Prices of the electricity we use to charge
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
Sometimes that is better, allowing for the facts. You quoted in an earlier link:
"Despite making up only 13 per cent of London’s total population, black Londoners account for 45 per cent of London’s knife murder victims, 61 per cent of knife murder perpetrators and 53 per cent of knife crime perpetrators."
But didn't highlight that the 13% is three times the ratio of the rest of the country, or comment on cultural behaviours. The "open door" that gave us most of that 13% was chiefly to the West Indies and Jamaica in particular, so let's look at that.
Last year London's 10 millions had 116 homicides. Jamaica's 2.8 millions had 1393 homicides.
Whilst obviously not approval, that now brings understanding and appreciation of our London position. There clearly is a big problem in both locations, but it is being worked on in both, and perhaps we should at least be pleased that we are so much better than the Jamaican source situation However, it is intractable in many ways, closely linked to crime in general and illicit drugs in particular.
Complaining about the murders doesn't help when it's the linked subjects that are almost entirely their source. The solution is in dealing with those, but success with that is elusive to say the least. Personally I believe we should decriminalise currently illicit drug use, remembering how successful that was with heroin use in the early 1960s, something I doubt you are aware of.
.
Last edited:
I am puzzled about how you might think you know what I am aware of and what I am not.
The war on drugs has never had any success at all. It certainly empowers the criminal world, but anyone who thinks legalising drugs would get rid of criminal gangs needs to wake up. They would simply swap to some other vice such as prostitution (already there) trafficking women (already there) trafficking illegal migrants (already there) stealing mobile phones (already there).
If they don't have something to sell which is illegal, they would just revert to protection rackets.
Organised crime will always find a way to make money by doing something that is against the law and then killing the competition in whatever field it is. When the USA abandoned prohibition, the Mafia didn't shut up shop.
Your solution to the issue will not solve the problem, though I don't object to it in principle. That said, most of the substances which are at present prohibited are very damaging to individuals and to society.
Should people be allowed to harm themselves and their families by using narcotics?
I don't take any position right now on that and am open to argument.
EDIT:
And by the way, I don't think I am just complaining about murders; I made the original remark about the Nottinghill Carnival asking why it is still allowed, given the regular terrible outcomes. I also wonder if other groups would be allowed to continue to operate something of the sort if their 'festivity' brought along with it, such a level of criminality. I suspect not. I intensely dislike and loath the EDL, but lets take them as an example. Would they be allowed to parade about the streets doing their thing if people were regularly stabbed and murdered? I doubt it and neither should they be if such outcomes could be predicted.
Last edited:
Good Bad Billionaire - George Soros: 'The man who broke the Bank of England' - BBC Sounds
A hedge fund tycoon who became one of the most successful investors ever
www.bbc.co.uk
Good Bad Billionaire - Sergey Brin: Googling billions - BBC Sounds
By founding Google, Sergey Brin helped shape the internet. He also got very, very rich
www.bbc.co.uk
Wrong. That is one example of why I did know what you are aware of and what you are not. Back in the 1950s we had a very minor drugs problem with a very small number of heroin addicts. We dealt with it very successfully by supplying their need with heroin.bpc on prescription at ngligible cost. There was no growth in the number of addicts, it remaining at some 400 nationally dealt with successfully since there was no mechanism for growth, no market for criminality. Until one idiot MP kicked up a fuss about the provision, leading to the heroin.bpc being replaced by the wholly unsatisfactory methodone. This opened the door wide to criminal supplies which lead to a huge expansion of heroin addiction as dealers encouraged recruiting with promises of free supplies.
I dislike the idea of making illicit drugs freely available as much as anyone, but it is proven to work by excluding criminals. The only question is, which is the greater evil.
Of course I don't think that and it is very offensive of you to even suggest as much. I repeat and expand, Which is the greater evil, addiction controlled or uncontrolled?
It doesn't immediately solve the problem but it does contain and control it, giving breathing space to reduce it.
As are others which are permitted, such as alcohol and tobacco and even some foodstuffs. And with full hindsight, would we have allowed the totally uncontrolled and unfettered expansion of personal motor vehicle usage from the 1920s? To the point where it has eventually become a virtual universal right of passage at incalculable multiple costs to individuals and societies worldwide, and indeed the health of our only planet?
I think probably not.
Which brings us back to, which is the greater evil in each case? We certainly allow them to harm themselved in many and various ways already
It was allowed by trial originally since those who wanted it had become such a large proportion of the population of that area and it was, and still is, recognised as largely successful .
Yours is largely a village outlook, shock and horror out of proportion to events. Ours is a large international city outlook, that what happens is part of that and that nobody suffers unnecessarily. The 2 million that enjoy it do so voluntarily, accepting the miniscule risks that come with it.
Those like me who dont go to it are not at any risk at all, so the over 99.9% of unaffected carnival goers and all the rest of us all end up satisfied.
.
Last edited:
There seems to be some misunderstanding here - maybe you were distracted.
Of course I knew what you were referring to earlier. Although in the 1950s I was a child, when doctors, were issuing private prescriptions for medical grade diamorphine , I have been well aware of that approach for at least fifty years. Apart form anything else, it often featured as a theme in films, usually being portrayed as a somewhat seedy trade, but not illegal.
As for your insight into what I know - don't pat yourself on the back too soon - when I referred to the war on drugs 'never having worked', this particular approach of allowing heroin to be prescribed to addicts was not what I meant, since it was no sort of a war at all and was a way of permitting addicts to obtain the stuff without the involvement of criminals. My attitude is little different to yours on the matter, as should have been pretty obvious from what I said above.
The 'war on drugs' means the outlawing of dug possession and the prevention of any legal means of obtaining relief for addicts, and the prosecution of people for possession and supply. None of that applied to prescribed heroin.
Since the discussion was about violent thugs and the murder of numbers of citizens and you went on to talk about the cultural baggage of some citizens of Caribbean heritage and then said:
And this is why I made the remark concerning the persistence of the problems of criminal gangs.
As for your remark :
This I find bizarre - Who do you think I am - Caleb on Clarkeson's Farm?
I lived four years in London and spent sixty-five years of my life as a city dweller.
It is not 'having a village outlook; to think it obnoxious that the capital allows an annual carnival soiled by murders, stabbings and crime with hundreds of arrests.
You actually write as if it doesn't matter that people are murdered - as long as other people enjoy it.
How fked up is that?
Like I said above ' Nothing to see here' ....... 'Better not to say anything'.
It's you who is misunderstanding and then trying to cover it with irrelevancies. I've made no mention of a war on drugs, only legalisation.
Gross exaggeration of the effects of the carnival, as I wrote 99.9% of those attending enjoyed the event without anything upsetting them.
Let me try to show you a different perspective. Ignore the incidental stabbings and arrests, there are huge numbers of those throughout the country every year, just look at the murdered only and the finality of those. Two million attended carnival that weekend, two murders, one per million. The normal murder rate in London is about 12 per million population each year, in England and Wales not much different at about 10 per million per year.
Of course the carnival is just one weekend, but this is why we have to look at actual risk. Eighty percent of us don't go to the carnival so there is no risk of ever being one of the killed. I also point out that even for the carnival goers it is a very tiny 0.0001% entirely voluntary risk once a year only.
Considering all that data, you are not just losing perspective. You are verging upon hysteria about an event who is nothing to do with you nor will ever be a risk to you.
Normal life anywhere in our city is a greater potential risk than the carnival for average persons such as myself, since the murders occur randomly throughout the city and are sometimes random in nature. They happen occasionally in my London borough very variably, usually none in most months. But I still remember one shocking freak September during my retirement when we had 8 murders inthe borough with 4 of them a metaphorical stones throw away from my home in places I regularly walked or cycled past.
To emphasise how close that can be in normal life and how random, I personally knew two of the murdered over time. Michael was killed by stabbing at 18 years old by a same age educationally subnormal boy in a way almost too ridiculous to believe. Totally innocent Robbie was shot dead at 21 years old by a hit man who had mistaken him as the intended target, simply because he was in the expected place for the target.
It all puts the carnival in a very different perspective.
.
Exactly, eight deaths in 37 years during attendance by up to 74 million people at the very crowded and inherently risky event that all such events are worldwide. That is under 1 death per 10 millions, the same as the annual rate as the rest of England and Wales and slightly less than London's annual homicide rate
That at such a very crowded event is easily matched many times over elsewhere, showing it to be almost an expectation rather than exceptional. That expectation is why we police it so heavily. That in turn means many more arrests and many more crimes reported, simply because so many police are present as an Oxford study showed.
