New York Times
I think the UK's problems are marginally worse than the rest of the world and will hit slightly sooner. Mainly due to bad planning, knee jerk government reaction and poor government policy mainly with regard to the North Sea and with the EU both before and after Brexit. A very free and investigative press has also helped to illustrate these problems more than any other country. I think it is about 10 years ahead of the rest of Europe in terms of collapse. Not sure about Australia but I think the size here makes it a bit more resilient, for instance Australia was able to seal off all its states from each other without causing major economic collapse.
With the decline is North Sea fossil fuels the UK is quite reliant on imports of nearly everything. I gave what I think the reasons are above but the hidden factor exacerbating this is the high population density caused by years of government inaction on immigration and population control. Surprisingly there has not been a balance of payment crisis yet and I would expect this to have a greater effect than the gas crisis when it does hit.
In terms of governments to blame, for me, the real culprits are the Major government 1990 to 1997 and the first Blair government 97 to 2001 when things like new nuclear stations could have been introduced and serious differences made to policy. Unfortunately it is looking like those options are now gone.
With the decline is North Sea fossil fuels the UK is quite reliant on imports of nearly everything. I gave what I think the reasons are above but the hidden factor exacerbating this is the high population density caused by years of government inaction on immigration and population control. Surprisingly there has not been a balance of payment crisis yet and I would expect this to have a greater effect than the gas crisis when it does hit.
In terms of governments to blame, for me, the real culprits are the Major government 1990 to 1997 and the first Blair government 97 to 2001 when things like new nuclear stations could have been introduced and serious differences made to policy. Unfortunately it is looking like those options are now gone.
G'Day cobber!
Re: Opinion from New York Times
A myopic, agenda riddled, puff piece, from a pointless Guardian journalist, sorry, click baiter, trying to up his profile
The whole socialist dribbling when boiled down makes four points.
1/ "The fuel shortages was caused by a lack of HGV drivers"
Complete horlicks, the fuel shortage was caused by crappy journalists, a local fuel shortage in a very small number of filling stations in the south east of England ( which is a very regular occurrence in some parts of the UK everyday for a variety of reasons) was reported as a 'national' fuel shortage. Then panic buying across the land. Nothing to do with a shortage of specialised ADR/PETROLEUM licensed drivers, which are highly sort after jobs because they have traditionally paid roughly a third more. They are the aristocracy of HGV drivers and they know it. Recruitment and retention is not an issue for Fuel tanker drivers.
2/Conservatives’ decision to slash welfare — has cast the country’s future in darkness
Where do you start with this bladder of idealogical claptrap? The Gov' has withdrawn the £20 pandemic uplift, a temporary measure costing billions. On a moral level you cannot pay people to stay at home when the country has an acute labour shortage. It is basic equity of a society. You help people who cannot work, you do not pay 1.55 million people unemployment benefit in a full employment/acute labour shortage jobs market.
3/"The signs of breakdown are everywhere"
Well in the last three weeks I have travelled across the UK. I have not seen breakdown anywhere. The shops are full, power is on, schools are open, hospitals functioning, police patrolling, air force flying, navy sailing...
4/ "One of the main causes of this predicament is Brexit"
Whenever you get this disingenuous statement, there is always an undemocratic drivelling remainer spouting it.
I could go on but the rest of the article is just subjective momentum rubbish.
The whole socialist dribbling when boiled down makes four points.
1/ "The fuel shortages was caused by a lack of HGV drivers"
Complete horlicks, the fuel shortage was caused by crappy journalists, a local fuel shortage in a very small number of filling stations in the south east of England ( which is a very regular occurrence in some parts of the UK everyday for a variety of reasons) was reported as a 'national' fuel shortage. Then panic buying across the land. Nothing to do with a shortage of specialised ADR/PETROLEUM licensed drivers, which are highly sort after jobs because they have traditionally paid roughly a third more. They are the aristocracy of HGV drivers and they know it. Recruitment and retention is not an issue for Fuel tanker drivers.
