The Politics Thread

To look at him,Sessions looks quite harmless.However………..

 

please log in to view this image

 

This is brilliant......

 

Sieg heil,MF.

 

It appears that Ivanka isn't the only one of the Trump women who the phrase "feckless ****" can be used to describe - although it is worth pointing out that the feckless **** is the first person in history to thank the kidnappers after the hostages are released


Meanwhile...

 

delete. ****ed that up completely.

 

I can't help think that the main reason the Orange Overlord wants to Space Defence Force is because he's convinced this is real...

 

We pay £141k a week to this ****ing moron

Wouldn't it be better spent on literally anything else?

 

Europe ticked off with Trump....now Johnson? The word "numbnuts" comes to mind!

 

Today's trip to the hate mines...

please log in to view this image

 

The corruption supporting Erdogan is worrying and difficult to find anything amusing. However some of the clickbait responses are feckin' funny.

 

Hillary got the same. So what happened?

 

Lots of discussion yesterday on the Heathrow 3rd runway debate. Interesting that Boris went missing for the vote. The point I wanted to make though is that this is another massive infrastructure project in a privatised industry that the public get to pay for. This isn't even commented on any more! Be it new rail lines, new power stations or new runways, let the private firms get the profits but the public have to pay for projects that the private industry won't. Just plain wrong.

As an aside, was at Houslow West at 0600 Sunday morning and the aircraft started coming in, every 2 minutes I think. They are coming into land there and are so low they have their wheels down. I used to complain about the tube line at the bottom of my garden (but it's why I could afford the house!) but I got used to them. I doubt you can ever get used to something far louder and at far greater frequency. My sympathies to the people that are affected by living near airports!

 

You do get used to it. I lived in Osterley and the planes flew directly overhead but after a short while you didn't notice until they switched to the other runway and it went quiet

 

Unfortunately the debate switched to the Boris absence, rather than the main point, whether or not LHR should have a third runway.

I fly into LHR on a regular basis and almost without fail the plane has to circle for between 25 minutes and 45 minutes before it can land. 2 minutes noise and pollution is one thing, 45 minutes 'sightseeing' over London is highly polluting and unforgivable. For that reason I support the third runway, as a way of reducing pollution over London. However, there needs to be a mechanism to limit the amount of traffic to avoid 45 minutes circling again in a few years time (circling tax?). If LHR needs a fourth runway, so be it.

And one does get used to noise, I used to live near a railway, and when I moved, I couldn't sleep for weeks, even months. The silence was spooky.

 

The basic problem was seeded long ago.
However, the cause is a time-honoured one.
Specifically : moron politniks vs science/engineering.

The choice of Heathrow was good, in that for the time
it was nothing more than a rural patch with reams of
water treatment works in the parish (some are still there -
you see them when you come in to land) .

What science/engineering does is ask : what if this
aviation lark spawns into something really big ??

Well, if we "ring fence" a large area around the current airport
so that the amount of residential property build is tightly controlled,
then expansion is possible if it occurs, and the population will not
be affected by noise etc. If it just a fad or the airport goes elsewhere,
then we can easily remove the ring fence in future and restore the
land to residential use.


"However, there needs to be a mechanism to limit the amount of traffic to avoid 45 minutes
circling again in a few years time (circling tax?). If LHR needs a fourth runway, so be it."

Of course it will happen (Parkinsons' law - just replace time with capacity) .

 

That's why you need a mechanism to avoid it. Say £10k per minute paid by the Airport, not the airline. That should avoid it. £450k for a 45 minute polluting sightseeing trip is about right.

 

On the other hand there wasn't much discussion at all about the Tories scrapping plans for a tidal lagoon renewable energy project in Swansea Bay that would have reduced CO2 emissions, potentially increased jobs in the area, and lasted an estimated 120 years - all for the cost that the Dire leader was happy to chuck in the DUP's direction to keep her in power (or, if you prefer, 1/20th of what Gavin "Shut up and Go Away" Williamson is demanding for the MoD because of reasons - and if he doesn't get it h's threatening to bring down anyone who gets in his way, the jumped-up little twat)

 

Every November 5th I celebrate Guido Fawkes getting caught hence delivering parliament from an evil terrorist attack. I'm beginning to think Fawkes may have had the right idea, albeit for all of the wrong reasons. I am beginning to wonder whether it is time for a benevolent dictator.

 

The problem is mainly due to delay (flights late to depart or arrive) .

So punishment has to be directed at the cause of delay
(outside of aircraft safety or poor weather issues) .

http://uk.businessinsider.com/why-your-flight-is-delayed-2016-8

suggests the airlines themselves should be punished most.