I have an article in The Mirror this morning based on my Twitter thread posted here yesterday:
The message is getting out about environmental insolvency.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Good.
I wonder if it is doing better as a subject than inflation?
This early morning on that purveyor of received wisdom that is Radio 4, I heard an interviewee talking about the withdrawal of savings by households and that it needed stop because it was ‘contributing to inflation’!!!!
I ask you?!
Inflation goes up, interest rate rises come in and people ask for more wages and /or start to use their savings in response. It’s a sign of coping strategies.
But no – apparently this is all wrong – they are putting the cart before the horse again and the damned interviewer did not even question this.
If you want to know why we are in the state we are in just listen to R4 from 06:00 to 07:00 – the first early hour is usually the worst for pedalling crap – which is not just in our rivers.
It’s as if reality must not disturb the assumptions underpinning their models
Very much agree about the Radio 4 program between 6 and 7.
It regularly provides an account of the world that is so Neo-liberal that it’s like being a Briton tuning in to a Goebbels broadcast about how WW2 is going or Putin talking about his invasion of Ukraine.
The one use of the 6.15-6.30 “Business” slot is that it frequently gives an insight of how the Tories really see the world i.e. Beyond the City of London nothing matters.
However, by way of balance, it also provides a thorough summary of the alternative reality made up of the latest lies invented by the Sun, the Daily Mail, the Daily express etc.
For the rest of the day this then becomes the BBCs version of the “News”.
All this despite the Sun, The Daily Mail and the Daily Express etc being the most distrusted “News” sources in the UK.
Here’s the essence of the scam this corrupt Tory government did nothing to stop. You might call it the legacy of Thatcherism’s “something for nothing”! Talking of Thames Water but applicable to other companies in the water and sewage industry this Guardian article on the scandal states the following:-
“Its pattern was to borrow against its assets to increase dividend payments to shareholders.”
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/30/in-charts-how-privatisation-drained-thames-waters-coffers
As Richard has clearly stated paying dividends to shareholders took priority over its job which was to invest to prevent sewage pollution of waterways and beaches and ultimately safe-guarding water supply. These privatised industries are able to do this because they are monopolies which prevent the public from exercising choice. These industries have taken advantage of this situation to free-ride!
The reason this is done is because it increases the price of the shares and the CEO gets a bonas based on the share price.
Zac Goldsmith resigns accusing government of ‘apathy’ over environment
“Too often we are simply absent from key international fora. Only last week you seemingly chose to attend the party of a media baron rather than attend a critically important environment summit in Paris that ordinarily the UK would have co-led.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jun/30/zac-goldsmith-resigns-accusing-government-of-apathy-over-environment
What lies behind Goldsmith’s resignation? This weblink explains the purpose of the Paris summit:-
https://focus2030.org/Summit-for-a-New-Global-Financing-Pact-towards-more-commitments-to-meet-the
Well done Richard. Good to see your messages getting ever wider publicity.
There seems to be an interesting debate to be had between you and Will Hutton:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/02/now-water-bosses-you-must-show-how-capitalism-must-work-for-the-common-good
He is again arguing for water companies to be incorporated
‘ as public benefit companies that puts social purpose first. Capitalism can be reconfigured to deliver the common good. It’s a principle that applies more widely. Start with the utilities and work from there.’
But is he correct in saying this would be better than taking them into public ownership would cost £250bn ‘dead money’?
If the water compnaies are essentially bankrupt – public ownership ought to cost very little?
I hope to do more on this tomorrow
Hutton is backing the wrong horse
Hope you do Richard – there seems to be much to learn from that discussion