Anger. Fear. Democracy. Voting. Connected?
An interesting article I read; How Fear and Anger Impact Democracy (May 21, 2019) brings some light on the OP title. It is an essay published in Items, Insights from the Social Sciences of the Social Science Research Council.
The article in my view shares what we may have long suspected and lived validated by science. People’s fears and anger affect voting. It is about a ten-minute read, yet skimming you can stop here and there. There are graphics illustrating their points. You will see the following subheadings:
https://items.ssrc.org/democracy-papers … democracy/
** What we have long believed
** What has long been hidden
** What fear and anger do
** Some evidence on what fear and anger actually do
** The different ramifications of fear and of anger
The introduction states:
“Observing the rise of right-wing extremism across the world has led many to a familiar and long-established explanation: fear fosters support for far-right parties and politicians. This explanation continues a long tradition in political thought and commentary that attributes a foundational role to fear. In this essay, I will use new thinking about emotion that draws on recent scholarship in neuroscience and empirical research on the role of emotion in political reasoning to argue that scholars need to distinguish between fear and anger as distinct negative reactions, each with different political consequences. The popular focus on fear has obscured the role anger plays in pushing voters to extreme positions when facing political threats. In order to respond effectively to political threats, we need to understand the different emotions that threats elicit among citizens. Moreover, the political system needs to take into account that fear and anger each identify different features of threats, and each requires different political remedies. Responding as if all threats provoke fear and only fear will leave democracies vulnerable because of their inattention to anger.
So, what do you think? Thoughts?
What are your feelings on fear and anger in your political life? Do those two have a different effect on your thinking about politics in general, your personal ideology, and finally voting?
How much do you think fear and/or anger will drive voters to the 2024 polls? Will we see a new voter turnout record set come this 2024?
Newton's Third Law: Action & Reaction - His third law states that for every action (force) in nature, there is an equal and opposite reaction. In that respect do you feel the fear and anger of one political interest is met by the reaction of another as in conservative vs. liberal?
Is that law occurring with such rapid-fire today the reason for the great cavernous ravine between factions along with enormous turmoil occurring today; Democrats vs. Republicans, Liberal vs. Conservative, and perhaps metro vs. rural?
We know the elite political minds running campaigns know what the article points out. How do you feel they take the opportunity to exercise its thematic relevance to gaining votes? Do you think they do it responsibly or is it simply a dog-eat-dog world?
Should it be concerning to our leadership, today, how fear and anger are affecting our heralded Democracy here in the USA?
[EDIT: Oops! It appears I did not have enough coffee earlier this morning. I forgot to post the link to the article. I inserted it.]In my adult life , I've eliminated fear and anger and avoid voting helps.
Anger leads to fear or inefficiency. Then greater to hate which can leads to possibilities of supporting murder. Murder being the top mental illness. When ever centroism divides people, they often join into us against them. The positive emotional replacement for me, tops, is love, health, freedom, passion and so on. People suffer more from negative emotional than from emotional intelligence or mental intelligence. Exspeacilly in groups in an over ego world. I look at people as individuals first. Being honest and Live and let live is a great policy and humor helps. Just look at Jew's and Muslims or right or left divided, I accept some of their ideas, just not their ever ending wars.My primary goal is too keep reactionaries and authoritarians out of office. It is instinctive for me to generally vote against conservative, Republican, rightwing oriented candidates. These people are generally the more problematic racists and race baiters and are Anti-Democratic more frequently and brazenly, not adhering to our rules of governance.
I believe that 2024 will be a pivotal year where we either decide to concede to dictators and tyrannical candidates and beliefs or we fight to maintain democratic institutions encouraging the participation of all eligible voters, working incrementally to make it better.
As in your example of Newton's Third Law, yes. Both sides will rush to the ballot box out of fear and distrust of the other in a way not seen in the past.
Rural people are afraid of the trend that eventually will prove not in their favor and that their comforting and provincial world is disappearing. All of this includes "traditional values" stuff, overbearing religion, comforting racism, etc. The capitalist class in the minority piggyback on this resentment of larger populations to reach their goal of less government, less regulation allowing them to act with no oversite, controlling others with impunity. Such, is the need to prevail as a shrinking minority in the face of inevitable change. That reality is partways why the divide between left and right, Democrat and Republican are so stark today.
You get to people's root fears to draw them out. It is the stuff that is not PC, but they all gather at the sound of the dog whistle, but they forget that many for whom the intended decibel range was to remain inaudible, hear it all quite the same.
It is the fear of tyrants and those that want to dispense with democracy that will guarantee my casting a ballot.Thanks, Cred. Noted!! No challenges or anything to add. What you said speaks volumes as I see it supported by your knowledge and experience in Life.
tsmog, you’re a Democrat. Stop calling yourself a “conservative.”
The race baiters love you, but when the rubber meets the road, they won’t honor your loyalty.
Granted, you have no idea what that means, but they do.I have to giggle at that!! I am much more conservative than many perceive. I am presently writing my autobiography. I spent a good portion of that with my career in scouting including earning the God and County award. hmmm . . . I was in the eighth then at age 12.
Erik Erikson's theory of Human Development says that is Stage 5: Identity vs. confusion. (12 - 18) "At this psychosocial development stage, your child faces the challenge of developing a sense of self. They form their identity by examining their beliefs, goals, and values."
I firmly established my identity at that time. However, when I experienced amnesia from a horrific car crash there was confusion, of course. I guess any liberal leanings I have I will blame on that perhaps an act of God. Who knows. ha-ha
tsmog, You’re a kind man, and in that respect you have conservative leanings that were certainly developed early on.
However, anytime one praises race baiters or those who have said “Israel deserved what they got…” that’s a problem.
I have faith that you will see the difference between those who love freedom and those who do not.I see . . . okay . . . respectfully, a problem for who? No need to go further. With the same respect should I take that to mean I have been warned?
Savvy has a unusual way of making friends and influencing people, I have been on the receiving end of such types of replies.
It makes a good example of perspective. Your comments may seem very 'Conservative' to some, while Savvy sees you as a "Democrat".Tsmog, I was thinking in terms of your possibly choosing to vote for Teddy Roosevelt in the next election. That won’t help the conservative cause.
Congratulations on writing your autobiography!Just kidding about. Right now Haley has my vote. If she doesn't make the ticket Teddy is looking good to me.
Haley is as establishment as they come. Well, at least you didn’t say you are voting for Pence.
(Sigh) Anyhoo, still luv ya, my friend.While this is true, she is still a major step up from Biden, both in terms of decency (doubt you'll see her sniffing little girls or fondling women in public) and mental capacity.
She will probably be more likely to steer us away from inciting nuclear devastation, might be less inclined to push EOs and laws to arrest parents for protecting their kids, probably won't be onboard with supporting MAPs becoming the next protected minority.
I could probably write a few more paragraphs why she would be worlds better than Biden... but really, as I have said, anyone the Republicans would throw up there would be better than this Administration.
If you are a sane rational person with a shred of decency in you, it's not even a debatable matter at this point.Pretty much anyone is better than Joe Biden. So, whoever the GOP picks, we may as well get behind him or her, otherwise we’re allowing the Democrats to put the final nail into the coffin. I don’t think Haley is strong enough not to be influenced by special interests, but then nobody is except Trump, and perhaps Kari Lake, who I think would be a great VP.
Personally, I wish we could find a strong Hispanic VP. That could create more momentum now that many minorities are waking up to the ugly reality of Biden’s administration.
If democracy truly worked, the tiny group of genderism would be not able to change the free speech laws for the first time in the English language history. And half of the world's population being female wouldn't fear modern woman with cocks and beards into their safe female spaces. Like washrooms, gyms, Sports, prisons. And cutting off the gendertilla of their own children. Wars , budgets, laws are pushed through without general public approval.
Well, as imperfect as it has been, it has worked here better than any alternative over the last couple of centuries.
What do you propose should replace democracy? I won't let anyone rule over me without my permission, AKA the votes of majority of the people.
I don't care as much about the cultural aberrations, they have always been there with each passing generation. But still, I am not keen on this genderism stuff all the same. But an introduction of a fascist Hitler like regime in response is certainly not the answer.We fear the same things.
We just have a different belief as to what is bringing it about.
Castle sees things more clearly than most regarding this Nation's government.
This is not a Democracy run by the people... that is an illusion you and many others still buy into. He sees the reality, as do I.
The politicians listen to the Institutions and Corporations that don't answer to the American people, therefore our government doesn't answer to the American people.
Do you think the people really wanted Biden? HAH!
The DNC pulling the strings, and the people pulling the DNC's strings, said here you are... here is your Democrat who will save you from that awful Trump who has done so many bad things to you for four years now.
You might have wanted Warren, or Sanders, or Gabbard... to F'n bad. You get what we give you to vote for... and you will like it... or we will cast you down with the rest of the deplorables and then you will have no where to belong.
Credence, you were forged in the 60s, you in many ways are still stuck in the 60s. Its hard for many older people to grasp the fact that the Democratic Party got hijacked decades ago, and it licks the boots of corporations and corruption in ways that even most Republicans resist (not all, there is still the likes of Graham who puts most of them to shame).
It pushes for wars more than any Republican ever did, with more reckless abandon than any sane person would imagine possible 25 years ago.
There is no parties, there is just the establishment, the illusions they feed you, meanwhile they are destroying the world, the country, to rebuild it into what they want... not what you want, not what the disrespected, the discarded, the victims of racism or sexism want (well not the sane ones).
They are so far ahead of the game, they make what was done in Germany in the 30s and 40s child's play compared to how deeply they have pushed this into the American psyche.
Our kids are going to wake up to a country that is more intrusive and controlling than China's is today, and Americans are going to skip right along to the Pied Piper that brings us to it.
Those that don't like it, well, they are just deplorables, they need to be reprogrammed or removed from society all together. You and I are going to live just long enough to see their NWO being incorporated... if these lunatics don't destroy the world in WWIII before then.Well, Ken we do have different beliefs, that is for sure.
Neither you nor Castle has told me yet what the alternative to the present system should be.
If you been reading the papers, the RNC is playing the same games, with Trump trying to give himself the advantage in the delegate counts.
Obviously, the people voted for and preferred Biden with over almost 8 million votes, that is enough for me. So, now you are saying that the people don't know who and what they vote for?
Ken, Trump sucks, period, from virtually every angle from which one might want to look.
Yes, I would have preferred Warren or Sanders, but more Democrats wanted someone more moderate. What would make me believe that my preference would necessarily be that of the party as a whole? Does that mean that I would embrace Trump and Republicans as any serious alternative? Hell no!!
I was a kid during the 1960s, I was hardly forged there. Let's just say that the almost 60 years since have had a much greater influence on my present opinions. It is my opinion that Republicans are far more autocratic, patronizing to the corporate class and retrograde in values over the Democrats. The so called idea of Democrats fomenting wars is just a matter of opinion. I seem to remember the longest war against AlQuida was started in a nation that had nothing to do with it, Iraq, don't you remember?
If it all an illusion, what would I want with the side that is clearly and starkly operating against my interests? Is Trump and the Republicans going to build the nation to the desire I want? That is even a lesser probability.
Show me a better alternative, besides a race baiting TV star and his cult like following?........
I have to go with lesser of two evils knowing full well the intrinsic corruption in politics, that lesser in my view is never Trump and the RepublicansThere may have been a time when I was attempting to sway you, or others, to see one political candidate or party over another.
That was the past.
Now I try to just open your perspective, to get you to give up this belief which you espouse these days that Republicans are evil, racist, greedy, sexist, etc. ... or using the very word Republican as code for something else which means essentially the same or worse.
The ability for humanity to reach a more enlightened existence with a One World Order, New World Order, Borderless World, and all the other concepts suggested by the UN, the WEF, driven largely by untouchable unelected bureaucrats throughout DC, Brussels, and other halls of power, is going to do for ALL of us... what Communism did for Russia.
Instead of being given pause by the radical statements coming from your Democratic Party Leaders today, you echo them.
When Clinton speaks of re-programming people, when Biden calls tens of millions of Americans threats to Democracy, when they define the opposition as traitors to the nation... this is language that speaks exactly to where this is headed, as seen in too many examples of history.
In a 1920 speech Lenin said that communists must subordinate morality to the class struggle. Good was anything that destroyed “the old exploiting society” and helped to build a “new communist society.”
In order to build their New World Order today, they are going to destroy this society... liberty, freedom, the Constitution... the very best ideas that this Nation stood for cannot cohabitate with a borderless NWO.
“We are not waging war against individuals. We are exterminating the bourgeoisie as a class. . . . Do not look for evidence that the accused acted in word or deed against Soviet power. The first question should be to what class does he belong. . . . It is this that should determine his fate.”
Lenin broke people down by class, today they are breaking people down by race and sex, you can rest assured no matter what happens... the Bezos and Gates of the world will be untouched, the truly elite like those who own the "Federal Reserve" will remain in control.
While the Soviet Union redefined human nature, it also spread intellectual chaos. The term “political correctness” has its origin in the assumption that socialism, a system of collective ownership, was virtuous in itself, without need to evaluate its operations in light of transcendent moral criteria.
We see all the same things occurring now in America, chosen pronouns, politically correct censorship, cancel culture, tearing down national monuments, the precursor to more significant change to come.
We are seeing it with the open border policy that is a "secure border" a fully supported and operated war against Russia that is "supporting" Ukraine, mind boggling government spending that is devaluing the dollar so that they can usher in their fully controllable Digital Currency.
Well, we are seeing it if we want to.
Some of us want to focus on what is not real... Republican vs. Democrat, White vs. Black, whatever it is that distracts and divides from the real threats to us all.
EDIT/ADD -
The point is, IMO, you are too wrapped up in this fight... Trump isn't the demon he is made out to be, he is the boogeyman being used to scare people into accepting something worse that they are ushering in.
If you didn't have Trump to fight, and I admit he is perfect for the role that they have him playing... whether it is willingly or whether he is just that arrogant and egotistical... but then again, a person would have to have a unimaginably massive ego to try and take on the behemoth of power and corruption driving the Nation today.
That is a conundrum I have been pondering since before he was elected... I still have no concrete resolution to whether he is a useful idiot for them to focus those who would resist the coming changes... or whether he is a legit believer in himself to that degree.
Clinton and others despise him so much, its hard to imagine it isn't legit.
But they don't hate him because he is a Russian puppet or a threat to Democracy... they hate him because he usurped their control and power, he delayed their efforts, and he openly insulted them and exposed their corruption."There may have been a time when I was attempting to sway you, or others, to see one political candidate or party over another."
I had an idea that is what you were attempting to do. But your views about American slavery, the place of women in society, etc, gave you away as hardly an objective neutral observer when making your points. No offense meant, but I smelled a rat.... Actually an advocate from what I consider the side of my adversary, but presenting himself otherwise.
I only define Republicans based on their policies and their behavior and not just a figment of my imagination. All of this has been quite evident, so until they change their behavior, associations and policies, I am going to believe my own lying eyes... The Republicans are at least as corrupt as the Democrats, if not more so, in my opinion. So,where is your solution?
You still have not told me what you think will be a better system and why. What is the alternative to all of these "traitorous" Democrats? Traitorous Republicans?True we view family values differently. The demise of traditional roles just happens to coincide with the many issues arising today in our society.
We see slavery the same way, where we differ is in view of indentured servitude and how that was the 'slavery' that built America in its first hundred years of making long before slavery of Africans became big business in the western world.
I recognize the Uniparty as being in control. This is why I no longer debate the matter of which party. I recognize it is not a government of the people and by the people anymore.
The really hard shift occurred after the collapse of the USSR. By the time Clinton was out of office the MIC and International Corporations had seized control.
Technology has much to do with it as well.If it can work for the golden goose, it can work for the Gander. Wisdom on wine selection, doesn't Trump a variety of skills and knowledge.
I hear you Ken, "traditional roles" are going to change with time and has changed with time. No one wants lives circumscribed by rules that unnecessarily bind them in their pursuit of a full life as you only have one.
Where we differ in the slavery issue is recognition of the magnitude of its effect on the African American and their prospects during and after as compared to Irish (indentured servants). That is quite substantive. I only hear this sort of minimilazation from the furthest of rightwing sources, (Prager U).
The problem with your Uniparty is that it seems to be composed of only Democrats.
We agree as to corporate abuse of power and control, we differ as to who and what forces are responsible for it.No matter left or right, we know it's the banksters and Government are the two top scammers.
We can start from top and work our way down.. It's so exhausting hunting every other lower level group down.Individualism versus the social cultural collective best.
By breaking down all the social norms, the family roles, the very concept of what masculine or feminine mean, etc. etc. You have a society of confused, detached, self-absorbed individuals that put themselves first, rather than concepts like duty, honor, civic pride, patriotism.
TikTok, Cell phones... technology plays its part as well.
If you want to deconstruct a society, this is exactly what you want in a populace, to break down support for nationalism, borders... I have yet to understand why there is so much effort to make women into men, getting them into combat roles they are physically inferior to perform for example, but it has to do with the complete deconstruction we see ongoing.
Its not a good thing.
Children growing up in a family that cares for and provides for them is a good thing. Concepts of commitment and self-sacrifice for the wellbeing of the family is a good thing. Things frowned upon or denigrated in many ways today.
When a family could survive well on one income, that was a good thing.
This is true, only because you think there was something substantially better that those indentured servants had, that slaves did not.
But when I was looking into this, what those indentured servants went through, from how they were transported to America, how their contracts were sold, how they were treated, killed, conned, as their Owner's deemed fit, is no different than what the African slaves contended with in later centuries.
They had no freedom, they had no rights, they had no way out, there was no Constitution. They were at the mercy of who-ever owned them and their own wits and guile to get themselves free of it, many died before they could.
This is true, it is the Democrat Party leading the charge.
The Republican party is at war with itself, between those belonging to the Uniparty, and those trying to stop the unstoppable.
Trump was not the Uniparty, his backing out of things like the Global Compact on Migration, the Paris Accord Agreement, his refusal to start a war with Iran or Russia.
Now that they have their man in charge... well we can see where things are going, war with Russia, war in the Middle East, threatening war with China... Germany heading to its worst depression since the 1930s, which will in turn take the whole EU down with it... Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Egypt, essentially all our former allies in the Middle East now moving to join BRICS.
We do, if you don't see this Administration as beholden to them as any in our past, we certainly do.Interesting, Ken, does that mean that white males are always to be at the top of the food chain to comply with your idea of "social norms"?
I can pretty much check out my own anatomy to identify which gender I belong to. It is a phony issue.
As I have said before, there is to be an immutable standard to qualify for anything. There is a physical standard for a firefighter, for example. Those standards are to closely correlate with effective performance in the actual job. There are women who can meet the physical standard, but not as many I believe. We don't discriminate against women, we discriminate based on adherence to the standards. What would Sally Ride have said about your gender based standards and restrictions? No one is dismissing the idea of women in domestic roles. But my point is that our throughly modern maidens want to be able to choose between June Cleaver or Sally Ride. As everyone wants to be able to choose, that is a hallmark of an advanced society. And none of that require that anyone compromise values of patriotism, civic pride, etc.
As for the slavery issue, it is more than what I think. American slavery has as an institution been overwhelming afflicted upon the blacks and its aftermath "Jim Crow" has had ever more deleterious effect. Any historian worth their salt would tell you that. Other perspectives mitigating that truth is just rightwing propaganda. Can white "Irish" indentured servants really compare?
Why am I to believe that Trump and MAGA is beneficial? I see those people as anti-democratic, leading us toward an authoritarian answer for people who cannot live with the rule and wishes of the majority of the people and their subsequent choice. How dumb is it to believe that a cowardly, shallow, narcissistic clown who fell into a pot of money, with a silver spoon in his mouth is going the lead the charge for a better America?
I see many past administrations supporting the status quo. Trump and MAGA is just a dupe to those who are receptive, taking us far enough down the road to the point where there can be no return. That is the danger. So, yes, our understanding of these matters is quite different.But that is not what we have in MSM messaging, nor in EOs coming from this Administration today.
Equality is not the message anymore... its Equity.
We do not have standards being held to... we have a lowering of Standards and when that doesn't work, forcing their removal all together.
I watched a very informative video this evening, which spoke about a lot of they problems we have in society today, and it speaks to why neither party will be able to fix this growing deconstruction/detachment.
The Sexual Revolution was a social movement in the 20th century that sought to upend and change the traditional sexual values of the Western World. Its effects and consequences have been felt most keenly in the United States of America. Traditionally a Christian country, the Sexual Revolution had devastating effects on American morality. In this video I explain how the Sexual Revolution happened, what its code of ethics was all about, and why it was an utter DISASTER for Western civilization.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5n-O1KGHB8
As I said, informative, I thought it was a brilliant insight that he had when he stated "...far beyond the intentions of any of the founders, if they saw the things many people do today, they would condemn them."
From the 5 minute mark to the 10 minute mark is excellent when considering how and why the country was created, what the intent was of the Constitution and how it ties into the social chaos we see today.
Take a 5 minutes to watch that part of it, if not the whole thing, and tell me what you think. Does it explain why we see a fast failing society today?A little wandering . . .
Thanks for the video, Ken. Important, yet, for me not really new. And, there is a lot to unpackage. To begin with, what 'State of Nature'; means in one sentence is, "a free entity in which no positive law exists; it is free from any form of government and/or that of the forces of society at large".
Next, is how each of our own personal values of morality are influenced as shared by Locke's view of natural rights. He advocated 'Life, Liberty, Property". His position was "that the most basic human law of nature is the preservation of mankind. To serve that purpose, he reasoned, individuals have both a right and a duty to preserve their own lives.".
In contrast, Hobbes's view is that humans were to use their reason to leave the state of nature and submit to the absolute authority of the monarch. The video's author seems to be supporting that position by inference. Maybe I got that wrong.
There is a third view. That of Rousseau. He says in essence, "The State of Nature "is a morally neutral and peaceful condition in which (mainly) solitary individuals act according to their basic urges (for instance, hunger) [Sexing] as well as their natural desire for self-preservation. This latter instinct, however, is tempered by an equally natural sense of compassion."
If one takes the time to ponder discovery may share those three views of the State of Nature are at play today. I often wonder if all three exist for society, yet are transitional from one to another historically in our nation. I don't know. Or, all exist and are in conflict today.
