The Very Meh Humza Yousaf Thread.

[Bigmouth Strikes Again]

3 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

The BBC summary on their website has mentioned a couple of times that the Cass Review, on gender related healthcare for children and young people in NHS England, is a factor in the break but I haven't heard anyone actually say that in any of the statements, which I admittedly haven't listened to start to finish.

Is there any indication that the Cass Review, and more specifically the NHS Scotland response to it, is a factor in what's happened today?  I can't see any but it's there on the BBC site, or it certainly was there.

'Rainbow Greens' have kicked up a fuss about the Cass report.

[vikingTON]

5 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

The BBC summary on their website has mentioned a couple of times that the Cass Review, on gender related healthcare for children and young people in NHS England, is a factor in the break but I haven't heard anyone actually say that in any of the statements, which I admittedly haven't listened to start to finish.

Is there any indication that the Cass Review, and more specifically the NHS Scotland response to it, is a factor in what's happened today?  I can't see any but it's there on the BBC site, or it certainly was there.

Also mentioned in another Westminster-based analysis:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/25/humza-yousaf-forgot-the-rule-leaders-who-want-to-look-tough-look-stupid

Quote

 

So what changed? How did we get from the never-ending coalition to divorce in just 48 hours? The tipping point may well have been a confidence motion in Harvie placed by the MSP Ash Regan, who came third in last year’s SNP leadership contest and has since defected to Alba. Keep up.

Regan’s point was that she was less than impressed with Harvie’s response to the Cass report. She argued that Cass was more clued up on the science than Harvie and she had had enough of his ignorance. A view that was shared by quite a few of the SNP MSPs. Enough for the confidence motion to pass. So Yousaf felt he had to be decisive and push Harvie before he jumped. Thereby forgetting one of the fundamental rules of politics. Leaders who want to look tough, invariably look stupid.

 

It would be quite fitting if the Greens contrived to get themselves emptied from government over this. 

[Freedom Farter]

47 minutes ago, virginton said:

Degrowth does nothing to explain how the lights will be kept on or the heating used in a still actually baltic country, never mind the unstoppable and rightful desire of billions of people to improve their standard of living above their current God-awful level. It also does nothing to address issues of how food is grown to make agriculture more productive and genuinely sustainable. 

Any Green political party that still outright rejects nuclear power and GM crops in favour of dung for dinner and here's a bottle tax alternatives does not represent a serious solution to their cause but are rather just 'back to nature' fruit loops. With the Malthusian consequences that would have for 8 billion people on the planet baked in to that perspective. 

I don't think you understood my comment as you make the same point again that I made (or at least was aiming for).

Degrowth posits that rising GDP is not inherently linked to an increase in living standards. The evidence for this is very strong. Proponents of degrowth suggest scrutinising the relentless pursuit of elite profits at the expense of the common folk's material needs. 

Bottle schemes and recycling in general are about inconveniencing and passing on costs to workers in order to maintain profit levels among major industries (eg. plastics). As I put, I am against this tendency of European Green parties. They refuse to promote radical economic arguments and instead come up with window dressing nonsense.

[Ludo*1]

Genuinely can't believe what an absolute fucking shambles and 'just as bad as the rest' politically in just a few short years.

So demoralising.

[Melanius Mullarkey]

Are we at the behest of the Rainbow Greens now?

[vikingTON]

8 minutes ago, Freedom Farter said:

I don't think you understood my comment as you make the same point again that I made (or at least was aiming for).

Degrowth posits that rising GDP is not inherently linked to an increase in living standards. The evidence for this is very strong. Proponents of degrowth suggest scrutinising the relentless pursuit of elite profits at the expense of the common folk's material needs. 

Rising GDP is linked to rising living standards for the vast majority of societies and the population living around the world. 

Degrowth is largely irrelevant to the environment because the greatest consequences on the latter will really not depend on whether developed economies like the UK grow at 1% or not at all. Just another example of the eco fruit-loops going down a pointless cul-de-sac for the sake of their hair shirt ideology. 

[ICTChris]

30 minutes ago, virginton said:

Also mentioned in another Westminster-based analysis:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/25/humza-yousaf-forgot-the-rule-leaders-who-want-to-look-tough-look-stupid

It would be quite fitting if the Greens contrived to get themselves emptied from government over this. 

Surely there is no way Regan would've got that motion passed.  I was just typing out that there's no way Yousaf would've ended the Bute House Agreement over that but everyone seems to have gone tonto so maybe that was it.

Anyway, Ash Regan's list of demands should be a hoot.

[Raab]

12 minutes ago, Freedom Farter said:

I don't think you understood my comment as you make the same point again that I made (or at least was aiming for).

Degrowth posits that rising GDP is not inherently linked to an increase in living standards. The evidence for this is very strong. Proponents of degrowth suggest scrutinising the relentless pursuit of elite profits at the expense of the common folk's material needs. 

Bottle schemes and recycling in general are about inconveniencing and passing on costs to workers in order to maintain profit levels among major industries (eg. plastics). As I put, I am against this tendency of European Green parties. They refuse to promote radical economic arguments and instead come up with window dressing nonsense.

I'm a rural dweller, living in a village 7 miles from a small shop and 15 miles from a supermarket of note.

Things like the DRS:

Does it effect me  - yes

Does it inconvenience me - yes

Does my tolerance for that inconvenience outweigh my perception of what is the greater good - no

I was already quite good at recycling, it was just going to become a pain in the arse having to store plastic bottles in a small house for the weekly trip to the big shop.

The Scottish Greens have been buggers for policies that might work in inner city suburbia, but maybe don't translate so well to rural Ayrshire.

[Freedom Farter]

9 minutes ago, virginton said:

Rising GDP is linked to rising living standards for the vast majority of societies and the population living around the world. 

Degrowth is largely irrelevant to the environment because the greatest consequences on the latter will really not depend on whether developed economies like the UK grow at 1% or not at all. Just another example of the eco fruit-loops going down a pointless cul-de-sac for the sake of their hair shirt ideology. 

You know the "line goes up" economists? They point to their GDP graphs with the line going up in response to everything. Degrowth proponents challenge this orthodoxy that the line going up always means better lives for people. Their argument isn't that the line going up doesn't improve lives but rather that more lives could be improved with a different approach.

I'm not a degrowth proponent because I don't understand it well enough. However, figures I admire are, for example Jason Hickel, so I don't dismiss it.

Anyway my point originally was that the concept of degrowth is misunderstood (or lied about by neoliberals). It does not mean reducing productivity. It means potentially increasing productiviry but certainly re-orienting productivity around what's needed not just what creates the most profit. It's the opposite to malthusianism as its looking to better sustain people than current arrangements.

[diegomarahenry]

19 minutes ago, Raab said:

I'm a rural dweller, living in a village 7 miles from a small shop and 15 miles from a supermarket of note.

Things like the DRS:

Does it effect me  - yes

Does it inconvenience me - yes

Does my tolerance for that inconvenience outweigh my perception of what is the greater good - no

I was already quite good at recycling, it was just going to become a pain in the arse having to store plastic bottles in a small house for the weekly trip to the big shop.

The Scottish Greens have been buggers for policies that might work in inner city suburbia, but maybe don't translate so well to rural Ayrshire.

One of my issues with the greens was the baws-oot, go big or go home policies they were forcing on people without trying to win the electorate over with or trying to implement gradually. The SNP have stopped trying to win votes now and just seem to be stuck in a tailspin. There is absolutely no one credible to take over from them and yet they are still shedding votes. 

[Binos]

28 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

 

Anyway, Ash Regan's list of demands should be a hoot.

They will be structured in a way that they can be accepted 

 

Edited April 25 by Binos

[Wee-Bey]

Just an incredibly funny day all round.

[Wee-Bey]

29 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

Anyway, Ash Regan's list of demands should be a hoot.

She's gonna ask for the big Independence Ready Thermometer isn't she.

[superbigal]

33 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

Surely there is no way Regan would've got that motion passed.  I was just typing out that there's no way Yousaf would've ended the Bute House Agreement over that but everyone seems to have gone tonto so maybe that was it.

Anyway, Ash Regan's list of demands should be a hoot.

Main one will be castration for anyone caught with a Gas Cooker

[ICTChris]

14 minutes ago, D Angelo Barksdale said:

Just an incredibly funny day all round.

Police Scotland need to get charges in against Nicola Sturgeon in the next few hours, just round it off.

[Wee-Bey]

1 minute ago, ICTChris said:

Police Scotland need to get charges in against Nicola Sturgeon in the next few hours, just round it off.

They'd be better off waiting until the potential snap election.

[Clangers]

1 hour ago, Melanius Mullarkey said:

Are we at the behest of the Rainbow Greens now?

We have been at there behest for years, this move today was the move away from them as there policies are vote losers. Ash Reagan had managed to get enough SNP back bench support to create a vote of no confidence on Patrick Harvey on his Cass report response.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/25/humza-yousaf-forgot-the-rule-leaders-who-want-to-look-tough-look-stupid

 

[Bigmouth Strikes Again]

1 hour ago, Melanius Mullarkey said:

Are we at the behest of the Rainbow Greens now?

Hiya Mullarkey, hiya pal....

Thank you.

[BFTD]

1 hour ago, ICTChris said:

Surely there is no way Regan would've got that motion passed.  I was just typing out that there's no way Yousaf would've ended the Bute House Agreement over that but everyone seems to have gone tonto so maybe that was it.

Anyway, Ash Regan's list of demands should be a hoot.

If there's one thing Scotland's been missing, it's our very own Marjorie Taylor Greene.

[Laid Back Maverick]

1 hour ago, Melanius Mullarkey said:

Are we at the behest of the Rainbow Greens now?

This is why I quit the greens years ago. I support gay and trans rights, but the Rainbow Greens completely usurped the policy focus from environmental issues.

The Greens were fucked as soon as they agreed the EGM. Patrick Harvie has avoided having to resign by losing a membership vote so he shouldn’t be greeting so much.