German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s efforts to present a united front against President Trump’s climate skepticism took a blow today, with the British government admitting that climate is not on their list of key objectives for the G20 conference.
Instead, Ms May will focus on
cutting off terrorist financing.
global migration.
modern slavery and
making the global economy work for everyone.
The_observer said:
German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s efforts to present a united front against President Trump’s climate skepticism took a blow today, with the British government admitting that climate is not on their list of key objectives for the G20 conference.Instead, Ms May will focus on
cutting off terrorist financing.
global migration.
modern slavery and
making the global economy work for everyone.
All that will mean zilch if climate change gets out of control.
The_observer said:
German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s efforts to present a united front against President Trump’s climate skepticism took a blow today, with the British government admitting that climate is not on their list of key objectives for the G20 conference.Instead, Ms May will focus on
cutting off terrorist financing.
global migration.
modern slavery and
making the global economy work for everyone.
Interesting; the first three topics all fall into the “problem with islam” category.
Tau.Neutrino said:
The_observer said:
German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s efforts to present a united front against President Trump’s climate skepticism took a blow today, with the British government admitting that climate is not on their list of key objectives for the G20 conference.Instead, Ms May will focus on
cutting off terrorist financing.
global migration.
modern slavery and
making the global economy work for everyone.
All that will mean zilch if climate change gets out of control.
It already has Neut. Just consider the billions wasted so far. & what has it achieved?….zilch
Not sure about promoting modern slavery would make the global economy work better for everyone.
party_pants said:
Not sure about promoting modern slavery would make the global economy work better for everyone.
No, their pointing out the problem of slavery that exists in islamworld. Sharia world to be specific
The_observer said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
The_observer said:
German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s efforts to present a united front against President Trump’s climate skepticism took a blow today, with the British government admitting that climate is not on their list of key objectives for the G20 conference.Instead, Ms May will focus on
cutting off terrorist financing.
global migration.
modern slavery and
making the global economy work for everyone.
All that will mean zilch if climate change gets out of control.
It already has Neut. Just consider the billions wasted so far. & what has it achieved?….zilch
The EIA energy data shows that fossil, nuclear and hydro provided more than 90% of 2016 U.S. energy production with rising petroleum and natural gas use while coal use is declining.
While the mainstream media continues to hype the role of decades long heavily government subsidized renewable energy the reality of U.S. and global energy use continues to be highly dependent upon fossil, nuclear and hydro energy resources.
!
Oh the bit i missed
A recent EIA report on energy production shows that wind and solar despite receiving tens of billions in government subsidies provided only 3.2% of U.S. energy in year 2016.
>making the global economy work for everyone.
Except the UK, who’ve decided to leave the EU and put themselves at the helpless mercy of said global economy.
The_observer said:
Oh the bit i missedA recent EIA report on energy production shows that wind and solar despite receiving tens of billions in government subsidies provided only 3.2% of U.S. energy in year 2016.
From the NYT
1,600 new coal-fired power plants are planned or under construction in 62 countries.
Bubblecar said:
>making the global economy work for everyone.Except the UK, who’ve decided to leave the EU and put themselves at the helpless mercy of said global economy.
They’ll be a sovereign state again. Rule Britannia
The_observer said:
Bubblecar said:
>making the global economy work for everyone.Except the UK, who’ve decided to leave the EU and put themselves at the helpless mercy of said global economy.
They’ll be a sovereign state again. Rule Britannia
hahahaha
Bubblecar said:
The_observer said:
Bubblecar said:
>making the global economy work for everyone.Except the UK, who’ve decided to leave the EU and put themselves at the helpless mercy of said global economy.
They’ll be a sovereign state again. Rule Britannia
hahahaha
European states seperate from the European gulag union were better off economically.
This EU thing is typically a lefty centralised control thing. A step towards a one world dictatorship
What’s their plan? British jam!
They’ll all be queuing for British jam!
And marmalade for a change now and then,
And big framed pitchers of Big Ben.
Bubblecar said:
What’s their plan? British jam!
They’ll all be queuing for British jam!
And marmalade for a change now and then,
And big framed pitchers of Big Ben.
Do you believe the EU gestapo is outto make the Brits p ay.LOL
The_observer said:
Bubblecar said:
The_observer said:They’ll be a sovereign state again. Rule Britannia
hahahaha
European states seperate from the European gulag union were better off economically.
This EU thing is typically a lefty centralised control thing. A step towards a one world dictatorship
hahahaha
britain is daft to abandon the co-prosperity sphere. imho.
The_observer said:
Bubblecar said:
The_observer said:They’ll be a sovereign state again. Rule Britannia
hahahaha
European states seperate from the European gulag union were better off economically.
This EU thing is typically a lefty centralised control thing. A step towards a one world dictatorship
Yeah ‘cause lefties like Angela Merkel support it… oh wait.
May can make Britain grest again.
First, energy security
Witty Rejoinder said:
The_observer said:
Bubblecar said:hahahaha
European states seperate from the European gulag union were better off economically.
This EU thing is typically a lefty centralised control thing. A step towards a one world dictatorship
Yeah ‘cause lefties like Angela Merkel support it… oh wait.
And old left Trots like Corbyn are keen EU fanboys… oh wait.
ChrispenEvan said:
britain is daft to abandon the co-prosperity sphere. imho.
Well yes but the Rubicon has been crossed, no point in looking back.
The_observer said:
May can make Britain grest again.
First, energy security
She’s already made Britain grest to a halt.
The British have very little anyone else wants, outside of their financial sector, which campaigned hard against Brexit because they know it offers them nothing except tears.
The_observer said:
May can make Britain grest again.
First, energy security
Lol yeah. Stop buying natural gas from Finland and stop buying Arab oil. Then invest in renewables with storage, or reopen all the old coal mines and revive militant unionism and Labour party funding.
If it is profitable to trade with the UK countries and companies will still do so, they are not bricking themselves in. If it is not profitable and they are in reciept of subsidies by virtue of being in the bloc that might explain why the bloc is shakey, looks to me like Germany is supporting everyone else which is it a good thing.
I think the EU is a good thing, but should not have involved a common currency, that is just unsustainable in a collection of lifters and leaners.
Insert an isn’t.
AwesomeO said:
Insert an isn’t.
where?
party_pants said:
The_observer said:May can make Britain grest again.
First, energy security
Lol yeah. Stop buying natural gas from Finland and stop buying Arab oil. Then invest in renewables with storage, or reopen all the old coal mines and revive militant unionism and Labour party funding.
Or is it Norway that supplies their gas? One of those.
party_pants said:
AwesomeO said:
Insert an isn’t.
where?
Germany supporting everyone else
And you…
Peak Warming Man said:
ChrispenEvan said:
britain is daft to abandon the co-prosperity sphere. imho.
Well yes but the Rubicon has been crossed, no point in looking back.
This reminds me:
millions of humans would starve to death in the 1970s and 1980s, mass famines would sweep England leading to the country’s demise
The German problem
Why Germany’s current-account surplus is bad for the world economy
The country saves too much and spends too little
Jul 8th 2017
THE battle-lines are drawn. When the world’s big trading nations convene this week at a G20 summit in Hamburg, the stage is set for a clash between a protectionist America and a free-trading Germany.
President Donald Trump has already pulled out of one trade pact, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and demanded the renegotiation of another, the North American Free-Trade Agreement. He is weighing whether to impose tariffs on steel imports into America, a move that would almost certainly provoke retaliation. The threat of a trade war has hung over the Trump presidency since January. In contrast, Angela Merkel, Germany’s chancellor and the summit’s host, will bang the drum for free trade. In a thinly veiled attack on Mr Trump, she delivered a speech on June 29th condemning the forces of protectionism and isolationism. An imminent free-trade deal between Japan and the European Union will add substance to her rhetoric (see article).
There is no question who has the better of this argument. Mr Trump’s doctrine that trade must be balanced to be fair is economically illiterate. His belief that tariffs will level the playing field is naive and dangerous: they would shrink prosperity for all. But in one respect, at least, Mr Trump has grasped an inconvenient truth. He has admonished Germany for its trade surplus, which stood at almost $300bn last year, the world’s largest (China’s hoard was a mere $200bn). His threatened solution—to put a stop to sales of German cars—may be self-defeating, but the fact is that Germany saves too much and spends too little. And the size and persistence of Germany’s savings hoard makes it an awkward defender of free trade.