Also, we must consider most religions, especially Christianity follow Hobbe's view in the sense that ultimately God or god(s) is the monarchical authority. One can go back to Adam and Eve where when they bit the apple they fell away from Hobbe's view to that of Locke or Rousseau.
Within that once the apple was bitten came knowledge of good and evil. Since that event man has been plagued with defining what is good and what is evil. For, Christians the Bible is the guide.
Thus, as I see it, the complexities our Founding Fathers wrestled with morality in the sense of being governed arriving with the principles of Locke leading them instead of Hobbes or Rousseau. Life, Liberty, Property For me property is not solely material, it is also in the sense of one's mind or the immaterial. For example, today Intellectual property rights. That didn't exist really until the 20th century.
As I see it that is why they purposely had no official religion and left each their own prerogative with liberty to choose. Remember religion is the institute of morality.
A long way to go to whether the sexual revolution is the downfall of our nation or not. The video seems to allude that the sexual revolution is not the downfall of our nation, as some suppose, but actually, it is 'Liberty'.
The sexual revolution led to other elements of sexuality, i..e., homosexuality, and transgenderism. One may ask are those simply the 'State of Nature' in its most raw form?Funny that you mention Locke, the next couple of videos I watched that night related to the French Revolution. Which some of his beliefs helped influence considerably.
It delved into the, rather extreme, concepts that were held by some people at that time of chaos, some 30,000 people were guillotined at that time... people that had nothing to do with the government, like nuns.
I followed that up by considering America's revolution and what caused it.
I must say, I see a considerable amount of both, as in the discontent and disharmony with the government, in our current situation that were some of the primary causes of problems that led to revolution then.
As I have been saying for a couple years now, without having considered what led to the French and American revolutions... all we are missing is economic hardships, a failing economy, to push things to that point.
I think we have everything else we need for it to kick off.
We have a government that taxes without giving us representation.
Our government works on behalf of the International Corporations and multi-billionaire class, it actually works today to undermine our sovereignty, our nationality, for a international bureaucracy, a borderless world akin to how the EU operates today.
Our government really stopped representing the people mid-90s, as we discussed previously, regarding the collapse of the USSR and the following hollowing out of American Industry and eventually all corporations.
Today our government/judicial system has corporations allowed equal rights as individuals, while at the same time making it illegal for its own citizens to buy cheaper drugs from foreign nations.
Americans are held hostage by the federal government in similar ways to how the UK tried to hold its colony's citizens hostage, forcing them to pay heavy tax on products that could have been purchased far cheaper elsewhere or without using UK merchants.
Back then it was sugars and tea... today it is medicines and energy.
You also see the disregard and disrespect our government has for its citizens when the President gets up and addresses the nation calling 70 million or more of its citizens threats to Democracy, domestic terrorists.
In truth, what that shows, is that we no longer have a representative government. We have a government increasingly trying to maintain its power through military might abroad, and through fear and police state tactics at home.Just made a new discovery for this reply;
"“Those who forget their history are condemned to repeat it.” This sentence, often attributed to the philosopher George Santayana, is actually a misquotation of his comment, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
That has me pondering, now. I mean that in the respect of forgetting supposedly being a natural process contrast 'cannot' as in purposely repressing a memory. Do you suppose that is what our illustrious politicians are doing today in seeking their goals governed by philosophical positions such as those I brought up with the 'State of Nature'.
History is interesting, isn't it. With that saying from Santayana one can ponder our status, condition, or state as a nation, today, as your shared, in my view, with elements of truth. Yet, perspective comes to mind, while looking at myself relative to those - status, condition, or state.
Your mentioning of drug costs hits home for me. I have two name brand drugs that are for chronic conditions, thus are maintenance prescriptions. At retail their value is over $600, each, for a 30-day supply.
Yes, insurance covers a portion. However, insurance is tiered. Once one goes over a cap it jumps to 25% of retail. I go over that cap with my first order for a 90-day supply. Then, I simply cannot afford that.
All that to get to one of my struggles of deciding between Democrats and Republicans for my vote. The need of help contrast my conservative views of free enterprise and the free market. A struggle while considering Lock's position - "individuals have both a right and a duty to preserve their own lives". How I vote, today, is directly related to that.No, I don't think " that is what our illustrious politicians are doing today in seeking their goals governed by philosophical positions such as those I brought up with the 'State of Nature'." is at all the reason why we see what we do today.
You credit our politicians today with too much intelligence, the likes of Biden and Pelosi and Graham aren't capable of such depth of consideration.
It is far more basic, arrogance and corruption, we have a government that has sold out to the MIC, International Corporations/Banks, etc.
It is also a detachment, much like the Nobility of those times, our DC elites have their galas, have their WH correspondence dinners, etc. they come in broke and leave DC worth hundreds of millions (hidden in various non-profits, trusts, and offshore accounts).
Those few decent politicians are too few, and often they are purged from DC... for example Tulsi Gabbard.
Also, another show of their arrogance, is how they force us to accept what we know is wrong. We know it is wrong to allow men to compete with women, to shower with and infringe upon women... yet we are forced to accept the insanity that men who want to identify as women should be allowed to do so, and government is going to enforce it.
Same with their efforts to force parents to accept child sex change if the child wants it, this is pure insanity, overreach, and arrogance.
No I think the elements that lead to the French Revolution are here, some of what led to the American revolution as well. It will be held off as long as the economy continues to struggle along.
If the economy tanks the way it did not so long ago in Venezuela, which is when they bring in their CBDC so that they can control whether you even have money to survive with or not... well, then we'll see.
I'm 50-50 on that, plenty of docile Americans willing to go along... much like we saw the population go along in Germany back in the 1930s... that really is why there is so much emphasis in politics today for removing weapons, its hard to subjugate a population completely if they have the ability to rise up.I know... it isn't so hard to see if you take the time to read Agenda 2030
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/m … tes/brazil
https://media.un.org/en/asset/k1g/k1gjj5ru7f
https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda
The WEFs ... Great Reset
https://www.weforum.org/events/world-ec … -overview/
https://capitalresearch.org/article/the … gKkHPD_BwE
And understand others who are making major impacts in our society and politics today:
https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/ … and-asylum
https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/20 … l-currency
If you aren't reading about what the IMF, UN, and other international agencies and wealthy influencers are pushing, then you really have no idea why your government is doing what it is doing.
Whether we are talking about the border, or extreme amounts of government spending with almost no accountability, or whatever...
If you start with those meetings of the WEF, G7, G12, etc. and what they are discussing as their goals, and understand what the IMF, UN, WB are setting as goals... then what is happening today makes a lot more sense.
If you never heard of the Global Compact on Migration, if you didn't know that Biden supports it fully, then what is going on at the border doesn't seem to make sense.
Most things that are occurring today are occurring for a reason, moving us towards Agenda 2030, Great Reset, IMF, etc. goals.
. . . and in pondering your thought about today's times 'sharing' those three views (and maybe to your wondering) . . .
Consider 'your' three views as an illustration of a ball on a balance beam on a fulcrum. Locke is the fulcrum. His views are the most simple and basic: his 'state of nature and war' description is the basis of both of the others.
Then, Rousseau is the balance beam on the fulcrum. his reasoning is the scale between Locke's absolutes. His views incorporate the traits of human behavior at a societal level—levels that may be revolutionary for the society but not the individual.
The 'ball' is society. That is where Hobbes comes in. I don't like his recommended directions or conclusions, but his view of human societal behavior seems right—the majority of humans need a 'higher authority', whether it's a Monarch or a God (or a demi-god or demagogue).
Hobbes's theories explain how we influence the movement of the ball on the beam and Rousseau's views mark the beam's reaction to the ball's movement. Too much, and the beam tilts off and it's crash and burn time.
But, as each new 'equilibrium' is found, the fulcrum adjusts to a newly accepted neutral point. Locke's theory at work. A 'foundational' adjustment. Think of the analogy of women's hemlines. First, a bared ankle was risque and now it takes a thong to (maybe) raise an eyebrow. That's Locke.
So, yes, all three theories describe modern-day humans and their societies. And no, they aren't transitional. The 'details' of whatever new development or social movement will always be different but the 'workings' of the theories won't be changed.
GAOkay . . . I will ponder. Just now, through discovery I see the state of nature was first introduced by a character named Mozi. He lived long before those three philosophers yet from China. At the time he came up with it the period was known as the Waring States.
Also, Hobbes wrote of it before Locke, not that that means his view is right. Along with that for my pondering is the social contract as perhaps the solution for a state of nature. Although that concept was introduced by Rousseau, both Hobbes and Locke wrote about it too.
The theory introduced by you seems to be the three views are synergistic rather than separate. Do I have that right? Thus, not transitional as I ponder. As said, I will ponder your model. Seems to make sense, yet I am not completely sold on it at this time. Oh well . . .Without getting deep into reading their beliefs, what we see is a push for people to embrace individualism over responsibility to society, nation, or religion in America.
By breaking down the cohesive structure of a nation/society as they have done in America, by putting emphasis on wealth and individualism above all else, we have a society in America today easily...
Well... United we stand, divided we fall, and America is very divided today, unlike any other moment in its history that I can see, going back to the Civil War. In some ways moreso... as there are much more than two sides to this division.
The narratives being pushed by MSM and other sources, the facts hidden or twisted... much like the issues at the border today, do not make sense, unless one factors in the Global Compact on Migration and other UN, Open Society efforts.
Today's volatility is not driven by intellectual theories or beliefs like Locke or Hobbes or even Marx, if anything Friedman and Dmitriev would seem more prevalent and they pushed economic theories, purpose of corporatism, etc. if I recall correctly... which is where we seem to be today, that is what the WEF is, that is what drives the IMF, economics and corporate interests.
The point of all this, was that our government is not beholden to the people, or concerned about the interests and wellbeing of the people.
Understanding what our government is beholden to and why... goes a long way to explaining why we see what is going on today, be it on our city streets, at the border, or why we choose to incite war.
Realizing the truth of this, one then understands the meaning of Uniparty, and why things don't change drastically from Bush to Obama, and why Trump, who during his four years was attempting to negate these efforts, taking America out of the Paris Accord, out of the Global Compact on Migration and trying to close the Border, etc. was despised by so many and such effort by the MSM was made to smear him and today our justice system has been weaponized against him, and his supporters.
You could say the American revolution to a degree, and the French Revolution by a great degree was driven by the intellectuals you reference... as much as by Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison, Thomas Paine, George Mason, James Wilson, Ethan Allen, and Alexander Hamilton... all of whom were also far more devout than any in the French Revolution, to my understanding.
“the Radical Enlightenment alone offered a package of values sufficiently universal, secular, and egalitarian to set in motion the forces of a broad, general emancipation based on reason, freedom of thought, and democracy” ... Jonathan Israel
Israel argues, the intellectuals who fomented the revolution men such as Jacques-Pierre Brissot de Warville, Jean-Antoine-Nicolas de Caritat, Marquis de Condorcet, and Camille Desmoulins ushered in a new regime founded on “human rights, secularism, sexual liberation, gender and racial emancipation, individual liberty, and equality before the law”.
That is not what is going on today in America... not by a long shot.Once again, the morning starts with a good cup of coffee and another healthy dose of confirmation bias. Your opening nailed the issue and your thought about what the problem is (who the government is "beholden" to) is spot on.
Except for the "Global Compact" stuff.
I'm still flogging that 'the details don't matter' horse with this humbling thought . . .
It seems the quoted philosophers see the same problem: reaching the best societal 'balance point', framed in some context of the individual within the collective. They simply offer different perspectives on the most equitable equilibrium.
GAAs Bill Maher would say, way back in his Politically Incorrect days "stop putting feelings ahead of facts".
We are an exceedingly fragile nation, where an individual's feelings or perception of reality is supposed to be paramount, depending of course, on one's place on the chain of minority/victim status. And this is emphasized by our MSM and Social Media sites... how much longer we can function as a nation/society in this delirium remains to be seen.Absolutely, Ken. It's akin to a cognitive contagion that has permeated numerous facets of our society. It appears that as long as people are fed the narrative of "We're thriving and heading towards even greater success," they move through life in a state of complacency, oblivious to the fact that the country is spiraling into chaos. Every day, we witness a cascade of significant issues. While I can't pinpoint it precisely, the notion of brainwashing comes to mind.
GA mentioned confirmation bias, and I found that in someone more intelligent and articulate than I am... it was something between a joy and relief to listen to him the first time... for three straight hours, because he was saying all the things I had been thinking or trying to say.
I don't expect anyone will sit through three hours of dialogue, but Weinstein verbalizes what I believe and perceive almost verbatim when it comes to politics, media, our world today:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJxBnSyH0T4
A politician that actually speaks to the truth is Ramaswamy in this clip:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqoElNWwLf4
At least some are still trying to open eyes and allow the light to shine on truth.Ken
I believe Ramaswamy is the right choice for the country at this juncture. We require a leader who speaks candidly, addresses the numerous challenges head-on, and focuses on rectifying the existing issues to restore stability in America. His approach embodies common sense, and his appeal is likely to resonate with voters who recognize the complexities our nation is facing.
Consider the current state of affairs: the notion of open borders, discussions on gender reformation, perceived weaknesses on the global stage, incidents of our drones being downed, and surveillance balloons hovering over our nation. A president struggling to articulate coherent thoughts adds to the concerns. It begs the question of when Americans would embrace such ideas.
I acknowledge the concept of confirmation bias, as mentioned by GA. While it's inherent in human nature to seek, interpret, and favor information that aligns with our pre-existing beliefs, I believe we are witnessing a shift in societal mindset today. Ideologies seem to be turned upside down, where what was once considered good is now seen as bad, and vice versa. This is evident in the various protests, some even calling for extreme measures like a "river to the sea" in the case of Israel.
In my perspective, we are navigating through precarious times. Values appear to be disregarded when deemed inconvenient for a particular agenda, and this inversion of traditional ideologies, and values raises concerns about the direction we are headed as a society.Yup... Weinstein talks about this in a much shorter and recent clip:
I'm Afraid Liberal Values Can't Defeat This Threat
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKolY2Zyvk8
Unfortunately, a couple times as he was elaborating on a thought the interviewer interrupted him.
Weinstein runs a hedge fund, he's critical of Musk, and a few other brilliant minds, so he can be interesting to listen to, to say the least.
He's also a physicist, one of the more brilliant ones, basically an Einstein of today.
I watched this discussion from speakers Sam Harris, Bret Weinstein, Eric Weinstein, Maajid Nawaz, Douglas Murray and thought of this thread.
It covers topics like Islam, Social Justice, Enlightenment, etc. which you may find of interest:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTz77SdlUuE
Ken, you did say that I had a problem with Republicans, here is just a couple of things that stuck in my craw.
Why is it when Trump has a rally there a handful of Blacks with signs saying "Blacks for Trump"? The people strategically placed within panning range of the camera, while Trump speaks. Do conservatives/Republicans really believed that I am going to be influenced by such a display? If the Blacks there were Trump supporters, why the need for the billboards? This was never done even in earlier gatherings of Republican candidates. Did the Trump campaign or the RNC pay these people to make such a display of themselves? If Republicans think that we can be so easily influenced, they have no idea of our demographic nor can appreciate our issues and objectives.
And then there was Herschel Walker in the 2022 Senate race against the Democrat Warnock. Again, Republicans and conservatives remain naive as to the true nature of the Black vote. You all really believed that putting a totally brain dead, immoral person in a position to run against Warnock to attract more black votes would actually work. But I sure saw how close it was because whites would vote for a dog over considering leaving the seat for a Democrat. Such are the divisions in Georgia politics and in many other states just like it.
The Republican/conservative neither know nor understand us, and that continues to give us and me reason to distrust them.
Just a couple of examples and there are many more.You are right in the sense that the Black voting bloc cannot be ignored. And, that they have a historical trend with whom they will vote for. The Democrat ticket. You know more than I do, yet here is some of what I learned this morning from a Pew Research study (10/12/22). It is:
Key facts about Black eligible voters in 2022
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads … s-in-2022/
An except states:
"In an August 2022 Pew Research Center survey, 70% of Black registered voters said they would vote for or were leaning to the Democratic U.S. House candidate in their district in the coming election. Another 24% were either unsure or said they would back another candidate. Just 6% of Black registered voters said they would back the Republican candidate in the race to represent their district in the House of Representatives."
The opening paragraph for the article/study is:
The number of Black eligible voters in the United States has grown at a modest pace in recent years and is projected to reach 32.7 million in November 2022. At the same time, Black eligible voters stand out for their relatively high voter turnout rates – 51% in 2018, higher than the turnout rates for Latino and Asian eligible voters in the same year (40% each).
The key talking point subheadings are:
** Black Americans are projected to account for 13.6% of all eligible voters in the United States in November
** As of 2020, eight states are home to about half of all Black eligible voters in the United States
** Black voters made up nearly half (46%) of all eligible voters in the District of Columbia in 2020, a higher share than any state
** Seven-in-ten Black people in the U.S. are eligible to vote
** Black eligible voters differ from the broader population of eligible voters by age, education and other factors.
Worth a skim to peek at the graphics giving insight into the Black voting bloc. Some of it may be surprising such as Texas had the most Black eligible voters in 2020. And, for demographics the graphic in the fifth or last subheading is interesting. It compares Black eligible voters to all eligible voters.Thanks for the data, TSmog, that just reaffirms what we are seeing.
The attempts of GOP state legislatures to hinder the black vote has just given most of us a fierce resolve to cast ballots in overwhelming numbers.
To the Right, we say, Here is our answer.The research I have been doing shows --- Oct 2023 More people of color are voting Republican. That's not all ...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions … ican-2024/
Trump hits new poll highs with Black, Hispanic voters. What to make of it?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics … -hispanic/
It is too early to tell who will support whom."It is too early to tell who will support whom"
Perhaps Sharlee, but if the past is any guide, the odds of Republicans gathering more than a token level of support from the Black Community is highly unlikely.I agree, that the greater majority of black citizens will support the Democratic party. One could not argue that. However, has the party become something different than it was? Will black citizens look at the Democrat agenda, this time around, as one they can support? Does it really offer anything of value to black citizens, or will they note migrants now taking up much of Demacrat's time, and efforts? I feel immigrants ' care, and support have taken the front stage. Will blacks note that? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3wOyumoImA
Yes, as an example, I note the inordinate attention being given migrants. While, Joe Biden is not the ideal, can we really expect anything better from Republicans? As I said, if the past can be considered a guide, probably not. We work within our preferred party of over internecine issues, rather that support what has been for most of us regarding our concerns, an intractable enemy.
At this juncture, I have little confidence in the current members of the GOP in Congress. It's evident that there's a significant divide among them, and their performance has been disappointing. They are clearly inept.
In all honesty, I believe our best hope for the near future lies in having a new president who prioritizes American interests, regardless of party affiliation. I also hope to see many incumbents in Congress replaced. A thorough assessment and cleansing of our political system are imperative; otherwise, we're heading for serious trouble. It's perplexing to me that more people aren't paying closer attention to the pressing issues we must address.
The current president's decision-making has been consistently questionable, resulting in various crises, both domestically and globally. It's crucial that we elect a strong leader for the White House; otherwise, America's future looks bleak.Just a quick reply. I got a notice Jordan lost the second round of voting. hmmm . ..
Oh my God! I'm utterly appalled. It's truly disheartening to witness the Republican Party splintering into numerous factions. On one hand, you have the traditionalists who uphold the old pedestal, on the other, those advocating for radical change, and then there are the indecisive hand-wringers who lack conviction.
They removed a person who had the ability to collaborate with individuals from both sides of the political spectrum and maintain a positive relationship with the president. As I've mentioned before, it's high time for a thorough cleaning of Congress.
What we must look like to the World in general... In my view, we have two parties that really are not giving Americans what we need or want. We have a broken corrupt system, neither seems to have the path we the people truely seek. We are spinning out of control, and many don't realize it yet, and those that do are powerless.
Thanks for the heads-up.
Low on Oil reserves
Low investment in our Military
Low on weaponry
A non-functioning Congress
A proxy war in Russia
Most likely a Middle East War is on the horizon
Americans taken hostage by Hamas
Iran has a nuke or close to it.
China hoping to take Taiwan
Oh and open borders
BUT ALL IS GOOD - Could it really get worse?
Yeah it can, and we are not in any respect prepared for the worst.Adding to . . . there was no mention of the cultural and social issues plaguing us under Biden's watch as well as our states and communities.
Great point -- I could write a book on cultural and social issues. And today, we are becoming pulled into a huge war in several Middle Eastern countries.
The situation at hand is undeniably grave, and I find myself harboring no confidence in the current administration's ability to manage any crisis, let alone one as significant as a potential world war. A noteworthy point of concern arises from President Biden's decision to provide the Palestinians with over one billion dollars in aid over the past two years and the lifting of sanctions on Iran, allowing them to generate approximately 80 billion dollars in oil revenue, which, on the surface, appears to have furnished Iran with substantial resources, potentially fueling this conflict.
Reports of the American embassy in Beirut engulfed in flames and the recent interception of two attack drones aimed at the Iraqi air base housing American troops merely hours ago have added to the gravity of the situation. All of this unfolds against the backdrop of a Congress that appears to be functioning poorly or not at all.
In the recesses of my mind, I can't help but ponder the possibility of Iran possessing nuclear weapons and the prospect of employing such weaponry against the United States. The very idea of this remains shrouded in uncertainty, given the history of misinformation and deceit over the years. Each passing day I witness events that defy even the wildest of imaginations.I, too, could write a book on social and cultural issues that would have to be to the detriment of conservatives, generally.
What I seem to be hearing is that these events would not have occurred if Biden were not President.
Why would I believe that? I recall an attack on American Marines during Reagan's term. Who was at the helm during the 9/11 crisis? I don't buy the idea that the sheer presence of a Republican President, or Biden's absence would have precluded these attacks.
What are you going to do to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons short of war? We had a potential solution with Obama's plan, but Trump trashed it while knowing absolutely nothing about international diplomacy."What I seem to be hearing is that these events would not have occurred if Biden were not President."
Predicting the outcome of a different administration in the White House is uncertain. It's worth noting that the Biden administration, in February 2021, reversed the restoration of U.N. sanctions on Iran imposed by the Trump administration, with the goal of rejoining the 2015 nuclear agreement. Additionally, there has been criticism about the reduced enforcement of oil sanctions on Iran, which may have contributed to increased revenue. to the tune of 80 billion. This money could potentially support organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah, as well as Iran's nuclear program. Some do believe this approach was a gamble reminiscent of the Obama administration's strategy, which aimed to secure a favorable nuclear deal but did not necessarily succeed.
Trump had Iran on the ropes, their economy had failed. There is no way of knowing what would have happened under Trump or what might have happened or not happened if he was still in office. One thing we do know is they were broke under Trump, and we were not seeing terror attacks, were we? We need to concentrate on the here and now.
That is water under a bridge. We have a new president, and in my view, it was not a smart move to make Iran flush with money. Makes me wonder just how close they are now to having nuclear capability. This could be the next shoe to fall. I have no faith in this administration's truthfulness.
Need I ask --- what next?"It's worth noting that the Biden administration, in February 2021, reversed the restoration of U.N. sanctions on Iran imposed by the Trump administration, with the goal of rejoining the 2015 nuclear agreement"
-----
Perhaps, but we had a golden moment in 2015, how much credibility did we now have with Iran to try to kickstart and agreement that was unwisely trashed before?
Trump says that he had Iran on the ropes, and I don't believe it. Trump and his administration only was fortunate to have walked inbetween the raindrops. I am certainly not ready to correlate Trump policies and presence with any lull in Iranian activism.America, particularly the Biden Administration has no credibility.
There was the abandonment of Afghanistan, NATO allies were left scrambling to pull their people out without due notice, we allowed chaos during our exit to leave to cause the deaths of many.
There is the conflict with Russia, the refusal to negotiate on their points and accept that they have their own concerns and National interests, they were given the option to submit or fight, they chose to fight.
The fact that Ukraine, with the full backing of America and NATO, cannot win, is emboldening many other nations that want to stand against what they consider America's tyranny.
This combined with the arrogance of Biden's Administration, has allowed Saudi Arabia, Iran, the UAE to come into alliance, to shift towards Russia, China and BRICS and away from what they see as a weak America led by insane, inept, insulting people.
This will continue to escalate, perhaps with China next, perhaps with Iran, perhaps somewhere else. America today appears to the world, much as Biden appears to you and I... confused, crochety, and incapable of getting the job done.America lost credibility before with Trump, as a virtual raging bull in the China shop.
Someone had to get America out of Afghanistan and end a futile conflict, while Biden was criticized as how it was done, at least he got it done.
There are many points of contention regarding Russia and the Ukraine, I cant compete with your obvious level of research in regards to this issue.
I am not going to buy your opinion that the Biden Administration is responsible for the entire world falling off from its axis.
As for the escalation, we will see if another one of your predictions actually comes to pass?
I hear you, Sharlee. But we can even dispute as to what is the nature of "prioritizing American interests".Looking at Republican infighting, they certainly are not an example of a solution.
Every new administration and congress speaks of "cleaning house". No one has really wanted to tackle those multiple aspects that makes the very suggestion a Herculean task. It is Lucy, Charlie Brown and the football.
I had just as many questions about the decision skills of the previous President as you have about the current one.
I'm not a Republican, I'm certainly not a Democrat either.
I fall somewhere between Independant and Libertarian, anyways, there are just as many strange or unseemly decisions made by the Democratic Party.
The point I try to make, these are small potatoes, they are the side dish most people allow themselves to get stirred up over. The main meal is what is transforming the country.
The other point is that you have way too much venom for Republicans, the Republicans doing stupid things trying to win votes and influence people is not the same thing as the Democrats supporting so many of the unpopular changes we are seeing within our country as well as the wars ongoing without.
I know what you are trying to say, the alternative to you (that being the Republicans) is worse, so far as you are concerned.
The problem, for a growing amount of Americans, is that both Parties, and what is occurring in our nation, is totally unacceptable... right now those people are being denigrated and labelled as Trumpsters and Traitors.
For a growing number of Americans, this government no longer represents them, what they want, what they believe... its a runaway train... the trainwreck is coming."For a growing number of Americans, this government no longer represents them, what they want, what they believe... it's a runaway train... the trainwreck is coming."
So agree, and this realization is present on both sides of the divide. This is clear at this point.
The present administration is a departure from the expectations of many Democrats. It seems to have veered far off course, and there is growing concern about the numerous crises it has instigated, both domestically and internationally, Biden's poor governing has created a cascading impact.
Hopefully, more Demacrats will realize what is smack in front of their eyes.Ken, I know that you say that you fall somewhere between independent and libertarian, but you consistently blame and bash Democrats as any Republican would.
For me and mine, Respect is important. When I was a kid, my father made me read "How to Win Friends and Influence People" by Dale Carnegie.
Anyone who approaches me with insult and disrespect as do the Republicans in so many ways, certainly are not my friends and can expect to have little influence. Your "big picture" is not my big picture.
The Republicans have earned that venum. Yes, as far as I am concerned the Republicans are worse. We both recognize troubling trends in the nation and on the planet at large. But you have yet to explain beyond bashing Democrats what your solution is and why it is to be better? Until you can a least do that, why should I give credibility to what you say? What are you offering as a solution to forestall the train wreck? Worshipping cretins like Trump and embracing his MAGA does not seem like much of a solution to me. Are you advocating doing away with democracy for a more authoritarian form of government, that seems to be the fashion amongst America's "New Right" these days. They gave us a sneak preview with the heralding of the Hungarian dictator as a model. Any retrenchment from Democratic governance will not tolerated without a conflict. Which will lead to the destruction of the country from within, who wants to go there?
And Republicans are not supporting unpopular changes, like Abortion prohibited with the exception of the threat of death to the mother?
So......I guess that makes me a bio-organisms first, An independent mini anarchist. Even though labels don't stick on me well. The World will change itself. I'll keep slipping through the cracks from parts of life that doesn't make good sense. At times visit groups that make common sense. When being creative and unique I make living in an uncommon sense artist lifestyle. love makes good sense. And work makes love visual and beautiful.
Understood, Castle, anarchy brings up visions of a post apocalypse society, "Mad Max in the Thunder dome". No one living in a world of others can be truly independent. I have to take a hand in whatever way I am able to prevent the world from changing into an undesirable state. Because if I foul the nest, I will have live to live in it. Cooperation and certain levels of accommodation amongst us all is necessary for the ultimate survival of humanity as a species, so perhaps then we can look upon the finer things in life. There exists many malevolent forces that will not make that journey easy, there can be no passive response in the face of such danger.
I'm lucky I don't have a family tree with any murderer or criminal in it. My daughter has an animation company call apocalybliss, love her curiousity and optimism and to challenge problems,. She and my girlfriend keep me on my happy feet. Everyone is dying and few are living it up. When I look into another strong individuals eyes, I can see their soul. Then I know I'm not alone of being the king of my own domain also. And know nobody owns me and nobody can boss me around all day and every day. Because by hypnotising myself , not by mass hysteria.
In my view, fear and anger can have a profound impact on the health and stability of any democratic society. While democracy thrives on open debate, informed decisions, and the peaceful exchange of ideas, these emotions can disrupt the balance big time. Fear, for instance, can lead to an erosion of civil liberties, as citizens may be overly willing to sacrifice personal freedoms in the name of security. It can also fuel the rise of demagogues who exploit public anxieties to consolidate power.
Similarly, anger can polarize communities and hinder constructive dialogue, pushing people towards extreme positions and away from the spirit of compromise that is often essential in a democratic system.
"What are your feelings on fear and anger in your political life? Do those two have a different effect on your thinking about politics in general, your personal ideology, and finally voting?"
Both anger and fear affect my thinking equally when it comes to voting. My fears ultimately initiate research and much of the time my research initiates anger. My common sense takes hold, and my decision-making comes down to using what I learn about a candidate, their past capabilities to do the job, and their general demeanor also plays a part.
My thought process regarding voting is equally influenced by both anger and fear. Often, my concerns and apprehensions are the catalyst for conducting research. Interestingly, this research can sometimes provoke feelings of anger. However, throughout this process, I strive to maintain a sense of rationality. Ultimately, my decision-making hinges on a combination of factors: the information I gather about a candidate, their track record in the role, and their overall demeanor also play a significant role in shaping my voting choices.
In regard to the 2024 election, I have no problem sharing I will be voting for the Republican candidate. I feel no connection to the Democrat's ideologies. I feel the current administration has all but ruined this country.
To be honest --- I think anger and fear will work to get Democracy back on the right track. I feel many have now become very aware of the serious derailment. I think most will be voting for a new conductor.
I say this frequently --- I mean what next? The country is in trouble,Sometimes I think the world is run by fear.
Yet, in my heart says love conquers all.Fear and love are two powerful contrasting human emotions. Fear can be both rational, such as fearing physical harm or danger, and irrational, such as phobias or anxieties about the unknown.
Love is a complex and multifaceted emotion, that encompasses a wide spectrum of feelings, from affection to passion. Love fosters connection, compassion, and a sense of belonging.
In my view, both influence our decision-making and behavior. Fear can work to drive us away from potential threats, while love draws us closer to what we see as positive, and tend to value.Being fearless dose not mean I'm not afraid. It means I'm brave enough to confront the problems, the unknowns or bullies.
I attribute that to innate common sense. One that just does not let fear control a situation has a good dose of common sense. I feel common sense has been attributed to our societal divide. Fear, love, anger -- ultimately one that has an abundance of common sense can maneuver their way through emotions such as love, anger, and fear as well as hate.
I list a positive means to an end feeling I want most in life by priority. 1.Love, 2. Healthy, 3.Free, 4.,Consciousness 5..Joy, 6. Fun, 7 8. Passion, 9.Security and lesser important felling and etc.
Negative feeling I want to avoid most 1. Frustration, 2.Overwhelm. Sadness, Humiliation, Dwelling,, and so on working on most.
Fear, angry, loneliness, depression, revenge, hate, envy, jealousy I've actually mastered to avoid.
Concept is avoid as much suffering as possible. Then send more times happy and pleasure feeling, as a means to an end.
Thanks, Sharlee, for sharing how fear and anger interact with your own pathway with voting. You have shared in the past how you approach voting. I admire that you put in the due diligence. Do you do that with initiatives and measures too? However, as an opinion, I think a minority of voters do put in that effort. I would suspect only a portion of the 44% of Americans that are college-educated.
As to fear and anger until reading the article I thought fear to be the culprit for pushing people toward the right and affecting voting. That is traditional thought. It is the fight or flight mechanism a reaction to the fear felt by a threat. Two examples are transgenderism and the border.
However, they share anger is what pushes people to the polls. They studied the French 2017 general elections, and the people had the impact of the 2015 Paris terrorist attack fresh in their minds. What they discovered is the more fear the less inclined to vote. The more anger the more inclined to vote and how they vote.
With that in mind, I ponder if the right media strategy is capitalizing on that knowledge – there is more to gain from anger than fear. What are your thoughts? Do the likes of CNN and FOX both seek the emotion of anger from their audience . . . the voters? Are they successful? Which of those two emotions has caused more turmoil in today's society with the deep divide between parties?That is why emotional intelligence is more important than mental intelligence. A good EIQ leads with the hearts shortly follow by the mind. Anger and fear causes negativties and more often negative results, caught in vicious cycle. The media and Politicans create the fake monster then the public throws money at it. Because of their fears to do anything about it. There is nothing in life that anyone can throw at me, that I'm not able to handle within my circle. When half my money is in some way ends up going to the Government to create even more monsters. That motivate me in my personal and business life to creates other new ways of thinking.
Ultimately, the decision to capitalize on anger or fear as part of a media strategy depends on the goals and values of the specific news outlet and the interests of its target audience. I feel, that media strategies employed by news outlets like CNN and FOX can vary, and do offer just what their target audience is looking for. It is clear more than ever Americans do not share all of the same ideologies, and will tune into the network that compliments their own.
CNN is generally considered to lean to the left, and it typically focuses on delivering news, that can evoke anger, relying on reporting that truely is meant to grab the social side of a story and engage in discussions and debates that could trigger emotions in their viewers. Sometimes, unrealistically not offer a common sense view.
FOX News, on the other hand, is known for its conservative-leaning commentary and offers opinion shows. In my view, some of its programs are more likely to use both emotional appeals, all carefully crafted to include the anger appeals. I think this is why they have a larger audience. They often feature hosts and guests who express strong, opinionated views that resonate with a particular audience. Fox most definitely generates strong emotions -- anger, fear, smack in the face common sense. These are our strongest emotions, our true fight-or-flight emotions.
I feel both networks use sensationalism which involves exaggerating news events to provoke strong emotional responses from the audience. Which spans from empathy to anger, and fear. CNN draws empathy, which ultimately can enlist emotions such as anger and fear. They just take a roundabout path to bring their viewers to these emotions. Fox, comes right at ya... They evoke immediate fight or flight. Get right to the emotion they are looking for.
Both engage in fear-inducing tactics. Both aim to instill in the audience a sense of deprivation in various aspects of their lives, whether it's freedom, values, common sense, human kindness, or fairness.
I have come to watch Fox more than CNN. I am a creature of common sense, and feel emotions (although very important in my day-to-day personal life) can be detrimental in figuring out politics, and can be detrimental in making decisions under the many crisis issues that we see in the media today. I look at crisis with a very realistic eye.
"Are they successful? Which of those two emotions has caused more turmoil in today's society with the deep divide between parties?"
Both are very successful, I feel both are equally successful in pushing their venue. Fox is more successful in drawing an audience.
In my view, anger had a big lead, until most recently. Fear will soon overtake anger due to the many crises we have endured under this president. In my view, I have witnessed a perfect domino effect that began with anger due to our economy, huge ideology clashes, a proxy war, and our border crisis, and now we face a very dangerous problem in the Middle East. So much more -- So, now we face fear, a fear mixed with anger.
I predict we will see record numbers come out to vote --- out of fear.
Anger will take a back seat this time around.
I don't feel the final domino has fallen. Do you?At least Fox has a little humor I can sometimes bare. I carry a BS detector that helps me change the channel. Comedians doing the news do it well, and in a good way of expressing truth deeper. Without getting cancelled or blocked so fast.
I have Problems with carbonism tax my gas tank went up 20% and our owners who own people, not me of course.
Carlin says it best, well ahead of his time.
https://youtu.be/t8O_CcGhLD8?si=VyvE5IukCTkkYz_5
For the forthcoming 2024 General Election in the UK, perhaps ‘anger’ is too a strong a word (but perhaps the right sentiment), but certainly the current state of the UK economy (the cost of living crisis, and the fuel crisis over the last two winters - caused mainly by Brexit, the pandemic and the Ukrainian war); plus the NHS crisis caused by the pandemic followed by continued NHS industrial action against the Government (their paymaster) since the summer of last year (18 months), has made the current UK Conservative Government very unpopular, and they are currently on course for a humiliating electoral defeat next year (potential landslide victory to socialism) – as this recent video clip shows:
Oct 2023: Conservatives suffer DOUBLE by-election defeat as Labour (socialists) wins the second biggest victory (swing to the left) in any election since WW2. https://youtu.be/RkA5zjGwTWoHello, Arthur!! How was your mini-vacation? It was a mini-vacation, right? I hope it was full of fun, fun, fun, and family fellowship.
It appears from your list of discontentment they parallel a few to many that are here. Thanks for the video. What caught my attention in the beginning the interviewee used the term 'rage' several times.
In my world, rage is an action of 'anger'. Then as the video progressed I got a good idea as to why the sentiment bears emotion(s). The history was interesting as well.
Here in the US, from my perspective, there is 'fear' from the conservative side more than the liberal. And, anger as well, which one may say is the more dominant emotion.
The article I shared in the OP, pointed out that 'anger' is the cause that 'push' people to the polls to vote. One graphic shares that the more fear a person has the less likely one will go to the polls, but the more anger a person experiences the more likely they will go to the polls and vote.
My observation is conservatives, yes, do 'fear' liberals. However, they are angry about the border issue with immigrants some say that is invading our nation. With the revolution of transgenderism, there are pressures on society to change and perhaps conform to their 'demands', i.e., the bathroom issue, biological males competing in women's sports, etc. Forcing conformity is a key element.
And, as you shared for the UK, the economic status today. Fresh on minds is the steep climb of inflation especially with fuel both for home - natural gas and electricity, and our vehicles. I am angry about that myself.
From experience, I have learned once a price increases due to inflation rarely does it go back to where it started from before the climb. Yes, inflation may slow to 2% or a little above. But, the starting point for that measurement is the new price as a result of the earlier 8%.
BTW . . . I wrote a HubPages article on my adventure with Medicare, medical groups, and bringing information to the new doctor one will have as a result of the change. Link following.
I hope I don't get penalized by HP as we are not supposed to promote our articles. Oh Well! I have seen others do it. Beware, it is about 15 minutes to read due to all the information provided.
Luck, Medical Groups, Medicare Part C, and an Adventure
https://discover.hubpages.com/health/lu … -adventureI’ll respond to your first question here, and the rest of your comments later in a separate post – as the response to your first question is going to be a lengthy one!
What you’ve called a “mini-vacation” is what we call a holiday in the UK e.g. a vacation lasting a week or more; a mini-break/long weekend are holidays (vacations) of typically 2 to 4 days, and a day trip is a local vacation for just a day or half day out.
Our holiday was a mixed experience, but we enjoyed it:-
The main purpose of the holiday was to watch the 1066 (Battle of Hastings) re-enactment over the weekend, on the very spot where the original battle of Hastings took place in 1066 – in a town (just a few miles north west of Hastings called ‘Battle’ (named after the Battle of Hastings); the town Battle has a population of 6,673. William the Conqueror (on the orders of the Pope of Rome) built an Abbey (Battle Abbey) in 1094 on the very spot of the battle, in ‘penance for killing so many people during his conquest of England – the ‘high altar’ of the church being built on the very spot that King Harold was killed during the battle on 14th October 1066.
The location of the re-enactment took place in part of the field, in the grounds of Battle Abbey, in Battle, Sussex, where the original battle took place, on the same day (14th October), with a repeat performance the following day (Sunday). For the re-enactment, we took with us folding chairs, flask of hot water (for coffee) and a freezer bag on wheels (with our packed lunch); and picking a suitable spot in the field, made ourselves comfortable for the day – and between performances (in the breaks) we took it in turn to explore the rest of the Abbey grounds, other side events, and market stalls on site.
The weekend weather was great (hotter than most of July and August), warm with blue sky and sun; so I think like September, October is going to be the hottest October on record (global warming).
Anyway, all went well until the end of the day, as we were packing up, and everyone was leaving; when suddenly, our son was knocked down by a big/heavy mobility scooter – he and the big lens he was using went flying, and his camera was run over by the mobility scooter; he pulled a muscle in his leg, but of more concern was his camera equipment, worth over $6,000 – which he depends on for his livelihood (professional photographer).
The disabled driver was very apologetic, and gave his full details (name and address) without hesitation; the camera lens is a right-off and the camera is damaged and will need repair, but still working to a fashion.
Fortunately, as it is his profession, our son’s camera equipment is fully insured, so the replacement lens and repairs for the camera will be paid for by insurance – so that’s not an issue. This issue is that he needs his equipment for his work. Fortunately, a close friend of ours has an almost identical lens and similar camera (amateur photographer), and agreed to lend them to our son for a few months, while the camera is in for repairs and the insurance money comes through to buy a replacement lens.
The intention was to swing by Portsmouth (where our friend lives) from Hastings, on the way back to Bristol at the end of the holiday: But for ‘the best-laid plans of mice and men’ that was not to be! On the Wednesday my wife fell ill with a bad throat infection – She phoned the NHS 111 phone line at 10am, gave them her details (so that they could access her medical records) and gave them her symptoms; and then we spent the day in Hastings near the pier to see one of the many Martello towers in the area, and for our son to get atmospheric photos of Hasting’s pier in the storm (Storm Babet):-
Martello towers are small defensive forts that were built across the British Empire (mostly coastal forts) during the 19th century, from the time of the French Revolutionary Wars onwards.
The UK was hit by Storm Babet from Wednesday, it swept through South East England on Wednesday (just the one day), and battered South West England until Friday morning, and then ravaged Northern Ireland and Scotland, causing severe flooding and power outages there. A contrast in weather e.g. over the weekend, while at the re-enactment of the Battle of Hastings, we were in summer clothes; on Wednesday, to keep warm and dry against the storm, I was wearing six layers of winter clothes.
Anyway, at 2:30pm that day, while we were having a late lunch in a local café in Hastings, the NHS (111 phone line) phoned back to say they’d looked at her medical records, consulted with a doctor, and passed an order for a prescription of antibiotics onto a local pharmacy near the caravan holiday park that we were staying at – and they gave us the address of the pharmacy where we could pick up the prescription (free prescription of course). So after our meal, and on our way back to the caravan holiday park we stopped at the local pharmacy and picked up the prescription.
Come Friday, when it was time to make our way back to Bristol, although the antibiotics had helped, my wife wasn’t in a fit state to make a detour to Portsmouth to pick up the camera and lens from our friend, so we just made a beeline for Bristol – But even that was an eventful journey.
On entering the M4 motorway, from the M25 motorway (ring road around London), both our Sat-Nav and the motorway message boards were telling us that the M4 was blocked outside of Bristol; so I Googled the M4 traffic up-date, to learn that in Storm Babet a lorry had flipped over, blocking the M4 motorway (in both directions) on the outskirts of Bristol. When we got to the Reading motorway Service Station for a rest-bite the lorry had been cleared but the traffic on the motorway at that point was at a standstill, with an estimated 45 minute delay – and by the time we got close to Bristol, no change: So rather than be stuck in a hour long traffic queue, and not moving for up to an hour on the motorway, we decided to come off at Swindon (the last motorway junction before Bristol), and drive the rest of the way on the side roads – a journey which should have taken an hour, but took 90 minutes because, not only did other drivers have the same idea (adding to the traffic) but with Storm Babet having passed through the area just hours earlier, for the first 10 miles (1/3rd of the route), a lot of the local roads were flooded; passable (with up to six inches of flood water on the roads), but it meant driving slowly and carefully through the flood water.
At the moment I’m just editing the video footage from our car cams of that part of the journey, for posting to YouTube later in the week.
In spite of the above mentioned issues, the rest of our holiday was good:
Although our son’s camera isn’t fully functional (because of the accident), it has enough working functions for him to carry on using it on holiday, with his other lenses.
