it's the opposite if anything with all the warnings about how much poorer people would be. Leaving is for the long term, there was always going to be short term uncertainty but fear of that shouldn't be enough to stay in a union that's failing.
==================
A union that is failing? In what way? Our leaving it will actually galvanise it further.
Need to worry about our own Union which is destined for a break up
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted less than a minute ago
As long as it met or exceeded the EU standards there would be no problem in selling it.
-----------------------------------------
Which is where many British Standards currently are. However we are still forced to meet the EU standards directive if we plan to export to the EU. So this sovereignty argument, is all well and good but we still have to do what we are told.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is something a lot of folk struggle to grasp.
We have essentially weakened our position in the EU and by extension the world.
I keep hearing about trade deals with other nations. We are a service driven economy and "sell services" for the most part.
Considering we outsource a lot of these services to China and India already
What exactly are we going to be trading with?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, though the remainers seem to be struggling with the concept that once they are a part of UK law EU regulations affect 100% of our trade, whether it is with the EU or not.
To trade with the EU we will presumably still have to have our products/service match the quality demands of the EU (as does the US/China/India), but that is different to saying we need to have it as part of our law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What is the difference? You can still meet and exceed Eu requirements.
So the EU provides a minimum requirement. I'm not sure what the problem is here to be honest.
What is the spirit behind regulations?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
the difference is that if the UK wants to sell less energy efficient vacuums to africa then either the UK government says that this is great (jobs and taxes in UK, vacuums in africa) or they say that this is terrible (destroying the environment), but they have the freedom to do what they (or the UK population) want.
as a part of the EU we have no say in that whatsoever.
What is going to happen to the agricultural sector without EU subsidies?
Looks like we will all be shopping at Lidl very soon
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 10 minutes ago
But will unrestricted trade not give us a chance of reducing that deficit? I'm not saying we can do it overnight, but long term.....
================
What would we be trading? Can you give us a few examples?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't decide that.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
the difference is that if the UK wants to sell less energy efficient vacuums to africa then either the UK government says that this is great (jobs and taxes in UK, vacuums in africa) or they say that this is terrible (destroying the environment), but they have the freedom to do what they (or the UK population) want.
as a part of the EU we have no say in that whatsoever.
======================
The Africans are not as dumb as a lot of people think. I do a lot of work on that continent and a lot of companies there for ease of operations keep the same standards to enable personnel seamlessly move across offices.
I have seen rigs, FPSOs, Vessels, etc sent back for not complying with EU regs.
Shell for instance require all these directives as well as their own business operating standards.
The EU regs actually encourage innovation in this sector.
What is wrong with that?
comment by Cal Neva (U11544)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 18 minutes ago
I said before
We have a trade deficit of €51bn with Germany
That is a third of their entire EU trade surplus.
Germany also happen to be the biggest net contributor to the EU and wield great influence.
Does Germany:
A) Push for a low (at or below the avarage 1.5% in current non EU goods) or zero tariff EU deal with Britain which suits both parties, and them in particular? As said by the equivalent of their CBI, which ridiculed the tariff idea
Or
B) Accept a punitive trade deal which hurts them more than any other EU member?
What do we think?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A couple of things. Our exports to the EU account for 13% of our GDP.The EU exports to the UK account for 3% of the EU's GDP. So these trades are more important to us.
On the BMW thing. BMW employ 8,000 directly in the UK and an estimated 50,000 supply jobs are connected.It isn't as simple as they need BMW car sales here.We are also dependent on those jobs here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
60% of the components are also made in the EU prior to assembly in the UK.
I keep asking this question but no one wants to answer it.
What is the spirit behind these regulations? What is the EU trying to achieve with them?
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted about a minute ago
it's the opposite if anything with all the warnings about how much poorer people would be. Leaving is for the long term, there was always going to be short term uncertainty but fear of that shouldn't be enough to stay in a union that's failing.
==================
A union that is failing? In what way? Our leaving it will actually galvanise it further.
Need to worry about our own Union which is destined for a break up
----------------------------------------------------------------------
a weak currency, unemployment twice as high as the UK, rising inequality. Other countries have the same problems we do in this country (or worse) and if they all held referendums a few others would leave as well. If there's that much discontent then it can't be running well...
in a way us leaving could spark the reform it needs and we miss out on it, but if we voted to stay it would be a vindication of the EU and they would carry on as normal.
Mate, I'm part European and a lot of folk do not understand Europeans.
You know the, them against us mantra?
Well we just activated the European one.