2/Conservatives’ decision to slash welfare — has cast the country’s future in darkness
Where do you start with this bladder of idealogical claptrap? The Gov' has withdrawn the £20 pandemic uplift, a temporary measure costing billions. On a moral level you cannot pay people to stay at home when the country has an acute labour shortage. It is basic equity of a society. You help people who cannot work, you do not pay 1.55 million people unemployment benefit in a full employment/acute labour shortage jobs market.
3/"The signs of breakdown are everywhere"
Well in the last three weeks I have travelled across the UK. I have not seen breakdown anywhere. The shops are full, power is on, schools are open, hospitals functioning, police patrolling, air force flying, navy sailing...
4/ "One of the main causes of this predicament is Brexit"
Whenever you get this disingenuous statement, there is always an undemocratic drivelling remainer spouting it.
I could go on but the rest of the article is just subjective momentum rubbish.
-
adam2
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10892
- Joined: 02 Jul 2007, 17:49
- Location: North Somerset, twinned with Atlantis
Re: Opinion from New York Times
It certainly struck me as being partisan/left leaning.
The food and petrol shortages are in my view very minor issues AT PRESENT though arguably a warning sign of future vulnerabilities.
The increase in crude oil prices will affect most of the world, but probably be worse in the USA were low taxes on road fuel and the popularity of large vehicles with poor fuel mileage increase vulnerabilities.
The natural gas price will affect much of the world, but will be worse in the UK than in many other places because we use a lot of gas, and have very little storage.
With one of the best wind power resources in Europe the UK should not be burning ANY natural gas for electricity production in windy weather, and should be burning less in calm weather than we do at present.
The food and petrol shortages are in my view very minor issues AT PRESENT though arguably a warning sign of future vulnerabilities.
The increase in crude oil prices will affect most of the world, but probably be worse in the USA were low taxes on road fuel and the popularity of large vehicles with poor fuel mileage increase vulnerabilities.
The natural gas price will affect much of the world, but will be worse in the UK than in many other places because we use a lot of gas, and have very little storage.
With one of the best wind power resources in Europe the UK should not be burning ANY natural gas for electricity production in windy weather, and should be burning less in calm weather than we do at present.
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
Re: Opinion from New York Times
Yes, we are certainly sailing into uncharted territory. A confluence of factors are present which have never aligned and which are now waiting to topple into each other.
Global debt tsunami.
Resource depletion.
China telling its local governments to acquire and purchase energy ' whatever' the price.
Pandemic supply breakdown from the worlds workshop (china).
A partisan networked social media, where the social group will never hear dissenting option,views,etc.from other networked social groups.
Once the global dominoes fall, there will be a new paradigm shift to the new epoch. The Guardian/BBC will blame Brexit.
Global debt tsunami.
Resource depletion.
China telling its local governments to acquire and purchase energy ' whatever' the price.
Pandemic supply breakdown from the worlds workshop (china).
A partisan networked social media, where the social group will never hear dissenting option,views,etc.from other networked social groups.
Once the global dominoes fall, there will be a new paradigm shift to the new epoch. The Guardian/BBC will blame Brexit.
Re: Opinion from New York Times
The old paradigm was that a nation is 3 missed meals away from revolution. Think it is clear (and has been taken as given on Powerswitch for 20 years) that the UK (and many other countries) are 3 closed fuel stations away from revolution.
The reason that there are so many job vacancies are
1. We are only just now winding down furlough - a million people have been paid to sit at home for the last 18 months. Many of these will be unemployed by Christmas as their jobs will no longer be economic in the new reality.
2. A lot of EU nationals have gone home because of Brexit and the pandemic making life here just too inconvenient or unpleasant for them. These are generally in two areas, the highly skilled like software developers and the very low paid from eastern Europe. It will take 15 years and a massive investment in specialist education to train up a new generation that have the IT skills we need - and we need to make the low paid jobs less miserable and have better employment rights to get young UK people off their backsides and into the fields. The combination of the gig economy and the evil catch 22 nature of universal credit are soul destroying.