We visited quite a few Martello towers along the coast, piers at both Hastings and Eastbourne, the RNLI lifeboat station at Hastings, and the maritime museum, Rye Harbour nature reserve, and the spectacular views at Beachy Head, where we also had a superb meal in the local restaurant there.
The only other irritation to our son was a coach load of young teenage Germans at Beachy Head, who got in his way while he was trying to take landscape photos; and the following day, when we visited the opposite end of Hastings to the pier, the same German coach, with the same teenagers, arrived in the same carpark as we did, at the same time as us - to our son’s annoyance; but which both my wife and I found amusing!
Anyway, our friend from Portsmouth is kind enough to visit us tomorrow (and stay for a couple of days) so that he can bring up his lens and camera, for our son to borrow while he’s getting his camera repaired, and getting a replacement lens – So all’s well that ends well – and I’ve got lots of video footage to edit and process for YouTube (particularly of the 1066 Battle of Hastings re-enactment).Responding now to the quite adventuresome journey you and your family experienced. A mini-vacation is not an American term I know of it. It is a term I made up. In my working days, I got 1-1/2 days off a week for about 24 years.
The last 14 years are when I did data mining, report creation, and research projects. Importantly there were close to a dozen reports and half were daily ones that only I knew how to do. So, on my vacations, I went to the office and did them after the stores were closed say around 10 p.m. In essence I did not have a vacation. So, if I got two full days off in a row I declared that a mini-vacation.
Back to your adventure. I am saddened your wife encountered the illness. Yet, very happy with the NHS system it was resolved. I, also, am bummed about your son's camera. I wonder what the gentleman was paying attention to when he ran him over. I have to dodge them when walking on the sidewalks alongside the street going on an errand. They are bullies in my mind with the attitude they have.
It appears the storm through a wrench in the works. Not good!
Overall, though, it seemed like the family did get enjoyment, especially with the reenactment observed. As they say, "things work out for the best." With your son resolving his camera problem through a friend, finally getting home traversing the atrocious storm damage, and as they say "home sweet home". I bet everyone grew a smile.
On the East Coast both south and north there are battle reenactments for the Civil War. I think there are some for the Revolutionary War too. I don't know of any here in Southern California. If there were it would be the Spaniards with the Native Americans or the U.S. with the Mexicans with the Mexican-American War of 1946 for California's independence from Mexico. But, I have not heard of reenactments.
There is a battle site less than 20 miles from me for a notable battle of the Mexican-American war called the Battle of San Pasqual. It is known as one of the bloodiest battles and is significant. It is a state park now. Next is a link to a site to explore at leisure. I will do that myself at a later time. I would be good for me to know some of the history where I live, right?
San Pasqual Battlefield Site Location Project
https://sanpasqual.org/I’m still rather busy doing other things so I’ll respond to this post in two separate parts; the first part being your first two paragraphs – which caught my eye:
For clarification, where you say: “In my working days, I got 1-1/2 days off a week for about 24 years.” That’s 78 days a year (1.5 x 52), so are you talking about the weekend, and did you not get paid vacation leave on top of that?
In the UK and EU the working week is generally 5 days a week; and the legal minimum in the EU and UK for paid leave (vacation) is 30 days (6 weeks paid leave) per year - Plus Bank/Public holidays of course.
And being in a large organisation like the civil service I also had flexi leave (paid leave in lieu of credit hours) to a maximum entitlement of 3 days paid flexi leave per 4 week period e.g. I used to work 9 hours a day instead of my standard 7.4 hours per day to build up flexi time and then take 3 days paid flexi leave off a month; on top of my six weeks paid annual leave per year.
What caught my attention is your comment that you would go into work on your days off; which is a common theme I frequently see in American films e.g. a culture of where Americans put work before family and personal life, and where the boss expects their employees to sacrifice their vacation time to do important and urgent work in the office?
It’s a theme that is played out time and time again in American films. But in contrast, cultural attitudes by both British Commerce (employer) and employee is that the six weeks paid annual leave is sacrosanct; in fact, in the UK an employer will take a dim view if an employee tries not to take their full annual paid leave (vacation) entitlement.
Have I gone off-beam or did I understand you correctly?Oops! Nathan, forgive me this is long. I chopped and chopped. I got it down to this to explain what I felt may make it understandable. I don't know if I did a good job or not. I wound up with a part 2.
First, the average American worker (age 16+) works 38.7 days per week. Over 32% of single job holders work weekends while 58% of multiple job holders work weekends. Take a peek at the next link with a graphic for the average weekly hours by demographic.
A short skim is informative. Doing that discovered is about 40 hours per week is normal. So, the theme seen in films perhaps is the exception with the goal centered on a conflict for dramatic purposes. For instance, executives are the minority.
What Is The Average Work Hours Per Week In The US? [2023] by Zippia - Career Expert (Jan 9, 2023)
https://www.zippia.com/advice/average-w … -per-week/
************************
Next, I will address your two following quotes:
“For clarification, where you say: “In my working days, I got 1-1/2 days off a week for about 24 years.” That’s 78 days a year (1.5 x 52), so are you talking about the weekend, and did you not get paid vacation leave on top of that?”
And,
“What caught my attention is your comment that you would go to work on your days off;”
**************************
Before I answer for background, for the last 24 years of my 40-year career, I worked for a chain of Automotive Tire and Service stores. By the time I left, there were 24 U.S. stores, 2 warehouses, and the corporate office located at the main warehouse. Plus, we had six stores in Mexico with a warehouse.
Right off you will see it is retail-orientated and was a seven-day operation for the stores and warehouses. While in the corporate office for the last 14 years before I retired I had responsibilities to each entity, all management, and employees.
I will stick to the last 14 years when I worked in the corporate office. I have like you a part 2 discussing the whys regarding days off for the positions in the company, vacations, holidays, and a retirement investment tool.
I feel you might find that interesting as a compare/contrast with your work background. However, not every independent business has the same structure we had. Nor, public entities such as governments, schools, and transportation systems.
The short answer is, that my days off were Thursday and a half-day on Sunday. Thursday was my choice. Sunday was not. Yes, I worked Saturdays. I worked Saturdays my whole working career with them. That is explained in part 2.
One important reason why I worked Sundays in the evenings was someone was available for computer malfunctions and administrative challenges. I could solve most problems like a frozen computer screen. Sometimes things like the drawer did not balance. They had to report that to me as I was the auditor for daily cash and credit card receipts.
On my day off they reported it to their district manager. For computer problems, the district manager called the vice president who was responsible for the computer system. Not me as it was my day off. She would resolve the problem from her home. She could access the mainframe from there if need be.
I should also say my hours were from 1 p.m. until I went home. Except for Sundays when I came at 5 p.m. and worked until I went home. That was my half day.
The time I left for home was after the last store closed, I posted the business to the main frame, did the reports, and distributed them. If everything went smoothly I was off by ten or eight hours of work plus one hour for lunch. On my half day, it was between four and five hours of work.
So, six days a week the management from store to corporate had their reports on the following morning. On the day following my day off the vice president would come in early before the stores and warehouses opened and post the business to the mainframe.
I got there an hour early on Fridays and did the reports. But, they weren’t pleased with that really. Who cared what yesterday’s business was? Half the day was gone. So, I was always in hot water. Ha-ha!
They wanted to see the progress report for that day, which I did at that time. I also got in hot water when sales were low. It was my fault since I did the reports.
I went in on vacation days to post the daily business and do the reporting, not my one day off. If everything went smoothly it was only two hours. If it was an end-of-month then it was longer no matter what day of the week.
The reason why I was the only one to do the reports is the owner of the company only allowed me access to my desktop PC with its information. And, access to the mainframe for data transfers.
That could only be accomplished with my PC. A trust issue is seen. The security he wanted meant when I left my PC I had to log off. It was password protected of course. He was the only other person to know the password. I would bet my bottom dollar he forgot it pretty quickly.
There were a few incidents where the vice president called me to do something on my PC on my day off. I was usually at home. I had no reservations about going in. I can’t remember any time I was not home when that happened. Luck for them?
Yes, I got paid vacations. I had three weeks a year. I achieved that after five years of service. More in part 2. And, I got paid for my time to go into the office to post the daily business and do the reports during any vacation days I took. However, it was not hourly. I was salaried with a bonus. It was computed into my bonus.
A notation is the owner of the company knew my sacrifices. Our working relationship was closer to a tight friendship than me as his employee. He took care of me on several occasions.
One was I had an emergency thoracotomy for my right lung. He paid me the whole time I was off. I was not off long enough to collect disability. I was off for two weeks. He took care of me when I left the business too. Nice! Consider we did not have retirement.Thanks for your comprehensive reply, which I think has helped to give some clarity.
Where you say “I went in on vacation days to post the daily business and do the reporting…” and “There were a few incidents where the vice president called me to do something on my PC on my day off.” - that is the very stuff of what I often see in American films e.g. in the UK the very idea of going into work while on holiday leave is in all but exceptional circumstances unthinkable.
Also, where you say “I got paid for my time to go into the office to post the daily business and do the reports during any vacation days I took.”; in the UK it is illegal to get paid in lieu of holiday leave e.g. if for any reason you have to cancel your holiday because of crisis at work not only would your employer have to pay you, but also you would keep your holiday to use another time – and if you had to go into work outside of your normal working time your employer would have to pay overtime rates e.g. 1.5 x your hourly rate, or double your hourly rate if it’s a Sunday.
I can understand the ‘trust’ issue you reference e.g. it’s your PC and the security issues etc. but nevertheless if work needs to be done when you’re not there, surly it’s management issue, and management has the responsibility to train others to cover for you in your absence – and in the UK those others trained up to cover for you would be given their own Computer and Account passwords so that they could log into your PC under their name (for audit purposes).
Thanks for the link showing the average American worker works 38.7 hours per week; in the civil service I worked 37 hours per week, which is above the average for the UK – the average working week in the UK is 35.9 hours per week.
I look forward to seeing your part 2: in the meantime, for comparison between USA & UK, below is a summary of UK Labour Laws (which is very similar to EU Labour Laws):
1. Paid Annual Leave (Vacation):
Under EU & UK laws every single employee, from the time they leave school e.g. from the age of 16, have a legal minimum of six weeks paid leave (vacation) from their first day in work.
2. Sick Leave:
Uncertified sick leave with pay e.g. taking the odd day off without a doctor certificate, such as having an upset stomach: There is no legal number of sick days an employee is allowed, so it’s up to each employer to set their own limit (which should be reasonable and proportionate – statistically in the UK it’s currently 4.4 days per year.
Paid certified sick leave e.g. sick leave with a doctor’s certificate because of flu or a broken leg etc. The employee is entitled to 28 weeks paid certified sick leave per year.
Doctors/Dentist appointments: An employer has a legal obligation to allow their employees to visit a doctor or dentist during work hours, on full pay.
3. Maternity Leave:
In the UK a woman is entitled to up to 52 weeks maternity leave, of which the first 39 weeks is paid, and the remainder is unpaid. By law the mother has to legally take at least 2 weeks maternity leave, minimum (after the baby is born). If the mother choose to take the full 52 weeks maternity leave then her employers is legally obligated to keep her job open for her e.g. employ temporary staff to cover her work until she returns from maternity leave.
Paternity Leave: The father is legally entitled to two week paid paternity leave.
Parental Leave: The mother can choose to give some or most of her maternity leave to the father (parental leave) e.g. the father gets paid for staying at home to look after the baby instead of the mother – or they can split her maternity leave so that the mother has time off before the birth and then both parents stay at home to look after the baby.
4. Flexible Working e.g. part-time, job sharing, flexible hours, home working etc.
In 2014 the UK Conservative Government amended the laws on ‘flexible working’ to make it a legal right for any employee to request ‘flexible working’. Under the law, an employer doesn’t have to accept the request, but if they don’t they have to give a valid reason for not doing so e.g. if the employer’s reason is wishy-washy then they run the risk of their refusal to flexible working be challenged in an Industrial Tribunal – In the UK the Industrial Tribunal is a ‘free’ government service.
This short video is how a Retail Company and Car Manufacturer responded to the new laws on flexible working in the UK – which I think helps to highlight some of the different cultural attitudes between the USA & UK: https://youtu.be/2Qs0EL6JWD0
I’d be interested to hear how the above UK laws and practices differ to the USA.Thanks, Nathan! Yes, the UK have embed laws for 'benefits' that we do no have. Hooray, for the UK as I see it. IMHO, the reason we do not is we are centered more on the free trade principle and that should even things out as they say.
The relationship of labor with business and the influence of capitalism is at the crux of it as I see it. Most 'voluntary benefits' becoming typical are the result of unions fighting for them through negotiations and strikes. Yet, one must bear in mind those benefits are really enticements and are not mandatory.
A note is this year alone there has been 312 strikes involving 453,000 workers. Many with large unions like United Auto Workers. They are just now coming to agreements with the different manufacturers with workers returning to the assembly line soon. Another significant strike was health care workers, e.g. nurses.
Why so many workers are striking in 2023: ‘Strikes can often be contagious,’ says expert by CNBC (Oct 9, 2023)
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/10/09/from-ua … -year.html
I will post the first part of the part 2 I am working on.
Before I get into how the company I worked for set up days off for scheduling purposes, vacation policy, holidays, and pay structure let’s peek at the following regarding what our Federal government says. Remember state laws may vary from one to another. But, Federal law trumps state laws.
First, Not all benefits are required by Federal law. Benefits here in the U.S. are two types.
Statutory – Those are benefits to full-time employees required by law. Federal statutory legal employee benefits for employers include:
** Social Security and Medicare
** Unemployment insurance
** Workers' compensation insurance
** Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) protections
Then there are voluntary benefits. Some of those are:
** Paid vacation time
** Contributions to retirement savings plans
** Education assistance
** Wellness programs
** Childcare assistance
** Paid sick leave
** How many days off per workweek
** And, others
There are caveats. One is part-time and the other is if a company has 50 or more employees. Also, states have their own laws too. For a full explanation of the Federal laws follow the next link.
Mandatory (Statutory) Benefits a Company Must Provide Full-time Employees by PayChex (Updated 08/01/23) It is a 7-minute read.
https://www.paychex.com/articles/employ … st-provide
I will mention there are laws for pay. One is the minimum wage. The federal minimum wage is $7.25 (£5.99). For people who receive tips, there is a formula for that. The minimum wage for employees who receive tips is $2.13 per hour. The amount of tips plus the $2.13 must reach at least $7.25 per hour. If not, your employer must pay to make up the difference.
Additional information is states do set their minimum wage as well as some cities. California, where I live, minimum wage is $15.50 (£12.80). Within the boundaries of San Diego City proper the minimum wage beginning 2024 is $16.85 (£13.91).
Of course, any business can have an entry minimum wage. For instance, for In-n-Out Burger starting wage is $19.08 (£15.06).
Two is overtime pay. Basically, you are paid overtime when you work over 40 hours per week at the rate of time and a half. Follow the next link for that. Some companies pay time and a half for working on Sundays. But, pay double time for holidays. It varies.
However, there are exemptions. Basically, it is for salaried employees. Those are:
** Executive
** Administrative
** Professional
** Computer employee
** Outside Sales representative
** High salaried employees
Overtime Pay by the U.S. Dept. of Labor (Very short read)
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime
Fact Sheet #17A: Exemption for Executive, Administrative, Professional, Computer & Outside Sales Employees Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) by the U.S. Dept. of Labor (Kind of a medium read?)
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-s … a-overtime
An interesting article about the five-day work is at the next link.
A brief history of the five-day workweek by SideKick (11/15/22) 4 minute read
https://www.morningbrew.com/sidekick/st … -work-week
It is apparent to you I am sure it is quite different than in the U.K. There are many voluntary benefits here that are embedded into the law there.
With my part 2, it turns the page to the structure for the company I worked at for twenty-four years before retiring. I am chopping it down now. I think you would find it interesting especially relating it to:
** what the statutory benefits are through Federal law here
** the voluntary benefits that became traditional like paid vacation time
** compare/contrast with your work experience in the UK and overall view of independent private businesses.
Addressing my situation I endured with going in on my vacation time to do the numbers. Remember, I always had the privilege to quit and go somewhere else. So, it is my fault as much as it was the company, right? Also, I did get paid for it through my bonus.
As far as the stringent security with my job and the PC. The only thing I can say is, the owner was burned once for over two million dollars embezzled by an employee. Using his privilege with the computer system he manipulated it to his personal benefit. He was prosecuted, it took over a year for the owner to win the case, yet he never recovered the loss. That is the cause of his trust issue. He had a lot of trust and faith in me.I will have to respond to your points in 2 parts, as I’ll not have enough time today to cover all the points - Part 1:-
Yep, America is very much a laissez-faire country; in contrast the EU & UK do heavily Regulate Industry – Two quite contrasting political capitalist economic systems.
Yeah, likewise in the EU & UK improved pay and working conditions are “the result of unions fighting for them through negotiations and strikes.”, and certainly, likewise in the EU & UK ‘enhanced benefits offered by an employer are also enticements to help Companies ‘recruit and maintain’ staff in a competitive labour market – especially during times of low unemployment.
The reasons we have generous labour protection laws in the EU & UK is mainly twofold:-
Firstly, without setting any minimum standards, while big strong unions in large Companies have the muscle to fight for workers’ rights; people who work for small Companies, with small weaker unions (if any union) are at great risk of being exploited by their employer - So minimum legal working conditions helps to protect vulnerable workers from being exploited.
Secondly, many of the legal minimum working conditions are generous in the EU & UK e.g. six weeks paid annual leave from day one in work etc., because of the ethos of the EU for a well-balanced “Work/Life Balance” – The belief of the EU Government (establishment) is that we shouldn’t be slave to work, but that we should be able to balance our work life with our family and personal life e.g. adapt the working hours to suit the needs of a mother with children at school, have sufficient paid leave so that people can enjoy the fruits of their labour and return to the office after their holidays (vacations) refreshed with recharged batteries - the view in Europe being “a happy workforce is a productive workforce”.
New (improved) EU Work-Life Balance Laws introduced in the EU in 2019: https://youtu.be/6FgNcbEj06g
STRIKES:
Likewise, Britain has been plagued with mass strikes over the last 18 months, due to hyperinflation; akin to the mass strikes in Britain in 1926 (just prior to the Great Depression of the 1930s), and the mass strikes in the late 1970s in Britain, following the oil crisis due to OPEC.
I can’t make a direct comparison with the figures you give and the info in your link, in that the stats for Britain is given in lost working days, rather than the number of strikes taking place, and the number of workers taking strike action. From June 2022 (when the strikes started, until December 2022, a total of almost 2.5 million working days lost due to industrial action; and although most strikes were settled by December 2022, a few linger on e.g. in the NHS and on the railways etc.
What I can do though is provide a comprehensive list of most of the major strikes in Britain over the past 18 months, due to hyperinflation at 11%, as follows:-
• Transport, including rail, air, buses, and truck drivers.
• Barristers – who after going on strike for just one month; was offered a 15% pay rise by the Government.
• Post Office (postal deliveries)
• NHS, including doctors, nurses and ambulance drivers.
• Telecommunications.
• Education, schools and universities.
• Refuse (Garbage) Collectors.
• Fire Service.
• Civil Service.
• BBC.
• Amazon workers in England.
• Rugby Union.
• Oil workers – on off shore oil rigs.
• Various Dockyards.
• Welsh Government workers.
• Music festivals.
• Water.
• Local government workers in Wales.
• Plus other, smaller industries and commerce.Thanks for the thorough reply! The bottom line is as I see it not only with the UK, but with the EU as well there is as you say a quality of life element embedded in law while here it is not . . . yet. However, as shared with the minimum wage example states do act on their own to institute better quality of life elements. One should bear in mind there are forces at play with federal, state, and businesses.
It is the business's prerogative to institute benefit packages. And, yes, many do so. One must consider the gamut runs from single sole ownership where the owner is the only employee to Walmart with over 2 million employees globally.
In other words, you can't condemn the business sector because there are no federal laws saying you have to provide for certain quality-of-life elements for employees. It is in their best interest to provide for it within their financial means. There are established traditional benefits today that have become conventional and expected. Otherwise, the business will not have employees, right?
For example peek at what Google provides their employees for benefits:
Benefits at Google Google employs 182,381
https://www.google.com/about/careers/ap … /benefits/
In contrast, next is the civil service for the U.S. government.
Federal Employee Compensation Package by U.S. Office of Personnel Management
https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversig … n-package/
IMHO, from what I have learned dialoguing with you for compare/contrast it comes down to three elements:
** Health care; e.g. NHS
** Vacation time and/or holiday - the UK six weeks contrast none here unless the business offers it with their benefit package
** Retirement - one reason to land a government position from the military to civil service with the federal perspective. That holds true with states. Education holds its ground for retirement programs. Other businesses like public transportation have established themselves as fruitful for employees. I guess one might say public careers vs private.
Yet, today, pension plans are in an iffy position. Some large corporations are phasing them out.
Traditional pension plans are pretty rare. But here’s who still has them and how they work by CNN (09/07/23)
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/07/success/ … index.html
That is why today there are financial tools for saving for retirement both in cooperation with the place of employment and one's own proactive steps.
And, with an emphatic, Yes, those three are very important for people as I see it. However, here, there will be an argument if they are a guaranteed right or not. The liberal segment or those aligned with the Democrat party will say yes. Those of the conservative or Republican party will say no. So, there goes the constant battle of who is right as well as the legislative process.
Don't get me wrong. I am not necessarily defended here vs there. Nor do I feel morality enters the discussion. I am just offering info for compare/contrast while learning through that process. I enjoy our dialogue, Nathan!Thanks for your detailed reply and links. Yep, you seemed to have summed things up quite well boiling it down to the three main elements of Healthcare, Vacation time, and pensions.
As explained in a previous post, since 2012 workplace pensions are now obligatory, and the minimum contributions made to it are:-
• Your employer pays 3% of your pay into your pension pot.
• You pay 5% of your pay into your pension pot, and
• The government chips in by making the contributions tax free (tax relief).
And of course, on top of your works pension, in the UK, when people who have been in work, paying their taxes 35 years or more reach State retirement age they automatically get the full State Pension, or a part State Pension (on a sliding scale) for people who have worked between 10 and 35 years.
In practice it means that with both the works pension and State Pension people’s income on retirement is typically as high in real terms as it was when they were working; and thus retains their standard of living in retirement.
