Poll: Poll: Prime Minister Theresa May calls General Election on June 8th

Who will you vote for?

  • Conservatives

  • Labour

  • Lib Dem

  • UKIP

  • Other (please state)

  • I won't be voting

Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
stewski said:
Im not sure why you posted that, it sure isn't proof that unregulated markets will provide in that department.
Click to expand...

You talked about the road infrastructure appearing by magic, that's clearly not the case, road users pay for roads and plenty more besides.

Advocating that rail users pay their costs is hardly earth shattering as an idea. Ticket prices should cover the cost of running the railways plus contribute to future investment. We could then apply the same logic to motorists. The state shouldn't be trying to manipulate the transport market with excessive taxation or subsidies.
 
Tunney said:
Why not? We can't expect the free market to tackle air pollution in any meaningful.
Click to expand...

Or congestion, or noise, or any of the other negative externalities of cars. It's also literally impossible for the free market to manage transport because it requires universal access and connected space. Only the state can manage the allocation of land required for transportation.
 
If subsidies are bad then we should do away with wind and solar energy...

In fact, we should just do away with these anyway. They don't work. Not on any meaningful scale.
 
Tunney said:
Why not? We can't expect the free market to tackle air pollution in any meaningful.
Click to expand...

Let's not pretend that tax from road users is actually used that way, because it would be a lie.

I wouldn't have a problem with identified and ring fenced taxation applied to modes of transport based on managing pollution impact or similar quantified externalities, but that's not what we have at the moment.
 
balky12 said:
In fact, we should just do away with these anyway. They don't work. Not on any meaningful scale.
Click to expand...

Over the past summer, there were days when Germany generated 100% of its energy from solar power. Obviously a mixed strategy is needed but solar power's price per kW is reaching parity with fossil fuels now.

The great thing about solar is that it's a technology problem. The rate at which the efficiency of solar power is improving is remarkable.

Elon Musk's goal for Telsa is a car that powers itself through a solar panel on the roof. That isn't some pipe dream like some of his other ideas. It's going to be acheivable at commercial scale in the next ten years.

With technology, you've always got to focus on where the puck is going.
 
Mr Jack said:
Or congestion, or noise, or any of the other negative externalities of cars. It's also literally impossible for the free market to manage transport because it requires universal access and connected space. Only the state can manage the allocation of land required for transportation.
Click to expand...

If congestion got so bad wouldnt companies start up to let people avoid it for a fee?

Ie trains etc
 
balky12 said:
If subsidies are bad then we should do away with wind and solar energy...

In fact, we should just do away with these anyway. They don't work. Not on any meaningful scale.
Click to expand...

They do. As stated, costs for solar are reaching parity with fossil fuels, Germany regularly produces most of it's power from wind and solar.

The UK could be a world leader in renewables. But it would require some competence and forward thinking, which rules it out for the British government.
 
Mr Jack said:
How would they get the land to build tracks on?
Click to expand...

The same way the railways were built in the first place, buy it or make some other arrangement with the landowner.

Remember, the development of rail had nothing to do with the state, the railways were only taken into public control in 1948 after the government starved the railways of materials access during the war.
 
Tunney said:
Over the past summer, there were days when Germany generated 100% of its energy from solar power. Obviously a mixed strategy is needed but solar power's price per kW is reaching parity with fossil fuels now.

The great thing about solar is that it's a technology problem. The rate at which the efficiency of solar power is improving is remarkable.

Elon Musk's goal for Telsa is a car that powers itself through a solar panel on the roof. That isn't some pipe dream like some of his other ideas. It's going to be acheivable at commercial scale in the next ten years.

With technology, you've always got to focus on where the puck is going.
Click to expand...

Indeed, which makes the luddite environmentalist response to nuclear power and the unwarranted delay in research and expiration of knowledge such a disaster.
 
Tunney said:
Elon Musk's goal for Telsa is a car that powers itself through a solar panel on the roof. That isn't some pipe dream like some of his other ideas. It's going to be acheivable at commercial scale in the next ten years.
Click to expand...

sounds like a pipe dream tbh... solar powered cars tend to be very light special purpose vehicles - I doubt that even with massive improvements in efficiency you're going to get sufficient power for a conventional car simply via solar cells on the roof/bonnet. Would be interested in further info though and more than happy for my preconceived idea of what is possible here to be changed.
 
Tunney said:
Over the past summer, there were days when Germany generated 100% of its energy from solar power. Obviously a mixed strategy is needed but solar power's price per kW is reaching parity with fossil fuels now.

The great thing about solar is that it's a technology problem. The rate at which the efficiency of solar power is improving is remarkable.

Elon Musk's goal for Telsa is a car that powers itself through a solar panel on the roof. That isn't some pipe dream like some of his other ideas. It's going to be acheivable at commercial scale in the next ten years.

With technology, you've always got to focus on where the puck is going.
Click to expand...

mid_gen said:
They do. As stated, costs for solar are reaching parity with fossil fuels, Germany regularly produces most of it's power from wind and solar.

The UK could be a world leader in renewables. But it would require some competence and forward thinking, which rules it out for the British government.
Click to expand...

Sure Germany ran on Solar Power? Renewable power maybe... but there is a massive caveat to that.

Want to hazard a guess at how much energy come from Solar and/or wind worldwide? To the nearest percentage? Remember this is energy. Which doesn't directly translate into electricity.
 
Last edited:
Dolph said:
You talked about the road infrastructure appearing by magic, that's clearly not the case, road users pay for roads and plenty more besides.

Advocating that rail users pay their costs is hardly earth shattering as an idea. Ticket prices should cover the cost of running the railways plus contribute to future investment. We could then apply the same logic to motorists. The state shouldn't be trying to manipulate the transport market with excessive taxation or subsidies.
Click to expand...

Why not?
 
balky12 said:
If subsidies are bad then we should do away with wind and solar energy...

In fact, we should just do away with these anyway. They don't work. Not on any meaningful scale.
Click to expand...
They get less subsidies than coal, nuclear and gas. So if we want to get rid of subsidies then we get no power at all.
 
Dolph said:
The same way the railways were built in the first place, buy it or make some other arrangement with the landowner.

Remember, the development of rail had nothing to do with the state, the railways were only taken into public control in 1948 after the government starved the railways of materials access during the war.
Click to expand...

This is untrue. Sure, it was private money but there were many acts passed regarding the establishment of railways. The functioning of the economy was also quite different in the Victorian era.
 
D.P. said:
They get less subsidies than coal, nuclear and gas. So if we want to get rid of subsidies then we get no power at all.
Click to expand...

They also produce a hell of a lot less electricity than coal, nuclear and gas?

My main point was basing a whole argument on subsidies was silly...

I then went off on a tangent about renewable energy :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom