Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,288,000 Posts!
Poker ForumFTR Community

*** OFFICIAL BREXIT SUNLIT UPLANDS and #MEGA THREAD ***

Page 21 of 25 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 ... LastLast
Results 1,501 to 1,575 of 1834
  1. #1501
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    But I don't see why it needs to be political.
    It wasn't a poltical issue in Canada, they just did it. Everyone agreed it was a good idea, and like I said there was a transition period where they used both.

    Here, it's either a weird coincidence that they're introducing the idea now, or it's specifically timed to appeal to a certain type of Tory voter. Guess you can figure out which one I believe.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  2. #1502
    I'm gonna go out on a limb and say there are old Labour voters who also prefer the old system.

    It wasn't a poltical issue in Canada
    It's you that's making it political. You and everyone else associating this with Brexit, or with Tory voters.

    To be clear, I know the metric system is superior. Well, it is for everything except miles. We're so used to miles that it would be a huge upheaval if we changed that one, it would require cars to be adapted, signposts around the country to be replaced, it wouldn't be worth it. Not knowing how many yards in the mile is completely irrelevant, since we just say 4.5 miles or whatever. I know a mile is 15 minutes walk, I immediately have a good idea how far somewhere is if we talk about miles, while in km I'll need to do some mental gymnastics, at least if it's a large number. I can estimate but I'll be off a bit, for example London is 240km away, not 220 like I suggested earlier. At the age I'm at, I can easily adapt, but probably not if I'm an old bugger losing my marbles.

    Miles is used for long distances, nobody needs to know how many meters it is to London.

    And I'd rather buy a pint of beer than half a litre, but that's more nostalgia than anything else. They're more or less the same amount. Although if we changed that, we'd probably get ripped off. I doubt it would be slightly cheaper to buy half a litre of beer than a pint, so that's 10% of a pint fleeced.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  3. #1503
    It's the Tories introducing it, just like the blue passports, the crown on the pint glass, the giant flags in their offices. There's a theme here. Whether you want to admit it or not, they're the ones making it political, I'm just ridiculing it.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  4. #1504
    But you said it wasn't political in Canada. Presumably it wasn't a political party who made the change?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  5. #1505
    It wasn't part of an overall scheme to MCGA if that's what you mean. It had broad support. It had nothing to do with culture wars.

    Here it's just one more trope to make people think the good old days are coming back. I get that you don't like to acknowledge how silly that is.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  6. #1506
    Personally, I too yearn for the "good old days", only those days are the late 90s, back when we could say "retard" without offending half the fucking population. We all have our nostalgias.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  7. #1507
    It's not silly to yearn for good old days. It's silly to go backwards. Next we'll be riding around in a horse and buggy.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  8. #1508
    Wouldn't that be good for the environment?

    If we were replacing the metric system with imperial, then yes I'd agree that's "going backwards". But having both?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  9. #1509
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Wouldn't that be good for the environment?
    Probably not as good as electric cars. Probably better than petrol cars.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    If we were replacing the metric system with imperial, then yes I'd agree that's "going backwards". But having both?
    It's pointless. That's why it's silly.

    How many shopkeepers who aren't shameless flagshaggers do you think are going to go to the trouble and expense of converting everything that's in metric over to imperial? If old people haven't figured out what 500 grams of hamburger looks like by now, they probably can't remember what a 1lb of hamburger looks like either.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  10. #1510
    Probably not as good as electric cars. Probably better than petrol cars.
    Electric cars aren't all that green. You still have to mine the metal they're made of, and they're not biodegradable.

    It's pointless. That's why it's silly.
    This is your opinion, which you're perfectly entitled to. Other people are entitled to their own opinion.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  11. #1511
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Electric cars aren't all that green. You still have to mine the metal they're made of, and they're not biodegradable.
    Horses aren't either. You have to grow the stuff to feed them, and they shit everywhere.

    On a tangent, people have to pick up after their dogs but not their horses. Why is it ok for your horse to take a dump in the road and someone else needs to come along and shovel it up for you?



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    This is your opinion
    It's a lot of people's opinion.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  12. #1512
    Horses aren't either. You have to grow the stuff to feed them, and they shit everywhere.
    lol they eat grass/hay, and horse shit is biodegradable.

    On a tangent, people have to pick up after their dogs but not their horses. Why is it ok for your horse to take a dump in the road and someone else needs to come along and shovel it up for you?
    There's a few reasons for this. For one, horse shit is nowhere near as nasty as dog shit, because of their diet. Also, if horse riders had to clean it up immediately, they'd never actually get anywhere. And horses just dump it out while the walk, the rider probably doesn't even know the horse has had a crap.

    It's a lot of people's opinion.
    Sure. It's also a lot of peoples' opinion that we should use both systems. And if we're talking about "a lot of people" making an opinion valid, then stop complaining about Brexit.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  13. #1513
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,628
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    IDK what the environmental impact would be if we suddenly needed to breed and maintain multiple horses per household at current population levels.

    My best guess is that it'd be a damn sight greener than any motor vehicle. Horses are vegivores, so the environmental impact needed for their feedstocks would be low. Almost certainly lower than the environmental impact of any state scale power generation we currently use.

    There are a lot of green energy ideas coming to fruition. Our generation was lectured about climate change, but we had to spend a lot of time confirming things. The next generation is busy building on those confirmations and taking our first steps at solar, wind, and wave power and iterating those ideas.

    But those new technologies are still in the proof of concept phase while continuously scaling up to something that makes sense to invest in from a state electric grid POV.

    And for all their being green once they're built... as ong pointed out... the environmental impact of mining the rare minerals needed for solar panels and batteries is huge. The maintenance costs on the new wave of green power production options will be non-0, too. They will have their own catastrophic failures like all things, and we don't know what those impacts will be.