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 13 seconds ago
the difference is that if the UK wants to sell less energy efficient vacuums to africa then either the UK government says that this is great (jobs and taxes in UK, vacuums in africa) or they say that this is terrible (destroying the environment), but they have the freedom to do what they (or the UK population) want.
as a part of the EU we have no say in that whatsoever.
======================
The Africans are not as dumb as a lot of people think. I do a lot of work on that continent and a lot of companies there for ease of operations keep the same standards to enable personnel seamlessly move across offices.
I have seen rigs, FPSOs, Vessels, etc sent back for not complying with EU regs.
Shell for instance require all these directives as well as their own business operating standards.
The EU regs actually encourage innovation in this sector.
What is wrong with that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It wasn't meant to be a sleight on african consumers, but point taken.
and EU regs will encourage innovation in the specific field affected by the regs - eg pollution, energy efficiency - but personally i'd rather have corporations innovate based on consumer demand, rather than suprastate regulation.
if consumers want to buy sugary drinks that rot their teeth and lead to obesity, fine with me; if they demand drinks that taste sweet and sugary but aren't, because they are laced with chemicals, also fine with me. But I'm happy for them to choose, and for companies to respond accordingly.
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 2 minutes ago
I keep asking this question but no one wants to answer it.
What is the spirit behind these regulations? What is the EU trying to achieve with them?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well why don't you tell us instead.
though i suspect the answer is that they have the welfare of the european people at heart, and they're doing all of this for our benefit, but we're just too stupid to see it.
"in a way us leaving could spark the reform it needs and we miss out on it, but if we voted to stay it would be a vindication of the EU and they would carry on as normal."
I think this is the likely outcome.
It's a schitt organisation not worth being in (and probably not worth existing) but this may actually spur the needed reform.
and EU regs will encourage innovation in the specific field affected by the regs - eg pollution, energy efficiency - but personally i'd rather have corporations innovate based on consumer demand, rather than suprastate regulation.
====================
The average consumer is not aware of the amount of Short Chain Chlorinated Paraffns in the environment.
This consumer does not know that these paraffins are present even in the paint they use in their homes.
The consumer does not know that these SCCPs are carcinogenic.
The EU invested heavily in researching it and it has been found even in human breast milk.
Now, if there was no supra-state legislation or regs, you will not be aware of this, would you?
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 3 seconds ago
What is going to happen to the agricultural sector without EU subsidies?
Looks like we will all be shopping at Lidl very soon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My brother in law is a farmer and he was fervently out.
The European Common Agricultural Policy did serious and irreversible damage to a lot of British farmers.
Leaving the EU will entitle British farmers the freedom to produce what British consumers want, not what the EU need them to.
No doubt, EU subsidies were a positive thing. However, the single market also damaged British farming and ruined a lot of farmers.
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 2 minutes ago
I keep asking this question but no one wants to answer it.
What is the spirit behind these regulations? What is the EU trying to achieve with them?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well why don't you tell us instead.
though i suspect the answer is that they have the welfare of the european people at heart, and they're doing all of this for our benefit, but we're just too stupid to see it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The spirit behind the vast majority of legislation is the protection of life and the environment.
Without them, I would not recommend you drank tap water
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 3 minutes ago
Mate, I'm part European and a lot of folk do not understand Europeans.
You know the, them against us mantra?
Well we just activated the European one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
posted about a minute ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 3 seconds ago
What is going to happen to the agricultural sector without EU subsidies?
Looks like we will all be shopping at Lidl very soon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My brother in law is a farmer and he was fervently out.
The European Common Agricultural Policy did serious and irreversible damage to a lot of British farmers.
Leaving the EU will entitle British farmers the freedom to produce what British consumers want, not what the EU need them to.
No doubt, EU subsidies were a positive thing. However, the single market also damaged British farming and ruined a lot of farmers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So why did the agricultural sector overwhelmingly support Remain?
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 32 seconds ago
and EU regs will encourage innovation in the specific field affected by the regs - eg pollution, energy efficiency - but personally i'd rather have corporations innovate based on consumer demand, rather than suprastate regulation.
====================
The average consumer is not aware of the amount of Short Chain Chlorinated Paraffns in the environment.
This consumer does not know that these paraffins are present even in the paint they use in their homes.
The consumer does not know that these SCCPs are carcinogenic.
The EU invested heavily in researching it and it has been found even in human breast milk.
Now, if there was no supra-state legislation or regs, you will not be aware of this, would you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
you're assuming that the most efficient way to discover this, or to generate scientific knowledge in general, is to have a huge european infrastructure taking money from the states - because of course the EU has legislative power but no fiscal power of its own - and then allocating it as we see fit.
plenty of knowledge existed before the EU, and plenty will exist after it.
and out of interest, if the EU is so great, why don't we go the whole hog and set up a world union, where every country in the world gives money to a global institution to dole out as it sees fit? no trade tariffs between any countries, just one big happy global family.
Rupees to a pound going up which is fantastic
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 32 seconds ago
and EU regs will encourage innovation in the specific field affected by the regs - eg pollution, energy efficiency - but personally i'd rather have corporations innovate based on consumer demand, rather than suprastate regulation.
====================
The average consumer is not aware of the amount of Short Chain Chlorinated Paraffns in the environment.
This consumer does not know that these paraffins are present even in the paint they use in their homes.
The consumer does not know that these SCCPs are carcinogenic.
The EU invested heavily in researching it and it has been found even in human breast milk.
Now, if there was no supra-state legislation or regs, you will not be aware of this, would you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
you're assuming that the most efficient way to discover this, or to generate scientific knowledge in general, is to have a huge european infrastructure taking money from the states - because of course the EU has legislative power but no fiscal power of its own - and then allocating it as we see fit.
plenty of knowledge existed before the EU, and plenty will exist after it.
and out of interest, if the EU is so great, why don't we go the whole hog and set up a world union, where every country in the world gives money to a global institution to dole out as it sees fit? no trade tariffs between any countries, just one big happy global family.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Like the UN without trade?
plenty of knowledge existed before the EU, and plenty will exist after it.
============
Agreed, so why are corporations having to be taught to comply with basic stuff relating to Safety of workers at work for instance
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 8 minutes ago
Mate, I'm part European and a lot of folk do not understand Europeans.
You know the, them against us mantra?
Well we just activated the European one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We're still European and part of Europe just not part of the EU, think that's the dilemma for a lot of people. I love Europe, I watched Belgium vs Swiss with my Belgian cousins and a Belgium flag wrapped around me. And one of my cousins with dual nationality voted leave too
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
posted about a minute ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 3 seconds ago
What is going to happen to the agricultural sector without EU subsidies?
Looks like we will all be shopping at Lidl very soon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My brother in law is a farmer and he was fervently out.
The European Common Agricultural Policy did serious and irreversible damage to a lot of British farmers.
Leaving the EU will entitle British farmers the freedom to produce what British consumers want, not what the EU need them to.
No doubt, EU subsidies were a positive thing. However, the single market also damaged British farming and ruined a lot of farmers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So why did the agricultural sector overwhelmingly support Remain?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
because the EU has made British farming dependent on CAP (or at least 55% of it) and there's uncertainty about what will replace CAP when Britain leaves the EU.
They were also threatened that land prices would crash, and statistics like "90% of farms would go bust" were thrown around - many chose not to gamble on their families futures.
However, I believe the farming minister was in the leave camp, and a lot of farmers argued that they could negotiate their own version of CAP with the government, like farmers in Switzerland who get even more from their government than they would through CAP.
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 42 seconds ago
Mate, I'm part European and a lot of folk do not understand Europeans.
You know the, them against us mantra?
Well we just activated the European one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not sure other participants the EU project share your view. I have family living in Spain. The town they live is very anti-the EU and Germany in particular. The only reason they aren't calling for a Spanish exit is because they are terrified by what their assets will be worth if they left the Euro. And if you suggest to them European hegemony they are far more likely to quote you 1000 years of history. Most in the Eurozone know they need political union to survive but most also don't want to give up whatever sovereign rights they have.
I think the biggest regret that Cameron had about losing the referendum was not that Britain was going to exit. But the fact that it would been far more painless when the Eurocrats did it in the next 5-20 years for a nation state in the Eurozone. But of course Britain would have had an obligation to share in the financial pain in the umpteenth bail-out of non productive countries whilst that happened.
I like the idea that we could have stayed and the EU could have stayed the same for the next 100 years. But that was not going to happen as ppl will again find out when Greece tries to go for bailout mk3 in a few months.
Sign in if you want to comment
LIVE: Great Britain EU Referendum
Page 243 of 395
244 | 245 | 246 | 247 | 248
posted on 28/6/16
it's the opposite if anything with all the warnings about how much poorer people would be. Leaving is for the long term, there was always going to be short term uncertainty but fear of that shouldn't be enough to stay in a union that's failing.
==================
A union that is failing? In what way? Our leaving it will actually galvanise it further.
Need to worry about our own Union which is destined for a break up
posted on 28/6/16
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted less than a minute ago
As long as it met or exceeded the EU standards there would be no problem in selling it.
-----------------------------------------
Which is where many British Standards currently are. However we are still forced to meet the EU standards directive if we plan to export to the EU. So this sovereignty argument, is all well and good but we still have to do what we are told.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is something a lot of folk struggle to grasp.
We have essentially weakened our position in the EU and by extension the world.
I keep hearing about trade deals with other nations. We are a service driven economy and "sell services" for the most part.
Considering we outsource a lot of these services to China and India already
What exactly are we going to be trading with?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, though the remainers seem to be struggling with the concept that once they are a part of UK law EU regulations affect 100% of our trade, whether it is with the EU or not.
To trade with the EU we will presumably still have to have our products/service match the quality demands of the EU (as does the US/China/India), but that is different to saying we need to have it as part of our law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What is the difference? You can still meet and exceed Eu requirements.
So the EU provides a minimum requirement. I'm not sure what the problem is here to be honest.
What is the spirit behind regulations?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
the difference is that if the UK wants to sell less energy efficient vacuums to africa then either the UK government says that this is great (jobs and taxes in UK, vacuums in africa) or they say that this is terrible (destroying the environment), but they have the freedom to do what they (or the UK population) want.
as a part of the EU we have no say in that whatsoever.
posted on 28/6/16
What is going to happen to the agricultural sector without EU subsidies?
Looks like we will all be shopping at Lidl very soon
posted on 28/6/16
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 10 minutes ago
But will unrestricted trade not give us a chance of reducing that deficit? I'm not saying we can do it overnight, but long term.....
================
What would we be trading? Can you give us a few examples?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't decide that.
posted on 28/6/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 28/6/16
the difference is that if the UK wants to sell less energy efficient vacuums to africa then either the UK government says that this is great (jobs and taxes in UK, vacuums in africa) or they say that this is terrible (destroying the environment), but they have the freedom to do what they (or the UK population) want.
as a part of the EU we have no say in that whatsoever.
======================
The Africans are not as dumb as a lot of people think. I do a lot of work on that continent and a lot of companies there for ease of operations keep the same standards to enable personnel seamlessly move across offices.
I have seen rigs, FPSOs, Vessels, etc sent back for not complying with EU regs.
Shell for instance require all these directives as well as their own business operating standards.
The EU regs actually encourage innovation in this sector.
What is wrong with that?
posted on 28/6/16
comment by Cal Neva (U11544)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 18 minutes ago
I said before
We have a trade deficit of €51bn with Germany
That is a third of their entire EU trade surplus.
Germany also happen to be the biggest net contributor to the EU and wield great influence.
Does Germany:
A) Push for a low (at or below the avarage 1.5% in current non EU goods) or zero tariff EU deal with Britain which suits both parties, and them in particular? As said by the equivalent of their CBI, which ridiculed the tariff idea
Or
B) Accept a punitive trade deal which hurts them more than any other EU member?
What do we think?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A couple of things. Our exports to the EU account for 13% of our GDP.The EU exports to the UK account for 3% of the EU's GDP. So these trades are more important to us.
On the BMW thing. BMW employ 8,000 directly in the UK and an estimated 50,000 supply jobs are connected.It isn't as simple as they need BMW car sales here.We are also dependent on those jobs here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
60% of the components are also made in the EU prior to assembly in the UK.
posted on 28/6/16
I keep asking this question but no one wants to answer it.
What is the spirit behind these regulations? What is the EU trying to achieve with them?
posted on 28/6/16
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted about a minute ago
it's the opposite if anything with all the warnings about how much poorer people would be. Leaving is for the long term, there was always going to be short term uncertainty but fear of that shouldn't be enough to stay in a union that's failing.
==================
A union that is failing? In what way? Our leaving it will actually galvanise it further.
Need to worry about our own Union which is destined for a break up
----------------------------------------------------------------------
a weak currency, unemployment twice as high as the UK, rising inequality. Other countries have the same problems we do in this country (or worse) and if they all held referendums a few others would leave as well. If there's that much discontent then it can't be running well...
in a way us leaving could spark the reform it needs and we miss out on it, but if we voted to stay it would be a vindication of the EU and they would carry on as normal.
posted on 28/6/16
Mate, I'm part European and a lot of folk do not understand Europeans.
You know the, them against us mantra?
Well we just activated the European one.
posted on 28/6/16
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 13 seconds ago
the difference is that if the UK wants to sell less energy efficient vacuums to africa then either the UK government says that this is great (jobs and taxes in UK, vacuums in africa) or they say that this is terrible (destroying the environment), but they have the freedom to do what they (or the UK population) want.
as a part of the EU we have no say in that whatsoever.
======================
The Africans are not as dumb as a lot of people think. I do a lot of work on that continent and a lot of companies there for ease of operations keep the same standards to enable personnel seamlessly move across offices.
I have seen rigs, FPSOs, Vessels, etc sent back for not complying with EU regs.
Shell for instance require all these directives as well as their own business operating standards.
The EU regs actually encourage innovation in this sector.
What is wrong with that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It wasn't meant to be a sleight on african consumers, but point taken.
and EU regs will encourage innovation in the specific field affected by the regs - eg pollution, energy efficiency - but personally i'd rather have corporations innovate based on consumer demand, rather than suprastate regulation.
if consumers want to buy sugary drinks that rot their teeth and lead to obesity, fine with me; if they demand drinks that taste sweet and sugary but aren't, because they are laced with chemicals, also fine with me. But I'm happy for them to choose, and for companies to respond accordingly.
posted on 28/6/16
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 2 minutes ago
I keep asking this question but no one wants to answer it.
What is the spirit behind these regulations? What is the EU trying to achieve with them?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well why don't you tell us instead.
though i suspect the answer is that they have the welfare of the european people at heart, and they're doing all of this for our benefit, but we're just too stupid to see it.
posted on 28/6/16
"in a way us leaving could spark the reform it needs and we miss out on it, but if we voted to stay it would be a vindication of the EU and they would carry on as normal."
I think this is the likely outcome.
It's a schitt organisation not worth being in (and probably not worth existing) but this may actually spur the needed reform.
posted on 28/6/16
and EU regs will encourage innovation in the specific field affected by the regs - eg pollution, energy efficiency - but personally i'd rather have corporations innovate based on consumer demand, rather than suprastate regulation.
====================
The average consumer is not aware of the amount of Short Chain Chlorinated Paraffns in the environment.
This consumer does not know that these paraffins are present even in the paint they use in their homes.
The consumer does not know that these SCCPs are carcinogenic.
The EU invested heavily in researching it and it has been found even in human breast milk.
Now, if there was no supra-state legislation or regs, you will not be aware of this, would you?
posted on 28/6/16
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 3 seconds ago
What is going to happen to the agricultural sector without EU subsidies?
Looks like we will all be shopping at Lidl very soon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My brother in law is a farmer and he was fervently out.
The European Common Agricultural Policy did serious and irreversible damage to a lot of British farmers.
Leaving the EU will entitle British farmers the freedom to produce what British consumers want, not what the EU need them to.
No doubt, EU subsidies were a positive thing. However, the single market also damaged British farming and ruined a lot of farmers.
posted on 28/6/16
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 2 minutes ago
I keep asking this question but no one wants to answer it.
What is the spirit behind these regulations? What is the EU trying to achieve with them?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well why don't you tell us instead.
though i suspect the answer is that they have the welfare of the european people at heart, and they're doing all of this for our benefit, but we're just too stupid to see it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The spirit behind the vast majority of legislation is the protection of life and the environment.
Without them, I would not recommend you drank tap water
posted on 28/6/16
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 3 minutes ago
Mate, I'm part European and a lot of folk do not understand Europeans.
You know the, them against us mantra?
Well we just activated the European one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 28/6/16
comment by The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
posted about a minute ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 3 seconds ago
What is going to happen to the agricultural sector without EU subsidies?
Looks like we will all be shopping at Lidl very soon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My brother in law is a farmer and he was fervently out.
The European Common Agricultural Policy did serious and irreversible damage to a lot of British farmers.
Leaving the EU will entitle British farmers the freedom to produce what British consumers want, not what the EU need them to.
No doubt, EU subsidies were a positive thing. However, the single market also damaged British farming and ruined a lot of farmers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So why did the agricultural sector overwhelmingly support Remain?
posted on 28/6/16
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 32 seconds ago
and EU regs will encourage innovation in the specific field affected by the regs - eg pollution, energy efficiency - but personally i'd rather have corporations innovate based on consumer demand, rather than suprastate regulation.
====================
The average consumer is not aware of the amount of Short Chain Chlorinated Paraffns in the environment.
This consumer does not know that these paraffins are present even in the paint they use in their homes.
The consumer does not know that these SCCPs are carcinogenic.
The EU invested heavily in researching it and it has been found even in human breast milk.
Now, if there was no supra-state legislation or regs, you will not be aware of this, would you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
you're assuming that the most efficient way to discover this, or to generate scientific knowledge in general, is to have a huge european infrastructure taking money from the states - because of course the EU has legislative power but no fiscal power of its own - and then allocating it as we see fit.
plenty of knowledge existed before the EU, and plenty will exist after it.
and out of interest, if the EU is so great, why don't we go the whole hog and set up a world union, where every country in the world gives money to a global institution to dole out as it sees fit? no trade tariffs between any countries, just one big happy global family.
posted on 28/6/16
Rupees to a pound going up which is fantastic
posted on 28/6/16
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 32 seconds ago
and EU regs will encourage innovation in the specific field affected by the regs - eg pollution, energy efficiency - but personally i'd rather have corporations innovate based on consumer demand, rather than suprastate regulation.
====================
The average consumer is not aware of the amount of Short Chain Chlorinated Paraffns in the environment.
This consumer does not know that these paraffins are present even in the paint they use in their homes.
The consumer does not know that these SCCPs are carcinogenic.
The EU invested heavily in researching it and it has been found even in human breast milk.
Now, if there was no supra-state legislation or regs, you will not be aware of this, would you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
you're assuming that the most efficient way to discover this, or to generate scientific knowledge in general, is to have a huge european infrastructure taking money from the states - because of course the EU has legislative power but no fiscal power of its own - and then allocating it as we see fit.
plenty of knowledge existed before the EU, and plenty will exist after it.
and out of interest, if the EU is so great, why don't we go the whole hog and set up a world union, where every country in the world gives money to a global institution to dole out as it sees fit? no trade tariffs between any countries, just one big happy global family.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Like the UN without trade?
posted on 28/6/16
plenty of knowledge existed before the EU, and plenty will exist after it.
============
Agreed, so why are corporations having to be taught to comply with basic stuff relating to Safety of workers at work for instance
posted on 28/6/16
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 8 minutes ago
Mate, I'm part European and a lot of folk do not understand Europeans.
You know the, them against us mantra?
Well we just activated the European one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We're still European and part of Europe just not part of the EU, think that's the dilemma for a lot of people. I love Europe, I watched Belgium vs Swiss with my Belgian cousins and a Belgium flag wrapped around me. And one of my cousins with dual nationality voted leave too
posted on 28/6/16
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
posted about a minute ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 3 seconds ago
What is going to happen to the agricultural sector without EU subsidies?
Looks like we will all be shopping at Lidl very soon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My brother in law is a farmer and he was fervently out.
The European Common Agricultural Policy did serious and irreversible damage to a lot of British farmers.
Leaving the EU will entitle British farmers the freedom to produce what British consumers want, not what the EU need them to.
No doubt, EU subsidies were a positive thing. However, the single market also damaged British farming and ruined a lot of farmers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So why did the agricultural sector overwhelmingly support Remain?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
because the EU has made British farming dependent on CAP (or at least 55% of it) and there's uncertainty about what will replace CAP when Britain leaves the EU.
They were also threatened that land prices would crash, and statistics like "90% of farms would go bust" were thrown around - many chose not to gamble on their families futures.
However, I believe the farming minister was in the leave camp, and a lot of farmers argued that they could negotiate their own version of CAP with the government, like farmers in Switzerland who get even more from their government than they would through CAP.
posted on 28/6/16
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 42 seconds ago
Mate, I'm part European and a lot of folk do not understand Europeans.
You know the, them against us mantra?
Well we just activated the European one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not sure other participants the EU project share your view. I have family living in Spain. The town they live is very anti-the EU and Germany in particular. The only reason they aren't calling for a Spanish exit is because they are terrified by what their assets will be worth if they left the Euro. And if you suggest to them European hegemony they are far more likely to quote you 1000 years of history. Most in the Eurozone know they need political union to survive but most also don't want to give up whatever sovereign rights they have.
I think the biggest regret that Cameron had about losing the referendum was not that Britain was going to exit. But the fact that it would been far more painless when the Eurocrats did it in the next 5-20 years for a nation state in the Eurozone. But of course Britain would have had an obligation to share in the financial pain in the umpteenth bail-out of non productive countries whilst that happened.
I like the idea that we could have stayed and the EU could have stayed the same for the next 100 years. But that was not going to happen as ppl will again find out when Greece tries to go for bailout mk3 in a few months.
Page 243 of 395
244 | 245 | 246 | 247 | 248