Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The politics of Wind farms: Even CON voters are more in fav
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The politics of Wind farms: Even CON voters are more in favour than against
One question, featured above, was on whether voters would be more or less inclined to vote for candidates who were in favour of wind power. CON voters be, admittedly, a small margin said here would be more likely to vote for such a contender.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Alternatively, this chart shows both recorded crime and the Crime Survey for England & Wales:
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/resources/figure1and3v2_tcm77-273248.png
From the report that is taken from:
"It is not possible to make long-term comparisons in police recorded crime due to fundamental changes in the recording of crimes introduced in 1998 and April 2002".
"The latest results show 2011/12 CSEW crime levels to be over 50 per cent lower than their mid-90s peak of 19.1 million crimes per annum."
I'm reasonably satisfied with that progress, and would not wish to do anything to jeopardise further progress.
The Spectator had a good panel discussion programme in this area the other week: "Fuel wars: how to get the best deal for consumers"
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/04/the-view-from-22-special-fuel-wars-how-to-get-the-best-deal-for-the-consumers/
People like unspoilt views, especially in the wild and windy places where you might want to put a windfarm.
People don't like electricity pylons, which of course are needed in much greater quantities over wide areas if you're getting power from a spread-out source like wind farms.
People don't like the idea of the electricity supply failing because of insufficient capacity, whether the wind is blowing or not.
People don't like the burning of dirty coal.
People don't like nuclear power.
People don't like fracking and don't want to rely on imported gas.
People like low energy bills.
Difficult, this government malarkey, isn't it?
However, Labour found the solution: make no decisions at all.
Intrigued to know how well you align with the LD consensus.
You might not be able to make precise comparisons but the small changes in the numbers in the years of the methodology changes suggest there's not a huge effect there. The long term numbers I showed on the previous thread showed that crime wasn't just lower for the majority of the 20th Century, it was much, much lower. The progress made in the decade after the mid-1990s also now appears to be flatlining. At the rate we've declined for the last five years, it would be decades before we reached average 20th Century levels.
Perhaps the present situation of very high and gradually declining crime is good enough for wealthier individuals like yourself, who can afford to live in nicer areas and have expensive security systems. However, for people living in poorer areas, and for people can remember the much lower crime of their childhood, this simply isn't good enough. I imagine this disconnect is one of the reasons the established parties, with their MPs largely distorted towards the very wealthy, and losing out to UKIP. One approach would be to attempt to understand these voters and address their concerns. Another would be to dismiss them as prejudiced raging thickos. I know which I think is more likely to be electorally successful.
It would be refreshing to see a politician work out what they think is objectively the right answer to a problem and then seek to persuade the public of this, rather than the opposite. In all the tributes to Mrs Thatcher, this was one theme about her that was not made enough of. The first Prime Minister to recognise the importance of the green agenda is less surprising when you appreciate that trait of hers.
If you add in the crimes of Savile and Friends during the 60s, 70, 80s the graph looks like the downhill slope at Kitzbuhel. And that's despite it being a crime to have a fag in a pub these days, or annoy some delicate flower on twitter, or call a police horse 'gay'.
On a more serious note, the graph doesn't seem to account for population, or for the colossal number of crimes which were unreported in yesteryear (particularly sexual offences and domestic violence).
You're demonstrating the usual UKIP trait of hankering after a better yesterday that never existed. For 20 years we have seen dramatic improvements in crime levels.
As it happens, I live in a very high crime area. One of the largest social housing estates in the UK is within 400 yards of my flat, so considerable poverty is on my doorstep, and that makes its presence felt in the crimes that you would associate with poverty. I have experienced crime against me, including quite serious crime (someone drove a car at fairly high speed directly at my partner and me with intent). I don't live in a bubble.
But I also accept the world as it is, not some fantasy of how it never could be. And this world and this country is generally improving. The irrationality of those who expect rapid progress all the time needs to be confronted head on. We're in for a tough few years, but it will only be made worse by listening to those who let incoherent slogans act as a substitute for thinking.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/26/labour-gains-local-elections
Mrs Clegg made a few quid out of them mind you.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nick-clegg/10030129/Nick-Clegg-I-shop-in-Primark-without-a-moral-calculator.html
The big headline on Friday will be how many of them are still in their hands after the votes are counted.
In 1993 they were reduced to just one - Buckinghamshire.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22356755
The BBC has had the effrontery to correct it without any kind of note to that effect. But the links on the right hand side to his other blog entries haven't yet been tidied up.
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
According to police figures and after taking into account the way in which the reported figures were adjusted in 1998 and 2003, there has been a four fold increase in violent crime since 1981 and a 13 fold increase since 1960.
Personally I am not against nuclear though there are big issues about funding the long term cost of any risk.
On wind farms the big problem is that they don't provide continuous power so other back up sources always have to be available.
From an aesthetic standpoint I rather like the look modern of wind windmills.
Anyway, let's restrict the evidence just to murder:
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs10/hosb0110.pdf
Table 1.01. As we can see in the early 1960s, there were around 300 murders a year. Now there are around 700. Sadly the data only goes back to 1960s. As we can see from the overall crime graph, there was already more crime in the 60s than in the earlier 20th Century, so the murder rate was likely lower then. Whatever your insults about me hankering for a previous past time, you can't deny the facts that there was less crime in the early 20th Century than there is now. Speak to any criminologist and they will back me up. Indeed, in the 80s and 90s many thought rising crime rates was just an inevitable part of modernity. Thankfully we've bashed that mindset in the head, but we can certainly do better.
Key data (so people can check): 2002, 900 murders, 52.1m people; 2011-2, 550 murders, 56.1m people. Other data here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate_by_decade
The City divisions voted as follow in 2009
Birchwood: Con 45.5 Lab 23.3 LD 16.9 BNP 14.3
Boultham: Lab 36.8 Con 34.2 LD 17.2 BNP 11.8
Bracebridge: Con 49.1 Lab 30.7 LD 20.1
East: Con 39 Lab 34.3 LD 26.7
Glebe: Con 43.1 Lab 24.5 LD 19.0 BNP 13.4
Hartsholme: Con 53,9 LD 24.2 Lab 21.9
Moorland: Con 43.6 Lab 28.9 LD 15.6 BNP 11.8
North: Con 41.1 Lab 35.5 LD 23.3
Park: Lab 34.3 Con 30.7 LD 25.3 Soc 9.6
West: Lab 38.6 LD 32.6 Con 28.8
In 2005 Labour won all of them.
Labour already won back East in a August 2012 by-election: Lab 48.8 Con 27.2 LD 8.2 UKIP 6.8 TUSC 6.8 EngDem 2%
Sitting Cllrs in Bracebridge and Glebe are not standing again.
"Sun Politics @Sun_Politics 2m
Lord Justice Leveson again rejects concern about Loverson scandal - says no benefit in "any further public debate" about inquiry's integrity"
Do you know how many constituencies are made up entirely of whole county council divisions so that we can add the votes up? Obviously seats which are comprised of whole districts or boroughs are in this category, such as Cannock Chase and Worcester.
Roundabouts like the ones used in the Netherlands separating cars from cyclists could be used in London as early as next year, the city's cycling commissioner has said."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-22347184
But have a wikipedia page on the growth of numbers of criminal offences:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_criminal_law#Bulk_and_complexity
As for your focus on murder, my main observation is that murder was and remains a very rare crime. Many more people die in road deaths. But UKIP would no doubt be horrified if anyone sought to tackle bad driving more effectively.
"Polling company ComRes Ltd. put two sets of questions to voters last week. After the first round of polling on April 24- 26, support for UKIP was at 19 percent. Farage’s party then rose to 24 percent in the second wave of polling on April 26-28 after the Tory attacks, putting it temporarily ahead of the main opposition Labour Party."
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-01/anti-ukip-rhetoric-feeds-bounce-in-farage-popularity.html
I may be wrong, but wasn't thought likely that the murder rate rose a little after the abolition of the death penalty. One reason being the greater chance of a jury bringing in a guilty verdict for murder (as opposed to manslaughter for example) when it didn't mean death for the defendant.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/347052/cruz-2016
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/7750/homicideratesew.png
@Socrates As you can see we've made very good progress so far. At the moment, the homicide rate is in the late 1970s, which is over thirty years ago. While you're absolutely right to say homicides used to be rarer, that time is getting further and further ago. It would need to fall by another third before the homicide rate could be at an all-time low (if I recall correctly, the early part of the 20th century was more peaceful than ever before).
How tedious that these people who live NEAR wind farms object to them, against the clearly expressed preferences of those who won't have to put up with the noise, ugliness, despoiling of the landscape, blood spatter from passing birds...
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jameskirkup/100214874/get-the-barnacles-off-the-boat-lynton-crosbys-advice-to-david-cameron-is-pure-west-wing/
"“Get the barnacles off the boat.”
That is part of the advice that Lynton Crosby has given David Cameron and senior Conservatives thinking about the next general election."
"Mr Crosby’s advice has helped the Tory team boil its message and its strategy down to a condensed essence: the economy, welfare reform, immigration controls, better schools."
Re. The low murder rate in the early C20: the First World War probably helped?
And it seems new boundary orders (for areas with boundary changes) don't have the clear divisions/wards recap as previous documents.
Of course murder is a rare crime, but I picked the one that you couldn't claim used to be under reported. It showed a very similar pattern to the overall crime rates. The level of crime used to be lower. This is widely accepted among criminologists. You're grasping at straws to pretend otherwise.
LibDem Youth Wing captured in the High Street - A wayward group of shaven headed infiltrators has been apprehended wearing orange robes and singing their support for a certain Harry Krishner - he's not even standing locally !!
The local branch of the WI has been disbanded after they were found this morning to be selling home made quiche products in the Methodist Hall. Other contraband included suspicious looking orange marmalade and what we believe to be knitted beard warmers !!
It's tough in the trenches !!
http://survation.com/2013/05/local-elections-2013-seat-projections-too-conservative/
If this breakdown is accurate (and we are in the process of adding more data) then the interesting conclusion is that the optimum UKIP vote share as far as Labour is concerned is actually around 16%. After than point, more of the marginal switchers to UKIP start to come from Labour than the Conservatives (even though the overall UKIP vote is still predominantly Tory into the 20%s, after 16% further growth in UKIP vote is offset by the falling Conservative share).
At this maximum point UKIP increases Labour’s lead over the Conservatives by about 5 percentage points, a potentially election-wrecking margin. Interestingly 16% is the UKIP vote share recorded in today’s Survation poll. In other words, UKIP is currently polling at the worst possible level for the Conservative Party’s prospects and is responsible for over half of Labour’s current lead in the opinion polls.
The reason I have serious reservations about wind power is that, rather than "something for nothing" as suggested downthread there is no evidence that it can compete with other sources of fuel on cost.
So we have to distort the market with green levies and carbon taxes and renewable targets for it to be built. There is a serious economic cost in these sort of fripperies and it can be seen in manufacturing employment. Personally, I don't think we can afford it.
I have similar reservations about nuclear. The real cost of our old nuclear stations (remember when they claimed nuclear would be so cheap electricity would not be worth charging for?) was truly catastrophic when the clear up costs were included. This is why the government is finding it so hard to persuade the private sector to take the risks and build new plants now. But nuclear does provide base which gives it a major advantage over wind.
Coal and gas are currently plentiful and cheap. We really should be using more of them and benefitting at least indirectly from the Shale revolution. If we don't we will lose what heavy industry we have left (and various pensioners will freeze to death because they can't afford to heat their homes etc).
We had really heavy hail here today. You can see white hills from my back garden, not very high ones. May. Just saying.
Just had Labour leaflet - £100,000 tax break for millionaires - how much do you earn to get that ffs. Local candidate for local people - but nothing on issues which directly impact on the ward or council level - all national issues.
Not in this together. Austerity. Fight the cuts. No to change in the NHS. Red herring BINGO. TBH - am pleased something eventually landed on the doormat even three days after I had actually posted the vote - but why did they bother to focus on national issues at a local election? Stuff on NHS was pathetic - given that local councils have damn all to do with the running of The NHS. Have just noticed the spelling and the punctuation, so much for Education, Education, Education.
Nothing on issues which Bristol Council actually could manage or influence. Nothing on Ed M the glorious leader heading to the sun kissed uplands.
A nice collection of ways of extracting energy from the environment (although Bourn Windmill ground its last corn many years ago). It will be interesting to see how well the wind and solar farms meet (or fail to) their stated capacities.
Of the three, the solar park is by the most visually obtrusive.
http://www.renewables-map.co.uk/details.asp?pageid=1790&pagename=Cotton Farm
http://www.skylarkmeadow.co.uk/
http://www.millsofeastanglia.org.uk/TEAMS/Bourn.html
are you in proper Bristol or outside of it?
Because on another forum there were talks about Labour lack of doorstep activities in Bristol this year.
There are very few positive votes in the issue, though there are a larger number that can be lost by going ahead with either (or both). On the other hand, there are also votes to be lost by doing nothing - though they won't be lost until further in the future.
Richard N sums it all up excellently early on in the thread.
All Tories. But they already voted by post.
The Heretic, who is very reliable when it comes to statistics, has a useful article here about violent crime. There is (qualified) good news. Violent crime rose relentlessly after 1950, and peaked between 2000-05, before dropping sharply. But, it remains well above the levels of 50-60 years ago. The rise and fall in rates of homicide over the same period has been less dramatic (one reason being that surgeons became much better at saving lives over the period) but it too peaked between 2000-05, before falling sharply. Overall, Britain is probably as peaceful now as it was in mid-Victorian times, but less peaceful than in the mid-twentieth century. Even mid-Victorian Britain was very peaceful by comparison with Britain in 1600, and still more, Britain in 1300.
WRT UKIP, I read Yougov's detailed data on them as indicating that they're the sort of people who fear (with good reason) that their children and grandchildren will be worse off than they were, rather than people who yearn for a return to the 1950s' (which most of them wouldn't remember).
A popular decision for both types of power could be this: free electricty for those who find themselves with either in their back yard. No, its not too difficult: the French did it with their nuclear power stations. Of course its 'not fair', but that does not stop it being sensible.
Do I want to get into a discussion about the 'radius of impact', or 'a sliding scale'? I do not (or not until I'm closer to being energy minister in a UKIP govt.....).
More like spend, spend, spend !!
Move the mouse on the right of your comment. A sort of wheel appears, click on it
I trust we're all excited about analysing in forensic detail and with methodical precision tomorrow's results? Are most of them being counted overnight?
We can despair as the land turns to dust and drought spreads its wicked claws once more.
That's a good idea: you could get round the problem of HS2 by offering free tickets to those living next to the line but miles from a station.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/telegram/100214897/will-ukip-bigots-ensure-a-labour-victory-in-2015/
Altogether now "LibLabCon, LibLabCon, LibLabCon...."
That's pretty much what I was thinking myself, that once UKIP get close to 20% they start eating into the traditional Labour vote just as much as Tory support. Nice to see it confirmed by a poll.
Spot the errors.labourbristol.org/profiles/phillip_jardine
In the UK hail is a weather phenomenon that is more common in the summer*, as it is mainly in the summer that one has the strong thunderstorms, with the strong updraughts and downdraughts, that are necessary to create hail.
Today, we have had a few days of mostly clear weather, so the land has heated up a bit. The sea temperatures are still quite cold. So you have cold moist air flowing over warm land - this would be perfect conditions for showers, except that the high pressure seems to be keeping a lid on things. Thus the saying of "April showers bring May flowers". If one of these showers is particularly vigorous then it will produce hail.
If the surface temperature is 20C then the freezing level is only 2-3km up, which is not really that far, so the hail does not have time to melt before it reaches the ground.
* It's useful here to think of a summer half of the year from roughly April to September.
There was no DNA profiling or CCTV in Edwardian times!
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you: Thangam Debbonaire!
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/47727000/gif/_47727330_crime_1898_09_466.gif
I highly doubt that domestic abuse can make up that gap. But even if it did, we can commend ourselves on doing much better at stamping out domestic abuse, while still being alarmed at the much higher levels of outside the home crime. There is firm academic evidence that re-offending and deterrents are much improved with longer prison sentences. It would also keep criminals off the streets longer and increase public confidence in the justice system.
http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2013/04/30/the-economics-of-f1-in-spain/
I wonder how many were convicted in Edwardian times for injuring poachers, beating servants and striking children? What was the white collar crime rate for stuff like fraud, insider dealing etc. etc.
EM Forster and JP Priestley are good on how the wealthy scr*wed the poor and got away with it.
So it is not an issue for NIMBYs, it is an issue for every taxpayer. The penny has not dropped yet. Poor taxpayers will be paying for rich business men's toy train set.
Where were your complaints then?
The result in 2010 was Con 40%, Lab 33%, LD 17%, BNP 5%, UKIP 3.5%:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/constituency/a89.stm
The four main parties are fielding a full slate:
http://www.cannockchasedc.gov.uk/downloads/file/3948/statement_of_persons_nominated
Con: disappointing, but mid term, protest votes, but better than expected, we did well in x.
Lib: disappointing, but mid term, protest votes, but better than expected, we did well in y.
Lab: better than expected, we did well in z, it shows we're winning all over the country, but lots of work still to do.
UKIP: better than expected, voters fed up of big parties, we're on the march.
Thanks, Mr. Tyndall!
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/05/nigel-farage-immigration-will-dominate-the-eu-referendum-campaign/
Of course the third sentence I've quoted is indeed true. If anyone can explain to me why this is an argument to vote UKIP in 2015, rather than Conservative in order to get the referendum so you can then vote for Out, I would be grateful. Any concessions Cameron may or may not get are irrelevant, aren't they? It's the referendum which the UKIPers want (or claim to want; one has to wonder how sincere they are). For UKIPpers to vote in a way that makes it more likely that Labour will form the government, and therefore to get no attempt (successful or not) at renegotiation AND no referendum, would be utterly bizarre.
How is the UK doing against the US and China?
Well we might not have caught up yet but we are the only one of the three moving in the right direction.
US manufacturing growth fell to 50.7 last month from 51.3 in March, according to the Institute for Supply Management (ISM), missing the 50.9 market estimate.
A reading above 50 indicates expansion.
The sector also weakened in China, falling to 50.6 in April from 50.9 in March. The official purchasing managers’ index, released by the China Federation of Logistics and Purchasing, came in below forecasts for a reading in line with the previous month.
In the UK, manufacturing increased to 49.8 in April from 48.6 the previous month, revealed the Markit Economics and the Chartered Institute of Purchasing and Supply. It beat analysts’ expectations for a reading of 48.5 but fell below the reading of 50 needed to indicate growth.
Whatever would the country have done without Osborne?
Cameron has already burnt his bridges as far as a referendum is concerned and he is simply not trusted on the issue.
Indeed, it's the only realistic result which could.
I'm beginning to understand. It's to do with alienation something I hadn't really considered till this morning. A feeling that your destiny isn't in your hands that we live in a dystopian Hell where authority is wielded by faceless people and cameras.
I might risk ridicule for this but my eureka moment came this morning when I got my second speeding ticket in a week. Both times for doing 38 MPH in an area unfamiliar and both caught on a camera which had no indication signs or warning.
Who is it that is spying on our every move? Who authorized this spying? It feels Orwellian. if UKIP give the impression of having a human face (and stops their racism and fruitcakery) then I can begin to understand their appeal.