BREXIT

[JohnfromUK]

3 minutes ago, oowee said:

What would you do away with?

It is far to big a field to be specific because the EU has rules for everything from a jet plane to the hole in the end of  toothbrush, but dreaming up rules principally to keep out the competition is not good long term sense.

I know before I retired - the data that had to be submitted for CE marking was massively onerous and much of it entirely unnecessary.

Many imports were CE marked - but had never been properly tested and never policed - result - WE the inside EU manufacturer had to meet all the expensive standards - the far east good just ignored the rules and stamped the mark on anyway - and sold as 'approved'.

[oowee]

6 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

 

Many imports were CE marked - but had never been properly tested and never policed - result - WE the inside EU manufacturer had to meet all the expensive standards - the far east good just ignored the rules and stamped the mark on anyway - and sold as 'approved'.

That's an enforcement issue. Get rid of the standard solves that problem in a stroke  

I am not saying that the whole thing is not without fault. There are no doubt thousands of things that could be improved but throwing the baby out with the bath water is not the answer. No doubt there are many things we could change for ourselves but then to trade we would either apply EU standards or ours and the EU's and probably those of the US too. Three lots of regulation instead of one. 

[Gordon R]

So we don't trade with the USA now?

[JohnfromUK]

Just now, oowee said:

That's an enforcement issue.

The real issue is we have so many standards, so much bureaucracy that the whole thing is completely voluntary ......... unless you happen to be be supplier based inside the EU.

There is no faster way to bring an organisation into disrepute that making loads of rules and not being able (or indeed willing) to police them for all.

Like our Shotgun/firearms licensing systems.  Over the years made vastly more onerous to those who follow the rules (and getting more so with Doctors letters required, rules on de-activated items etc.).  Still nothing effective is/can be done about the unlicensed ones - which are largely those that crimes are committed with.

• A good organisation has few rules and rigorously polices and applies those rules.  Everyone respects the rules
• A poor organisation has loads of rules that are effectively 'voluntary'.  Many simply ignore the rules

[oowee]

19 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

The real issue is we have so many standards, so much bureaucracy that the whole thing is completely voluntary ......... unless you happen to be be supplier based inside the EU.

There is no faster way to bring an organisation into disrepute that making loads of rules and not being able (or indeed willing) to police them for all.

Like our Shotgun/firearms licensing systems.  Over the years made vastly more onerous to those who follow the rules (and getting more so with Doctors letters required, rules on de-activated items etc.).  Still nothing effective is/can be done about the unlicensed ones - which are largely those that crimes are committed with.

• A good organisation has few rules and rigorously polices and applies those rules.  Everyone respects the rules
• A poor organisation has loads of rules that are effectively 'voluntary'.  Many simply ignore the rules

I would not argue with that. 

[JohnfromUK]

6 minutes ago, oowee said:

I would not argue with that. 

I might have added;

26 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

• A good organisation has few rules and rigorously polices and applies those rules.  Everyone respects the rules Everyone prospers and lives happily
• A poor organisation has loads of rules that are effectively 'voluntary'.  Many simply ignore the rules  Those who ignore the rules prosper - those who follow them suffer

"A poor organisation has loads of rules that are effectively 'voluntary'.  Many simply ignore the rules  Those who ignore the rules prosper - those who follow them suffer"

This is why the French (who ignore rules that don't suit them) have done well under the EU, and the UK, who tend to follow rules have found it difficult.

Edited November 3, 2019 by JohnfromUK

[Scully]

1 hour ago, oowee said:

We vote directly for the EU parliament its approval is required for EU laws. The President needs approval for action from the Parliament we vote for. The UK's PM with those across the EU is responsible for the overall direction and political agenda of the EU. 

Why should anyone be scared of ceding some control with trade? We will give that control whether we are in or out of the EU. When we trade with other nations outside of the EU we already agree to be bound by controls. When we agree a trade deal with the US we will agree more controls. When we agree a trade deal with the EU then more controls. 

If you have any doubt ask why Google is paying the EU $5bn.

Ok, so if the EU proposes policy which I don’t agree with, how do I make my voice heard? How do I vote for or against a particular EU candidate, whose policies have the potential to effect my life? 

[oowee]

4 minutes ago, Scully said:

Ok, so if the EU proposes policy which I don’t agree with, how do I make my voice heard? How do I vote for or against a particular EU candidate, whose policies have the potential to effect my life? 

The same way as in the UK GE. You vote for the candidate that most represents your views.  Unfortunately the UK and it's reps have been disengaged. I reckon the brexit vote is likely to have had the biggest impact on making the EU rethink it's game plan together with the inclusion of the former Eastern European states. 

 

Edited November 3, 2019 by oowee

[Scully]

4 minutes ago, oowee said:

The same way as in the UK GE. You vote for the candidate that most represents your views.  Unfortunately the UK and it's reps have been disengaged. I reckon the brexit vote is likely to have had the biggest impact on making the EU rethink it's game plan together with the inclusion of the former Eastern European states. 

