We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 109 comments are related to the topic:
surely the tories cant be winning the polls?
surely the tories cant be winning the polls?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 109
|
By:
that includes everybody in it
|
|
By:
"why do we want to pay for something(energy) if we can get it for nothing????"
do you really think a government is going to give you something for nothing? In the 50's the mantra was that nuclear power was going to be so cheap it would cost them more to send out the bill. Yeah right. |
|
By:
If we had gone to 100% Nuclear Power it may well have been.
We did not |
|
By:
 |
|
By:
France went 100% nuclear but their electricity is not free.
Not unless the power workers work for nothing, the uranium miners work for free, The plant suppliers and builders give it away and everybody volunteers to do the decommissioning in their spare time. |
|
By:
agree...but it is still cheaper than buying in fossil fuels Foinavon
|
|
By:
The decommissioning costs were not factored in at the time. With renewables you would not have those costs.
Also we have keep rebuilding Nuclear Power stations...we would not have to do that with renewables |
|
By:
I'm not so sure Gery. Uranium is expensive and there are a lot of costs involved in preparing the fuel cells and disposing of the spent fuel. Safety costs and building the plant is much more than for a fossil fuel burner and nobody wants one in their back yard.
|
|
By:
all true Foinavon
|
|
By:
Haven't seen costings for renewables but you need an awful lot of windmills to generate as much electricity as a nuclear plant.
|
|
By:
That is true...but I still think we must be moving towards this. We must have them on land.
Strictly speaking our population should be no larger than we can feed ourselves either. We still trade of course. World exponential growth is a time bomb....people will end up starving. We don't have the energy for everybody. This country must start thinking of self sustainability, or Europe has to, if we wish to tie ourselves to Europe forever. |
|
By:
World exponential population growth is a time bomb
|
|
By:
I agree that we should have built more nuclear plants during the past 20 years but the NIMBY lobby was too strong. To fill the gap and reduce our dependence on imported fossil fuel we should get on with fracking. The trouble with using indigenous fuel is that we become too complacent as happened with North Sea Oil and we are only now waking up to the reality.
|
|
By:
As nations become richer population growth tends to slow. Eventually they import the labour they need from abroad as we have seen in this country. This creates other problems of course.
|
|
By:
Fracking wont last forever, divert some of this money to renewables, as neither will North Sea Oil.
Also at some point, there will be nothing left to burn will there????? Only some countries become richer. Capitalism drives inequality. |
|
By:
As things stand the whole edifice is unsustainable, built on the sands of the Arabian desert. "Fiddling while Rome burns" comes to mind.
Democracies don't seem able to act until the lights go out and the complacent voter starts to wonder what happened. |
|
By:
There will always be something left to burn, however it will cost more energy to extract than is generated by burning it.
|
|
By:
Well we will have to disagree on that one Foinavon....I firmly believe we must move to renewables
and the idea of a steady state population...which should ideally be no more than we can feed ourselves because I think we are endangering ourselves if we do not The world could become a better place in the future, but it could also get a lot worse, we have no idea.????????? |
|
By:
That would seem ideal Gery and people would have to accept a static and egalitarian standard of living for it to work. If all wealth is spread across the present 7 billion equally then the standard would not be very high.
Probably would need a big brother world government and police force to enforce it too. Doesn't tally with human nature unfortunately. At present I would compare our state to a piece of mouldy bread which has taken a week to be half consumed as the mould population doubled and redoubled. On day eight the mould has doubled again and all the bread has gone. |
|
By:
The alternative is the shambolic labour party
just watch this interview with douglas alexander the guy running their election strategy http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b042b8tc/sunday-politics-northern-ireland-11052014 go to 6mins 30 The VAT part would be funny if it wasn't for the possibility they could be running the nations finances again. Its no wonder they got us into such a mess last time. |
|
By:
That would seem ideal Gery and people would have to accept a static and egalitarian standard of living for it to work
yes that is what I believe in Doesn't tally with human nature unfortunately true also as the repression...well no, I am somehow hoping we will see this voluntarily |
|
By:
I was only speaking for our own country at the moment
I think the whole world economic system will collapse at some point, I would us to protect ourselves |
|
By:
Foinavon
|
|
By:
Anyway I was only speaking about making our own society sustainable...whatever economic system we want to adopt
|
|
By:
Sorry Gery, I was watching Douglas Alexander
Don't see how we could isolate ourselves from the outside world as we would still need to trade. If the rest of the world is carrying on as normal then shortages would sooner or later occur and affect us as would pollution, climate change and political decisions of governments and groups who might be hostile towards us. Sooner or later the four horsemen will put in an appearance.  |
|
By:
Fair play to whomever posted the douglas alexander link. He was abysmal.
|
|
By:
Can't blame Labour for the financial crisis given nearly every other western country went into recession too. Now the conservatives have sorted it out get Labour back in and let the good times roll again.
 |
|
By:
Labour rolled in it when the times were good, six, seven, eight, nine, ten years of unrivalled prosperity they said come every budget, but it was all built on a lie. Gordon Brown said no more boom and bust. Then was in charge for the biggest boom and bust ever. Fk new labour, fk blair and fk brown.
|
|
By:
Sooner or later the four horsemen will put in an appearance. Devil
indeed they may Foinavon don't say I did not warn you |
|
By:
 |