    There's a lot of reason to hope that we'll be on greener and greener power sources over the coming decades.


    I mean... thermodynamics says the more power you use, the more heat you create... and we probably need to be thinking about ways to actively cool the planet eventually. Maybe another generation's problem, though.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  14. #1514
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    lol they eat grass/hay, and horse shit is biodegradable.
    Missed my point. Horses use more energy to go the same distance. They might not emit CO2, but they do emit methane, which is even worse.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    and horse shit is biodegradable.
    If there's horses everywhere instead of cars, it will be all over the streets, and it's either going to runoff into into the sewers and need to be treated, or go onto people's shoes. Not exactly a fan of either option.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    There's a few reasons for this. For one, horse shit is nowhere near as nasty as dog shit, because of their diet.
    They dont' have to eat it, just pick it up.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Also, if horse riders had to clean it up immediately, they'd never actually get anywhere..
    Yeah, a shovel and bag are a huge hindrance. Not like a horse is even big and strong enough to carry them.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    And horses just dump it out while the walk, the rider probably doesn't even know the horse has had a crap.
    If I can hear it in my car or while walking, surely the rider who is much closer can as well.

    To be clear, I'm not talking about them taking a shit while out on a ride in the woods. I'm saying while walking down a public road like it's the fucking 1800s still.

    Also, check this out. But don't tell the #MEGA crowd or they'll be clamoring for it.

    https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryU...risis-of-1894/
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  15. #1515
    Missed my point. Horses use more energy to go the same distance. They might not emit CO2, but they do emit methane, which is even worse.
    We could put something on their arses to capture the horse shit and methane, and turn that into energy.

    If there's horses everywhere instead of cars, it will be all over the streets
    See above. I just solved this problem.

    They dont' have to eat it, just pick it up.
    My point is that there won't be as much nasty bacteria in horse shit compared to dog shit.

    I mean I'm not really being serious here, it's just a fun topic.

    I was on holiday over the summer and on the caravan park where I was staying, they had horses as a fun family activity. There were piles of horse shit on the beach, and on the way down to the beach, which is problematic when you're walking around bare foot. With that said, they did employ someone whose sole job was to shovel up the shit, but obviously he can't be everywhere at once.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  16. #1516
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo
    I mean... thermodynamics says the more power you use, the more heat you create... and we probably need to be thinking about ways to actively cool the planet eventually. Maybe another generation's problem, though.
    Is it possible to have 100% efficiency when it comes to converting one form of energy into another, in terms of not losing energy to heat? I can think of one case where it surely is... throwing an object into the air in a vacuum. We're turning kinetic energy into potential energy without loss.

    I do find it interesting to think about where the energy from "renewables" comes from. No energy source is forever renewable. Obviously solar energy is there for as long as humans are surviving on Earth, so it's infinite for all practical purposes, and we can mitigate the extra heat by painting rooftops white to reflect more solar energy.

    Tidal energy is also interesting... we are taking energy from the earth-moon system (let's ignore the sun here). I don't see us being able to take enough energy to cause the days to become noticeably longer, but over a century, if all our energy was met by tidal energy, we're maybe adding 0.1 seconds to the year (pure guesswork).

    It's important that those in power aren't guessing like I am.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  17. #1517
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    We could put something on their arses to capture the horse shit and methane, and turn that into energy.
    "Hey everyone, tie this to your horse's ass. It will collect their poop and methane. Then at the end of the day, bring the 30 pounds of shit and methane in to your neighborhood horseshit recycling center."



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    My point is that there won't be as much nasty bacteria in horse shit compared to dog shit.
    If it doesn't get in your mouth, it's not really a problem is it? Unless you think bacteria can fly.

    If anything it should be safer to handle horse poop than dog poop.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I mean I'm not really being serious here, it's just a fun topic.
    Good thing you're saying this, otherwise someone might go all forum gestapo on you.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I was on holiday over the summer and on the caravan park where I was staying, they had horses as a fun family activity. There were piles of horse shit on the beach, and on the way down to the beach, which is problematic when you're walking around bare foot. With that said, they did employ someone whose sole job was to shovel up the shit, but obviously he can't be everywhere at once.
    I like horses, just not a big fan of having to dodge their poops. Also my dog seems to think it's tasty, which is a bit nauseating. Would prefer it wasn't there.
    Last edited by Poopadoop; 09-18-2021 at 12:09 PM.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  18. #1518
    "Hey everyone, tie this to your horse's ass. It will collect their poop and methane. Then at the end of the day, bring the 30 pounds of shit and methane in to your neighborhood horseshit recycling center."
    This might surprise you, but manure is a valuable source of energy at many farms around the country (usually chicken or pig shit). And horses tend to be more common in the countryside, I don't think I've seen too many walking down the streets of Birmingham.

    *edit - the exception is police horses. At football games, with a heavy police presence, there's plenty of piles of shit to dodge.

    Obviously capturing methane is me being ridiculous, but a shit bag to capture manure might be practical.

    If it doesn't get in your mouth, it's not really a problem is it? Unless you think bacteria can fly.
    You can tread it into your house pretty easily.

    If anything it should be safer to handle horse poop than dog poop.
    Definitely true.

    I like horses, just not a big fan of having to dodge their poops. Also my dog seems to think it's tasty, which is a bit nauseating. Would prefer it wasn't there.
    I'd prefer it if dog shit wasn't a problem, but not at the expense of fewer dogs.

    I don't really like horses, I find them intimidating. If I'm near a horse, I am not relaxed and constantly aware of where it is.
    Last edited by OngBonga; 09-18-2021 at 12:24 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  19. #1519
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    This might surprise you, but manure is a valuable source of energy at many farms around the country (usually chicken or pig shit).
    It doesn't surprise me, I grew up where there's lots of farms.