Yes, from other forums on HP it’s clear to me that there is a great divide between the Republicans and Democrat Party in the USA – “Never the Twain Shall Meet”. Whereas in the EU & UK, although we have a far wider political spectrum, there is more common ground between left and right on such social issues.
I think a large part of the differences between American and European politics is that unlike America there are far more checks and balances and Regulations to limit the amount of influence that businesses can have in politics – For example:-
In the UK the political parties, including their funding, are heavily ‘Regulated’ by the ‘Electoral Commission’. The Electoral Commission is an independent Government Department that is NOT answerable to the Government e.g. they are only answerable to Parliament.
The Electoral Commission sets the rules for political party funding, adverting etc., and limits the amount a political party can spend on an Election – so as to help ensure that no individual person, organisation or business can ‘buy favours’ and to help ensure a more level playing field to give smaller political parties a fighting chance in election.
Electoral Commission https://youtu.be/T5mg5OceG-I
In the 2019 General Election the Electoral Commission capped spending at £30,000 ($36,000) per seat; so with 650 seats, the maximum the large parties like Labour and Conservatives could spend on their Election campaign was just £19.5 million ($23.67 million) – which is a lot less than is spent on the Presidential Election in the USA.
After each election, all political parties have to submit their financial accounts to the Electoral Commission for audit. For example, in 2017 the Electoral Commission fined the Conservative Government £70,000 ($85,000) for trying to hide a £275,000 ($333,000) overspends in its election campaigns.
The Electoral Commission also dictates how many ‘Party Political Broadcasts’ each political party is permitted to have on TV e.g. giving each large political party the same amount of air time on TV, and ensuring that the larger small political parties are also given air time proportionality e.g. the Green Party Election Broadcast in the Local Election in May 2023: https://youtu.be/R_1lZZEu3L8
2nd part to my reply on this post:
The benefits you list as ‘Statutory’ for America are irrelevant in the UK e.g. because of the NHS and the Welfare benefit system, which are all paid for by the Government from tax revenue.
It’s interesting how a lot of the ‘voluntary benefits’ that you list for America tend to be a little more Regulated in the EU & UK – For instance prior to 2012 workplace pensions were voluntary; but from 2012 the Conservative Government made it a legal requirement. And to make it easier, whereas prior to 2012 if on retirement you’d worked for several different Companies that gave work pensions, you would have to claim you pensions from each one individually on retirement.
Since 2012, in the UK, your work place pensions became transferable e.g. when you change jobs you can take your work pension with you and add it to your new work’s pension with your new employer – so when you retire you only have to worry about claiming just the one works pension.
MINIMUM WAGE
It’s interesting to see that while the federal minimum wage is a lot lower than the legal minimum wage in the UK, that the minimum wage in some of the State in the USA notably higher than in the UK.
In the UK the legal minimum wage is £10.42 ($12.66); as with the USA, some (but not all) Companies will pay above the legal minimum wage for new recruits in unskilled work.
And there is also a campaign organisation in the UK (founded in 2011) calling themselves the ‘Living Wage Foundation’, and although their recommendations have no legal status, they have set the minimum wage at £12 ($14.58) which so far over 1,300 employers have signed up to https://youtu.be/gncqiJKDMNg
OVERTIME
Overtime in the UK is similar to the USA; the only subtle differences being that in the UK it’s not the 40 hours rule. In the UK “Overtime is taken to mean any work which is over and above the basic working hours included in an employment contract.” E.g. if your contract of employment is 37 hours then overtime is paid (usually 1.5 times pay) for any hours worked over the 37 hours. Under EU and UK laws the maximum numbers of hours you can work (including overtime) is 48 hours per week (averaged over 17 weeks). So if your contract is for 37 hours a week, the maximum amount of overtime you could regularly do per week would be 11 hours e.g. 37+11=48 hours (maximum you are allowed to work per week).
48 hour maximum rule includes secondary jobs e.g. if you main work is 37 hours per week, you’d only be able to take a secondary (part-time) job of no more than 11 hours a week – such as an office worker, working in a pub in the evening to earn a bit of extra cash.
One of the Industries that the 48 working hours limit most affects is the truck industry; as explained in this short video: https://youtu.be/0IyVm-ySAjI
In browsing through your various links, one point that wasn’t clarified is that in the USA whether overtime is voluntary, or whether an employer can dictate if and when their employees must do overtime. In the UK overtime is 100% voluntary.
In your concluding paragraphs: Yes I appreciate that theoretically you had “the privilege to quit and go somewhere else”; but in practice that is not always a practical of viable option, it depends on the job market and how easy it would have been to find suitable alternative employment. So IMHO I would say that it wasn’t you fault that you had to go into work while on vacation.
I can understand an employer being wary about security when an employee embezzles; but it still doesn’t alter the fact that IMHO, placing all the burden on just one ‘trusted’ employee is taking an unfair advantage of that employee.You obviously have a much more realistic view of what is going on in your country as all I see are news reports and Youtube videos, so I wanted to ask if the economy is getting so bad that NHS is going to lose funding? It sounds like the NHS works better than most of the health servcies around the world.
Good question.
The short answer is no, the NHS is not going to lose its funding. In General Elections the NHS is, according to the latest opinion poll (30th October 2023) the 2nd most important issue at 43%, with the Economy being the most important issue to voters at 57% e.g. it would be political suicide for a Government to undermine the NHS. And with the next General Election being just 12 months away for the Government to be seen undermining the NHS would be a vote looser.
If Labour wins the next General Election, which increasingly looks likely, their mission (which will be part of their Election Manifesto) will be “to build an NHS fit for the future: that is there when people need it; with fewer lives lost to the biggest killers; in a fairer Britain, where everyone lives well for longer.” - A vote winner mission.
Labour Party’s Plans for the NHS: https://youtu.be/gAlBrBRiBQw
If the Conservative Party doesn’t match Labour’s plans in their Election Manifesto then the Conservatives will lose valuable votes on this issue come the General Election in a years’ time.That is good news. I think the UK government has made mistakes over the years, as have all of the governments of the world, but that program is certainly one that is working much better than most.
Jumping to whether overtime is mandatory or not, it varies. At the company, where I worked everyone signed a hire packet that they knew they had an obligation for sixty hours per week. That was for both wage-based and salary.
Curious I checked for federal civil service. Next, it states:
What are the rules about the number of overtime hours a supervisor may require employees to work? by U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
"No statutory or regulatory limits apply to the amount of overtime work a manager may require an employee to perform. However, an employee may be excused from overtime work for reasons such as illness or the illness of a family member.
If an employee refuses to perform overtime work, the agency may discipline the employee for failure to report for scheduled overtime duty."
In the trucking industry, there are regulations by federal, state, and individual companies. Of importance is what the federal regulations are. Next, is a link to the federal.
Hours of Service (HOS) by Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/hours-of-service
As an example for drivers at the company where I worked the warehouse drivers were given two days off a week. The warehouse house workers, the warehouse office personnel, and the warehouse manager had 1-1/2 day off schedules.Wow, I am shocked that overtime can be compulsory in the USA (speechless). In my 40 years in the civil service I always volunteered for overtime whenever it was offered (which was almost never) as overtime in the civil service is extremely rare – but if it was compulsory I would have been very resentful as it would potentially infringe on my family and social life e.g. a negative effect on a good ‘work/life’ balance.
The compulsory overtime in America takes me back to my original point of a poor ‘work/life’ balance, as reflected in so many American films that portray American workers having to sacrifice their family/social life in order to be at the beck and call of their employer!
However, in those 40 years in the civil service, I did voluntarily do around 60 hours overtime (at 1.5 x pay) in total; mainly acting as a night security guard, keeping an eye on builders working outside of office hours (overnight) to modernise our building (about 5 nights in total). It was a cushy few nights, where I would take in a flask of hot coffee, and a packed lunch, and catnap in the office chair – and fun e.g. one group of builders had a routine of taking a 15 minute coffee break every hour; and during their break I would join them for a social chat e.g. the breaks kept them rejuvenated, so that for the next 45 minutes they would work hard.
The only real area of concern with labour laws in the UK is the ‘zero hours contracts’ introduced by the Conservative Government in 2011. A zero hour contract being where you don’t get paid unless you work, but you have to be available to work whenever required; it’s a controversial law as people on zero hour contracts have no guarantee regular income to pay their bills.
Currently there are 1.18 million people on ‘zero hours contracts’ in the UK; but if and when Labour comes to power their policy is to ban ‘zero hours contracts’.
Thanks for the link Hours of Service for Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. I compared the legal hours for truck drivers in the link for the legal hours for truck drivers in the UK (UK laws and EU laws are the same in this area); and compiled a comparison spreadsheet (copied below) – I haven’t done the same for passenger drivers, but I’m sure the difference between the USA & UK will follow a similar pattern.
Wow!! The comparison you shared at the bottom has me questioning how much safety enters the picture. Firstly, I am more educated now from that comparison. I only knew our commercial truck drivers especially long haul drivers have to keep a log book for hours driving. They have to produce it to law enforcement if asked. Rumor is some keep two.
One is the official one and the other is the real one if you catch my drift. However, I believe the larger share by a big margin are on the up and up. Long haul truck driving is a noble career as well as being legend with folklore, musical ballads, and portrayed in cinema.Interesting: Across the EU & UK tachographs became compulsory in all trucks in 1986: Tachographs is a tamperproof device that automatically records all your driving and rest period – and thus proves that you are driving within the law with regards to ‘driving hours’.
So truck drivers on this side of the pond don’t have any opportunity to fiddle the books, as all the recordings of their driving and rest periods are automatically recorded by the tachograph (which can’t be tampered with) that’s fitted to the truck.
This short video, from 4:50 minutes into the video, briefly covers tachographs (which is where I’ve set the video to start from); but if you are interested, running the video from the start, the chap actually explains in detail (in simple clear language) exactly what I’ve showed in the previous chart:
Basic Driving hours (Tachograph) under EU/UK law:- https://youtu.be/PbaZGZryPcA?si=N8-2jo9 … &t=288
Yep, I know, as you say “Long haul truck driving is a noble career as well as being legend with folklore, musical ballads, and portrayed in cinema.” – Great films, which we love, such as Smokey and the Bandit and Convoy etc.
Thanks for the link to the San Pasqual Battlefield Site Location Project; it was a good read - I and my family love that sort of stuff. In fact we occasionally take a day trip to Warwickshire Castle and Berkeley Castle, Gloucestershire to see medieval war re-enactments e.g. the War of the Roses (1455 to 1487) and the English Civil War 1642 to 1651.
The War of the Roses (1455 to 1487) was a civil war in England between the different Royal Houses fighting for the Crown (claim to the throne). It’s a complex war to explain in just a few words; but in brief summary:-
The war of the Roses was fought two rival branches of the royal House: The Royal family in Lancashire (red rose) and the royal family in Yorkshire (white rose). The wars extinguished the last male line of the House of Lancaster in 1471, leading to the Tudor royal family to inherit the Lancastrian claim to the throne. Following the war and the extinction of the last male line of the House of York in 1483, a politically arranged marriage in 1487 united the Houses of Tudor and York, creating a new royal dynasty which inherited the Yorkist claim as well, thereby resolving the conflict.
The English civil war of 1642 to 1651 is a lot simpler to explain; in simple terms, it was a civil war between Parliament (Government) fighting to impose a Protestant rule over England, against a Catholic King who wanted to keep the religious status quo.
Both Berkeley Castle (18 miles from where we live) and Warwick Castle (95 miles from where we live) are two fully intact castles that were vital strongholds in the War of the Roses (1455 to 1487) and the English civil war of 1642 to 1651.
Berkeley Castle was on the side of the Royalists (King/Catholics) during the English civil war and Warwick castle was on the side of the Parliamentarians (Protestants). Most castles that sided with the Royalists (like Bristol castle) were raised to the ground (destroyed) by Oliver Cromwell, after the civil war – Berkeley Castle somehow escaped that fate.
Below are a couple of videos I made of the ‘War of the Roses’ from our last trip to Warwick Castle:
Trebuchet Live Demonstration at Warwick Castle (Trebuchet being the Weapon of Mass Destruction during the War of the Roses) https://youtu.be/peQwMoYGRZE
Wars of the Roses Re-enactment at Warwick Castle: https://youtu.be/acqLpUlMHLk?si=cejDTki … &t=240
The other English civil war was ‘The Anarchy Years’ (1138 to 1153) when two first cousins (Stephen and Matilda) fought each other for the crown; 15 years of ‘no rule of law in England’ (Anarchy). The war only ended when the church brokered a peace treaty between Stephen and Matilda, and during the peace negotiations Stephen’s son (his chosen heir to the throne died), so instead Stephen agreed that Matilda’s son (Henry) would become King on his death, and that until then Stephen would rule England – the following year Stephen died and Matilda’s son became King Henry II; ending 15 years of anarchy.Thanks for the history and the videos. You as I have an interest in history. Fortunately, for you, the history of your country for the European medieval period is in your backyard, literally.
I began penning a book many years ago about a wayward character, Sir Sremmus, and his adventures in England and later in Scandinavia. The adventure began with the Crusades era. He met Princess Lennas, a warrior princess who brought him to Scandinavia.
I stopped writing because with learning I recognized I had gotten two eras mixed between themselves and were not historically correct.
I have an interest in the Norse Viking era from studying literature in Norse mythology. I enjoy Greek mythology as well, yet Norse seems more attractive to me. For a period one could say I was polytheistic in nature.Yes, I do feel lucky and privileged to live in a country strewn with countless historic and prehistoric sites dating back over 10 millennia (10 thousand years), the Neolithic period (new stone age). Whenever on holiday, we almost always make a point of visiting as many as we can wherever we are.
With your interest in the Norse Vikings (Vikings from Norway), did you touch on the Danish Vikings (the Danes Vikings)? The main reason for asking is that from 864 AD until 954 AD England was two countries; Northern England was ruled by the Dane Vikings, and was called Danelaw, while southern England was ruled by the Saxons, and called Wessex (ruled by Edward the Elder) and Mercia (ruled by his sister, Æthelflæd) – see map in this short (2 minute) video below:-
What was Viking Danelaw? https://youtu.be/GVhDsGn0Dn0
The main reason I referenced Danelaw is that although Northern England was under Viking rule for only a relatively short period (less than 100 years), and it was almost a 1,000 years ago; culturally and socially, the north south divide that is shown in the map, in the above video, still exists to this day!!!
People from the North of England have a distinct different characteristic and personality to we southerners e.g. they are noticeably more sociable and friendly, and more willing to share in times of need. There is also a distinct economic and political divide between the north and south of England e.g. people in the north tend to be less wealthy and less well educated, and until the last General Election a stronghold for the Labour Party (The Red Wall – Red being socialism in Europe, and blue being Conservatives in Europe). During the last General Election the Conservatives managed to smash the red wall and turn it blue, which helped them to power; and to try to maintain their gain the Conservatives introduced a policy called ‘Levelling Up’ e.g. invest more money in the North in an attempt to buy votes? However, in spite of the Conservative Government creating a new Government Department called the ‘Department for Levelling Up’, they’ve done a poor job in doing so – so all the signs are is that come the next General Election the Conservatives are likely to lose all or most of the gains they made in the North during the last General Election.
Are UK Red Wall Towns Levelling Up? https://youtu.be/6n7l_zqAXtI
NOVEL WRITING
Your story line for the book you started writing sounds really interesting; and it’s a shame that you stopped – I don’t see any issue with mixing different eras (artistic licence), as long as you let your readers know what your storyline is based on e.g. The ‘Game of Thrones’ (American fantasy drama TV Series – filmed in Europe).
I don’t know if you’ve ever watched the Game of Thrones TV Series.
The Game of Thrones was principally based on the English ‘War of the Roses’ (1455-1485), but also takes inspiration from the Roman Empire, the legend of Atlantis, the Viking era and the ‘hundred year’s war’ (war between France and Britain) from 1337 to 1453 etc.
In spite of mixing and matching different eras, the Game of Thrones was a very successful and popular TV Series; and in watching it, where you are familiar with a particular historical fact or setting e.g. Hadrian’s Wall, it can be fun spotting it in the TV Series.
The film locations included Northern Ireland, Iceland, Croatia and Spain have become big tourist attractions by fans:
Top 10 Game of Thrones Locations You Actually Can Visit https://youtu.be/04fdHz7Yi44Yeah, I should take up the pen again and work on that book. There is a fellow writer here at HP from northern England somewhere near the Scottish border. He is a historian and his articles here on HP are on Great Britain's history.
I fail to remember his name right now. Old guy stuff, my memory challenges. If I do remember I will post it for you. You two would get along great. He is in my eyes very knowledgeable. It was with a few back-and-forth conversations with him that I realized the timeline for my book was askew.
Anyway, he is why I stopped writing realizing the significance of being historically correct unless consider it historical fiction. That is the genre The Game of Thrones falls into alongside fantasy I presume.
No, I didn't see that series as I have basic cable. It streamed on a cable network station. I don't get those as basic is what fits my budget.Yeah, Game of Thrones is historical fiction (and fantasy), but nevertheless it does give a sense of the politics of the time of the ‘War of the Roses”, as rival Royal Houses in England fought each other for the (crown) throne during that time period.
We have cable TV and we also subscribe to Netflix (for just £11 per month). It was Netflix that aired the Game of Thrones Series, but my son (being an ardent fan) got it on Blu-ray, and we watched it from that. The complete Box set (all 8 Series) on Blu-ray is only $100; if you ever did decide to splash out on the box set e.g. as a Christmas treat, it’s a very gripping series.
I do hope that you do start writing your novel again; what you described sounds a good story line.
Thanks for the link – I loved the upside-down horse shoe (sends a strong message); although you’ve previously gone to great lengths to explain the American healthcare system to me, I still found your article hard reading because it’s all alien to me e.g. when my wife fell ill on holiday, and needed antibiotics urgently, all she did was dial 111 on her smart phone and within hours she had her antibiotics (free phone call, free prescription, and no paperwork) – Such a simple process compared to the complexities of the American system.
In digesting the rest of your post:-
In the UK, the form of fear the conservative have is panic in the realisation that they are almost certainly going to lose heavily to Labour – and with panic comes mistakes e.g. the Conservatives are panicking, and making mistakes in their policy direction, which will lose them as many votes as it gains. The latest example (this week) is the fiasco over Section 21 (no-fault eviction) of the Housing Act introduced by the Conservative Government in 1988, it allows a landlord to evict a tenant without giving a reason; prior to that Act it would take over six months to get an eviction through the Courts. To appease the voters (in the run up to the General Election next year) the current Conservative Government wants to repeal that section of the Act, but due to a large number of Conservative rebels (worried about losing votes from landlords) the Government has now delayed the process of the Bill through Parliament indefinitely.
As well as fear and anger influencing voting, other emotions like ‘expectation’ can motivate voters e.g. the groundswell in support of the Green Party will encourage more voters in Britain to vote Green, with the prospect that the Green Party may well pick up a few more seats in the next General Election. Speaking with my next door neighbour (during a social chat and drink a few weeks ago), he’s far more left wing than I am, so much so that the Labour Party is too right-wing for him, so he was intending not voting in the next General Election (despondent, apathy etc.); but on learning that voter popularity in Bristol is on the rise (the Greens now have a majority of seats in the Bristol local government), he has now decided that come the General Election he is going to vote Green.
Yeah, anger (in its many forms) is certainly a motivator to get people voting. The main issues you listed in your post as main issues from the Conservative perspective included the Economy, Immigration and Transgenderism.
In the UK - Public Opinion - Voting Issues (as at 16th October), as follows:
• Economy = 56%
• NHS = 45%
• Immigration = 35%
• Environment = 25%
• Housing = 21%
• Crime = 21%
• Brexit = 15%
• Education = 14%
• Defence = 13%
• Tax = 11%
• Welfare Benefits (Social Security) = 9%
• Pensions = 6%
• Family life and childcare = 6%
• Transport = 4%
So if a Political Party wants to win votes in the General Election next year in the UK they need to focus on the first six issues listed above. The only one of the top six that the current UK Conservative Government has a good track record on is the Environment.
Yes, where you say “once a price increases due to inflation rarely does it go back to where it started from before the climb” is largely true; but there are some notable exceptions, for example:-
1. I don’t know about the USA, but petrol (gas) although in the long term the trend is upward, in the medium term petrol prices in the UK fluctuate daily (sometimes quite dramatically up or down from week to week) e.g. last year, due to the Ukrainian war petrol prices in Britain shot-up overnight from around £1.50 ($1.84) per litre to £2.00 ($2.46) per litre, but then after a few weeks started to slowly fall again; and currently it’s back to around £1.50 ($1.84) per litre.
2. Seasonal crops, like potatoes go up and down throughout the year dramatically, but when in season can be quite cheap.
3. Also, in the UK there is a lot of stiff competition between the different supermarkets (large food shops) e.g. price wars; so if you shop around there are always bargains to be had e.g. products at half price etc. That’s why we have a food store in our back garden e.g. my wife buys food products in bulk when they are cheap and keep them in our store; that way we save over $500 a year on our food bill.
4. But the one product area that does buck the trend is electronic equipment e.g. new technology tends to be very expensive when it’s first released, but over time it becomes cheaper and cheaper. A prime examples are computers; 20 years ago the general rule of thumb for UK prices was around £300 for a level entry computer, £600 for a mid-range computer, and about £900 as the starting price for a high-end computer; today (over 20 years later) new computers are generally the same price in monetary terms e.g. much cheaper in real terms.
I found your comment ‘though provoking’: so above are just my first impression, random thoughts, triggered by your comments. You’ve raised some interesting points for me to ponder; plenty for me to contemplate.Yes, most definitely the NHS is far and above what we have here. If I was in the situation as your wife for immediate care I would have three avenues.
** Go to my medical group Express Care which accepts walk-ins. But if I was out of town that won't work.
** With my present medical group I can do a video visit. But, I don't own a smartphone. So, if in your situation I would be out of luck.
** Go to a hospital emergency room. That is what I would have to do if out of town.
There may be other options I am not aware of.
As far as pricing goes I am sharing about California. Our gas prices are the highest in the nation and a large margin compared to some states.
Gasoline (Petrol) per gallon (3.75 liters)
Aug 31, 2020 = $3.16 £2.58
Aug 31, 2021 = $4.32 £3.52
Aug 31, 2022 = $5.33 £4.35
Aug 31, 2023 = $5.13 £4.19
Data from California Retail Gas Price by YCharts
https://ycharts.com/indicators/californ … ne_monthly
Food
Annual decreases (September 2022 to September 2023) have been most dramatic among the following indexes:
** Eggs (-14.5%).
** Other pork including roasts, steaks, and ribs (-4.3%).
** Oranges, including tangerines (-4.1%).
** Butter (-4%).
** Lettuce (-2.8%).
** Cheese and related products (-2.8%).
Annual increases (September 2022 to September 2023) have been most dramatic among the following indexes:
** Frozen noncarbonated juices and drinks (+21.3%).
** Frozen vegetables (+11.6%).
** Uncooked beef steaks (+9.7%).
** White bread (+7.8%).
** Beef and veal (+7%).
** Crackers, bread, and cracker products (+6.9%).
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) also found that:
** The index for food at home (groceries) is 2.4% higher year-over-year. From August to September, grocery costs increased slightly by 0.2%.
**Restaurant patrons are still paying more (6.0%) for food than they did a year ago. And the price index rose 0.4% from August to September.
** Specifically, limited service meals (takeout only) rose 6.4% year-over-year, while full-service (sit-down restaurant) meals rose 5.1% year-over-year.
** Overall, the annual inflation rate has been declining.
The Cost of Groceries: Are Food Prices Going Up?
Food prices in August 2023 increased 4.3% from the same time in 2022.
https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/fina … ce-of-food
My natural gas this year went up close to 50%. That means electricity went up too because the plants run on natural gas. But, the state gave us two forms of credit to us for four months which took a big chunk out of the total billing.
I get an advertisement/newsletter from Newegg a computer/electronics mass merchandiser. I am into computers as in building them and thus design. Yes, electronics of all sorts are inexpensive. I keep a close eye on computer components with the dream of building another one if I find some money somewhere ha-ha
Newegg
https://www.newegg.com/This is just a quick response to your last paragraph, and a quick mention about ‘smartphones’ (which you mentioned) - as our friend from Portsmouth is due to arrive shortly with the lens and camera for my son, and he will be staying with us for a few days; so I’ll reply to the other parts of your post later in the week.
Earlier this year, with help from our friend from Portsmouth, we custom built a new high-end computer for me and my wife – using the latest and most expensive components (no expense spared); which cost around $6,000. Super-fast and highly powerful – it takes just 15 seconds from switching it on until it’s in Windows and ready to go; and opening programs is instant as I’ve installed Solid State Hard Drives (no moving parts); and its heavy and big – it took two of us to carry it up the stairs to our home-office, and it fits under the desk with about an inch to spare.
We’ve only had smartphones for a couple of years, before that we had old bricks that did nothing other than make and receive phone calls.
I originally got myself and my wife a mobile phone each form O2 (service provider), on the same contract, hence on a family discount (two phones) back in 2000, for just $6 each per month.
A couple of years ago, without any notice O2 put the monthly subscription up from $6 per phone per month to about $30. Rather than complaining, and having an argument with them, I just looked around for a new contract for smartphones, and found that Virgin Media was offering a phone deal for Apple iPhone 10 for just $10 per phone per month, with free phone calls, free text and 2GB free cloud storage. And in getting two phones on the same contract (one each for me and my wife) they gave me a $2.50 monthly discount (family discount).
I took the offer, and once the new phones arrived I dialled the special number that automatically transfers your old mobile phone number to your new mobile phone; and within two minutes of me transferring the phone numbers over O2 phoned me to ask why I had changed Service Provider (in the hope of getting me to change my mind – which obviously I wasn’t going to do, and which the O2 chap at the other end understood, once I’d explained how they pushed their prices up without notice. The chap was very apologetic, and to my surprise O2 refunded the money they took, back into my bank account a few days later – which was nice of them, as I didn’t even bother asking them to do that as I didn’t expect them to.
Anyway, an ironic twist to the tale is that earlier this year Virgin Media sold their mobile phone service to O2 – So I’m back with O2 again; on the same price deal, but with improved conditions e.g. Free Cloud Storage increased from 2Gb to 10Gb, not that I use it because I regularly transfer any photos and videos I take on the smart phone to my computer anyway.
And for the smart phones, I’m now paying $10 per month, per phone, subscription; compared to $6 per month per phone over 20 years ago for old bricks – So in real terms (taking 70% inflation into account since 2000), I’m paying about the same (in real terms) now for our mobile phones that I was paying over 20 years ago, but with a much improved technology.Thanks for the link to your California Retail Gas Price chart; I found a similar chart for the UK that goes back to 2004 (image below); and comparing the two charts from October 2018 (which is when the California chart starts) the charts for both California and the UK have the same rollercoaster pattern e.g. oil prices in both are reflected by world events.
For a more direct comparison, I’ve taken the data you’ve provided for the four dates and crossed referenced them with the UK, as shown in the chart below:
The reason petrol (gasoline) is far more expensive in the UK & EU is that ever since the oil crisis of the 1970s European countries has always heavily tax petrol (gasoline).
I haven’t been able to compile such a detailed grocery list of food inflation over the last 12 months, as you; although as in the USA, different food items have gone either up or down in prices dependent on supply and demand for that product.
So instead, I’ve looked at UK inflation from September 2013 to September 2023 (ten years); which includes total inflation and food inflation separately – See chart below.
UK inflation Sept 2022 to September 2023 was 6.3% (dark blue line in chart below), helped by the fall in the annual rate of food inflation from its peak of 19.2% (light blue line in chart) in March 2023 down to 12.2% in September 2023.
Interestingly, looking at the chart, in the UK we actually had deflation in food prices from May 2014 to Jan 2017, and again from Nov 2020 to July 2021 e.g. food price changes below the ‘0’ (in the negative).
Yep, likewise, because of the world shortage of natural gas due to the Ukrainian war, the price of electricity and gas in the UK has risen by over 54% since April 2022; and likewise, last winter the UK Government automatically paid for a large chunk of the increased cost for every household on their domestic utility bills.I can see it easily with the charts/graphics. Thank you for providing the comparison too. Yes, my friend in Sweden and I chat about gas prices now and then. I know prices are high in the UK and EU.
One thing to bear in mind and is of importance. The gas prices I shared are for where I live California, not the U.S. California is the highest for gas prices by leaps and bounds. And, it varies by county and if a city or not. Right now the Chevron I use is at $5.59 for regular (£4.61). For California, today's (10/29/23) average for regular gas is $5.30 (£4.37).
For the state of Georgia, it is $2.97 (£2.45). The average for all states is $3.45 (£2.85). As seen a big difference. I frown when I hear someone here on HP complaining about gas prices.
See the following link for gas prices by state from AAA I think they update it daily, so the prices may have changed from what I just quoted. There is a map too showing each state color-coded for grouped prices.
https://gasprices.aaa.com/state-gas-price-averages/Wow, that is a big variation from State to State; the map clearly shows that the West is generally a lot more expensive than the East.
In the UK there are slight variations from petrol station to petrol station; with the most expensive tending to be on the motorways (motorway services) – but the variations in price is never more than $0.25.
So when we travel we never fill up on the motorway, we look for a petrol station in a town or city near wherever we are; and to ensure we get the cheapest price my wife uses an ‘app’ on her smart phone that lists all the petrol stations near where we are, highlights the cheapest ones, and gives sat-nav type directions.
PetrolPrices app: To find cheap petrol prices near you: https://youtu.be/fmw6vSzxOH8
If the Tesco petrol station is one of the cheapest (as it often is) then my wife will head for a Tesco petrol station because she has a Tesco Loyalty card, and earns points for buying petrol from a Tesco petrol station, which she can subsequently redeem in a Tesco supermarket (food store).
Tesco Loyalty Card: How it Works: https://youtu.be/O5dtKgaFLjg
The above video makes a passing reference to the ‘Supermarket Price Comparison’ App, which we also use to compare prices between competing supermarkets, so that we can buy our food from whichever is the cheapest at the time – and when they offer ‘free home delivery’ (which one or the other of the supermarkets does periodically) then we opt for a home delivery e.g. saves us time and petrol cost.Yup, quite a variance between the states. I didn't notice the gradual decrease from the West to the East Coast until you pointed it out. I just knew the East Coast was cheaper.
Interestingly enough, California has 17 refineries and is an oil-producing state. The refineries supposedly are sufficient for the demands of the state. So, why a higher price?
Environmental costs plus maintenance are continual at the refineries. Some of our largest spikes come from refineries being taken offline for maintenance.
Yes, we have rewards programs giving us discounts on gas. Not quite the same system as the Tesco Loyalty card. There are rewards programs with the gas companies themselves, banking/credit card usage, and major grocery chains.
The rewards can be used for discounts. In the grocery store I shop at, Albertsons, rewards can be exchanged at 1 reward = $0.10 off per gallon with a singular fill-up. (£.08 - I don't know what that means per liter) You can use multiple rewards with the same singular fill-up.
You earn 1 point for every $1 (£0.82) spent in the store. It takes 100 points for one reward.
It doesn't help me, I am afraid. My weekly grocery expense is from $50 ( £41) to sometimes higher than $70 (£58). So, it takes a while to accumulate enough rewards to make a difference. Plus, I only get gas close to every other month. I drive about 2000 miles a year (3218 km).
Your guide to gas rewards programs by BankRate (05/03/23)
https://www.bankrate.com/finance/credit … ams-guide/
Question: What is diesel usage like in your neck of the woods? Here, besides being used with large commercial trucks and 18-wheelers, it is used with some large pickup trucks (3/4 ton - 1-ton models) and mainly imported cars. Mercedes is popular.Thanks for the info and link - The Reward Programs in America look very similar to the UK.
Currently, you get 1 Tesco Clubcard point for every 2 litres of petrol you buy, or for every £1 you spend on food in their supermarket. 1 point is worth £0.01, and you need a minimum 150 points to turn the points into a voucher that you can use for shopping. So you have to spend a minimum of £150 before you can convert your points to vouchers worth £1.50 (which given the price of petrol and that my wife buys food to feed three), over the year the vouchers soon rack-up.
Using the Tesco locality card scheme, when buying food in a Tesco supermarket, saves you 1% on your food bill. 1% saving may not sound a great deal, but there is a philosophy in Britain that “if you look after the pennies, the pounds will look after themselves” e.g. by being frugal you can make great savings in the long run, which you can then splash out on some luxury item or treat!
In answer to your question in your last paragraph:
Currently in the UK, it’s not just the majority of truck (Lorries) and vans that uses diesel, a lot of buses and coaches and trains are diesel, as are a high percentage of cars. In 2021 over 37% of cars in the UK used diesel - But it is a rapidly changing picture, as summarised below:-
TRUCKS:
In 2020 in the UK, 98.6% of trucks were diesel; it’s mainly just local governments who have switched to electric and or green gas for their trucks.
BUSSES AND COACHES:
I don’t know about coaches, but suspect most are still diesel.
However, in most cities across Britain most bus companies have now switched to green gas; predominantly green hydrogen in Scotland and Northern England – while in Bristol all Bristol buses now run on green gas created from domestic food waste (collected by Bristol local government from domestic homes weekly) and green gas made from Bristol sewage.
Bristol Buses run on Green Gas: https://youtu.be/QV4VEprPfos
TRAINS:
Britain switched from coal powered trains to diesel trains in the mid-1960s.
When the Conservatives came to power in 2010 they embarked on an ambitious plan to electrify the railway network; but it’s been a slow and expensive programme, and so far only 38% of the rail network has been electrified (the busier sections of the network); so currently only 29% of UK trains are still diesel.
In 2018 the UK started to develop its own green hydrogen train, which is cheaper and quicker to rollout than electric trains. Current Government policy is to switch to the development of green hydrogen trains to bridge the gap in transitioning away from diesel trains, and to completely ban all diesel trains by 2040.
2020: UK Green hydrogen train ventures out onto the main line for first time https://youtu.be/OddzzRZGsLU
CARS:
As mentioned above, in 2021 over 37% of cars in the UK was diesel; but as the chart below shows, c2017 the sale of new diesel cars in the UK plummeted, and by 2019 the sale of new petrol (gasoline) cars started to rapidly fall as the sale in new electric cars started to increase exponentially.
The chart below doesn’t show it, because the chart only goes up to 2021, but in December 2021 sales of new electric cars for the first was greater than the sales for new petrol cars; and on current trends virtually all cars on British roads will be electric by 2035 – which coincides with current Government policy to ban the sale of all new fossil fuel cars by 2035.
The charts below are only up to 2021 - so do not show the latest data e.g. sales of new EVs was higher than sales for petrol cars for the first time in December 2021.
Interesting! Thanks, Nathan. Diesel usage is significant there as compared to here in California in regard to cars. 37% for Britain and here in California it is 2%.
I suspected that since the popular diesel cars here are mainly imported from Europe. Utility/work/passenger trucks are a different ball game to itself. Some people own diesel 3/4 or 1-ton diesel trucks to pull a recreation vehicle trailer.
The following is for types of fuel for registered cars in California for 2022.
Electric (EV) - 903,600 - 2.5%
Plug-In Hybrid Electric (PHEV) - 361,100 - 1.0%
Hybrid Electric (HEV) - 1,514,000 - 4.2%
Biodiesel - 183,900 - 0.5%
Ethanol/Flex (E85) - 1,338,000 - 3.7%
Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) - 10,300 - 0.03%
Propane - 1,500 - 0.0%
Hydrogen - 14,900 - 0.04%
Methanol - 0 - 0.0%
Gasoline - 31,059,000 - 86.0%
Diesel - 725,300 - 2.0%
Unknown Fuel - 8,200 - 0.0%
California Transportation Data for Alternative Fuels and Vehicles by U.S. Department of Energy for 2022. There is info on alternative fueling stations on that landing page.
https://afdc.energy.gov/states/ca
I didn't look into commercial vehicles, though I know diesel has a large percentage of use. Yes, buses are diesel here while like there they are slowly being converted to natural gas and electric.
The link following is regarding fuel type for buses for the nation. It is from 2007 - 2019. It is noticeable the decline of diesel usage. I would say a moderate pace while considering how funding arrives to make the changes.
https://afdc.energy.gov/data/10302Thanks for the info and links. I just assumed that diesel cars were as common in the USA as the UK, so learning that isn’t the case is a surprise, and educational.
It’s also good to see a growth in EV’s in America; It’s interesting to see from the link that there are over 40,000 EV charging points in just California alone (very impressive); and which compares favourably to the UK with only 50,000 charging points (over 30,000 charging locations) currently – but new EV charging points are being added all the time at breakneck speed. But to put it in perceptive, in comparison, there are only 8,365 petrol stations in the UK.Yup, strides are being made with EV's. With our dialogue, I try to use California, my state, with comparisons with the UK rather than the U.S. as a whole. We learned with the gas prices how wide the variances can be between states. That extends into many elements and perspectives.
I think comparisons are more relevant between the UK and California, though the federal impacts the State of California. The land mass is much closer in size and, population too when considering that of the U.S., California politically speaking is progressive. And, the economies are next to each other with California the world's fifth largest and the UK the sixth.
What do you think?Yep, your approach sounds reasonable and logical to me
On that note with EVs here in California in 2035 only EV and hybrid sales will be allowed for cars, SUVs, and pickup trucks. Isn't that what it is in the UK? California is the first state to set a date. Eight states have followed suit. Consider that is state actions, not federal ones.
These 9 States Are Banning the Sale of Gas-Powered Cars by CNET (Sept 7, 2023)
https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/stat … ered-cars/Yep, that is the same as the UK e.g. 2035.
Ahead of that, in 2008 London introduced a ‘Clean Air Zone’ e.g. vehicles with high levels of greenhouse gas emissions have to pay an expensive surge charge to drive in the area. Since then 14 other cities (out of the 76 cities in the UK) including Bristol have to date followed suit e.g. Bristol became a ‘Clean Air Zone’ in 2022.
Currently, petrol cars manufactured after 2006, and diesel vehicles manufactured after 2015, meet the clean air zones in that their greenhouse gas emissions are much lower than older vehicles; so most older vehicles manufactured prior to these dates (including trucks and buses) may to pay the expensive surge charges (subject to the local rules) to drive in these cities.
To check in advance on whether you have to pay is simple process that takes only a minute e.g. you just log onto the appropriate website for the appropriate city and tap in your vehicle Registration number – and you get an instant answer.
Fortunately, our two cars were manufactured after 2006 and do comply with the ‘clean air zones’. But if you have an older car that is subject to the surcharge, and you don’t pay within 6 days of driving in a ‘Clean Air Zone’, you will be charged a hefty penalty (fine) for non-payment.
New LEZ (Low Emission Zones) UK https://youtu.be/0RxiUgTdNgE
Do you have similar ‘Clean Air Zones’ in any States in the USA?No, after a search I find nothing like the 'Clean Air Zones' you have there. I suspected that. The closest to that we have is in California is our smog or emission laws for vehicles. The bottom line is if you don't pass the every other year test, you can't operate the vehicle on public roads. There are 34 states that emission testing in the U.S. I am speaking about cars at this point.
For California the following briefly shares about testing:
"California - Inspections are required for all vehicles except motorcycles or vehicles that were manufactured prior to the 1976 model year, and diesel-powered vehicles manufactured prior to the 1996 model year that have a gross vehicle weight of over 8,500 lbs. Vehicles that are registered in areas subject to the biennial smog certification program are required to submit evidence of a smog certification for every other renewal period."
34 States that Require Emissions Testing by TruckParts (May 7, 2021)
https://www.jittruckparts.com/blog/34-s … ns-testing
In California smog testing runs the gamut from lawn equipment to diesel big rigs. See article next if curious.
Landmark California smog rules target lawn equipment, big rig trucks by CalMatters (12/09/21)
https://calmatters.org/environment/2021 … mog-rules/
There are emissions regulations by the Federal and by California. California has the most stringent of all the states. The car manufacturers build cars to be sold in California to their standards.
When I was doing smog checks back in the 70's the first thing we had to do was establish if it was a California car or not before testing. There was a decal in the engine compartment sharing that info. If not we had to use the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) to establish it.
For deep dives if interested:
Overview of the Clean Air Act and Air Pollution by the United States Environmental Protection Agency
https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview
And,
California Air Resources Board (CARB) Laws and Regulations Both motor vehicle and public health are covered with links
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/docume … egulationsThe first thing that struck me in reading your post, and browsing your links, is that in the USA the standards for car manufacture vary from State to State e.g. “The car manufacturers build cars to be sold in California to their standards.” That contrasts quite significantly to the EU & UK where the car manufacture safety standards are more or less uniform across the whole of the EU (which included the UK until 2021) e.g. Laws passed by the EU (Directives & Regulations) – akin to Federal laws in the USA.
For clarity, at national level, we have three types of Legislative laws in the UK; Acts of Parliament, EU Directives and EU Regulations. Both EU Directives and EU Regulations override British Acts; a Directive is EU law that is compulsory across the whole of the EU, and EU Regulations are EU laws that each Member State of the EU can choose on whether they adopt that particular law or not.
So with regards to the legal level of car emission in the UK, that is currently governed by ‘Euro 4 emissions standards’ (Directives 98/69/WE and 2002/80/WE).
ANNUAL EMISSION CHECKS UK
I note from your comments and links that most vehicles manufactured and used in California are subject to emission testing once every two years: That raises the question of whether you have an MOT system in the USA?
In the UK all vehicles over three years old (including trucks and buses, and motorbikes) are required to have a comprehensive ‘safety check’, called an MOT e.g. akin to you having a complete medical check-up once a year – Link to what’s tested during the MOT for a car below:-
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u … t-vt29.pdf
As you will see from the above check-list (link) emission testing is part of the MOT, for all vehicles over three years old, except motorcycles. The MOT check-lists for trucks and buses are obviously different, but they also include the emission tests.
If your car fails its MOT for any reason, including failing on emissions, then you can’t get it taxed to drive on the road until/unless the faults are corrected and an MOT certificate is issued.
In short, you can’t get your annual vehicle road tax without a valid MOT, and without the road tax you can’t drive the vehicle on the road.
Prior to 2014 the Road Tax used to be a physical disc of paper that you stuck on your windscreen, colour coded (different colour each year) so that the police could see from a distance, without having to read the actual date on the tax disc, if your car tax disc was way out of date e.g. wrong colour.
Since 2014, no physical tax disc is required because now whenever you drive your vehicle on British roads CCTV cameras are constantly cross checking your vehicle registration against a national database to ensure that your vehicle is fully taxed and insured.
Annual MOT of a Truck: https://youtu.be/l5W3cbSnj6ENo, Calif does not have a vehicle inspection, anymore. Just the emission testing. Way back in the 70's the state Highway Patrol would set up inspection sites along a thoroughfare pulling random vehicles in for brake and light inspections. That is why I got my smog, brake, and light licenses so that I could do the repairs and certify them.
Once upon a time emission testing was only at time of sale. It had to be done to transfer ownership at the sellers expense. And, the dealerships with new cars had to certify emissions.
Later as NoX devices entered the scene, early '70s, vehicles had to have them installed to register the car. That was lucrative for me to install them and certify the cars.
There are many states with safety inspections. One reason is where rust enters the equation.
Vehicle Inspection Requirements by State (2023) by Insurify
https://insurify.com/car-insurance/vehi … nspection/
In Sweden they do have safety inspections from my conversations with my friend there. I imagine the EU regulations enter the equation. She is always worried about it when the time arrives. But, I don't think they do emissions testing.Wow - That I do find shocking; it seems to throw ‘road safety’ in the USA out of the window? It may partly explain why road deaths in the USA per capita are far greater than in the UK:-
• UK joint 7th safest roads per capita in the world e.g. only 2.9 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants.
• Whereas the USA is 74th safest country worldwide, with 12.9 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c … death_rate
Yes, EU Laws in the EU & UK will most certainly enter the equation.
Looking at the cost given in your link for States where Vehicles Inspections are required, it seems quite clear that the Vehicle Inspection costs in the USA are generally a lot cheaper than in the UK e.g. the maximum costs in the UK for cars is £54.85 ($67.54) (same price as for a small truck under 3 tonnes); the cost for a large truck is just £58.60 ($72.15). The most expensive are large passenger vehicles, with a maximum cost for the MOT being £124.50 ($153.30).
