Utopia, you are standing in it!

The Swedish Food Agency (Svenska Livsmedelsverket SLV) recently published a report on a many-faceted breakdown of environmental effects in farming per one kilogram of farming product. This report was also discussed in an opinion piece in the Sweden’s largest newspaper, Dagens Nyheter (under the title “Organic farming has never been better for the environment”).

In this SLV’s report the researchers looked at environmental impacts separated into the subtopics of climate, over-fertilization, acidification, eco-toxicity, energy use, and land use. They determined there to be a difference between the two when a study would find more than 10 % variation in the two farming systems’ respective impacts, and when two thirds of the studies considered would be in agreement over the effect. The number inside each cell signifies the number of studies considered. They compared these effects per one kilogram product for nine categories of food product: milk, beef, pork, chicken…

I recently discovered the excellent twitter account @AwfulLibraryBooks.  One recent post highlighted a “Russian Phrase Book: Department of the Army Pamphlet Headquarters, Department of the Army, 1962.” It has some pretty funny phrases in it.  Here are some favorites:

“If we cannot trust a man, (1) wink your right eye, (2) place your left hand on your stomach, (3) move your head to the right, unnoticed, until we note your signal.”  I assume they are supposed to choose one of these things and not all three.  Also, what does the “unnoticed” mean?

“You certainly read our leaflets.”

“Do they place faith in America?”

“The enemy will lose the war”

“We are here to help them in the struggle on the side of (1) the free world, (2) the US, (3) Allies, (4) freedom, (5) God.”  Take your pick.

“Is there any (1) bear, (2) wild deer, (3) hare, (4) boar, (5)…

Legal action has been initiated against the UK Government to compel it to seek authorisation from Parliament before it can trigger Art 50. Various suggestions have been put forward as to how such legal action should be framed. This post argues that the most compelling case for mandatory Parliamentary Mandate for triggering Art 50 is based on the well-established constitutional principle that only Parliament may abrogate fundamental rights (the ‘Legality Principle’). It will be shown that part of the Legality Principle is that the executive (either acting under subordinate legislation or Royal Prerogative) cannot abrogate fundamental rights without an Act of Parliament having express words to that effect or with necessary implication.

The European Communities Act 1972 (‘ECA’) has given domestic legal force to a series of fundamental rights, in particular (but not exclusively) to a wide array of civil and political rights recognised under the EU Charter of Fundamental…

One of the hallmarks of traditional Conservatism was a belief in rule by the landed classes. By the 20th century, it might be thought that idea’s time had gone, that the new age of democracy would see the end of deference. A simple run through of Britain’s post-war political leaders might Illustrate the limits to any such process: Attlee (Haileybury), Churchill (Harrow), Gaitskell (Winchester); Eden, Macmillan and Home were all Old Etonians. Indeed, of the eighteen members of Eden’s cabinet, ten went to Eton; in 1955, one in five Conservative backbenchers were Old Etonians, like Eden here in 1910.

Nor was the domination of national life by the great public schools confined to the Conservative Party. A 1939 survey showed that three out of four leading figures in the church, judiciary, senior civil service and leading companies were educated in the public schools. Two-thirds of all those earning over £1,000…

The voters in Tasmania have pushed a Labor Senator up the ranks and she will be reelected ahead of other candidates of the party.

Under the old system, most voters cast ticket votes, making the order of election in any given party more closed list than open or STV. Now, voters can rank “below the line” without having to rank all candidates. (Alternatively, they can rank parties “above the line”.)

The article notes that Tasmanian voters have tended to vote below the line more than voters in other states, anyway (probably because they use STV for their state assembly).

There are also some strange ballot rankings above the line. ABC says, quoting Polling analyst Kevin Bonham:

I’ve seen cases like people voting One for the Shooter, Fishers and Farmers, and Two for the Animal Justice Party, two parties that are more or less totally opposed to each other in the…

There are a series of issues that, I think, heavily condition one’s political beliefs. They are empirically solvable, and this is good.