    But, I don't imagine it would be trivial to take several hundred pounds of horse manure from every household every month to recycle out to the countryside. Surely it's a logistical problem.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I don't really like horses, I find them intimidating. If I'm near a horse, I am not relaxed and constantly aware of where it is.

    I have that feeling around large dogs that I don't know. Never been afraid of horses though. Unless you're made out of oats or hay I don't think there's too much to be afraid of. A cow is more likely to take a dislike to a person than a horse. I've never heard of a horse attacking anyone. They're big scaredies.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  20. #1520
    Horses are prone to panic, and it's common knowledge you don't stand behind them. I'm ok with large dogs because they're dumb enough to be intimidated by humans, at least most of them are, and when they're not protecting their territory/owner. I guess really it simply comes down to experience... I've never handled horses, never ridden one, never made friends with a horse. Dogs, the instant I meet them I give them fuss, say hello, make friends with them. Dogs are incredibly responsive.

    There are some dogs that have made me nervous. I used to house share with a friend, and we paid his mother £20 once a week to do some housework for a couple of hours. She'd bring her dog, an Alsatian, and it would sit there, basically guarding her, unfriendly as fuck. I didn't like that dog. It annoyed me too, because I'm thinking "dude this is my fucking territory". But for the most part, I'm not afraid of dogs, and certainly don't show fear to the few that I am nervous of.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  21. #1521
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,628
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Is it possible to have 100% efficiency when it comes to converting one form of energy into another, in terms of not losing energy to heat? I can think of one case where it surely is... throwing an object into the air in a vacuum. We're turning kinetic energy into potential energy without loss
    Of course there are processes which result in no change in Entropy, but Entropy of a system can never decrease.
    In general, Entropy increases. For any process that reduces entropy in one part of a system, it creates at least as much entropy elsewhere.

    A general rule for the max theoretical efficiency of a heat engine would be the Carnot Efficiency, which is

    100% - T_C / T_H

    where T_C is the temperature of the cold side, and T_H is the temperature of the hot side, both in Kelvin. T_C cannot be absolute 0, and T_H cannot be infinite, so the fraction is positive, and the max efficiency of a "useful" engine is less than 100%.

    What this means is that for any real world process from which you wish to extract energy, the max possible efficiency is less than 100%.

    It doesn't matter if you're using a heat difference to get energy or using energy to create a heat difference in this regard. The Carnot Efficiency is based on the Carnot thermodynamic cycle, whose significance is that it is a perfectly reversible process.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Tidal energy is also interesting... we are taking energy from the earth-moon system (let's ignore the sun here). I don't see us being able to take enough energy to cause the days to become noticeably longer, but over a century, if all our energy was met by tidal energy, we're maybe adding 0.1 seconds to the year (pure guesswork).
    There's tidal wave energy, and there's wind wave energy. The waves that go up and down on the shoreline about once every 10 seconds or so are wind waves. Extracting energy from wind waves wont impact the moon.

    The moon recedes from the Earth at a rate of about an inch per year, IIRC, due to energy lost to the ocean tides. I'd have to think on it, because my first instinct is that if humans extract the tidal energy, then the moon stops being slowed by tidal bulges as much, and it's recession rate goes down, not up. I'd have to think on it.

    At any rate, the length of year wouldn't be affected by changes within the Earth-Moon system. The barycenter (Center of Gravity of the system) of the Earth-Moon system will remain on its orbital path unless the Moon separates itself from being Earth's Moon.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  22. #1522
    but Entropy of a system can never decrease.
    This seems to be a rule we observe, but if the universe fluctuates between expansion and contraction, then we might need to revisit this assumption.

    Extracting energy from wind waves wont impact the moon.
    Of course, but how much energy are we getting from wind waves? I can't imagine it's much compared to tidal energy. Surely we get more just from wind turbines.

    due to energy lost to the ocean tides.
    I believe there's more to it than just ocean tides. The moon is tidally locked and it has no oceans. Before it became tidally locked, it was slightly deformed by the earth's gravity, and the deformation moves around the moon, slowing it down (and causing it to drift away). The moon has the same effect on the earth, only much much less extreme, which is why the earth is not tidally locked to the moon (yet).

    At any rate, the length of year wouldn't be affected by changes within the Earth-Moon system. The barycenter (Center of Gravity of the system) of the Earth-Moon system will remain on its orbital path unless the Moon separates itself from being Earth's Moon.
    I'm gonna stick my neck out and say I think you're wrong, that it will very slightly increase the day, but I'm not certain and will have to research. To be continued...
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  23. #1523
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,628
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    This seems to be a rule we observe, but if the universe fluctuates between expansion and contraction, then we might need to revisit this assumption.
    As always, if something we have never observed no matter how hard we've tried is suddenly observed, then of course we have to revise our theories.

    It's not at all clear to me that the universe contracting would require a decrease in entropy. Stuff collapses and gets hot all the time.

    But entropy isn't an obvious consequence of QM or GR. Thermodynamics is a statistical analysis. That said, it does hold for those regimes in between QM and GR.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Of course, but how much energy are we getting from wind waves? I can't imagine it's much compared to tidal energy. Surely we get more just from wind turbines.
    I honestly don't know. I've seen floating barges of vertical tubes that use bobbers floating in the tubes to charge batteries. IDK how much potential it has to scale up.

    Tidal power is also scaling up. I just read the wikipedia page and I had no idea it was as old a tech as it is. Again, there are recent innovations in tide power that are coming to fruition.

    It's worth noting that whatever green energy solutions we use, will be varied. The pros and cons of each serve to balance each other out when taken as various facets to an overall power plan.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I believe there's more to it than just ocean tides. The moon is tidally locked and it has no oceans. Before it became tidally locked, it was slightly deformed by the earth's gravity, and the deformation moves around the moon, slowing it down (and causing it to drift away). The moon has the same effect on the earth, only much much less extreme, which is why the earth is not tidally locked to the moon (yet).
    If the moon were slowing down, it would be drifting toward the Earth. As it slowed, it would decrease the altitude of the point opposite its current orbital location, causing it to spiral in slightly.

    The Moon causes the tides, but the Earth rotates under the tides in the same direction the Moon rotates around the Earth. The Earth's rotation pulls the tidal bulge slightly ahead of where it would be due to the Moon alone. This puts a slight forward pull on the moon, speeding it up. Speeding it up increases the altitude of the point opposite its current orbital location, causing it to spiral out slightly.

    If we, as humans, extract the tidal energy, the bulge is not moved, but it is diminished.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I'm gonna stick my neck out and say I think you're wrong, that it will very slightly increase the day, but I'm not certain and will have to research. To be continued...
    First you said the year, now you're saying the day. These are unrelated lengths of time.

    I mean... they're currently related at 365.25-ish to 1, but it could be anything.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  24. #1524
    First you said the year, now you're saying the day. These are unrelated lengths of time.
    Oops my bad. This is a rotational thing, not an orbital thing, so I most definitely mean day, not year. Although, there will surely be a similar mechanism between the earth and sun, and in the case where the earth is becoming tidally locked to the sun, where the earth's rotation slows relative to the sun, the earth would also drift relative to the sun, so this would change the orbit. But if we're ignoring the sun, and just looking at the earth-moon system, then the length of the year is unchanged.

    What we're looking at here is gravitational friction. The tidal bulge of a non-tidally locked body will migrate around the body, and this causes internal friction. We see this on the earth with the tides being slightly behind the the moon, because it takes time for the tidal effect to take place. There is resistance. This friction causes heat dissipation, and that energy is coming from the earth-moon system. The oceans aren't the only things affected by tidal forces... everything is. That friction exists in everything on the planet, it's just much more obvious when we look at massive bodies of water.

    It's not at all clear to me that the universe contracting would require a decrease in entropy. Stuff collapses and gets hot all the time.
    It seems very clear to me. Sure stuff collapses and gets hotter all the time. We know entropy can decrease in isolated systems, so long as the total entropy of the universe remains constant or increases. This isn't a problem. But if EVRYTHING is collapsing, this is a very different scenario. Entropy is decreasing. If we assume the universe was a singularity before the big bang, this singularity is literally the lowest entropy possible in the universe. If this is the ultimate fate of the universe, then the total entropy of the universe must decrease to get there.

    If we can say with 100% certainty that entropy cannot decrease, then that's the same as saying that the universe cannot collapse into a singularity. At least, that's how I interpret it.

    If the moon were slowing down, it would be drifting toward the Earth.
    Again, I'm talking rotational velocity here, not orbital. The moon's rotational velocity has slowed down to the point of stopping, relative to earth.

    If we, as humans, extract the tidal energy, the bulge is not moved, but it is diminished.
    The bulge is slowed, which is the same as moved. If you stand in front of a train and get hit by it, you will very slightly slow the train down as it hits you. That's pretty much the same as causing the train to move. That's more obvious if we imagine two people running into each other... both will stop. Is this not relative motion? Is this not "movement"?
    Last edited by OngBonga; 09-19-2021 at 06:59 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  25. #1525
    Ok this is interesting...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_power

    Because the Earth's tides are ultimately due to gravitational interaction with the Moon and Sun and the Earth's rotation, tidal power is practically inexhaustible, and is thus classified as a renewable energy resource. Movement of tides causes a loss of mechanical energy in the Earth-Moon system: this is a result of pumping of water through natural restrictions around coastlines and consequent viscous dissipation at the seabed and in turbulence. This loss of energy has caused the rotation of the Earth to slow in the 4.5 billion years since its formation. During the last 620 million years the period of rotation of the Earth (length of a day) has increased from 21.9 hours to 24 hours;[9] in this period the Earth-Moon system has lost 17% of its rotational energy. While tidal power will take additional energy from the system, the effect is negligible and would not be noticeable in the foreseeable future.
    That last sentence seems to confirm what I'm suggesting... that tidal energy will cause the earth to lose rotational velocity. Unfortunately, it only says the effect is "negligible" without any numbers to say how negligible.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  26. #1526
    I mean, the inertia of the earth is absolutely fucking huge, so it stands to reason that it truly is negligible, to the point of immeasurable. If we can get all the energy humans need from tidal power, and that's adding 0.1 seconds to the day over a century, that's obviously pretty good and not something we should concern ourselves with. It's definitely +ev compared to how we currently get our energy. And you'd imagine that within a century, other technologies will develop, such as solar power. So I think it's perfectly fine calling tidal energy "renewable". But if we're to assume humans will live for many tens of thousands of years, with increasing energy needs, these negligible losses might need to be taken into account.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  27. #1527
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,628
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    I was thinking more along the lines of the recession of the moon is caused by the tide bulge being pushed forward by the Earth's rotation under the tide bulge. That forward push slightly speeds up the moon's orbital velocity, causing it to spiral outward.

    If we take energy from the bulge, then it is diminished. I take back that I said the location wouldn't move. There are multiple methods of extracting energy from tide power, and we can both reduce the peak of the tidal wave by extracting energy from it and/or we can allow the tide to lift water that we dam and hold to use when we need it. Both effects would reduce the height and/or delay the location of the tidal bulge.

    So we can alter the shape of the tidal bulge in different ways as we extract energy from it. However we alter it will change the moon's recession rate. Maybe to the point where we could be taking so much energy that the moon starts to spiral inward. IDK. Seems theoretically possible, but not technologically possible at the scale of the entire Earth's tides.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  28. #1528
    Maybe to the point where we could be taking so much energy that the moon starts to spiral inward.
    idk, I think the opposite is true. We're taking energy from the earth's rotation. Due to conservation of angular momentum, if the earth's rotation slows, the moon's orbit will increase. It's like a spinning skater. Arms out cause the skater to slow down.

    If the moon spirals inwards, the earth will rotate faster (arms in), shortening the day, not increasing it.

    It's not easy to wrap our heads around this one eh?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  29. #1529
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,628
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Your thoughts on conservation of angular momentum seem on point.


    The Earth rotates about its own axis in the same direction that the moon orbits the Earth. I.e. toward the East.

    The current explanation for the Moon's recession is that the Earth is dragging the tides slightly ahead of where the moon would put them. This is causing the moon to experience a subtle forward force in its direction of motion on top of the centripetal force that keeps it in an elliptical orbit. F_tangential = m*a_tangential and thus the moon accelerates tangentially, changing speed.

    When you increase the speed of an orbital object, you do not change its altitude at that location. You change the altitude opposite that point in orbit. Speeding the object up pushes that opposite point away to a higher altitude. If you speed it up enough, it reaches escape velocity and is no longer in an elliptic orbit.

    The Earth's rotation is currently slowing because of the friction it puts on the tides to advance them ahead of the moon. The moon is currently receding because this process is speeding up its orbital velocity ever so slightly. The days are getting longer, ever so slightly.


    The slowing of the Earth is not solely due to a transfer of angular momentum to the Moon. It also transfers angular momentum to the ocean waves, which can dissipate that energy as heat. Photons carry angular momentum and heat is radiated in infrared light. Keep in mind that the Earth-ocean interaction is based on friction and friction is not a conserved force.

    IDK if there's any way to change the fact that the Earth loses angular momentum to the ocean currents via friction without locking the water in place - a distinctly not liquid thing to do.



    As far as what you said about the consequences of moving the tidal bulge to be behind the moon instead of in front of it - that this would reduce the moon's orbital angular momentum, transferring it to the Earth - is on point, I believe.

    It stands to reason via the Intermediate Value Theorem, that there is a perfect midpoint where we could hold the Earth's rotation steady, at a slight loss to Moon orbit, such that the moon orbital decay exactly compensates the friction on the tides by Earth.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  30. #1530
    It seems very clear to me. Sure stuff collapses and gets hotter all the time. We know entropy can decrease in isolated systems, so long as the total entropy of the universe remains constant or increases. This isn't a problem. But if EVRYTHING is collapsing, this is a very different scenario. Entropy is decreasing. If we assume the universe was a singularity before the big bang, this singularity is literally the lowest entropy possible in the universe. If this is the ultimate fate of the universe, then the total entropy of the universe must decrease to get there.


    If we can say with 100% certainty that entropy cannot decrease, then that's the same as saying that the universe cannot collapse into a singularity. At least, that's how I interpret it.
    Thinking more about this. An expansion-contraction cycle implies increasing entropy then decreasing entropy... why seems to violate the laws of thermodynamics. I'm going into speculation mode here but my best guess would be that the total entropy of the universe is constant, and we just happen to occupy a region where it increases due to expansion. In other regions of the universe, contraction is happening which perfectly balances out the net entropy. This idea implies the big bang is still happening... simultaneously the big crunch is happening elsewhere. The torus model of the universe is a potential model that allows for such dynamics.



    The "big bang" is basically the centre, and is a constant event. Presumably it has immense gravity, which eventually recaptures what it spews out. We have ejection in the "north", and capture in the "south", in perfect equilibrium.

    I'm not sure if there's anything we understand which directly refutes this model, but it's certainly a pleasant model to consider.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  31. #1531
    Side note - that model is a three-torus, not a torus, Subtle difference. This is a torus...


    This is a three-torus...


    Note the centre of the three-torus is a singularity, not a hole.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  32. #1532
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  33. #1533
    The left - waaa too much CO2, block the M25
    also the left - waaa not enough CO2, fuck Breixt
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  34. #1534
    Yup, it's all the Remainers' fault.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  35. #1535
    Maybe we should stop putting CO2 in drinks, seeing as we have a CO2 crisis. How come we have to make sacrifices that don't include not drinking fizzy pop?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  36. #1536
    You know they use CO2 to manufacture more than soft drinks right? Meat, fertlizer, food preservatives. Should we stop using those too all of a sudden?

    And oh, since you're such a fan of irony.

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/19...id-gas-crisis/
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  37. #1537
    Yes I am aware that we use CO2 for a lot more than fizzy drinks. What uses are essential for human survival? Is fizzy pop essential? What about preservatives?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  38. #1538
    And oh, since you're such a fan of irony.
    Boris lied? Fuck me dead. Give them back our sovereignty.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  39. #1539
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Yes I am aware that we use CO2 for a lot more than fizzy drinks. What uses are essential for human survival? Is fizzy pop essential? What about preservatives?
    You're right, we don't need food.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  40. #1540
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Boris lied? Fuck me dead. Give them back our sovereignty.
    What benefits has reclaiming our "sovereignty" given us so far? I mean real benefits, not uneven trade deals with countries halfway around the world that are going to hurt us more than help us. Is it worth it?
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  41. #1541
    Fizzy pop is food? Or did you completely miss my point and assume I was also arguing preservatives are not essential?

    What benefits has reclaiming our "sovereignty" given us so far?
    Sovereignty is a benefit.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  42. #1542
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    What about preservatives?
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Or did you completely miss my point and assume I was also arguing preservatives are not essential?
    Error: Does not compute.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Sovereignty is a benefit.
    No, "sovereignty" is a word. A benefit is something you can point to as a way your life has become better.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  43. #1543
    Your reading comprehension is lacking.