Full list of maximum costs for the annual MOT is here: https://www.gov.uk/getting-an-mot/mot-test-feesI don't know if one can make the leap to car safety as the cause of driving deaths or not. Distracted driving is attributed to the greatest car accident deaths. That is followed by speeding and then drunk driving.
The Top 25 Causes of Car Accidents in the United States by GJEL accident attorneys
https://www.gjel.com/car-accident-lawye … -accidents
I just re-wrote an article; Texting, Driving, the Senses, your Reaction Time, and Teens you may like to read. Oops! I just did some self-promotion. Oh no!Interesting: I tried to find web sources to make comparisons with the UK and your link of leading causes of car accidents in the USA, but with little success as the data sets between the USA & UK seem to be too dissimilar?
I did also browse through your article link, and according to one website British drivers are just as likely to use their smart phone and text as American drivers, but I couldn’t verify how reliable that data source was; although looking at reliable data I did find, even if that is true, it’s not a major cause of accidents e.g. according to data compiled by the Department of Transport only 0.6% of accidents are caused by drivers suing a mobile phone – which is consistent with other sources found on the subject!
Interestingly, although mechanical failure is not listed as a leading cause of accident in the UK in any of the web sources I found, according to the information given in the above mentioned web source (link below), mechanical and brake failure accounts for 2.8% of accidents – and that’s even with the strict annual MOT test, so I wouldn’t be surprised if, on delving deeper it was found that, in the light of the absence of annual tests in the USA that the percentage of car accidents caused by mechanical failure is higher in the USA! In looking at your link, Vehicle Malfunction is listed as the 19th most common cause of accidents in the USA, but no percentage is given!
The link below, not only lists the leading causes of car accidents in Britain (top 10 causes), but in scrolling down the website gives further useful information on car accident statistics.
https://www.nimblefins.co.uk/cheap-car- … cidents-uk
Another UK Government useful website I found on the subject is this link:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u … 015-02.pdf
I used to work in the Department of Transport, and for a brief period in my civil service career was involved in some of the road safety (road traffic accident) data monitoring.
The interesting part of the opening paragraph in the above report (link), is that in spite a 15% increase in population over a 30 year period in Britain, road fatalities have fallen by 68%.
And looking at the charts there seems to be a link between for example the introduction of strict drink driving laws in 1967, and compulsory wearing of seat belts introduced in the 1983/1991, and a decline in road fatalities. And of course, seat belts are one of the items checked on the annual MOT to ensure that they are not faulty.
Even if you skim through the graphs and charts, the Conclusion at the end of the report is worth a quick read.I liked the PDF document the most spending a bit of time on it. I liked the history it presented. Thanks!
You seem to be emphasizing using exclamation marks that the lack of safety inspections is a leading cause of traffic accidents. I frankly, did not know. But, with research it seems that is not the case.
In the US mechanical cause for car crashes is 2%. So, the UK and US are similar I would say. The only official report I could find was for 2018 by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. I am also posting a Google landing page for the browser search phrase, "car mechanical failures for car crash". It has law firm after law firm sharing information on that to choose from.
From that report I discovered causes for car accidents are:
Drivers = 94%
Vehicles = 2%
Environment = 2%
Unknown = 2%
Published by NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis
TRAFFIC SAFETY FACTS A Brief Statistical Summary March 2018
Critical Reasons for Crashes Investigated in the
National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey
Critical reason attributed to vehicles
The critical reason was assigned to vehicles in an estimated
44,000 crashes comprising about 2 percent of the NMVCCS
crashes, though none of these reasons implied a vehicle
causing the crash.
The report is a PDF document that is a download only. The landing page for Google where it is found is next. It is the top search result titled Critical Reasons Reasons for Crashes investigated in the National . . .
https://www.google.com/search?client=fi … ion+Survey
Page 2 in the right hand column is where mechanical cause is shared. There is a table with reasons.
That Google landing page for law firms is:
https://www.google.com/search?client=fi … +cash#ip=1
For a historical trend line is following. It is from 1913 - 2021. There are two graphs. Looking at it appearance is the UK has done a better job at lowering deaths. However, comparison may have variables to consider I would suspect such as types of roads, number of drivers, number of vehicles, and on and on. I don't offer that as an excuse, only a consideration.
For instance the UK has 33 million vehicles whereas the US has 290 million. Yet, mechanical failure as a cause of accidents between the UK, 2.8%, and the US, 2%, are too close to say there is a real difference in my mind.
It is important to bear in mind what the opening paragraphs states when reviewing the graphs. "In 1913, there were about 1.3 million vehicles and 2 million drivers, and the number of miles driven was not yet estimated. The latest 2021 data report 282.4 million vehicles, 228 million licensed drivers, and 3,140 billion miles driven annually."
Car Crash Deaths and Rates by National Safety Council
https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-vehic … and-rates/Thinks for the info, links and clarity - The facts speak for themselves - clearly showing (as you say) that the percentage of car accidents caused by mechanical failure is basically the same in the USA & UK - which does surprise me, considering that unlike the UK, cars in the USA are not annually safety checked.
That leads me to my next thought – ‘If cars are not annually safety checked in the USA, how many cars are being driving in America with undetected faults that could cause a ‘preventable death’ in an accident’ (an accident waiting to happen) e.g. defects in the car that don’t appear in the stats because they are not the cause of the accidents, but which puts lives at risk e.g. a faulty seat belt.
My train of thought is coming from the fact that my wife’s car failed its MOT last year because of a faulty rear seat passenger seatbelt e.g. in an accident, anyone using that seat would have been unprotected (a potential but avoidable fatal accident waiting to happen). To the untrained eye the seatbelt seemed to be functioning fine, until the MOT Inspector demonstrated the fault to my wife.
It was a bit of inconvenience having to get a new seatbelt fitted, and passing an MOT re-test; but at least we know that the rear passengers in our car is now safer due to a properly functioning seatbelt.
My point being is that if we didn’t have annual safely checks on our cars in the UK my wife would still be driving around with a rear passenger seatbelt that wouldn’t do its job in an emergency (a potential death trap).I can understand with the example of your wife's car that safety inspections should be done. No argument on my part. I don't know why they really don't do them here other than emissions and VIN number. I poked about to see what one of the 15 states that require a safety inspection look for.
Next is a link to what Pennsylvania inspects. It looks to be pretty thorough. But, there was no inspection of seat belts. I didn't look at all states. We know, here, in Calif they don't require them.
What's Covered in a PA State Inspection? by girls auto clinic.com
https://www.girlsautoclinic.com/blog/pa … inspectionActually, if you look at your PA State Inspection link again, you will see that under “PA Safety Inspection”
4th bulleted item is “All seatbelts must work.”
"cars in the USA are not annually safety checked."
In the state where, I live I cannot legally drive a vehicle unless in has a current car inspection sticker. I have to have my car inspected every year. I had to pay some money last year to have one of my cars pass inspection.You need to scan back and look at the previous discussions between me and Tim, where Tim provided links showing that not all States in American have car safety checks.
Going off at a slight tangent on road safety; on speaking to other Americans in the past my understanding is that jaywalking is illegal in the USA, and that cars have priority over pedestrians.
In the UK jaywalking is not and never has been illegal e.g. pedestrians are legally allowed to cross any road other than a motorway. Although prior to 2022 (like America), in Britain, traffic generally had priority over pedestrians other than at a zebra crossings.
However, in 2022 the UK Government turned that concept on its head with changes to the ‘Highway Code’; so that pedestrian and cyclist now have ‘right of way’ as explained in this short 2 minute video e.g. “The hierarchy in the new Highway Code places those road users most at risk in the event of a collision at the top of the hierarchy.”
Changes to the Highway Code in the UK that gives pedestrian and cycles right of way over cars: https://youtu.be/MhWi-9NrJeUHere again, it varies by state. California just recently made jaywalking legal. It is called the Freedom to Walk Act. It became effective Jan 1, 2023. A local San Diego article about it next.
California's new 2023 jaywalking law explained by CBS8 (12/29/2022) Fairly short read.
https://www.cbs8.com/article/news/local … 1435c7d5f0
Also, right-of-way laws vary by state. For instance, in California, you have to stop at a signal or stop sign before turning right. In Oregon, you don't. Next, is a video about right-of-way laws in California.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmNYLKYcdrw
Bicycle laws also vary by state and in some cases by city. In California bicyclist right of way was always the same as a vehicle. Bicycling is growing by leaps and bounds. San Diego proper has a vast many bike routes now. Over 1,715 in the County. (2,760 km)
They are creating new ones all the time. It is controversial, though, in many cases because parking along the side of city streets is being eliminated to make room for them at the disdain of business owners.
From the Bicycle Coalition of San Diego County is:
Bicycle Laws & Safety Tips
https://sdbikecoalition.org/resources/b … the-rules/
Personally, I think in general most bicyclists are arrogant and extend their rights beyond reasonable and courtesy. I can't count the times they ride side-by-side instead of behind each other in a bike lane. A bike lane is five feet wide. (1.5 meters) And, how many times have I run up to a bike riding on the line provided for distinguishing a bike lane. They are tempting fate. I have to move into opposing traffic to get around them.
I drive old Highway 395, which is one lane in each direction. The speed limit is 55 MPH (88 KPH) and I will go around a bend and low and behold three or more across the lane. Arrogant!! Definitely not safety-minded. And, they will be in a group stopped drinking water and chatting. Given it is not a heavily trafficked highway, but the speed limit is 55 MPH.
" The law says that people who ride bikes must ride as close to the right side of the road as practicable except under the following conditions: when passing, preparing for a left turn, avoiding hazards, if the lane is too narrow to share, or if approaching a place where a right turn is authorized. (CVC 21202)"
Then, again, they may think I am the arrogant one.
Edit: The big 'problem' today is motorized skateboards and scooters on sidewalks and streets.
ELECTRIC SKATEBOARD vs ELECTRIC SCOOTER video (9 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U03sHfobJzI
They rent the scooters and many people ride them on the beach walkways.Does it get confusing knowing whether you are driving within the law, if you drive across America, when such laws vary so widely not just from State to State, but also from city to city?
It’s a lot easier in Europe in that there is very little variation in such laws across the EU & UK e.g. when we used to frequently take our car on holiday in France and Belgium, or a shopping day trip to France, there was very little variation in the road laws.
The only differences in the road laws between France and Britain were:-
1. Short range FM transmitters are illegal in France e.g. used to be used to connect an iPod to the car radio for example – Although these days it’s done via Bluetooth, which is legal in France.
2. Sat-navs with speed camera technology is illegal in France.
3. In France you are required to have one hi-vis-vest for the driver and each passenger easily accessible in the boot of the car.
4. In France you are required to have a warning triangle easily accessible in the boot of the car.
Your 1st link was (Access Denied – which happens sometimes between countries e.g. a website blocked in some counties, usually either for legal reasons or due to licensing laws).
I found your ’11 Right of Way Laws in California’ video interesting; very similar to the laws in the UK, with a few subtle differences, as follows:-
1. Pedestrians in California have right of way when crossing the road, regardless to whether it’s at a zebra crossing or not: In the UK pedestrians only generally have right of way at a zebra crossing.
2. In California, it is illegal to pass a school bus that has stopped and its red lights are flashing. In the UK we don’t generally have school busses, so we don’t have that law.
3. Interactions without stop or yield signs? In the UK, such intersections don’t really exist.
4. For intersections that are marked, as next shown in the video, in the UK such intersections would be mini roundabouts, and at mini roundabouts traffic entering the junction on your right has priority – I noted in the video that at such Intersections, traffic on the right also have priority (even though you drive on the different side of the road to us)?
Double Mini Roundabouts (which are very common in Britain): https://youtu.be/JhxpIwZRbMw
It’s brilliant to hear that cycling is growing by leaps and bounds in America; impressive that San Diego has 1,715 miles of bike routes.
Across the UK there are now 12,739 miles of cycle paths; 7,519 miles on road, and 5,220 miles of traffic-free paths e.g. cycle paths converted from disused railways and redundant canal towpaths etc. So that these days you can cycle the length and breadth of Britain almost exclusively by cycle path – as all the cycle routes become joined.
The first ever cycle path in Britain was actually built in the late 1970s from a disused railway linking Bristol to Bath: https://youtu.be/g9w9zn8Z8AI
On reading your link on the San Diego Bicycle Laws, one thing that struck me is “Safety V C 21212 -Requires any person riding a bicycle under the age of 18 to wear a properly fitted helmet.” - Which is in contrast with the UK, where there is no legal requirement for any cyclist of any age to wear a helmet.
It’s your last paragraphs, about cyclist rights, where there seems to be the most deviant between the USA & UK:-
I can sympathise with what you are saying, but because British laws covering this aspect (since the changes to the Highway Code in 2022) are the opposite of the American laws, and like with America, those laws are there on the grounds of safety – a different legal viewpoint generating a different cultural attitude between our two nations.
Put briefly, although I sympathise with your frustration of cycles riding two abreast, in Britain because that is now the legal recommendation on safety grounds (different viewpoint), when we are stuck behind cyclists on narrow country lanes for miles (which happens quite often these days, when we’re on holiday), we just take it in our stride, and enjoy the journey; albeit following cyclist and tractors for several miles at a time can add 5 minutes or so to our journey.
The critical rules introduce to the Highway Code in 2022 are:-
Rule 66: Be considerate of the needs of other road users when riding in groups. You can ride two abreast and it can be safer to do so, particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders. Be aware of drivers behind you, and allow them to overtake (e.g. by moving into single file or stopping) when you feel it is safe to let them do so.
Rule 213: On narrow sections of road, on quiet roads or streets, at road junctions and in slower-moving traffic, cyclists may sometimes ride in the centre of the lane, rather than towards the side of the road. It can be safer for groups of cyclists to ride two abreast in these situations. Allow them to do so for their own safety, to ensure they can see and be seen. Cyclists are also advised to ride at least a door’s width or 1.0m (3 feet) from parked cars for their own safety.
Another interesting comparison is where you state for where you live “The law says that people who ride bikes must ride as close to the right side of the road as practicable”; under British Law (Highway Code) cyclists should maintain a distance of 0.5m (18 inches) from the edge of the road, and when a vehicle (car) overtakes a cyclist, under British law the car must be keep at least 1.5m (4.5 feet) away from the cyclist.
Where we do have a common problem on both sides of the pond are the electric scooters that plagued our city streets; albeit electric scooters and electric skateboards are still illegal in the UK, so the only electric scooters allowed are the ones that you hire, which are permitted under Britain law as part of a nationwide trial period?
With reference to my last post about the new changes to the Highway Code in the UK; in speaking with Americans in the past I got the impression that the car is the king of the road and that there is little provision for cyclists!
In the UK many roads in cities and towns, we’ve had bus lanes for years, but in more recent years many roads are being modified to include cycle lanes. A prime example is the main road leading out of the Bristol City Centre towards the motorway via the roundabout. Originally that section of road was two and three lanes shared by all traffic, in 2021 the local government changed the layout of that road so that now the three lanes are one lane for buses and taxis only, just one lane for cars, and one lane exclusively for cyclists – As shown in this short (3 minute) video I made at the time:
Marginalisation of Bristol Cars https://youtu.be/eQnkDjAS_dw
Do you have cycle and bus lanes in America, or is it all just for cars?I think I answered that in an earlier post about jaywalking. As far as bus lanes from my observation in Escondido where I live they only exist where the terminal is. I don't know about in San Diego metro. With a short peek I see in Los Angeles they are supposedly going to be the next boom.
However, at this time they only have 40 miles of them. (64 km) City streets there are 7,500 miles (12,070 km) including residential.Wow – It’s hard to imagine what it would be like to drive on British roads without bus lanes. There are almost as many bus lanes as car lanes in cities; and often the main shopping High Street in towns are buses only e.g. car drivers have to find parking outside of the shopping centre and then you have to walk the short distance to the shops.
Having so many bus lanes in cities certainly makes bus travel easier and quicker e.g. buses not being caught up in traffic.
Guided Buses are also quite common in some cities in Britain (including Bristol – where I live).
Do you have Guided Busways in America?
A Guided Busway is a bus only road that no other traffic can use, where conventional buses steer themselves.
This first short video is of a Guided Busway in Bristol: https://youtu.be/L0JS0QueeaM
This 2nd video explains how Guided Busways work: https://youtu.be/o-q7x_sqYwcBuses are a big subject from the national perspective I would imagine. In my city and San Diego metro, there are no Guided Busways that I am aware of. I had not even imagined such until you shared the info. Innovative.
There are streets dedicated to bicyclists, but not much.
Watching the videos I get the impression they are for somewhat of a distance? In the San Diego metro, there are no barren areas as I saw in the video.
As far as going from San Diego metro to where I live in Escondido some forty miles away (64km) they travel by on the interstate. They are privileged to drive in the Express Lane.
Interstates have four lanes going in both directions with a speed limit of 70 MPH (113 KPH). Yes, people in the fast lane go as fast as 80 MPH (129 MPH). The slow lane goes at 60 MPH (97 KPH). I drive in that lane most of the time.
The center between the sets of four lanes is the Express Lane. You can only drive in that lane if there are at least three in the car, have a paid permit for a car or motorcycle, and buses. Some interstates have one going in both directions while some go in one direction only during the morning and the opposite way starting in the afternoon. The idea is to bypass the traffic congestion.
Edit; I should mention there is more traffic going to San Diego in the mornings heading for work. And, the going-home crowd in the afternoons. A good percentage are coming from the area I live in the area known as North County some 40 miles away. (64 km). And, just as many coming from the next county over some 60 miles away or further. (97 km)Yes, Public Transport, including buses, is a big subject from both a national and local perspective in the UK: Public Transport is always a major part of Government Policy – In 1992 the Conservative Government introduced a policy of ‘Integrated Transport’ which has been followed through by every Government since.
Actually, the guided busways are not for long distances, they are built to run short distances within the urban cities. In Bristol for example, there are 4 guided busway routes, 31 miles in total, within the city of Bristol; the particular video you saw is of the 2nd guided busway that runs just 6 miles from just outside the city boundary to the city centre.
What you described as “barren area” in the video of the Bristol guided busway video is actually ‘urban green land’ within the heart of the city.
Ever since 1948 it’s always been Government policy to aim to maintain at least a third of Urban Space as ‘Green Space’ within cities and that every citizen in a city or town should be within a short walking distance of ‘green space’ – a philosophy that ‘green space’ is physically and mentally healthy, as explained in this short video about Green Spaces in the heart of London: https://youtu.be/Y332SeVd-F0
With an ever constant demand for new housing, and with the restrictions imposed by the Green Belts, along with a policy to maintain urban green space, local governments have to be innovative in the way they use land for housing development e.g. the constant recycling of ‘brownfield’ sites (checking on the web, the official definition in the USA for brownfield sites is quite different to the official definition of brownfield sites in the UK).
For clarity, Green Belts, introduced in 1947, is a large belt of land, where development is prohibited, that surrounds every city and town, so as to prevent urban sprawl.
And also, for clarity, some of the ‘green space’ within the urban area of cities is ‘Common Land’ e.g. Durdhum Down in Bristol; Common Land was first enshrined in the Magna Carta in 1215 (although Common Land existed before that, in Saxon times). Its land that by medieval law is protected against development, that belongs to everyone (public open space), which everyone has free access to – originally created to allow peasants somewhere where they could graze their sheep and collect firewood.
One such example of Common Land in Bristol is Durdham Down, which has been Common Land since 883 AD.
Video of Durdham Down (Common Land – Just 2 miles from the city centre): https://youtu.be/2br4uZJmCmQ
For long distance public travel by road e.g. intercity (city to city) it’s not buses that are used, its coaches. So instead of going to a bus stop and catching a bus from A to B within a city, or to a neighbouring town or village within 20 or 30 miles, you make your way to a coach station for the longer journeys.
Intercity coaches will obviously use the motorway network, whereas buses don’t; and because the journeys are longer the coaches tend to be luxurious, to make the journey pleasant.
INTERSTATES/EXPRESS LANES (MOTORWAYS)
On reading your description of how Interstates and Express lanes work in America, I had to take a coffee break to try to let it sink in; as it’s a system that is quite radically different to how our motorways work in the UK – So I will reply to this section in a separate post - after I've had time to gather my thoughts.Thanks for the info offering clarity, Nathan. Curious, I checked to see for the San Diego area how much is green space. I discovered "Impressively, 45 percent of the total land area of San Diego county is green space. However, many communities are park-poor even though the region as a whole is park-rich." Mind you that is the County.
More poking about I found that San Diego was ranked 24th nationally by Trust for Public Land for parks. They state that 81% of residents are within a 10-minute walk to a park. It is an interesting easily skimmed report with graphics.
https://www.tpl.org/city/san-diego-california
However, still curious, poking about I discovered the following, % of public green space (parks and gardens) for cities across the world. San Diego isn't listed, but London is at 33%.
The city with the highest of those listed is Oslo at 68% followed by Vienna at 50%. Next is Edinburgh at 49.20%. Have a peek. The first thing noticed is the data is from different years.
http://www.worldcitiescultureforum.com/ … nd-gardens
Note: I see your other post regarding thoroughfares and public transportation. I will think about and respond later.Brilliant; cool to hear that San Diego, and America in general, takes urban green space seriously (thanks for the links).
However, I found that your 2nd link is for just those cities (40 in total) who are members of the ‘World Cities Culture Forum’. I did try to find a more comprehensive list that included all world cities, but could only find websites that listed the ‘greenest’ cities in the world, which includes London at 33%.
Although, in poking around I did discover that the ‘within 10 minutes walking distance of green space’ is a standard set by WHO. And on delving into that aspect for the UK found that over 90% of the population in the UK are within that ’10 minute walking distance’; which is similar to the 81% you quote for San Diego.
The only website that I could find of any real and meaningful value on the subject of ‘Urban Green Space’ is the Wikipedia article on the subject; which is educational, and well worth a read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_green_space
Another good video footage of green space in the heart of Bristol is Cabot Tower. Cabot Tower is just ½ mile (10 minute walk) from the city centre; and although this video footage is short (just over 1 minute), it does give an excellent aerial view of the city of Bristol, nestled in a basin, surrounded by green hills on the horizon. https://youtu.be/30xOXCJDjAY
Cabot Tower (105 feet tall) was built in 1898 to commemorate the 400th anniversary of the journey of John Cabot from Bristol to discover Newfoundland, Canada.