3. Demographics means an ever shrinking work force and ever growing hordes of the old and the sick as the peak of the post war baby boom hit retirement (The peak was 1962, the year I was born). I have been anticipating a limited supply of care facilities for 25 years - it was part of the motivation for me to adopt children, so that I would have someone to keep an eye on me (if I did a decent job of bringing them up) and also that the real value of pensions would collapse, which is why I put most money into (hanging on to inherited) property rather than a dodgy private pension which I saw as a money stealing scam from the start. The governments for the last 30 years have replaced the missing workforce with immigration, which forced up the demand for housing (which pleased the Tory and Labour backing big housing developers) and also attracted a lot of highly skilled and highly trained staff from the 3rd world, keeping services like the NHS running.
We now seem to be going cold turkey on this valuable resource (cheap skilled immigrant labour) which means that we are going to collapse sooner, and that is probably a good thing, as we will avoid the rush.
In some ways Covid could have done something similar, by culling the old and the sick in far larger numbers (as it would have done if we had 1918 levels of medical support and knowledge) it would have reduced the demographic timebomb for the survivors.
This country feels a lot like Germany in 1930 now. We have major economic disconnects, with just in time becoming just too late, and a totally out of touch and incompetent administration and archaic civil service , and social media that is fragmented into echo chambers with foreign corporations controlling most traditional media, and increasingly anti-immigration becoming anti(choose your favourite racial or ethnic prejudice).
The reason that there are so many job vacancies are
1. We are only just now winding down furlough - a million people have been paid to sit at home for the last 18 months. Many of these will be unemployed by Christmas as their jobs will no longer be economic in the new reality.
2. A lot of EU nationals have gone home because of Brexit and the pandemic making life here just too inconvenient or unpleasant for them. These are generally in two areas, the highly skilled like software developers and the very low paid from eastern Europe. It will take 15 years and a massive investment in specialist education to train up a new generation that have the IT skills we need - and we need to make the low paid jobs less miserable and have better employment rights to get young UK people off their backsides and into the fields. The combination of the gig economy and the evil catch 22 nature of universal credit are soul destroying.
3. Demographics means an ever shrinking work force and ever growing hordes of the old and the sick as the peak of the post war baby boom hit retirement (The peak was 1962, the year I was born). I have been anticipating a limited supply of care facilities for 25 years - it was part of the motivation for me to adopt children, so that I would have someone to keep an eye on me (if I did a decent job of bringing them up) and also that the real value of pensions would collapse, which is why I put most money into (hanging on to inherited) property rather than a dodgy private pension which I saw as a money stealing scam from the start. The governments for the last 30 years have replaced the missing workforce with immigration, which forced up the demand for housing (which pleased the Tory and Labour backing big housing developers) and also attracted a lot of highly skilled and highly trained staff from the 3rd world, keeping services like the NHS running.
We now seem to be going cold turkey on this valuable resource (cheap skilled immigrant labour) which means that we are going to collapse sooner, and that is probably a good thing, as we will avoid the rush.
In some ways Covid could have done something similar, by culling the old and the sick in far larger numbers (as it would have done if we had 1918 levels of medical support and knowledge) it would have reduced the demographic timebomb for the survivors.
This country feels a lot like Germany in 1930 now. We have major economic disconnects, with just in time becoming just too late, and a totally out of touch and incompetent administration and archaic civil service , and social media that is fragmented into echo chambers with foreign corporations controlling most traditional media, and increasingly anti-immigration becoming anti(choose your favourite racial or ethnic prejudice).
Re: Opinion from New York Times
More like typical Tory supporting idealogical claptrap.Stumuz2 wrote: ↑02 Oct 2021, 09:44 2/Conservatives’ decision to slash welfare — has cast the country’s future in darkness
Where do you start with this bladder of idealogical claptrap? The Gov' has withdrawn the £20 pandemic uplift, a temporary measure costing billions. On a moral level you cannot pay people to stay at home when the country has an acute labour shortage. It is basic equity of a society. You help people who cannot work, you do not pay 1.55 million people unemployment benefit in a full employment/acute labour shortage jobs market.
The fact is, we are seeing the cost of everything going up - food (& Food Bank use), fuel (& fuel poverty), rent (& homelessness), everything...
This always hits those at the bottom of the pile the hardest - many will have to choose between heating their homes or eating this winter...
Meanwhile, those at the top of the pile will be considering which wines to restock their cellar with, or where to next for their foreign holiday...