.
Yeah - you're right. It's only eight deaths. Nothing at all.
Nothing more to say on this.
Councils to get control of local buses under government plan
"Transport Secretary Louise Haigh said that after "decades of failed deregulation", "local leaders will finally have the powers to provide services that deliver for passengers". "
"In London a franchising system was introduced, with Transport for London deciding routes, timetables and fares and operators bidding to run services for a fixed fee.
This has contributed to the capital seeing an increase in bus use, with services less hit by cuts, in contrast to other parts of the country."
"Transport Secretary Louise Haigh said that after "decades of failed deregulation", "local leaders will finally have the powers to provide services that deliver for passengers". "
"In London a franchising system was introduced, with Transport for London deciding routes, timetables and fares and operators bidding to run services for a fixed fee.
This has contributed to the capital seeing an increase in bus use, with services less hit by cuts, in contrast to other parts of the country."
Government pledges more local control for England bus services
Transport Secretary Louise Haigh promises to deliver a "bus revolution" that will save vital routes.
www.bbc.co.uk
Last edited:
An increase in bus use! That's a massive understatement. Our bus fleet has doubled from 4500 to 9000 now and they are all much cleaner, gradually changing to pure electric. We also now have by far the lowest incidence of car ownership in the UK as people find they don't need cars any more by just using buses and bicycles.
A big dose of that is what the whole country's urban areas need.
.
Plenty of bus enthusiasts (is that spelt right?) In the Philippines too 
. No electrics tho, doh!
. No electrics tho, doh!
I bet there's a bus thread these should be in, hehe
(Like the "local" accent too)
youtube.com
(Like the "local" accent too)
Local Bus Journey in the Philippines #shorts
Local bus in philippines #alwaysonajourney #philippines #cebu #bus #local #moalboal #morefuninthephilippines #shorts
youtube.com
Starmer and Reeves are playing a dangerous game. How much more do they think Britain can take?
Rachel Reeves warns of difficult decisions ahead in Budget
Rachel Reeves says tough choices will have to be made over tax, spending and welfare.
www.bbc.co.uk
What pollution is that?
ULEZ is a great big lying scam. Trumpian levels of misinformation. This map below is the real live government data. Follow the link to full information rather than just looking at my screenshot which was taken at 12.09 on 11th September.
DEFRA monitoring of air pollution data live feed...... Empirical data is the ONLY thing you can listen to. Political spin fouls all the announcements of politicians and their spokesmen.
uk-air.defra.gov.uk
ULEZ is a great big lying scam. Trumpian levels of misinformation. This map below is the real live government data. Follow the link to full information rather than just looking at my screenshot which was taken at 12.09 on 11th September.
DEFRA monitoring of air pollution data live feed...... Empirical data is the ONLY thing you can listen to. Political spin fouls all the announcements of politicians and their spokesmen.
Interactive monitoring networks map - Defra, UK
uk-air.defra.gov.uk
Your favourite twerp Geoff obviously doesn't think:
The congestion charge lowered central London motor traffic by 20%.
The scrappage scheme permanently got rid of a large number of the dirtiest diesel vehicles.
The LEZ and ULEZ zones have resulted in large numbers of other high emission diesels leaving London for much more distant parts.
Over 1400 of our buses are zero emission and that is rapidly increasing.
Over half of all our London cabs are battery electric driven now and zero emission capable.
Over 65,000 of our London cars and vans have no exhaust pipe now.
Private car ownership in London is now at an all time low.
National average annual car mileages are down 40% from those of fifty years ago.
And vehicle mileages per gallon have enormously increased over that same period.
Over a million of our national car fleet is now solely battery electric, with a further 600,000 hybrids.
Of course our pollution is down, enormously down.
.
Last edited:
Related Articles
-
MTF Enterprises announces acquisition of EMU Electric Bikes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Wisper 806T folding bike wins Which? ‘Best Buy’- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Sustrans calls for protected cycle lanes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Amazon launch their first UK e-cargo micromobility hub- Started by: Pedelecs
