So we are going to not only going to fail to expand existing solar but we're actually going to shut them down? I'm not sure about the wisdom of that plan.
85,000 wind turbines would produce about 465 000 000 MWH, anout 30% more than total annual UK consumption. As mentioned above that many could fit in a square 11 miles on each side. Do you pull your numbers out personally or have your proctologist do it?
They are good when we are making use of the additional labour we are freeing up to reduce the workload on the rest of the workforce and making sure the benefits spread to all of humanity. If it's just an excuse for Amazon to fire the only people that work for them, hoover up more cash from shops (also firing workers), then skip out on paying any tax on income then I don't see it as a benefit to humanity.
My big problem with DTE (Distance To Empty) readings is that few cars report them accurately, a problem made difficult by the fact that driving conditions change depending on changes in traffic and roads. 100 KM to empty can change to 40 KM to empty if you hit some traffic.
Interestingly that probably depends how fast you're going and how it averages the mileage, if you've been driving a long time at significantly above optimum speed (say 90mph) then you are sitting in traffic for a while you will likely see your "miles remaining" increase as you are now using very little fuel but you have still travelled a lot of miles in the "average window" the car is using to calculate your current average consumption. I have actually seen this happen though I suppose it depends how your car works out the miles remaining, and as always - YMMV.
Arguments like yours are a pretty good example of misleading information as well, he clearly meant "to bring water to the boil" not "to boil water away", that is what most people would understand by his statement.
Just like if I was to say "the climate is warming due to the addition of billions of tons of CO2 to the atmosphere" you would start talking about apples in your grandparents day being bigger.
It's like no-one in here has ever had a car with a broken speedo, after a few weeks you don't even notice it's absence, you keep pace with the rest of the traffic unless it feels too fast. The only time it's ever a concern is when there is a police car directly behind you, even then you can guesstimate the speed pretty accurately.
It still doesn't support your case as it comes from before the tax even came into effect. You won't find any evidence to support your proposition because it does not exist. All that's been said is "it brought in a bit of money, but not as much as the other party said it would". It should be fairly obvious what that means. Do you think anyone is now saying "I'll shift some of my earnings now so I can pay more tax to get back up to my fair share"?
Lots of people can tell when something sounds bad, knowing what to do about it is a different story. Your argument is like saying you don't need to be a skilled coder because there are debuggers that can find any errors.
You might also notice the article you posted comes from before the tax even takes effect, and is basically rich tossers saying they'll move if it comes in and is well supported be the public. They didn't move when it did come on, more's the pity in the case of Andrew Lloyd Webber...
The washington post know nothing, the fact of the matter is the 50 tax rate was never properly assessed before it was scrapped by an idealist government. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Who said anything about 70%? It's probably not far off optimal for the top bracket of income tax, look historically at the best years for employees and it was around there. What's your ideal level?
And while I'm picking you up on your faulty logic, here's cracker:
My danish cousins hilariously came to the US with empty suitcases and filled them with crap they bought at local department stores because it was so much cheaper then anything they could buy in Denmark. That means that the VAT and other assorted sales and import taxes in Denmark were at that time and likely still are well over the hump on the laffer curve.
Very few people will be able to refuse buying something considerably cheaper than they would normally be able to buy it for, this has nothing to do with the Laffer curve.
They've already seen that in England and France quite recently. The French and English tax hikes have been hilarious failures because they actually got less money.
This is just flat out wrong, I'd like to see your proof of it, France considered raising taxes but didn't, the only BRITISH tax rises we have had are for VAT http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V..., there is considerably more money coming in now from VAT than before the recession, don't forget the recession in your calculations, I know how you love to change the subject.
You sure post a lot for someone so concerned about tax rates, do you actually have a job?
No, you said we should do nothing because the issue was too "polarised" and "politicised", which is absurd. I'm sure you think you're a free thinking rebel, in actuality you're an apologist for the deniers. I'd be the first to celebrate if you stopped commenting on environmental arguments, your logic has bigger holes than the ozone layer in the 80s. It's good to see you showing your true colours though, lay it on me, I can take it.
Slashdot Mirror
I bet "Austerity Empowers" is the baddest mofo on the block.
So we are going to not only going to fail to expand existing solar but we're actually going to shut them down? I'm not sure about the wisdom of that plan.
85,000 wind turbines would produce about 465 000 000 MWH, anout 30% more than total annual UK consumption. As mentioned above that many could fit in a square 11 miles on each side. Do you pull your numbers out personally or have your proctologist do it?
Start off in the Philippines.