As for the 1.55 million people on unemployment benefit, I agree, if they can work, they should...
But anyone who has looked at this even for a brief moment will know that very few of these people can easily work for various reasons
They are mostly (not entirely) the 'unemployable', rather than the 'unemployed', as they are mainly people with health conditions, those with severe drug/alcohol issues, those with caring/childcare issues that limit choices, those who are isolated from work by transport issues, etc. etc.
Re: Opinion from New York Times
Agree. What struck me most about about the pandemic/financial crash was peoples/governments willingness to park their beliefs for the sake of BAU. When the inevitable reshaping of society happens when resource limits hit harder, i think, people will adapt quite quickly. No one wants to hear their future is cancelled, they will make an alternative future instead, and think it was their idea all along.
Re: Opinion from New York Times
Yes, this is the result of worldwide QE. You print insane amounts of currency out of thin air and you get inflation.But if it is a comfort blanket for you, then of course blame the conservatives.
Common myth, inflation is beneficial to those at the coal face. It a subject called debt dynamics. When a working person bought a house in the 1970's they lived through a period of high inflation. This in effect paid off their debt. Banks hated it because it eroded the value of their loan. So the myth that inflation is bad for those at the bottom of the earning table was promoted by banks.
If they have health conditions then they are on disability benefit, we should not be giving cash to people with drug/alcohol issues if they refuse to work, caring/childcare again part time work can be had, lack of transport=move. I have witnessed the damage living on benefits does to communities and individuals. It should be viewed as a public health issue and drastic measures adopted to prevent it and give people a bit of dignity of work and autonomy.Mark wrote: ↑02 Oct 2021, 15:42
They are mostly (not entirely) the 'unemployable', rather than the 'unemployed', as they are mainly people with health conditions, those with severe drug/alcohol issues, those with caring/childcare issues that limit choices, those who are isolated from work by transport issues, etc. etc.
Re: Opinion from New York Times
Stumuz..., you obviously understand nothing if you think that the economic situation for a person struggling on benefits in 2021 has any correlation at all with a working person buying a house in the 1970s.....
Even the Tories (who introduced UC) now accept that it's a shambles.
Universal Credit isn’t working: proposals for reform
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/l ... 05/105.pdf
Even the Tories (who introduced UC) now accept that it's a shambles.
Universal Credit isn’t working: proposals for reform
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/l ... 05/105.pdf
When the Government announced plans to introduce Universal Credit in 2010 the scale of its ambition was greeted largely with approval in Parliament and amongst stakeholder groups. However, support is seeping away as Universal Credit is rolled out to more people.
The way that Universal Credit has been designed and implemented appears to be based around an idealised claimant and it has features that are harming many, particularly the most vulnerable. Universal Credit can disadvantage women, disabled people and BAME people. It is also linked to soaring food bank usage. Housing providers have reported dramatic increases in rent arrears. Many claimants report finding the system incomprehensible. Universal Credit’s reputation has nosedived.
Nevertheless, we received overwhelming evidence that Universal Credit should not be replaced with a new system, not least because of the severe disruption that this would cause for millions of people. Instead, substantial reform of the benefit is needed to make it fit for purpose. Change cannot come soon enough. The economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic have resulted in many more people claiming Universal Credit and millions more are expected in the months ahead.
In our inquiry, we identified three main aspects of Universal Credit that require substantial reform: its design and implementation, the adequacy of its awards, and how it supports claimants to navigate the system and find work. We believe the original aims and objectives of Universal Credit remain broadly correct but without reform it will fail to deliver upon its promise. Moreover, without reform, we are concerned that it will fail to meet the basic requirement of a social security system: the provision of a dependable safety net
Last edited by adam2 on 02 Oct 2021, 19:15, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Removed personal remark
Reason: Removed personal remark
Re: Opinion from New York Times
Would you employ someone with drug/alcohol issues......., no...., and neither would most employers
So, if you don't want to give them subsistence benefits either, what do you suggest ??
But no doubt you'd complain bitterly if they burgled your house....
Agreed, but maybe you need to spend some time learning how UC works....
You might understand more then.