Imperfect harmony
At bottom, a trade surplus is an excess of national saving over domestic investment. In Germany’s case, this is not the result of a mercantilist government policy, as some foreigners complain. Nor, as German officials often insist, does it reflect the urgent need for an ageing society to save more. The rate of household saving has been stable, if high, for years; the increase in national saving has come from firms and the government.
Underlying Germany’s surplus is a decades-old accord between business and unions in favour of wage restraint to keep export industries competitive (see article). Such moderation served Germany’s export-led economy well through its postwar recovery and beyond. It is an instinct that helps explain Germany’s transformation since the late 1990s from Europe’s sick man to today’s muscle-bound champion.
There is much to envy in Germany’s model. Harmony between firms and workers has been one of the main reasons for the economy’s outperformance. Firms could invest free from the worry that unions would hold them to ransom. The state played its part by sponsoring a system of vocational training that is rightly admired. In America the prospects for men without college degrees have worsened along with a decline in manufacturing jobs—a cause of the economic nationalism espoused by Mr Trump. Germany has not entirely escaped this, but it has held on to more of the sorts of blue-collar jobs that America grieves for. This is one reason why the populist AfD party remains on the fringes of German politics.
But the adverse side-effects of the model are increasingly evident. It has left the German economy and global trade perilously unbalanced. Pay restraint means less domestic spending and fewer imports. Consumer spending has dropped to just 54% of GDP, compared with 69% in America and 65% in Britain. Exporters do not invest their windfall profits at home. And Germany is not alone; Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark and the Netherlands have been piling up big surpluses, too.
For a large economy at full employment to run a current-account surplus in excess of 8% of GDP puts unreasonable strain on the global trading system. To offset such surpluses and sustain enough aggregate demand to keep people in work, the rest of the world must borrow and spend with equal abandon. In some countries, notably Italy, Greece and Spain, persistent deficits eventually led to crises. Their subsequent shift towards surplus came at a heavy cost. The enduring savings glut in northern Europe has made the adjustment needlessly painful. In the high-inflation 1970s and 1980s Germany’s penchant for high saving was a stabilising force. Now it is a drag on global growth and a target for protectionists such as Mr Trump.
The shift from thrift
Can the problem be fixed? Perhaps Germany’s bumper trade surplus will be eroded as China’s was, by a surge in wages. Unemployment is below 4% and the working-age population will shrink, despite strong immigration. After decades of decline, the cost of housing is rising, meaning that pay does not stretch as far as it used to. The institutions behind wage restraint are losing influence. The euro may surge. Yet the German instinct for caution is deeply rooted. Pay rose by just 2.3% last year, more slowly than in the previous two years. Left to adjust, the surplus might take many years to fall to a sensible level.
The government should help by spending more. Germany’s structural budget balance has gone from a deficit of over 3% of GDP in 2010 to a small surplus. Officials call this prudence but, given high private-sector savings, it is hard to defend. Germany has plenty of worthwhile projects to spend money on. Its school buildings and roads are crumbling, because of the squeeze on public investment required to meet its own misguided fiscal rules. The economy lags behind in its readiness for digitalisation, ranking 25th in the world in average download speeds. Greater provision of after-school care by the state would let more mothers work full-time, in an economy where women’s participation is low. Some say such expansion is impossible, because of full employment. Yet in a market economy, there is a tried and trusted way to bid for scarce resources: pay more.
Above all, it is long past time for Germany to recognise that its excessive saving is a weakness. Mrs Merkel is absolutely right to proclaim the message of free trade. But she and her compatriots need to understand that Germany’s surpluses are themselves a threat to free trade’s legitimacy.
This article appeared in the Leaders section of the print edition under the headline “The German problem”
https://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21724810-country-saves-too-much-and-spends-too-little-why-germanys-current-account-surplus-bad
Bob Geldoff stopped that…
furious said:
- millions of humans would starve to death in the 1970s and 1980s, mass famines would sweep England leading to the country’s demise
Bob Geldoff stopped that…
pfffft a bandaid solution.
I’ll pay that…
party_pants said:
The_observer said:May can make Britain grest again.
First, energy security
Lol yeah. Stop buying natural gas from Finland and stop buying Arab oil. Then invest in renewables with storage, or reopen all the old coal mines and revive militant unionism and Labour party funding.
They have plenty of energy waiting to extracted.
