How Mad is Our Energy Policy?

When windfarms are paid not to generate electricity, its sheer madness.

Our energy policy is truely beyond a joke now.

Immigrants Add to GDP?? I Think I Need a Huge Pinch of Salt With That.

The BBC has a cosy report that Eastern Eruropean EU migrants have added £5bn to the GDP of the UK.

However, reading on, the rpeort says that at the same time as we were receiving those immigrants from the EU, GDP went up. But there is no direct correlation, only an assumption that because GDP went up while they were arriving, they made a net contribution to GDP. Its a lot like the man made global warming argument, based on a loose correlation between statistics. The fact that there are two sets of statistics in the same time frame does not prove a link. In the same vein I could say the increase in summer temperatures is caused by increased ice cream sales. I know thats a lie, but the statistics can be used to tell any story you want, especially if you aren't held to prove the actual link.

Besides, there's no mention of whether we would have had a higher rise in GDP had we had immigration restrictions in place. No mention of the net drain to the economy of the influx from the EU of benefit scroungers, the alcoholics and career criminals that see the UK as a cushy number.

No mention either of the effect the supression of wages has on the economy overall, where low wages means that people on benefits have a better standard of living than if they took a job and the drain of keeping those people on the dole. No mention of the drain of providing benefit for children of EU immigrants that are not even in this country. No mention of the effect of EU immigrants migrating back to their countries of origin once they'd saved up enough to live comfortably back home, or the effect of exporting money back to their families.

Even if you take it at face value and agree the influx of cheap labour was good for the economy. Ok, but who really benefits from that?
Business owners? Shareholders?
Certainly not the man in the street, the ordinary worker. I'm sure they don't see the benefit as any increased tax take is gobbled up by the inefficiencies of government.

Nope, not even this report can convince me that unfettered immigration is ever a good thing.

None of the Above...

As the local elections hove into the media spotlight this week after the distraction of the royal wedding, I just wonder if its time to revisit the old chestnut of a "none of the above" option on the ballot paper. Maybe it should be named the "I won't vote for any of you, provide me with a candidate who I feel has the policies and personality to properly represent me" option.

Because honestly, with so many people not bothering to vote, the question has to be asked again: why is it that we don't have election candidates that move voters to vote? Is it the party system? Is it their policies? Is it just the wrong type of person being put forward as candidates? Just what would get people to vote?

I doubt very much that a change to the AV system would change things, which is why I'm voting no to AV.

Would a random local resident, plucked from obscurity like a jury member placed on the candidate list as an alternative to those desperate to join local politics motivate people to vote for them?

I do know I don't have the answer and I'm equally sure changing to AV isn't it either. But what would get people more involved in chosing the people that run their lives?

Maybe thats the answer: that they don't understand that these people will run their lives for them, or maybe they just don't care until it adversely affects them in some way. Maybe thats why politicians get away with so much.

Maybe I'm rambling too much today as my sinuses are playing up (thank you Mrs D. for your loving gift of that virus you had last week).