    You argued that CO2 is used for more than just fizzy pop... and cited preservatives. I was making the point that one is essential and the other is not.

    As for sovereignty, since it's just a word to you, presumably you don't think Kosovo should be independent? Or anywhere for that matter.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  44. #1544
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Your reading comprehension is lacking.

    You argued that CO2 is used for more than just fizzy pop... and cited preservatives. I was making the point that one is essential and the other is not.

    So in other words, a CO2 shortage is a problem. Thanks for agreeing with me.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    As for sovereignty, since it's just a word to you, presumably you don't think Kosovo should be independent? Or anywhere for that matter.
    How are we more independent now than before? Because we can't get people to work here and have to deal with shortages and price increases? Sounds more like being dependent to me.

    Also, that conveniently ignored the question: How are we better off now?
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  45. #1545
    How are we more independent now than before?
    I know this is confusing for you so I'll say it slowly

    Because

    we're

    more

    sovereign.

    Also, that conveniently ignored the question: How are we better off now?
    ditto
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  46. #1546
    lol, nice dodge.

    How is sovereignty making us better? By blocking our trade and making us all poorer? Who is benefitting from all this sovereignty and how?

    I mean it's the same question that's been asked for five years now, so I don't really expect an answer. But at the same time, you probably shouldn't dismiss all my posts about the problems being caused by Brexit if you can't articulate what the benefits are in complete sentences.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  47. #1547
    So here's a recap of this thread in the last year or so.

    Poop: Here's the latest shit we're in thanks to Brexit.

    Ong: Yeah, but sovereignty.

    Poop: Here's some more shit.

    Ong: Democracy.

    Poop: ...and more shit.

    Ong: Sovereignty.

    Poop: How is sovereignty making our lives any better? Seems to be making it worse.

    Ong: Because we're sovereign now.

    Poop: Glad you thought it through.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  48. #1548
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,628
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    I also find ong's attachment to the word sovereignty to be odd. I think, as far as I can tell, he's just saying people have a right to self-governance. Whether good or bad, if people are in control of their own outcomes, that's for the best.

    What I don't get is why the imaginary line around the UK is where he draws his boundary. Why not his house? His community board? etc. Why Parliament and not the EU? Why is that the line where he stops considering himself a member of that community?

    He's argued that the EU sets policy for the UK in some regard, but ... again ... how's that different than his local planning board setting policy on who can build a house or a pub and where?


    Like, I see a need for a line. If India and China could settle their differences, that's so close to half of all humans that they wouldn't need much extra support to out Democracy all other humans with whatever laws they wanted. Assuming a world democracy. Tyranny of the majority seems inevitable on that scale.

    It's not that I find the notion of all humans under a single rule of law distasteful, as such. It's that I distrust any human-run government to handle that vastly complex and diverse and subtle situation well.

    But also... that's not being proposed by anyone, and it's not a metaphor for the UK.


    Anyway... I see cultural divides are meaningful, and disregarding them is folly. I don't see why ong feels so distinctly British and not at all European, I guess.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  49. #1549
    This is difficult for you to comprehend because for some reason you place no value on the importance of sovereignty. But of course when it comes to countries that aren't the UK, you'd naturally see it differently.

    This will be even more apparent if, as I suspect, you'd be cheerleading Scottish independence from the UK. Even if it hurts them economically, which it will. You'd understand why they want independence, you'd understand that the economic cost is worth it.

    Prove me wrong. Tell me you think economics is more important for Scotland and they should remain part of the UK. I'll remain consistent and say, like I always have on this matter, that Scotland should be independent if it's what they democratically choose, regardless of the economic cost.

    I dismiss your comment because it's irrelevant to me. I wasn't telling you that things would instantly be better when we left the EU. I was saying that, over the course of maybe a decade, the economic cost would be less harsh. But I have always acknowledged it wouldn't be plain sailing. So when you scream "but look at this" my response is "I don't care". Sovereignty isn't about being economically better off, not to me.

    This is why we don't live in our Moms' basements. Because we value independence, as people. Owning a house, paying our own bills, it's an economic burden, but that doesn't stop us leaving home.

    As members of the EU, we were burdened with regulation that was not subject to the democratic will of the British people. Now we've left, we can begin to undo that. With the Tories in charge, a bunch of corrupt idiots, that isn't so easy. But we vote them in regularly. We get what we deserve there. At least that IS the democratic will of the people. So I tolerate the Tories. Again, democracy is more important than economic wellbeing.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  50. #1550
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo
    What I don't get is why the imaginary line around the UK is where he draws his boundary.
    It's not even a UK thing. The UK isn't a nation, it's a union. I'm fine with the breakup of the union into its component nations. My house is not a nation. England is a nation. A nation is a group of people with common language, culture, territory, with a history of self governance.

    I'm also fine with the UK remaining a union, if it's what all four nations agree. Currently that's the case, though with the Scotland issue it's tenuous. Not sure when that will be resolved, but surely within the next decade.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  51. #1551
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  52. #1552
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,241
    Location
    Finding my game
    How many countries could be added to the UK until it became a bad thing?
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  53. #1553
    It's not that I would dispute Scotland's right to independence, it's that if I were living in Scotland I'd ask what the benefits were. And if all they could say was "sovereignty", I'd point out the economic costs and say "do better."

    The mum's basement argument is lame because unlike leaving the EU, there's a lot we gain by leaving mum's basement. We don't have our mum around judging us all the time for one. We don't have friends thinking we're a loser 'cause we still live in our mum's basement. We can turn up the stereo. There's a lot more freedom.

    Leaving the EU is more like moving out of your house, burning it down, and living on the street. It has not given us any more freedom; that's an illusion. We still have to trade with the EU, and this is making that harder. When we were in it, we could shape the rules for trading with the EU, now they don't have to care whether we're happy or not with the agreement because they're the big bloc and we're just one country.

