David Craig, on February 28th, 2023Wednesday/Thursday blog
Explaining ‘mutually exclusive’ to a stupid politician
Britannica Dictionary definition of MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE: related in such a way that each thing makes the other thing impossible: not able to be true at the same time or to exist together. A clear example is the set of outcomes of a single coin toss, which can result in either heads or tails, but not both.
(yes I do know that someone has worked out that there is a 1 in 6,000 chance a coin could land on its side but I rather doubt this figure)
Our next PM – Sir Keir ‘kneeler’ Starmer’s five pledges
Apparently our next useless prime minister has set out five missions for his government:
- Securing the “highest sustained growth” in the G7 group of rich nations, made up of the UK, US, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan, by the end of Labour’s first term
- Making Britain a ‘”clean energy superpower”, removing fossil fuels from all of Britain’s electricity generation by 2030
- Improving the NHS
- Reforming the justice system
- Raising education standards
Let’s just look at the first two – “highest sustained growth” in the G7 group and Making Britain a ‘”clean energy superpower”
Growth versus green
I’ll take the car industry as an example. There are about 182,000 people employed directly in car manufacturing in the UK and another 650,000 in the overall motor industry. It’s one of the most critical industries for any country wishing to have a healthy economy. As our useless politicians phase out petrol-driven cars and replace them with electric vehicles, we won’t need many of the 182,000 people involved in manufacturing. An electric vehicle requires about 30% less work than a petrol-driven car as there are fewer complex moving parts. So that’s 54,600 car workers who won’t be needed.
Then there’s the Government’s plan to reduce the number of cars on Britain’s roads by 30%. This will largely happen because many people won’t be able to afford electric vehicles. So, altogether we can expect another 54,600 manufacturing jobs to go and another 195,000 in the wider motor industry. Well done Westminster politicians, you’ve just signed the death warrant for around 304,200 motor industry jobs.
That’s NOT what most people would call the ‘economic growth’ which Starmer has promised.
IG Metall, the German union for most of that nation’s autoworkers, estimates that 75,000 German jobs building engines and transmissions will be eliminated by 2030. And just as in the UK, many more will go in the wider automotive industry.
And it’s not just the motor industry which will be destroyed by the supposed ‘green revolution’. Britain has already lost most of its heavy industry and try buying anything on Amazon that isn’t made in China. There isn’t much.
But what about the ‘green jobs’?
Of course, our politicians tell us that going green will create millions of new, high-skilled jobs. And that’s true. But where will those jobs be created? In countries with expensive power like Britain and Germany due to their move to inefficient, unreliable supposedly renewable energy?
Or will the ‘green jobs’ be in countries like China and India with reliable, cheap energy because they use lots of energy-rich coal?
China has us by the testicles
In addition, you have to consider that China has a virtual monopoly of the rare earth metals needed for our rulers’ great green revolution:
Dear Mr Starmer, do you think the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is going to allow these rare earth metals to be exported so that other countries can make solar panels and car batteries and all the other things needed to go green? Or will the CCP restrict exports of rare earth metals so that most of the manufacturing of solar panels and car batteries and other stuff will be done in China?
Going green and economic growth are incompatible. They are mutually exclusive.
Going green is economic suicide.
Category: 
Or as Kemi Badenoch said “Net Zero is economic disarmament”. They’re all idiots, they haven’t got the brains of a rocking horse. I despair.
I don’t believe they even know what “green jobs” means, it’s just a phrase they bandy about. There will be no additional jobs, it simply means those who worked in the fossil fuel industry will move sideways into the renewables industry.
I think you have assumed we will still have a modern economy by 2030 after tory / labour government vandals have finished the work for their globalist masters.
Provided they can crush the economy and close down most manufacturing and farming in the next 5 years then achieving a little growth should be possible from 2030. After all the pound will be almost worthless and EU / IMF will have to take charge of the economy so after years of depression the numbers will eventually turn positive but from a far lower base then now.
