Jerry_Atrick

For context, the above is in response to this: Tfe anti-EV argument based on the grid, today, not being able to handle 100% EV adoption is, well, illogical (I am not sayine OME is arguing anti-EV based on this, BTW). The percentage of cars on the road in July 2024 are nowhere near being able to bring down the grid today. It stands to reason that as the demand for electrickery grows, so too will the capacity of the grid. There are people, some very smart people, who curnch the numbers, forecast demand, and plan investment to meet that demand and provide a return on that investment. The powers that be decide whether or not that investment takes place. Call me cynical, but if politics is involved in that decision, then the decision won't be purely in meeting community needs, even at a profit - while they have their sponsors - er donors. Remember this famous quote:

Wasn't it CNN that hosted the debate. I am guessing they acquiesced rather than set the rules - as the ratings were probably more important to them than the fairness of the debate. It's not a debate of you don't have to answer (reasonable) questions and someone isn't there fact checking the answers - for both sides. It is just who is better at posutlating and propaganda.

Well, insurance company has the tape; the car gets picked up tomorrow to be fixed. I thought that there may be a bingle or two down these lanes, so I paid a bit extra to protect my no claims discount. Have supplied the vid to the insurers and apparently, if a car is stationary when hit, it is the other driver's fault. However, I was only stationary for about a second, if that.

OK..this week was treading water from last week. I think I gaiend a couple of $ all up: My bets this week were: $30 on Sydney to beat St. Kilda at St. Kilda's home. What peeved me off is I had a chance in the first quarter to hedge the bet at 80:1 for the Saints as they were getting walloped. But decided against it.. That was a mistake. Sydney list by I think 2 points thanks to a miss on the siren. Well done to the saints for coming back from what lkooked like a thrashing. North Melbourbe v Gold Coast. This was specualtive as North Melbourne aren't terribly good and Gold Coast don't travel well. I put £15 on North as a sepculative at 3.30. North got the chocolates and it covered the Sydney loss. Calton v. GWS = Who would have thought Carlton would lose by 2 goals, even in Sydney. Darn it. Lost £25. Geelong v. Hawthorn: Well, I was certain Geelong was going to win, as James sicily was out, and there is no coincidence that when he is out, the Hawks generally lose. So I put £30 in at 1.55. Geelong won. All in all, about where I was last week.

On the way home from the supermarket, driving on the country lane into our village, I came to a quick stop, colliding with an oncoming car. These are single lane lanes that have dugouts every so often for passing. When I learned to ride a motorbike here, they taught us that we should not be going so fast as not to be able to stop in the distance we can see in front of us. Thankfully, I had the Go Pro on and it captured that we didn't have a lot of time to react or stop,but I had both stopped in the distance I could see and before the collision (i.e. she was still moving forward when we hit). I have no idea what the legal position is, for this one and no doubt the insurance companies will work it out. Her husband arrived and insinuated as a foreigner it was my fault. I let him know I had it on video and the insurance companies would make that determination. That, and his wife scolding him, shut him up a bit. But what a prat. When the insurance is done with, I will post the vid. As this was practising for YouTube, I was discussing the idea of going to the pub for a quick pint. Ah well.. hadn't been there, yet.

Cock Receptacle?

The Democrats have backed themselves into a corner. While Biden is probably cognitively better than Trump, his physical frailty is a concern, and few swinging voters are going to vote for someone who will likely be replaced before the end of the term, And, of course, changing now will require someone who is popular, has a thick skin to absorb the press hounding,and has the gravitas and assertion to go on the attack and make inroads in a very short period of time. In addition, while the economic numbers are better than Trumps and probably what would have been Trump's if he was re-elected, many younger families are still feeling the pinch of the cost of living as wages have not kept up with inflation and of course, a reduced inflation rate still means prices are rising, not falling. Also, in some states,such as Nevada, there is a rental crisis looming as well. In the same way Albo is copping it electorally for not being a strong leader, previous economic policies and global shocks that caused the mess, both he and Biden ar ebeing tarred with the brush of blame for things not getting better (fast enough).And, it is useless to say to an American that their leader's handling of the global headwinds was far better than most because god resides in America and they con't compare themselves to anyone. Of course if either lose their respective elections, the potential fruits of their policies will ripen and sweeten just as the Republicans/Lib Dems get in or shortly after, and who will take the credit It seems to be the cycle. So, it is very likely that Trump will take the chocolates this time around regardless of what the Democrats do, even id dog albitey himself decided to lead them. Happy Daze..

The only thing in a legal sense that will be able to stop it is the Supreme Court willing to declare that the office holder of the presidency is invalid at the requisite time and the military's preparedness to act to evict the trespasser. However, will the Supreme Court actually find the presidency invalid at the requisite time? And if so, will the military be prepared to act in what could be considered a military coup (or painted like one regardless of the legal position). Of course, this is when the second amendment does come into play: the right to bear arms against an oppressive government.. Democratic leaning people also have guns... so it will be time to pull up a chair, grab some popcorn and watch the show.

I would gues the method of appointment. However, I would suggest the House of Lords has, for the most part been an effective check and control as once appointed you can't be unappointed, and that has tended to result in members of the House of Lords more readily departing from party lines. Of course, BoJo has provided examples where it can be exploited outside of convention. But the key difference between the Australian and UK bicameral system is that a bill does not have to pass both houses to become law. If the House of Lords continually blocks legisation, the government can invoke the Parliament Acts of 1947 and 1949 and bypass the House of Lords entirely. Of course, the political ramifications for doing so are potentially huge, so they don't do it often. OK to the election. In the end, despite the massive gains to Labour, the results are very similar to that of the last Aussie federal election. The reason for the difference, I think, is two fold. First, the UK has a first past the post system; the one weith the highest votets - not the majority - in a seat. The second is voting is not compulsory, and this was the second lowest turnout since the mid 1800's, at around 60%. I would suggest a lot of the people of the greater than average who didn't turn out to vote were Tory voters who couldn't vote them in, and couldn't vote for another party. If they had all turned up and voted for their next best, the results may be different. With 6 seats to go, here are the stats: Labour: 410 seats (326 to win, up by 209); 33.8% of the national vote. Up by 1.6% (yes, Labor in Australia was down and only had 30% of the prmary vote). Conservatives: 119 seats, down by 248 seats, and 23.7% of the vote. So, with 7% less of the national vote, they have just over half the searts. Lib Dems made a comeback and a half. 71 seats - their best ever; up by 63 with 12.2% of the vote. Scottish Nationals were wiped out of Scotland with 9 seats, so far a loss of 38 seats and with 2.4% of the national vote,. (yes, all concentrated in Scotland, so that has to be taken into account) Sinn Fein made some real gains - 7 seats; a gain of.. 7 seats with 0.7% of the vote (concentrated in Northern Ireland). Independents: 6 seats, up by... 6 seats with 2% of the national vote. These are Jeremy Corbyn and a handful of pro-Palestinian candidtes; there may be a couple that are running on independent lines. Democratic Unionist Part 5 seatsl down by 3; with 0.6% of the national vote, concentrated in Northern Island. Hang on, in the national parliament, there seems to be some gerrymander for the smaller states (they are not countries). Reform UK (Nigel Farage's far right partyy): 4 Seats.. up by 4, on 14.3% of the national vote - that is 2.1% more than the Lib Dems that managed over 70 seats! Greens: 4 Seats - up by three on 6.8% of the national vote Plaid Cymru: 4 Seats - up by 2 on 6.8% of the national vote )concentrated in Wales). The rest are minor parties.. There seems to be a disporoprortionate allocation of seats based on the national vote. Despite the hughe parliamentary majority Labour has, it is not representative of the national votes cast. Obviously, for example, Reform UK had very high levels of concentration in their votes, but many of their supported will feel short-changed when the Lib Dems had less of the national vote, but acquired almost 18 times the number of seats! In a proportional or perferential system of voting, the numbes would look a lot more like that of the Aussie election - Labour would have probably still won, but nowhere near with the same majority. Labour ran a candidate in similar vain to the ALP - from humble background, probably a very good deputy, but with little charisma; and they ran a small target campaign when the electorate were crying out for boldness. I credit Starmer with more intelligence than Albanese and the above numbers will not be lost on him. He has to perform to stop the lurch to the far right; he knows it. His acceptance speech, I thought was measured and about the job that has to be done. Even the Murdoch press, in the end, got behind him. The Sun, which has lambasted him virtually through the campaign, in the last print before the election coverage backout 24 hours before polls open, stated their readers should vote Labour. I think that was the dawn of reality - their readers would have voted Reform UK if nto Labour, and that would even be worse for the conservatives.

