Spain uses almost as much oil as the uk. With a smaller population.
List of countries by oil consumption - Wikipedia
We're actually 76th on the list of amount of oil each person uses. Spain 53rd.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)
- Thread starter SpurMeUp
- Start date
Spain uses almost as much oil as the uk. With a smaller population.
We're actually 76th on the list of amount of oil each person uses. Spain 53rd.
SteveAWOL
Garth Crooks
Imagine being hunkered in a bunker and then you see a dragon drone overhead about to rain down molten thermite on your position
Rorschach
Bert Bliss
I saw one vid of a heavy drone carrying in one of the ground drones, which are about the size of a golf buggy, say. The ground drone had a couple of heavy-calibre machine guns mounted on it, and it pummelled the brick out of some russian position in a building. When it ran out of ammo, it drove into the building and detonated. It is getting more like some dystopian sci-fi movie every day.Imagine being hunkered in a bunker and then you see a dragon drone overhead about to rain down molten thermite on your position
ricky2tricky4city
Gary Stevens
Video games becoming reality....and the safest place for humans is the same as the video game...on the end of a controller.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
Pensions account for 55% of the benefits bill. Unemployment, housing and child support is 30%. Disability support is 15%
You can't cut the benefits bill without taking a big proportion from the main source of cost
glasgowspur
Jimmy Cantrell
Still can't understand why we pay child support, can't afford them then don't have them.
Take that away and the free child care from the grandparents and watch the burn.
Yes you can. £5bn a year on accomodation for asylum seekers alone. Let alone healthcare, clothing, food etc...
£130m a year on disability payments for drug addicts and alcoholic. Get them clean and in work.
£14.1bn foreign aid.
But you'd rather take from your parents and grandparents who have worked their whole life for it and give it to strangers. Or people that want to get off their face.
Sorry for me you look after your family first.
Te £146bn pensions are spent in this country. Every pound spent is taxed. It creates jobs. Which those people then pay tax. It's not going abroard.
johnaliola
Edgar Davids
State pensions were okay before the state second pension was removed in 2016. It surprises me how few people are conscious of this robbery.
The maximum current payment for those with full basic and full additional state pension is £415 per week which would only be payable to the boomer generation.
Many people contracted out of this via their pensions schemes as GMP or as Protected rights and it is easy to forget this. The protected rights values of serps/s2p rebates were typically invested in funds and worth hundreds of thousands.
I did not contract out, and accrued state second pension between 1988 and 2016 which should have been worth hundreds of pounds a week - but it was washed away in 2016.
So whilst I cannot accrue more state pension as i had already maxed out with the s2p at age 50, had i contracted out I would have plenty of headroom to accrue more state pension!
I and many like me have been cheated out of quite a big deal of comfort in retirement. Civil servants and MPs neatly sidestep all these negative impacts as they do time after time.
The maximum current payment for those with full basic and full additional state pension is £415 per week which would only be payable to the boomer generation.
Many people contracted out of this via their pensions schemes as GMP or as Protected rights and it is easy to forget this. The protected rights values of serps/s2p rebates were typically invested in funds and worth hundreds of thousands.
I did not contract out, and accrued state second pension between 1988 and 2016 which should have been worth hundreds of pounds a week - but it was washed away in 2016.
So whilst I cannot accrue more state pension as i had already maxed out with the s2p at age 50, had i contracted out I would have plenty of headroom to accrue more state pension!
I and many like me have been cheated out of quite a big deal of comfort in retirement. Civil servants and MPs neatly sidestep all these negative impacts as they do time after time.
Even accepting all your figures, they total £19.23bn. That's your absolute theoretical maximum, assuming you could eliminate every penny of that spending, which you obviously couldn't.
You've also mixed up entirely different budgets, overstated asylum accommodation costs and potentially double-counted expenditure.
More importantly, you've provided no evidence that those savings would be sufficient to meet whatever budgetary target you're talking about, let alone address the longer-term growth in pension expenditure.
Nobody is saying pensioners must have their benefits cut. The point is that pension spending represents an enormous proportion of welfare expenditure, and listing three unrelated areas of spending doesn't make that arithmetic disappear.
You've demonstrated where you'd prefer to cut spending, not that your proposals eliminate the need to examine pensions.
Gb made a statement saying you can't cut the benefits bill without cutting pension. I pointed out that you can.
I never mentioned any target. Never said that it should be cut completely. Merely saying it could be cut.
MadSpurs
Andy Gray
Bloody hell
Saying "don't have them if you can't afford them" assumes nobody's life ever changes over 18 or so years.
Redundancy, illness, or bereavement can hit any family overnight. Child support stops a sudden crisis from ruining a child's start in life—and those same kids are the future taxpayers who will be funding that 55% pension bill that @Gutter Boy mentions in twenty years' time.
The birth rate is already dropping, so pricing ordinary working families out of having children is economic self-sabotage.
glasgowspur
Jimmy Cantrell
Bloody hell
Saying "don't have them if you can't afford them" assumes nobody's life ever changes over 18 or so years.
Redundancy, illness, or bereavement can hit any family overnight. Child support stops a sudden crisis from ruining a child's start in life—and those same kids are the future taxpayers who will be funding that 55% pension bill that @Gutter Boy mentions in twenty years' time.
The birth rate is already dropping, so pricing ordinary working families out of having children is economic self-sabotage.
It's tongue in cheek reply to GBs constant pensioners are stealing all our money mantra.
Bloody hell
Saying "don't have them if you can't afford them" assumes nobody's life ever changes over 18 or so years.
Redundancy, illness, or bereavement can hit any family overnight. Child support stops a sudden crisis from ruining a child's start in life—and those same kids are the future taxpayers who will be funding that 55% pension bill that @Gutter Boy mentions in twenty years' time.
The birth rate is already dropping, so pricing ordinary working families out of having children is economic self-sabotage.
Tbf. Kids born now are unlikely to work. 50,000-100,000 humanoid robots were built this year. That's set to rise exponentially over the next decade. The cost of each robot is about $14k which has been dropping. Which is cheaper than most workers.
Add AI into the mix. Self driving taxis are already on the roads. Trucks etc... will follow.
We have robot deliveries.
Not sure what they'll be left to do.
MadSpurs
Andy Gray
An interesting post.
Previous industrial revolutions took the physical graft and moved us into offices. This one is coming for our backs and our brains at the exact same time, total dominance it would seem.
The maths for employers is a huge factor looking at your post. An £11k machine needs no pension, never calls in sick, and works 24/7. Warehouse work, driving, and desk jobs are definitely on the chopping block. That said, I can't see a robot crawling under the floorboards of a crooked 19th-century terrace to fix a weeping lead pipe. Standardised factory floors and motorways are easy for machines, whereas the messy, unpredictable real world is a nightmare for them. Bespoke physical trades and anything requiring real human empathy will probably be the last bastions of human graft.
There is a massive flaw in the corporate plan. Robots do not buy things. If you automate the workforce out of a wage, who is left to buy the stuff the machines are making, or pay for the self-driving taxis? Either the whole system collapses through a lack of customers, or governments are forced to tax automated labour heavily and bring in a Universal Basic Income.
The real danger is not a future where kids do not have to work. It is the messy 20/30 year transition period where the jobs have vanished and the politicians still have not figured out how people are supposed to pay the mortgage without a salary each month.
Yes previously new technologies created new sectors of employment. Saddle makers, moved to making car seats for example.
But this might create new roles. But if those roles can also be done by robots or ai what then?
The robots now might not be able to crawl under floor boards. The robots 20 years from now?
As for where the money will come from? That will need to be looked at. Would it even be a requirement? Or will we have to shift to some form of communism. You'll own nothing and be happy.
Last edited:
MadSpurs
Andy Gray
Hardware moves fast. Once they crack fine motor skills in chaotic environments, even the plumbers could be buggered That saddle maker example is the exact trap economists keep falling into. They assume a magical new sector will always appear. When those newly invented roles are immediately swallowed by the next software update or hardware model, human labour hits a permanent dead end.
If money as we know it stops working, the reality is less like communism and more like corporate rationing. Communism implies the public owns the means of production. In reality, a tiny handful of tech giants will own the servers, the power grids, the food supply, and the robot fleets.
We will probably end up with a digital allowance—state credits handed out just to keep the peace and stop people rioting, which then get spent straight back into those same mega-corporations. The "own nothing" phalanx will get their wish for the majority.
In this world, the only real security left won't be a career or a degree. It will be owning tangible, physical assets before the ladder gets pulled up completely—paid-off property, a bit of land, and the practical skills to produce some of your own basics outside their system.