I saw a old comment from Douglas Murray yesterday basically saying if you reverse a view expressed and it doesn’t make sense then don’t believe the original view. This seems to apply to Starmer and probably every politician. Starmer would never say he was aiming for lowest growth in the G7 or any other position but the highest growth. But is is just a statement with no supporting evidence to prove he is capable of achieving it.
His second target about being a green superpower is perfectly summed up by Carolyn. The net zero policies are entirely based on the false premise that there is a human caused climate crisis. GB News regularly makes the same error. The presenters don’t understand the science and base their views on the idea that progress towards net zero has to be slower and not that it is wrong. Perhaps they are afraid of being closed down by Ofcom.
I think you raise several important points about jobs. But this is nothing new. Automation has been reducing job requirements for years. In my view this has resulted in products deliberately being made unreliable so that the factories can remain in production and the second issue is that we are encouraged to throw away and replace with the latest “superior” products. All of this results in a massive recycling problem and a bonanza for the manufacturers because we effectively have to buy three of everything where one we bought one. It is part of the massive transfer of our wealth to the rich. It might be that the WEF is correct when it says that there are too many people to find employment in the modern economy for the basic reason that we have become too efficient. The west has the additional problem that it expects to be paid more to do the same work as the poorest in the world to support their inflated sense of entitlement.
Friedrich Nietzsche warned in the 1880s that equality was going to carry the west away. And here we are now when no leader of the west dares to say that only women have a cervix, etc.
Here is a telling quote from Nietzsche’s book called “The Will to Power: An Attempt at the Revaluation of All Values”.
“Socialism ― or the tyranny of the meanest and the most brainless, ― that is to say, the superficial, the envious, and the mummers, brought to its zenith, ― is, as a matter of fact, the logical conclusion of “modern ideas” and their latent anarchy: but in the genial atmosphere of democratic well-being the capacity for forming resolutions or even for coming to an end at all, is paralysed. Men follow ― but no longer their reason. That is why socialism is on the whole a hopelessly bitter affair: and there is nothing more amusing than to observe the discord between the poisonous and desperate faces of present-day socialists ― and what wretched and nonsensical feelings does not their style reveal to us! ― and the childish lamblike happiness of their hopes and desires. Nevertheless, in many places in Europe, there may be violent hand-to-hand struggles and irruptions on their account: the coming century is likely to be convulsed in more than one spot, and the Paris Commune, which finds defenders and advocates even in Germany, will seem to have but a slight indigestion compared with what is to come.
“Be this as it may, there will always be too many people of property for socialism ever to signify anything more than an attack of illness: and these people of property are like one man with one faith, “one must possess something in order to be someone.” This, however, is the oldest and most wholesome of all instincts; I should add: “one must desire more than one has in order to become more.” For this is the teaching which life itself preaches to all living things: the morality of Development. To have and to wish to have more, in a word, Growth ― that is life itself. In the teaching of socialism “a will to the denial of life” is but poorly concealed: botched men and races they must be who have devised a teaching of this sort. In fact, I even wish a few experiments might be made to show that in socialistic society life denies itself, and itself cuts away its own roots. The earth is big enough and man is still unexhausted enough for a practical lesson of this sort and demonstratio ad absurdumb ― even if it were accomplished only by a vast expenditure of lives ― to seem worth while to me. Still, Socialism, like a restless mole beneath the foundations of a society wallowing in stupidity, will be able to achieve something useful and salutary: it delays “Peace on Earth” and the whole process of character-softening of the democratic herding animal; it forces the European to have an extra supply of intellect, ― it also saves Europe awhile from the marasmus femininus [feminine decay or atrophy] which is threatening it.”
On the positive side,todays Telegraph seems to be full of people who say they were so against lockdown and it was Matt Hancock who did it.Seems he is being thrown under the bus (good) but they cannot avoid being implicated and just as responsible.Bit rich coming from the Telegraph who supported the narrative and still are.
[…] Starmer you idiot – growth and green are mutually exclusive […]