You could have said all that with a, "." Gotta get with the program 😉

.

I'll be there shortly 😉 (The first to respond don't come is usually the best to go to)

We are witnessing the crumbling of democracy. This, and now Europe is moving to the far right (Italy already there, European elections there, French first round, and of course, but who would have guessed, Holland). Canada is veering there as well. It looks likely Britain and Australia are the outliers, but wait a minute - haven't the polls suggested Dutton is ahead of Albanese? Does this translate to LNP ahead of Labor? If so, wow! That didn't take long despite Labor handling the economy into a softer landing than LNP policies would have. Daily, democracy is now appearing to no longer be listening or representing people; Thus can be for many reasons, but the reality is people will get what they vote for. The rhetoric and political discourse is not inconsistent to that pre world war 2, if not as openly taking aim at sectors of society. It's ironic the world is richer than it has ever been, yet the masses are getting very restless. The salient question of this thread is where does one go to bunker down and ride it out?

Typical.. maybe an email to the minister cc'ed to A Current Affair and an ant Labor masthead will help?

That was a ripper.. laughed out loud on a packed train

As long as it was part of official duties.. hmm summary decision if treason should do it [Edit] of course, the current bench would rule that Biden didn't really win the election so he has no official capacity

As my teacher used to say, it's not how many times you fall down; it's how many times you get up.

Interesting video, but there was notning compelling about using nuclear specifically for stabilising the grid. As per the prior vid, it owuld appear the current Aussie plan is to use gas. And I draw you to about the 2:51,, "... but, in the grand scheme of things, wind is still incredibly cheap." The same cannot be said about Nuclear. And, there can be other ways to stabilise the grid, as trhe vid points out. So, yeah, there are engineering challenges.. That comes with any infrastructure. But, nah, there doesn't seem to be a compelling case to plug those challenges with nuclear in Aus. And, yeah, Texas is an isolated grid.. thanks to the Republican policies.

Although pitched at a younger audience, this may provide some colour on Nutton's plan: And, yes, he has also made vids critical of Albo and the Labor government to counter the Albo sycophant assertion made earler.. Oh, and he presents his sources, too.

Buggah! It was a brutal one this week... I haven't done the spreadsheet, but I guess I became too cocky with my picks. Losses this week: Sydney defeated by Freemantle: I fell for the sure bet.. I just learned that the surest bet is still no sure bet. I did write up in my preview that Sydney were due a loss, I just thought it wasn't this week. £100 - pffft - gone. On the final kick after the siren - the Dockers brought it home by a point. Lesson learned, there is no sure bet, and manage concentration risk (i.e. putting all your eggs in one basket). Essendon smashed by Geelong: Essendon were the up and coming team and Geelong were heading south on th ladder quickly. I don't think too many would have predicted a win for Geelong, and no one would have predicted the quantum. I was 90% sure Essendon would win, so the system was stuck to. However, that was based on not looking at all the factors; oddly, both teams are coached by brothers - Chris Scott coaches Geelong and Brad Scott coaches Essendon. I don't think the latter has had a win over the former.. if he has, they have been very few and far between. Or maybe Essendong thought it would be a walk in the part.. in this case, full of doggy dos. However, I put this down to the inevitable losses. It was £30, so no big deal and within the system. (But that Sydney game After the losses, I thought let's do a Nick Leeson again, as I have a 100% record with it - in the red! Collingwood were 18 points down I think at 1/2 time against Gold Coast (at home), so, for no other reaosn than they have come back before, I decided to chick £25 at them to try to get back. They ended up losing the game by 11 points.. At this point, I pulled out of the rest of the round; it wasn't happening and I decided to hit a stop loss. For th record, I would have probably lost more. The odds for Carlton against Richmond were too low, and since Sydney lost the unloseable, I figured so could Carlton and would not have bet. In the St. Kilda. v Port adeliade game, I honestly couldn't tell who would win and would have gone the home team; in reality I would not have bet, but say I did, I would have lost (by two points). I was going to put a cheeky tenner on West Coast with Harley Reid to beat Hawthorn at Subiaco, but to my pleasant surprise, the Hawks came home by 61 points and a desperately needed percentage booster. Total losses - £155; Total winnings; £20; so I am down £135, which leaves me a little over 50% of last week's tally. Still on a 200%-ish return, but this one was unpleasant. And looking at next week's games, it is going to be a while before I catch up (if I do).

Is it Dick Van Dyke?

That may be true, but all that shows is at that time, demand exceeded supply and they needed to prioritise. Spike on demand happen so the question becomes do we want to have so much capacity that we can meet every possible spike in demand? However, if this sort of thing becomes systemic, then, yeah it needs to be looked at. It can also come to management; there is a crisis in A&E here and after attending it twice last week, my observation is that it is as much about management as it is about funding. The A&E consultant who finally saw me agreed.

Interesting this has been placed in politics rather than science and tech. Be that as it may: Which means some 200 odd others don't. OK, lets say 150 can't afford it or they have too tiny populations; that is still about 80 that it could apply to in total, of which 33 is a minority And there are at least 3 in G20 that don't - Italy and Germany being two of them.. Can't recall the third. I think if you read the literature, Snowy 2.0 with its cost and time blowouts will likely take as long as nuclear is expected to take minus the inevitable time and cost blowouts. The delays and cost blowouts came partially due to the engineering challenges, but also thanks to covid and a worldwide supply chain crisis. Care to comment on the many 10s, if not hundreds of bullions fossil fuel subsidies and tax breaks are? Couldn't find reference to the 22,000 solar panels; Yes, 40 7 mw/h wind turbines a month is correct. The 28,000 kilometres of tranmission lines is not quite correct. It is 10,000km, and another 18,000 is we want to export the excess power renewables is expected to generate. I have not found references to this cost, but as part of a 1.5tn cost, that doesn't seem huge. If it is based on 28,000km of line, you can at least halve the number. Over what period? According to costs, it will not increase per year GDP investment that we already have (7.5% or thereabouts) creates a lot of jobs (can't recall is if was 70,000 or 700,000 - lets go with the former) , and secures Australia's net-zero energy future. Given nuclear is the only alternative to emmission free generation, going 90% nuclear would cost how much? Its costs look very good in comparison - to the shareholders. Now, imagine if Labor put in place the proper buy Australia policy to ramp up a home grown renewables manufacturing industry.. Maybe that would generate much more, as the world is moving to an increasing share of power generation by renewables..

Vodaphone is a UK brand and, of the 4 mobiles I fund, only one of them is Vodaphone; and once that expires, it is a PIK code and change to another network Expensive and many of the features I get with the others are extras (so we don't use them). I took them because their coverage was supposed to be better, but in the areas we frequent, it is often worse than the other we use.

Indeed they do.. Not full slabs, though. You can get 20 small bottles in boxes.. bit a slab for be will always be 2 dozen cans... VB..