    A better analogy would be if I decided I wanted independence from my local supermarket for some weird ideological reason I couldn't articulate, so I decided to regularly drive out an extra half hour to another market for half the selection at twice the price. This also fits the economic aspect of your argument that "er, teething problems," because it's not as if the other market is going to come closer to me over the years because I boycott the closer one. There's no long-term economic smoothing out of this process, it's just long-term economic pain. If anything, things will get worse over time as whatever stocks we have run out.

    I mean if you're happy to live through this past year of bad news and the more bad news that's likely to come, just so you don't have to consider the UK a part of something bigger, and the best argument you can make for it is that you felt you were living in your mum's basement and that sucked, than that's just weird to me.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  54. #1554
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    The old "it's not Brexit it's just rich fuckers fucking with you" argument. Yeah, funny how this isn't happening in Europe though. Also, he's just talking shit about most of our imported gas coming from Norway. I bet he thinks the truck driver shortage is coming from Norway too.

    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  55. #1555
    Seems being in the EU might have helped us avoid this.

    According to a 2017 study by the University of Exeter and Chatham House researchers, there are considerable benefits for the UK to be integrated into the European energy market. The study notes, "if the UK wants to enjoy the economic benefits of remaining part of what is an increasingly integrated European electricity market then, as European legislation is currently drafted, it will not only have to forgo an element of autonomy through accepting legislation and regulations made collectively at the EU level, but it will also lose much of its voice in that decision making process, effectively becoming a rule-taker rather than a rule-maker
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  56. #1556
    Quote Originally Posted by CoccoBill View Post
    How many countries could be added to the UK until it became a bad thing?
    This is kind of a pointless question. If Ireland wanted to join, and it was democratically acceptable to the rest of the UK, that isn't going to be a problem, but why would anyone else want to join? There's no historical precedent for anyone else to do so. The British Empire was exactly that... an empire... not something anyone worth listening to wants to see restored.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  57. #1557
    Quote Originally Posted by poop
    We don't have our mum around judging us all the time for one.
    The analogy holds here. Dad says "if you live under my roof, you live by my rules". Which is analogous to living by EU rules.

    We don't have friends thinking we're a loser 'cause we still live in our mum's basement.
    Who gives a fuck about this? If I lived in my Mom's basement for economic reasons, I wouldn't care who thinks I'm a loser. If a "friend" thinks I'm a loser, then the word "friend" is inaccurate.

    Leaving the EU is more like moving out of your house, burning it down, and living on the street.
    If you say so. I don't agree at all. I'd say it's more like moving out of shared accommodation and into your own house, which perhaps is lacking in furniture and fittings. Just needs time and investment.

    We still have to trade with the EU
    We don't have to, it just remains mutually beneficial for us to do so.

    There's no long-term economic smoothing out of this process,
    Sure there is. It would encourage you to grow your own food, and use local shops instead of the big supermarket.

    I mean if you're happy to live through this past year of bad news...
    You've asked me in the past to tell you how my life has improved thanks to leaving the EU. It hasn't. Neither has it gotten worse. Nothing has changed for me personally. So all this "bad news" is just noise to me, made by remoaners who gleefully seize any opportunity to politicise anything that trends on twitter.

    I bet he thinks the truck driver shortage is coming from Norway too.
    Spoiler - he's a comedian. It's satire. I posted it for the lulz.

    Seems being in the EU might have helped us avoid this.
    "seems"
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  58. #1558
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  59. #1559
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  60. #1560
    The glorious EU...

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...oal-mine-open/

    Poland faces E500k fine per day for keeping one coal mine open.

    Germany operates 84.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy...any#Coal_power
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  61. #1561
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    You've asked me in the past to tell you how my life has improved thanks to leaving the EU. It hasn't. Neither has it gotten worse. Nothing has changed for me personally.
    You're getting your energy from what, riding a bicycle attached to a generator? Or is it free where you live?



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    So all this "bad news" is just noise to me, made by remoaners who gleefully seize any opportunity to politicise anything that trends on twitter.
    Yeah remainers are thrilled their country voted to impose economic sanctions on themselves. What a joy it's been watching all the predictions come true.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  62. #1562
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    The glorious EU...

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...oal-mine-open/

    Poland faces E500k fine per day for keeping one coal mine open.

    Germany operates 84.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy...any#Coal_power
    Right. Well unfortunately I can't read that article cause it's the Telegraph and I'm not signing up for that rag.

    But I'm curious, do you think the rules are only applied to some countries in the EU and not others? Does it say somewhere that only Germany gets to have coal mines?

    I'm guessing that the problem with the mine is that it's on the Czech border and therefore it's pollution is spilling over into Cz. What do you think?
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  63. #1563
    You're getting your energy from what, riding a bicycle attached to a generator? Or is it free where you live?
    It's not coming from gas.

    Yeah remainers are thrilled their country voted to impose economic sanctions on themselves. What a joy it's been watching all the predictions come true.
    You're evidence of the glee that is taken. How many times have you posted in this thread since we left? Who are you talking to? Me, that's who. And I ignore most of it, but that doesn't stop you. I can't imagine why else you'd keep posting if you're not getting some kind of perverse enjoyment out of thinking you're right, even though we're what, 18 months in?

    What predictions have come true?

    "Households £4,300 worse off"

    Nope.

    "Half a million job losses"

    Nope.

    "recession"

    Not until covid, and we're emerging out of recession.

    "The collapse of the West"

    Donald Tusk made this prediction. And it's a nope.

    "WWIII"

    Cameron of all people made this suggestion, and it's another big fat nope.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  64. #1564
    But I'm curious, do you think the rules are only applied to some countries in the EU and not others?
    It certainly looks that way. Show me that the EU are punishing Germany with fines 84x what they're fining Poland and I'll reconsider.

    I'm guessing that the problem with the mine is that it's on the Czech border and therefore it's pollution is spilling over into Cz. What do you think?
    This is a factor. But guess what? Germany have coal mines on the border with Poland.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  65. #1565
    It's not coming from gas.
    Actually I don't know this. We're all electric, which comes from the national grid. That could be coal, nuclear, wind, tidal, solar, or indeed gas.

    But we don't have gas coming directly into the house.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  66. #1566
    You heat with electric? Yikes.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  67. #1567
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post

    What predictions have come true?
    Increased food prices.

    Increased energy prices.

    Inflation.

    Shortage of drivers.

    Shortage of agricultural workers.

    Shortage of staff in service industry.

    Shortage of food.


    I've never even heard of the ones you listed. They sound made up, or made by crackpots.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  68. #1568
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    This is a factor. But guess what? Germany have coal mines on the border with Poland.
    It's too bad it's the Telegraph reporting it or we might actually find out the truth of what's going on.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  69. #1569
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I can't imagine why else you'd keep posting
    Because I want you to wake up and smell the coffee, that's why. If there's another vote in a few years I want you to know what damage has been done so you can make up for your bad decision.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  70. #1570
    Increased food prices.
    What was causing the increase of food prices before Brexit?

    Inflation.
    This.

    I mean, inflation happens anyway, which in turn causes price rises.

    I predict the Brexit will result in petrol causing cars to accelerate.

    Next time your car works, be sure to remember it's because we left the EU.

    Shortage of drivers.
    Not sure who predicted this, but it's a temporary problem, since we simply need to recruit more drivers.

    Also, we didn't have this problem until covid complicated matters.

    Shortage of agricultural workers.
    I have to look for work as a condition of my benefits. I haven't seen hoards of jobs advertised by local farms. Maybe I'm just looking in the wrong places. Most jobs I see advertised are care, retail and hospitality.

    Shortage of food.
    Caused by the driver shortage, and tenuous at this stage. Supermarkets are still well stocked as far as I can tell. I did my shopping today, got everything I usually get.

    I've never even heard of the ones you listed. They sound made up, or made by crackpots.
    Google them.

    You heat with electric? Yikes.
    Partly, also a wood burner. The joys of the countryside.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  71. #1571
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    It's too bad it's the Telegraph reporting it or we might actually find out the truth of what's going on.
    Replace the word "Telegraph" with literally any other MSM agency and it's equally as valid.

    Because I want you to wake up and smell the coffee, that's why.
    I'm not going to change my mind, regardless of what you post.

    If there's another vote in a few years I want you to know what damage has been done so you can make up for your bad decision.
    If there's a vote tomorrow, I vote to remain outside of the EU. If there's a vote in a decade, same. I reject continental superstates.

    The word "damage" is extremely subjective.

    And it's your opinion that my decision was bad. Assuming you voted to remain, I think your decision was bad.

    Furthermore, I have no interest in trying to get you, or anyone, to think along the same lines as I do. I encourage you to make your own mind up, which you have done. If we have a vote again, do as you please. It's your vote.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  72. #1572
    Ah the old "it's all covid" argument.

    Here, let me explain this to you.

    The Road Haulage Association predicted the shortage of drivers long ago. When covid hit, all the EU truck drivers we used to have went home. That wasn't a problem then because of lockdown transport wasn't needed. Then when Brexit happened, the EU drivers stayed there because they weren't allowed back in without a lot of hassle, and some of them not at all. Most all of them said fuck that and stayed home. So no Brexit, no shortage to the extent there is now. And it's unlikely they're magically going to recruit 100k drivers in the next few months. They need to train them first. It's not temporary, unless by that you mean "for years to come."

    The 70% increase in energy prices is also not covid. If it were it would be hitting the entire world or at least the entire EU. It's not.

    And, your supermarket is not a representative sample of the entire country. Where do you think all those pictures of empty shelves are coming from? it's not the EU mate. There are shortages in my market and I live close to London. So either you're lying, or you happen to live on some important haulage route, or space-time has warped near you causing your shelves alone to be full.

    Second, were there farms close you before that employed EU workers? 'Cause those are the ones that are short. There's different kinds of farms, those that are reliant on seasonal labour are the ones suffering. Don't you live in the hills somewhere? Not many farms using intensive labour crops there I imagine.

    Third, why do you think all those care, retail and hospitality jobs have opened up? Have you not heard businesses complaining about not being able to get staff? Do you think it's because all the people in their 20s who used to do those jobs got covid and died? No, it's because they all fucked off back to Europe. Several hundred thousand in London alone. So I guess we need to train more of those too.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  73. #1573
    Ah the old "it's all covid" argument.

    All I said was it's complicated by covid. Which is absolutely true. Which of course you know.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  74. #1574
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,241
    Location
    Finding my game
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    This is kind of a pointless question. If Ireland wanted to join, and it was democratically acceptable to the rest of the UK, that isn't going to be a problem, but why would anyone else want to join? There's no historical precedent for anyone else to do so. The British Empire was exactly that... an empire... not something anyone worth listening to wants to see restored.
    I'm just trying to gauge why you think a coalition of certain countries is ok, but a coalition of different countries makes you lose you sovereignty. As mojo said, you draw pretty arbitrary line on the EU level, especially considering your England is already in a coalition with 3 other countries, and that doesn't bother you one bit it seems. Makes me think there's nothing logical or practical about it, just an emotional connection with the UK.
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  75. #1575
    ^^ This is a good point. I guess one argument would be the countries making up the UK share a common language, and so have a common culture, though to be fair that's been imposed on three of them. I also think not having a land border with the rest of Europe contributes to the feeling of being separate. A lot of people here don't consider themselves as "European."
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •