Geoff Pickering

Yorkshire Wolds sheep farmer

[Geoff Pickering @tintodog]

@JackHadders @ThorpeLynden @reformparty_uk Oh you sweet innocent you… 😊 Of course they tell you that it’s what people do to get rid of political door knockers when they are activists pretending to canvass the homeowners opinion. In reality what you do by trying to change voters‘ minds is strengthening their resolve 🤪

[Geoff Pickering @tintodog]

@WilfandErnie Wonderful congratulations 🥳

[Patrick Byrne @PatrickByrne]

I know philosophers who dine out their whole career in exposition of the brilliant Hannah Arendt.

When COVID-19 hit, every single one kept his mouth shut.

[Robbie @Robbie_Reasons]

The Somerset Farmhouse of 1 North Street, Williton were approached by a "food influencer" that wanted to charge them £2,000 for a review.

They put out a video of Sally eating a sausage roll instead 😆.

Lets make Sally and the Somerset Farmhouse famous for free.

[jakob @jpspsb]

@elonmusk Reminder:

[Geoff Pickering @tintodog]

I claim this Mum for infinite Otto cuddles 🥰

[Laila Cunningham @policylaila]

So ministers are campaigning to win a seat they already had, for a candidate that wants to replace the PM that they have full confidence in and claim is going nowhere.
And we are meant to pretend this is all perfectly normal.

[Geoff Pickering @tintodog]

@Kesthecollie What’s their problem 🤷

[Geoff Pickering @tintodog]

@Kesthecollie She got the table cloth caught up in it too

[Nickie Brown @Nickie_Brown]

Let’s have a think about what’s happening in Makerfield.

This by election is costing taxpayers £226,208. And it’s happening because a Labour MP chose to step aside to make room for Andy Burnham’s leadership ambitions. He admitted that himself.

But here’s some more interesting figures.

If Burnham wins, he’ll have to resign as Greater Manchester Mayor too. That triggers another election costing taxpayers around £4.7 million.

So in total, nearly £5 million of public money could be spent not on improving services, fixing roads, supporting communities or helping struggling families, but on political career ambitions.

People are struggling with bills, crime, NHS waiting lists and communities being ignored. Yet Westminster politics still seems focused on who climbs the ladder next.

That’s what frustrates people. Not democracy. Political games made to look like democracy.

[Geoff Pickering @tintodog]

Is it just me or does Michael Ostrowski have a bit of a Savile vibe ? #Eurovisión

[Geoff Pickering @tintodog]

Gluten free???

[PARAGON @The_Code_369]

@coolhogsnacks That's not a good ingredients list for traditional scratching.

[Andrew Neil @afneil]

British politics will reach a new reductio ad absurdum in the Makerfield by election:
Vote Labour to destroy the sitting Labour Prime Minister.
Support Labour PM Starmer but NOT voting Labour.
We are having a by-election not because there’s any demand or need in the national interest but entirely to suit the convenience of the byzantine politics of the ruling party and the political pygmies in whose interest it is run.
We are no longer a serious nation. No wonder the bond markets are squiffy.

[Ellie Hodges @elliehodges62]

This image being shared across Ashton and Bryn local groups.

[HistoryandHeritageYorkshire @GenealogyBeech]

🧵This LiDAR imagery shows the Scheduled Monument of the deserted medieval village of Hilderthorpe on the southern edge of Bridlington. It shows the “ghost” layout of the village before its long slow desertion. A hollow way runs through the centre, marking the main

[David Starkey @DrDStarkeyCBE]

Brexit was just the beginning of the process of taking back control of this country.

In a sense the sequel of Brexit is an “internal Brexit” - wresting control from the deep state: the quangos, the judges, the permanent bureaucracy, and making it once again subject to public accountability.

But if we’ve learned anything from the Brexit Wars, it’s how fiercely the establishment will resist this change.

As Danny Kruger reminds us, just look at how even Parliamentarians in the 2015-2019 Parliament used unconstitutional methods to oppose reclaiming the sovereignty that is rightfully theirs.

If it was that bad then, how bad will it be next time around?

[ClarksonsFarm @ClarksonsFarm1]

Repost!🙌🏼

[Sama Hoole @SamaHoole]

Myth: "I only wear vegan fabrics. Better for the animals, better for the planet."

Let's check in on Doris's annual contribution.

Once a year, in late spring, Doris is sheared. The procedure takes approximately three minutes. Doris does not enjoy it. Doris does not, by any visible measure, suffer from it. Doris is, immediately afterwards, a noticeably more comfortable animal in the British summer.

The fleece weighs approximately 3 kilograms. It is sold to the British Wool Marketing Board for, depending on the year, between £0.40 and £2.50 per kilogram. The shearing costs more than the wool fetches. Brian is shearing Doris at a loss.

The wool is then:
- Naturally flame-retardant
- Naturally antibacterial
- Moisture-wicking
- Biodegradable
- Renewable, annually
- Carbon-storing while in use

The replacement, in performance fabrics:
- Polyester
- Polyamide
- Acrylic
- Polypropylene
- All petroleum-derived
- All shedding microplastics on every wash
- All requiring fossil fuel inputs to produce
- All non-biodegradable, with a typical landfill lifespan of 200-500 years

A single wash of a polyester fleece can release up to 700,000 microplastic fibres into the water system. These fibres are now in: every tested water source on earth, every tested human placenta, every tested rainfall sample, the deep ocean, the Arctic ice, and the lungs of marine mammals.

A single wash of a wool jumper releases: nothing. The wool, when eventually disposed of, returns to soil within a few years.

The fabric being marketed as the "ethical" alternative to wool is plastic.

The plastic is "ethical" because nobody has been asked to slaughter the polymer.

The polymer also has not been asked.

Doris, by being a sheep on a fell, is producing the most thoroughly sustainable performance fabric humans have ever made.

Brian is selling it at a loss.

The fashion industry, meanwhile, is selling petroleum at a profit and calling it ethical.

Reject plastic. Wear wool.

Doris is, this morning, growing next year's batch.

[M.A. Rothman @MichaelARothman]

𝐊𝐄𝐌𝐈 𝐁𝐀𝐃𝐄𝐍𝐎𝐂𝐇 𝐉𝐔𝐒𝐓 𝐃𝐄𝐋𝐈𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐄𝐃 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐋𝐈𝐍𝐄 𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐘 𝐖𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐄𝐑𝐍 𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐒𝐄𝐑𝐕𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐕𝐄 𝐋𝐄𝐀𝐃𝐄𝐑 𝐇𝐀𝐒 𝐁𝐄𝐄𝐍 𝐃𝐎𝐃𝐆𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐀 𝐃𝐄𝐂𝐀𝐃𝐄.

An LBC caller asked Badenoch how a Muslim could trust the Conservative Party after Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Timothy criticized mass Ramadan public prayer in Trafalgar Square as “an act of domination.” Badenoch did not duck.

Her opening:

𝘔𝘺 𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮. 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘣𝘰𝘳𝘯 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 50% 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮. 𝘐 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮 𝘱𝘳𝘢𝘺𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘍𝘳𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘵 𝘴𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘭. 𝘐 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮.

Then the line:

𝘐𝘯 𝘮𝘺 𝘷𝘪𝘦𝘸, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘸 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘴 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘊𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺, 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮.

Then the closer:

𝘐𝘧 𝘸𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘻𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘸𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘧𝘢𝘣𝘳𝘪𝘤, 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘺. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘐 𝘧𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘢𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵.

British law over religious law. British culture over religious deference. The right to criticize ANY religion — Christianity, Islam, all of them — is a non-negotiable feature of a free society, not a privilege the majority granted to the minority.

This is the Western mainstream conservative position. Badenoch — daughter of Nigerian immigrants, raised Christian, lived among Muslims her whole childhood — said it on national radio without hedging, without apologizing, and without softening it for the audience.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐬𝐚𝐢𝐝 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐖𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐝𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐚𝐲. 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐟𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐢𝐬 𝐝𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠.

𝘝𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 @𝘓𝘉𝘊.

[Brivael Le Pogam @brivael]

Hello Julia, sans aucune ironie, c'est top que tu prennes le temps de te renseigner. Mais le problème quand on lit Marx aujourd'hui, c'est qu'on prend pour acquis sa prémisse de départ, alors qu'elle a été démontée scientifiquement il y a plus de 150 ans.

Toute la pensée de Marx repose sur la théorie de la valeur-travail. L'idée que la valeur d'un bien vient de la quantité de travail nécessaire pour le produire. Si tu acceptes cette prémisse, alors oui, tout son raisonnement tient. Le capitaliste "vole" la plus-value du travailleur, l'exploitation est mathématique, la révolution est inévitable.

Sauf qu'en 1871, trois économistes (Menger en Autriche, Jevons en Angleterre, Walras en Suisse) découvrent indépendamment la même chose : la valeur n'est pas objective, elle est subjective et marginale.

Un verre d'eau dans le désert vaut une fortune. Le même verre à côté d'une rivière ne vaut rien. Le travail incorporé est identique. Donc le travail ne détermine pas la valeur. C'est le consommateur qui valorise un bien selon son utilité marginale dans un contexte donné.

Exemple concret : tu peux passer 1000 heures à tricoter un pull moche que personne ne veut. Selon Marx, ce pull a énormément de valeur (beaucoup de travail incorporé). Selon la réalité, il ne vaut rien. Parce que personne n'en veut.

À l'inverse, Bernard Arnault crée des milliards de valeur non pas parce qu'il "exploite" mais parce qu'il a su anticiper et organiser des désirs humains à grande échelle. La valeur est créée par la coordination, pas extraite par le vol.

Cette découverte (la révolution marginaliste) a invalidé tout l'édifice marxiste. Pas pour des raisons idéologiques, pour des raisons scientifiques. C'est pour ça que plus aucun département d'économie sérieux au monde n'enseigne Marx comme un cadre d'analyse valide. On l'enseigne en histoire de la pensée.

Maintenant, le truc important. Si ton intention en lisant Marx c'est d'aider les pauvres (c'est une intention noble), alors tu vas être surprise par ce qui suit.

Regarde les chiffres de la Banque mondiale. En 1820, 90% de l'humanité vivait dans l'extrême pauvreté. Aujourd'hui, moins de 9%. Cette chute historique ne s'est PAS produite dans les pays qui ont appliqué Marx. Elle s'est produite dans les pays qui ont libéralisé leur économie.

Chine post-1978, Vietnam post-1986, Inde post-1991, Pologne post-1989. À chaque fois qu'un pays libéralise, des centaines de millions de gens sortent de la pauvreté en une génération. À chaque fois qu'un pays applique Marx (URSS, Cambodge, Corée du Nord, Venezuela), c'est la famine et les goulags.

Ce n'est pas une opinion, c'est l'expérience la plus massive jamais menée en sciences sociales. Plusieurs milliards de cobayes humains, sur un siècle.

Donc paradoxalement, si tu aimes vraiment les pauvres, la position la plus cohérente n'est pas d'être marxiste. C'est d'être pour la liberté économique. Parce que c'est empiriquement la seule chose qui a jamais sorti massivement les gens de la misère.

Pour creuser, je te recommande trois lectures qui vont changer ta vision :

"La Loi" de Frédéric Bastiat (court, lumineux, gratuit en ligne)
"La Route de la Servitude" de Hayek
"Économie en une leçon" de Henry Hazlitt
Bonne lecture, et vraiment chapeau de chercher à comprendre plutôt que de rester dans tes certitudes. C'est rare.