Why full employment? Why aren't we all working half time and spending more time living our lives?
They are good when we are making use of the additional labour we are freeing up to reduce the workload on the rest of the workforce and making sure the benefits spread to all of humanity. If it's just an excuse for Amazon to fire the only people that work for them, hoover up more cash from shops (also firing workers), then skip out on paying any tax on income then I don't see it as a benefit to humanity.
limited experience results in incorrect conclusions.
I bet those stupid kids haven't even been to Mars!
How many AU is that?
But only because the government told them to with the weight and measures act.
My big problem with DTE (Distance To Empty) readings is that few cars report them accurately, a problem made difficult by the fact that driving conditions change depending on changes in traffic and roads. 100 KM to empty can change to 40 KM to empty if you hit some traffic.
Interestingly that probably depends how fast you're going and how it averages the mileage, if you've been driving a long time at significantly above optimum speed (say 90mph) then you are sitting in traffic for a while you will likely see your "miles remaining" increase as you are now using very little fuel but you have still travelled a lot of miles in the "average window" the car is using to calculate your current average consumption. I have actually seen this happen though I suppose it depends how your car works out the miles remaining, and as always - YMMV.
Arguments like yours are a pretty good example of misleading information as well, he clearly meant "to bring water to the boil" not "to boil water away", that is what most people would understand by his statement.
Just like if I was to say "the climate is warming due to the addition of billions of tons of CO2 to the atmosphere" you would start talking about apples in your grandparents day being bigger.
https://www.google.co.uk/searc...
It's like no-one in here has ever had a car with a broken speedo, after a few weeks you don't even notice it's absence, you keep pace with the rest of the traffic unless it feels too fast. The only time it's ever a concern is when there is a police car directly behind you, even then you can guesstimate the speed pretty accurately.
IMDB and virtually every other watcher disagrees about Dexter. I thought it was awful as well for whatever that's worth.
Realistically if you've spent 10,00 hours doing something and you're not expert in it you are probably an incurious buffoon.
They go downhill, the first is the best.
What evidence do you have the other guy would have been better? After all you only had the choice of two at the end...
It still doesn't support your case as it comes from before the tax even came into effect. You won't find any evidence to support your proposition because it does not exist. All that's been said is "it brought in a bit of money, but not as much as the other party said it would". It should be fairly obvious what that means. Do you think anyone is now saying "I'll shift some of my earnings now so I can pay more tax to get back up to my fair share"?
Lots of people can tell when something sounds bad, knowing what to do about it is a different story. Your argument is like saying you don't need to be a skilled coder because there are debuggers that can find any errors.
You might also notice the article you posted comes from before the tax even takes effect, and is basically rich tossers saying they'll move if it comes in and is well supported be the public. They didn't move when it did come on, more's the pity in the case of Andrew Lloyd Webber...
The washington post know nothing, the fact of the matter is the 50 tax rate was never properly assessed before it was scrapped by an idealist government. You have no idea what you are talking about. Who said anything about 70%? It's probably not far off optimal for the top bracket of income tax, look historically at the best years for employees and it was around there. What's your ideal level?
My danish cousins hilariously came to the US with empty suitcases and filled them with crap they bought at local department stores because it was so much cheaper then anything they could buy in Denmark. That means that the VAT and other assorted sales and import taxes in Denmark were at that time and likely still are well over the hump on the laffer curve.
Very few people will be able to refuse buying something considerably cheaper than they would normally be able to buy it for, this has nothing to do with the Laffer curve.
They've already seen that in England and France quite recently. The French and English tax hikes have been hilarious failures because they actually got less money.
This is just flat out wrong, I'd like to see your proof of it, France considered raising taxes but didn't, the only BRITISH tax rises we have had are for VAT http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V..., there is considerably more money coming in now from VAT than before the recession, don't forget the recession in your calculations, I know how you love to change the subject. You sure post a lot for someone so concerned about tax rates, do you actually have a job?
You seem to think it's about sex and race. Why do YOU think that helps them the most?
This is far too politicized to be judged scientifically anymore
You argue yourself into knots then get insulty when it's pointed out to you. I'd think you were a troll if you weren't so obvious.
No, you said we should do nothing because the issue was too "polarised" and "politicised", which is absurd. I'm sure you think you're a free thinking rebel, in actuality you're an apologist for the deniers. I'd be the first to celebrate if you stopped commenting on environmental arguments, your logic has bigger holes than the ozone layer in the 80s. It's good to see you showing your true colours though, lay it on me, I can take it.