An exact replica of The Matthew (the ship used by John Cabot to discover Newfoundland, Canada, was built in 1996; and when it’s not being used is permanently docked in Bristol Harbour, on the city centre, as a tourist attraction.
If you are interested, this short video documentary (12 minutes) has live footage of The Matthew (full size replica) at sea, and gives its history (and general maritime shipping history of the 15th century), which is quite educational: https://youtu.be/-6TikIvFmeo
INTERSTATES/EXPRESS LANES (MOTORWAYS)
Motorways in the UK are not anywhere as extensive as in the USA and mainland Europe e.g. just 2,300 miles of motorway in Britain.
Britain built it first motorway in 1958, and in 1963 accelerated the motorway building programme as the then Conservative Government switched the emphasis of transport away from railway to road.
However, in 1992, when Margaret Thatcher was forced to resign as Prime Minister, within a week of the new Conservative Prime Minister coming to power all current and future motorway building programmes were cancelled overnight, as the Conservative’s new transport policy was to put the emphases for transport on railways rather than road – and since the Conservatives have come to power in 2010 they’ve embarked on a major railway building programme to bring the railway network back to its former glory of the Victorian era.
Consequently, along with other expansions to the motorway network, the planned motorway to the South West of England was never built e.g. the motorway network in the South West ends at Exeter (just 90 minute drive south of Bristol); so driving in Devon and Cornwall, predominately on country roads, can be challenging – as this short video that I filmed a few years ago shows: https://youtu.be/k3NrXr7WqYY
Our Intercity motorways in the UK are normally just 3 lanes in each direction; where you see 4 lanes, its where the inside lane is part of the slip road. The slip road is entry and exit road to motorways.
The standard speed limit on motorways is 70mph, although because our motorway network in Britain are smart motorways e.g. traffic monitoring and control; many motorways have variable speed limits to control the flow of traffic and reduce the risk of traffic jams.
Variable Speed Limits on British Motorways: https://youtu.be/7StmCL1h8Ik
In principle:-
• The inside lane is for slow moving traffic e.g. trucks, cars pulling caravans and coaches etc., often travelling at 60mph.
• The middle lane is for overtaking, and for faster moving vehicles.
• The outside lane should just be for overtaking.
The motorway is extensively covered with speed cameras, including the new ‘average speed’ speed cameras; so it is pointless speeding on the motorway. The average speed, speed cameras are CCTV cameras that times how long it takes you to travel from A to B and works out your average speed.
The only equivalent we have to your Express lanes are the ‘2+ lanes’ (which are not that common in Britain). For example, a small section of the motorway skirting around Bristol where the inside lane for that section of the motorway is a 2+ lane e.g. you can only use it if there are two or more people in the car – otherwise you have to use the middle (busier) lane for driving and the outside lane for overtaking.
SLIP ROADS
How do you enter and exit your interstate roads (motorways). In the UK (as in the EU) it’s always by a slip road rather than a junction. And in the UK, because we drive on the left, the slip roads for entry and exit are always on the left e.g. so that you don’t cut across traffic to joint or leave a motorway.
If it’s any different in the USA, this video demonstrates how slip roads work in the UK: https://youtu.be/7wsk0W7gwgs
Tony Blair lost his election really bad over 9/11. Looks like Biden is using Hamas vs Israel another 9/11 false flag :to help his losing polls to Trump. Politician and wars are the ultimate part of their insanity. They better get a handle on this one.
You need to check your facts; 9/11 was in 2001 - Labour didn't loose power until 2010 e.g. following the UK economy taking a nosedive due to the worldwide financial crisis of 2008.
UK didn't realize how terrible the wars were on their economy until then. Bush was also very popular over 9/11. Today generally public learned how much they are just Globalist puppets.
The Iraqi war and Afghanistan war had nothing to do with the UK economy; the UK economy took a nosedive years later, in 2008/09 because of the banking crisis in America.
On 15 September 2008 the investment bank Lehman Brothers collapsed, sending shockwaves through the global financial system and beyond - causing the most severe worldwide economic crisis since the Great Depression of 1929.Hope I don't understand Politics and the head of the snake financial institutions as well as you do. I prefer to simplify and nothing is worst than murder and stealing
Fear and Anger are both emotions that are contagious.
I think social media has a lot to answer for. Millions of experts ventilate their opinions about this or that without having actual knowledge. Influencers talking about stuff they don't know anything about, but are heard by billions of followers.
Conspiracy theories are also highly contagious. broadcasters like Joe Rogan are terrible for society as he is a spreader of fake news and not making a distinction between fact or fiction. The only thing that counts is the mighty dollar bill. And if you can get more viewers by getting people upset and angry than by giving people courage and advice, talkshows will make people angry and upset.
Fear sells and anger sells, and as the US finds money more important than anything else the results are that lies spread like viruses and undermine the democracy itself.Yep, absolutely; and yes, as you say "Conspiracy theories are also highly contagious."
Agreed to social media's influence and as you say through influencers not only lacking in knowledge, yet a semblance of truth. I don't know about where you are, but here one current trend with Tik-Tok and Instagram is antisemitism. Some from what I hear are pretty vile and hateful.
"Good governance, good journalism, good scholarship, and good citizenship depend on knowing the valuable roles, that anger and fear play."
We must see and understand the anger and fear that lingers within the human psyche.
ROLES????What about the role of bravery?
What emotion is bravery dependent on?
Confidence?
Confidence in what one is consciously aware of?
Conscious awareness depends on the knowledge one acquires by the diligent search for the truth and the facts.
Conclusion: People should vote according to their conscious awareness of what is real and true.Funny, my consciousness tells me not to vote. Cutting the stress or any unethical psychopaths leading me down a world of broken promises and lies.
Anger. Fear. Democracy. Voting. Connected?
That is the title of this OP!
However, in another time and another place . . . .
Jim Jordan lost the third round of voting!!
I just now 9:53 am PDT got a notice from CNN Breaking News
News Alert: Jim Jordan loses third vote for House speaker as he resists pressure to drop out of the race
Republican Rep. Jim Jordan again failed to win the speaker’s gavel in a third vote on Friday, a loss that comes as he faces growing pressure from within his own party to drop out of the race and the House remains in a state of paralysis.
Does the OP title apply? I wonder?
UPDATE
The latest on the House speaker fight
Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, is no longer the speaker nominee. A secret ballot taken in the House caucus this afternoon had 112 ballots cast against him and 86 in favor, sources told NBC News.Breaking News - NBC on 10/24/23 at 7:45 PDT
Mike Johnson clinches GOP nomination for House speaker: Live updates
The House has been left rudderless for weeks after Kevin McCarthy was ousted from the top spot and three nominees to replace him dropped out of the running.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congre … rcna121674
After a day of playing pinball finally, there is a candidate to vote on for House Speaker. Hooray!! Seems a decision can be made in a timely fashion, huh? Unsure of that conclusion since it has been around three weeks without a speaker. Gasp!
Vegas odds now have him pegged at about +800 with a 12% chance. It may be too early to determine those numbers, but, hey, got to start somewhere, right?Breaking News
There is a new king in the House. Mike Johnson was elected as Speaker. Finally, there is a chance of stability and movement in one direction or another. Some say that is progress.Trump has offered support for Mike Johnson. I know nothing about this man, he flys below the radar.
I know who this Mike Johnson reminded me of, a character from an old early 1950s sitcom. The title character played by the late Wally Cox, Mr. Peepers.....
https://www.abebooks.co.uk/first-editio … &pid=1
When a political party or a religion spend most of their time trying to convince you to be afraid of something or a litany of somethings - it's time to find a new one.
Kathleen --- Or try to convince you all is well when it is not.
The acceptability of a political party or movement often depends on individual perspectives, values, and priorities. However, many people at this point do seem to appreciate political entities that don't address crises with a balanced and pragmatic approach or even acknowledge the severity of the issues at hand or work towards effective solutions.
A party that excessively focuses on bloviating or exaggerating policy wins without meaningful policies or actions to support their views, can ultimately be seen as untruthful.
Ideally, political parties that engage in responsible governance and effective problem-solving are more likely to garner citizen's support. This form of governing involves acknowledging the seriousness of crises, proposing evidence-based solutions, and fostering open and transparent communication with the public.
Hopefully, a majority of voters may favor parties that prioritize addressing issues with a clear understanding of their severity and a commitment to implementing practical, well-thought-out solutions.Focusing, ONLY, on crisis is debatable if it garners support. Frankly. yes, tell me about the crisis from that political individual's perspective, but that person damn well better present reasonable solutions. Not radical ones that will further divide the nation that will send it in a tailspin worse than it is.
I don't see that much in my view. Maybe I am blind to it. I see condemnation, the opposing side is evil, and the nation is going to Hell in a handbasket. That does not solve anything.
Just, a perspective, and everyone has their own unique reality while seeking agreement and a sense of belonging. Perhaps, sadly, I personally feel no sense of belonging to either party at this time. Maybe I must be plain weird.Not weird at all – In Britain you’d be classified as a ‘floating voter’. As shown in the graph below, currently about a third of the British voting population are floating voters; and those are the voters that the political parties try to entice to their side during Elections.
"Focusing, ONLY, on crisis is debatable if it garners support. Frankly. yes, tell me about the crisis from that political individual's perspective, but that person damn well better present reasonable solutions. Not radical ones that will further divide the nation that will send it in a tailspin worse than it is"
I'm seeking a leader who recognizes the gravity of crises, advocates for solutions grounded in evidence, and prioritizes open and transparent communication with the citizens. It's disheartening to hear claims about the thriving economy when my personal finances indicate otherwise. As an adult, being told to simply "eat your vegetables" feels patronizing and dismissive. An insult to my intelligence.
" I see condemnation, the opposing side is evil, and the nation is going to Hell in a handbasket. That does not solve anything."
Certainly, I concur. Nevertheless, I pose a direct inquiry. Isn't the nation currently grappling with a multitude of crises, each seemingly spiraling out of control simultaneously? Do you perceive the escalating national debt as a cause for concern? Moreover, do you acknowledge the challenges associated with accommodating millions of migrants, bearing in mind our responsibility for their education, healthcare, and often housing? Additionally, do you view the financial backing of two ongoing wars as a problematic issue? I'll conclude here, as I could elaborate extensively on this matter.
It appears imperative for us, as Americans, to seek a president who is more inclined to address our existing issues rather than persist on a course that exacerbates them.
Malevolence is evident in Washington, spanning across various factions. Should we merely express our concern and resort to crafting philosophical statements? Is the nation not facing a downward spiral? I invite you to highlight any positive aspects you perceive in the current state of the nation.
I find myself detached from allegiance to any party or even to the nation in its present form. There's a sense of shame for both its government and, regrettably, a portion of its populace. The time for avoiding direct discussions has passed."Certainly, I concur. Nevertheless, I pose a direct inquiry. Isn't the nation currently grappling with a multitude of crises, each seemingly spiraling out of control simultaneously? Do you perceive the escalating national debt as a cause for concern? Moreover, do you acknowledge the challenges associated with accommodating millions of migrants, bearing in mind our responsibility for their education, healthcare, and often housing? Additionally, do you view the financial backing of two ongoing wars as a problematic issue? I'll conclude here, as I could elaborate extensively on this matter."
Firstly are you suggesting I am ignorant of those? Seems so, from my perspective. Why?
Foregoing philosophy . . .
What are the solutions being offered? I would rather you point out those that our current political leaders campaigning for the top seat in government are proposing. Perhaps I am blind to that.
I have seen a bit and a byte about their past performances in their careers. Kudos to them. Am I to assume that as a go-getter they 'automatically' will solve our problems today? Simply trust them and have faith? My Lord, half the nation did that last time, right? Lesson learned!!
I certainly haven't seen proposed solutions and I at least skim about a dozen newsletters everyday. I hear they will fix this and that, but I want to know how. I do see send me money or buy a Trump bobble head or collector's card. I have checked their websites, too!
As far as that goes the same with House leadership. For at least a decade or more all I see from that institution is investigate this or that. I don't care who held the majority.
As pointed out our border is a mess. I live it being in the San Diego area. I don't need to be informed it is mess. How about the House get off their silly butts and get some legislation going on new immigration laws. Is that a novel idea?
Yes, I know the differences between the ideologies very well! Ideologies are not solutions in my mind. I want concrete solutions being presented, not as inferred the evils of the other party or the much discussed dementia of Biden as the cause of all things going to hell in a hand basket. We are stuck with him and have been!
I want to know what a supposed replacement is going to do! I believe I am capable of a compare/contrast, but what am I do that with.
In other words, I am not going to just assume the conservative/Republican ideology/Party platform is the solution. I respectfully would like to hear or read something that will entice my vote. Then again, as said, I may simply be uniformed or blind. I don't mind being told I am ignorant or stupid. As they say 'sticks and stones'.
Forgive the little rant . . ."Firstly are you suggesting I am ignorant of those? Seems so, from my perspective. Why?"
No, I meant no offense. Note my lead in " I pose a direct inquiry".
I simply wanted to see if you feel these problems exist. I am very sure you realize many do not see any of the above-mentioned as true problems, and vehemently will debate the opposite.
Just trying to get an idea if we are even indirectly on the same wavelength. I was too direct. My apology.
I do not argue for what you have shared, nor do I have solutions to how we as a people can truely set the ship right. I do know we can't be complacent.
In my view, both political parties bear responsibility for disregarding the voices of the people, often tailoring their messages to manipulate public opinion. There's a blatant disregard for consistency, as they fail to reconcile current statements with contradictory ones from the past.
In my opinion, the grand experiment we once held dear seems to have concluded. I previously in another thread outlined the qualities I seek in a leader, avoiding allegiance to any specific party. However, when I recently asked others to nominate a potential president, few could propose a suitable candidate. This raises the question of whether we, as a collective, are the root of the issue. If we struggle to identify a worthy leader, what does that imply?
So, is the blame on the politicians, or have we, through our failure to hold them accountable, empowered their actions? It appears that many now vote for someone they don't vehemently oppose—using a strong term deliberately, as witnessed in the 2020 election. It seems likely that, once again, we'll reluctantly align with a candidate, holding our noses in the process.
My intention wasn't to insult you but rather to highlight the uncomfortable reality of our current political climate. I appreciate that instead of engaging in a contentious debate about my concerns, you responded with vigor, offering more insight into your preferences for a candidate. Regarding how they would fix problems, rather than just talking about problems. I now better understand your perspective and value the direct and honest way you expressed your thoughts.Sharlee . . . I apologize if too candid. Consider I did not enter into the game of politics as a close observer until 2015. I was as many call it a sheeple voting the Republican party ticket since '72. I towed the line as they say. So, in essence I am just now learning how the game is played, and, frankly I feel it is lacking in integrity and authenticity.
I was not really impressed with both candidates for 2016. My BS detector for both was like a gong heard for miles. It didn't change for 2020.
My idea for what a leader should be is based on my experiences with business while being closely tied to the leaders I not only worked for, but side by side.
Maybe my perspective may be skewed as the company I worked placed an emphasis on performance in that there must be a plan, work the plan, assess constantly, make adjustments, and continue.
Each of the 24 store managers and 2 warehouse managers along with departments heads were held to the fire for that. The corporate managers did that also with the store managers and department heads.
And, they were required to have weekly meetings to share those plans with the employees, the workers, and in the sense of our nation . . . the people who are voters.
Communication is 'Key'! I take the perspective if I don't know what the plan is or understand it then it is the leaders fault and they have the responsibility to correct it.
That is my view of expectation for the leaders of our nation.
True, and I would suppose I have espoused the "opposing side is evil, and the nation is going to hell" more than once, in a variety of ways.
However, if one identifies a problem, the first thing to solving the problem is identifying it, getting others to identify it as such, so that more people are aware of it, and if nothing else, voting and acting with that knowledge.
It is important not to pretend, to be able to differentiate between MSM messaging and reality. If one believes something, its not a bad idea to try and forward that information to others.
I have been posting here for more than a decade, we have debated a lot of things, all throughout the Obama and Trump years, even under the influence of Fox News, I rarely, if ever, used the word evil.
Unfortunately, we have arrived at a time where I recognize what we have for an Administration today as such, based on their actions and where they are leading the nation.No disagreement, Ken. However, the sad part in my mind is as a nation, we have an ingrained Dichotomous Thinking Mindset through Conditioning. That stymies creative thought needed for solutions, which is a very important part of problem-solving from my understanding and studies.
Yes, most certainly one party or the other will solve 'Some' problems while those will be much more aimed at the extreme fringes. Black then white, then black, then white. At least that is what I have observed in at least the last two decades. So, what has been happening is nothing gets done in the middle where, to me, the bulk of the challenges are. Progress as a 'Whole Nation' goes nowhere.
However, as I shared with Sharlee, perhaps, I am ignorant, stupid, blind, or just a crotchety old guy, At least offered were four choices to choose from.I think it is far more than a, we see things in Black or White.
We see lies as truth, truth as lies, we've created a culture where being a victim is status, being a race means benefits, what sex you are is a choice, and so on.
The Biden Administration is so corrupt and so dismissive of regulations and laws its not any one thing, it is all things.
For instance, a House committee is investigating the Biden administration’s SEC for quietly working with its European Union counterparts to make European regulations as impactful as possible.
Why does that Matter?
Because in the process, the SEC is, as several U.S. lawmakers observed, “willfully circumventing the U.S. regulatory process by actively coordinating with foreign governments to dictate climate and economic policy to U.S. companies.” At the same time, the SEC has proposed its crushing Climate Disclosure Rule.
In short, the Biden Administration is using the EU to force ESG, Equity, and all sorts of other BS down America's throat.
And it is everything they do... Executive Orders to give Transgenders special protections and rights... funding wars no American wants to fund, even when the House shoots it down. Its totally out of "the people's" control.
The acceptability of a political party or movement often depends on individual perspectives, values, and priorities. However, many people at this point do seem to appreciate political entities that don't address crises with a balanced and pragmatic approach or even acknowledge the severity of the issues at hand or work towards effective solutions.
A party that excessively focuses on bloviating or exaggerating policy wins without meaningful policies or actions to support their views, can ultimately be seen as untruthful.
Ideally, political parties that engage in responsible governance and effective problem-solving are more likely to garner citizen's support. This form of governing involves acknowledging the seriousness of crises, proposing evidence-based solutions, and fostering open and transparent communication with the public.
Hopefully, a majority of voters may favor parties that prioritize addressing issues with a clear understanding of their severity and a commitment to implementing practical, well-thought-out solutions.I swear you can't make this stuff up...
Biden's Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has implemented a new gender pronoun policy, requiring employees to use preferred pronouns or face firing.
The move has been criticized by a former HHS official, Roger Severino, who argues that it violates employee rights and forces individuals to speak falsehoods.
“HHS and the federal government is requiring its employees to speak falsehoods,” Severino stated.
The Harvard graduate posted that HHS “imposed a transgender pronoun mandate on its employees who will now be forced to deny biological realities with their own words or face firing.”
He pressed that the First Amendment serves as protection to staff from being forced to do so, as the move requires many employees to reject their own faith for the sake of embracing the State’s ideology.
“These policies would require all of those things,” said Severino.
The policy, supported by White House executive orders, aims to combat gender discrimination and protect gender identity rights.
“All employees should be addressed [by] the names and pronouns they use to describe themselves,” an HHS email read.
“All applicants and employees should be addressed by the names and pronouns they use to describe themselves. Using correct names and pronouns helps foster workplaces free of discrimination and harassment,” a statement by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management reads.
The policy also allows individuals to use facilities based on their gender identity, raising concerns about privacy and civil rights.
“Men who identify as female have the right to get naked in front of female colleagues in the locker room,” Severino pressed.
“It used to be that if you allowed a man to get naked in front of a woman in the workplace that is instantly a violation of civil rights law,” he went on.
“That’s the quintessential hostile work environment, subjecting women to that. Now, the policy says to the women who may be uncomfortable with that situation, they’re the ones who have to leave.”
“Governments cannot compel speech and certainly cannot compel false speech,” he added, referring to West Virginia vs. Barnette.
“We protect the right of political dissent and here it’s a pledge of allegiance to the Rainbow flag that’s been essentially required.”
“They are faced with a horrible dilemma,” Severino said of employees with conflicting faith. “Do they hope that they can fly under the radar and try to avoid the issue and keep a low profile and perhaps hide their faith so they can keep their job, or do they stand up and say this policy is wrong and fight for their rights? And then see a gigantic target on their back after that.”
Severino highlights the potential negative impact on morale and production among government employees.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/biden … b&ei=3
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/new-or … gal-expert
Related Discussions
- 17
What do Americans think of the Democrat & Republican parties?
by Tim Mitchell 6 days ago
How Americans describe the Democratic and Republican parties by YouGov (July 8, 2024)"A new YouGov survey asked Americans which positive and negative traits they associate with the Democratic and Republican parties. Each party is described as corrupt by 34% of Americans, and similar shares...
- 28
Have you ever changed your political stance? What changed your mind? What would
by Nicola Thompson 11 years ago
Have you ever changed your political stance? What changed your mind? What would change your mind?I find that usually people are stuck to the political side they have chosen. Is it possible to change sides? What might be inspiring to one to go from republican to libertarian? Extreme left to the...
- 13
The Right, Conservatives, Republicans prefer Autocracy over Democracy?
by Credence2 2 years ago
I find this topic most disturbing as it is a reflection of the goals and aspirations of the American Right wing movement. There is no such thing as it being "fringe" as Trump, Carlson and many Republican Senators avoided direct answers or said that the Orbanz authoritarian regime in...
- 40
Okay, a sincere inquiry why be a Liberal or Conservative?
by Tim Mitchell 2 years ago
To begin the discussion and keeping it simple a quick peek at Oxford Dictionaries says:Conservative (in a political context) favoring free enterprise, private ownership, and socially traditional ideas.Liberal relating to or denoting a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights,...
- 18
Hey Boehner, how's that relentless focus coming along?
by Susan Reid 11 years ago
During the 2010 mid-terms the GOP campaigned fiercely on the platform of job creation and, as a result of such promises, the GOP gained the majority in the House of Representatives. As the new Speaker of the House, John Boehner made the welcome claim that the primary goal of the Republican Party...
- 2
In a world divided by anger and fear who must stand alone to save us all?
by LeonJane 7 years ago
In a world divided by anger and fear who must stand alone to save us all?