The_observer said:
party_pants said:
The_observer said:May can make Britain grest again.
First, energy security
Lol yeah. Stop buying natural gas from Finland and stop buying Arab oil. Then invest in renewables with storage, or reopen all the old coal mines and revive militant unionism and Labour party funding.
They have plenty of energy waiting to extracted.
what and where? They have fuck all oil.
party_pants said:
The_observer said:
party_pants said:Lol yeah. Stop buying natural gas from Finland and stop buying Arab oil. Then invest in renewables with storage, or reopen all the old coal mines and revive militant unionism and Labour party funding.
They have plenty of energy waiting to extracted.
what and where? They have fuck all oil.
They can send all the coloured kids down the coal mines.
party_pants said:
The_observer said:
party_pants said:Lol yeah. Stop buying natural gas from Finland and stop buying Arab oil. Then invest in renewables with storage, or reopen all the old coal mines and revive militant unionism and Labour party funding.
They have plenty of energy waiting to extracted.
what and where? They have fuck all oil.
There’s all those old coal mines that The Wicked Witch of Whitehall closed down
pommiejohn said:
party_pants said:
The_observer said:They have plenty of energy waiting to extracted.
what and where? They have fuck all oil.
There’s all those old coal mines that The Wicked Witch of Whitehall closed down
Yeah, but as I said that would just revive militant unionism and funding for the Labour Party, which is why the Iron Lady was so happy to see them closed in the first place. Interestingly, her cover story for doing so was human caused climate change, she was one of the first global politicians to advocate action on it… because it suited her domestic agenda.
party_pants said:
pommiejohn said:
party_pants said:what and where? They have fuck all oil.
There’s all those old coal mines that The Wicked Witch of Whitehall closed down
Yeah, but as I said that would just revive militant unionism and funding for the Labour Party, which is why the Iron Lady was so happy to see them closed in the first place. Interestingly, her cover story for doing so was human caused climate change, she was one of the first global politicians to advocate action on it… because it suited her domestic agenda.
Realistically the skills no longer exist in the UK workforce to start coal mining again. Her agenda was simply that strong unions had destroyed the previous Conservative government and she was going to beat them no matter what.
The US ran out of oil, didn’t they?
As OPEC tries to keep oil off the world market, U.S. oil producers are pouring more onto it.
The U.S. last week sent more than 1 million barrels a day of crude out of the country, the third biggest export week ever, and double the average amount exported in 2016. It is also the third time this year that U.S. exports exceeded a million barrels a day, an industry record.
party_pants said:
party_pants said:
The_observer said:May can make Britain grest again.
First, energy security
Lol yeah. Stop buying natural gas from Finland and stop buying Arab oil. Then invest in renewables with storage, or reopen all the old coal mines and revive militant unionism and Labour party funding.
Or is it Norway that supplies their gas? One of those.
Who is it that supplies Australia with all our solar panels & wind turbines?.
But we do have an abundance of coal gas & uranium right here
The_observer said:
party_pants said:
party_pants said:Lol yeah. Stop buying natural gas from Finland and stop buying Arab oil. Then invest in renewables with storage, or reopen all the old coal mines and revive militant unionism and Labour party funding.
Or is it Norway that supplies their gas? One of those.
Who is it that supplies Australia with all our solar panels & wind turbines?.
But we do have an abundance of coal gas & uranium right here
You just want that un renewable stuff so you can sell it for profit.
Free energy frightens capitalists!
Tau.Neutrino said:
The_observer said:
party_pants said:Or is it Norway that supplies their gas? One of those.
Who is it that supplies Australia with all our solar panels & wind turbines?.
But we do have an abundance of coal gas & uranium right here
You just want that un renewable stuff so you can sell it for profit.
Free energy frightens capitalists!
You just want that un renewable stuff so you can sell it for profit at the expense of the environment.
Free energy frightens capitalists!
fixed
Tau.Neutrino said:
You just want that un renewable stuff so you can sell it for profit.
Free energy frightens capitalists!
It doesn’t seem to have Elon Musk too bothered.
99% of our energy needs are supplied at zero cost (mostly solar). It’s only the additional 1% that we need at night, and to warm/cool living spaces, and for transport etc that we pay for, and there is plenty of scope for capitalists to make money out of supplying that service, even if the fuel cost is reduced to zero.
The Rev Dodgson said:
Tau.Neutrino said:You just want that un renewable stuff so you can sell it for profit.
Free energy frightens capitalists!
It doesn’t seem to have Elon Musk too bothered.
99% of our energy needs are supplied at zero cost (mostly solar). It’s only the additional 1% that we need at night, and to warm/cool living spaces, and for transport etc that we pay for, and there is plenty of scope for capitalists to make money out of supplying that service, even if the fuel cost is reduced to zero.
I wonder where he got the 1% figure from?
Also they are not supplied at zero cost. Maintenance, distribution etc all cost $$
The Rev Dodgson said:
Tau.Neutrino said:You just want that un renewable stuff so you can sell it for profit.
Free energy frightens capitalists!
It doesn’t seem to have Elon Musk too bothered.
99% of our energy needs are supplied at zero cost (mostly solar). It’s only the additional 1% that we need at night, and to warm/cool living spaces, and for transport etc that we pay for, and there is plenty of scope for capitalists to make money out of supplying that service, even if the fuel cost is reduced to zero.
How much of the Elon Musk’s battery solution is recyclable?
Tamb said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
Tau.Neutrino said:You just want that un renewable stuff so you can sell it for profit.
Free energy frightens capitalists!
It doesn’t seem to have Elon Musk too bothered.
99% of our energy needs are supplied at zero cost (mostly solar). It’s only the additional 1% that we need at night, and to warm/cool living spaces, and for transport etc that we pay for, and there is plenty of scope for capitalists to make money out of supplying that service, even if the fuel cost is reduced to zero.
I wonder where he got the 1% figure from?
Also they are not supplied at zero cost. Maintenance, distribution etc all cost $$
The 99%/1% are my numbers. It’s my estimate of the energy we receive direct from the Sun, relative to energy sources that require some human intervention.
The fact that the 1% has associated costs, even if there is no fuel involved, is my point.
The Rev Dodgson said:
Tamb said:
The Rev Dodgson said:It doesn’t seem to have Elon Musk too bothered.
99% of our energy needs are supplied at zero cost (mostly solar). It’s only the additional 1% that we need at night, and to warm/cool living spaces, and for transport etc that we pay for, and there is plenty of scope for capitalists to make money out of supplying that service, even if the fuel cost is reduced to zero.
I wonder where he got the 1% figure from?
Also they are not supplied at zero cost. Maintenance, distribution etc all cost $$
The 99%/1% are my numbers. It’s my estimate of the energy we receive direct from the Sun, relative to energy sources that require some human intervention.
The fact that the 1% has associated costs, even if there is no fuel involved, is my point.
Point taken.
Tau.Neutrino said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
Tau.Neutrino said:You just want that un renewable stuff so you can sell it for profit.
Free energy frightens capitalists!
It doesn’t seem to have Elon Musk too bothered.
99% of our energy needs are supplied at zero cost (mostly solar). It’s only the additional 1% that we need at night, and to warm/cool living spaces, and for transport etc that we pay for, and there is plenty of scope for capitalists to make money out of supplying that service, even if the fuel cost is reduced to zero.
How much of the Elon Musk’s battery solution is recyclable?
Let’s not get bogged down with one specific Musk project. He was just an example of a capitalist who sees non-fossil fueled energy supply as an opportunity. There are plenty of others.
(But in answer to the question, a large part of it I should think).
Tau.Neutrino said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
Tau.Neutrino said:You just want that un renewable stuff so you can sell it for profit.
Free energy frightens capitalists!
It doesn’t seem to have Elon Musk too bothered.
99% of our energy needs are supplied at zero cost (mostly solar). It’s only the additional 1% that we need at night, and to warm/cool living spaces, and for transport etc that we pay for, and there is plenty of scope for capitalists to make money out of supplying that service, even if the fuel cost is reduced to zero.
How much of the Elon Musk’s battery solution is recyclable?
https://waste-management-world.com/a/1-the-lithium-battery-recycling-challenge
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214993714000037
It seems I way overestimated the proportion of our energy needs that comes from human supplied sources.
Total average energy supply is about 160,000 TW.
Divide by the Earth’s cross section area gives 0.14 W/m2.
So human generated energy is about 1/10000 or 0.01% of the energy supplied direct from the Sun.