 

Really? 😀 So how come we’re still in the EU then? That’s worked well hasn’t it! 
So tell me, what is it you’re so scared of losing that is worth more to you than that hard fought freedom to choose? 

 

[oowee]

12 minutes ago, Scully said:

Really? 😀 So how come we’re still in the EU then? That’s worked well hasn’t it! 
So tell me, what is it you’re so scared of losing that is worth more to you than that hard fought freedom to choose? 

 

I was referring to the act of voting to leave. 

Rather than have freedom to choose, we will have the same rules with less influence. Rather than having the opportunity to lead Europe we will follow. Indeed some will argue that we will have multiple rules for different markets as we adopt to EU, UK and US rules and regs. We will pay more for less with tariff and the conformity bill will be greater. We will loose many of the privileges around travel and work that we have now.

Of course they could still be available but we will be a minor player at the negotiation party. 

 

[henry d]

4 hours ago, Scully said:

Not at all. Anything which ties us to the EU isn't leaving. The 'scare' campaign made it abundantly clear; this was a once in a lifetime vote and out meant out. Which part of that do you not understand, as I can't really make it any simpler? 

That is because they knew the bourach it would end up being, anyone with a political brain would have known it was going to be dragged into a no deal situation. Any exit from something like this needs negotiated, otherwise we should have left within weeks of the vote.

[Yellow Bear]

10 minutes ago, henry d said:

we should have left within weeks of the vote.

For once we agree

[Scully]

26 minutes ago, oowee said:

I was referring to the act of voting to leave. 

Rather than have freedom to choose, we will have the same rules with less influence. Rather than having the opportunity to lead Europe we will follow. Indeed some will argue that we will have multiple rules for different markets as we adopt to EU, UK and US rules and regs. We will pay more for less with tariff and the conformity bill will be greater. We will loose many of the privileges around travel and work that we have now. 

Of course they could still be available but we will be a minor player at the negotiation party. 

 

Influence? We don't even have enough influence to leave!  Privileges? You consider being in the EU a privilege? You are looking at this from the viewpoint of trade and your own personal finances, and a willingness to forego democracy and accountability to ensure it.  We can no more influence a vote for a foreign EU candidate than we can influence the tides. The point is though, at least with the UK one I get the choice and the opportunity. 

Like I've said before, if anyone needed reminding of just how undemocratic and corrupt the EU is, they need look no further than the perfect examples given by our home grown pro euro politicians since we voted to leave. The only positive is that ( unlike their EU counterparts ) they are accountable. 🙂

34 minutes ago, henry d said:

That is because they knew the bourach it would end up being, anyone with a political brain would have known it was going to be dragged into a no deal situation. Any exit from something like this needs negotiated, otherwise we should have left within weeks of the vote.

But they didn't know that at all! Those 'anyones' with political brains expected us to vote to remain!  How bright are they? 😃

[Dave-G]

6 hours ago, das said:

Yes, I will pay a higher green fee as a visitor, but then I can choose to play as I feel, when I want. But, I won't be paying a £1000 + membership subscription. IE I am free from the tie of the club.   What the golf club choose to make as a markup on beer, food and other incidentals is entirely up to them. They will soon find out if their prices are too high. As far as green fee prices go, check your nearest golf club, all fees will be online. As far as non member surcharges go, never heard of them in my 30 years of golf.

And you are free to join any other clubs you wish.

[henry d]

9 hours ago, Dave-G said:

And you are free to join any other clubs you wish.

So you want to leave one and join another... the mind boggles!

[Centrepin]

2 minutes ago, henry d said:

So you want to leave one and join another... the mind boggles!

If the first club is ****, overpriced and overbearing, why not leave and join another? Surely that's the free choice that we fought for. 

[henry d]

As Kylie said "Better the devil you know..."

[TIGHTCHOKE]

No thanks!

[Scully]

42 minutes ago, henry d said:

As Kylie said "Better the devil you know..."

Absolute sphericals! 

[Dave-G]

2 hours ago, henry d said:

So you want to leave one and join another... the mind boggles!

That's not what I said henry, I didn't think you would twist words in the way you have.  

The fact that I CAN join any other club that for example doesn't demand I let them fish in my pond and doesn't interfere with my doings elsewhere is up to me - not them.

[Newbie to this]

 

 

[JohnfromUK]

The left doesn't need to 'understand'.

The left view is that the states takes on control - of Labour, (as in manpower, not the party) Businesses, Wealth, Money supply, Transport, Utilities, you name it - they want it all 'managed' by the state - on behalf of 'the people'.  Historically the state has been very bad at doing this.  But if you make all of your voters happy by taking money from the evil rich - and giving it to your core voters, you will get elected time after time.

Just like the famous Diane Abbott interview about police numbers and costs - she didn't understand.  She didn't need to understand - her voters aren't interested in the costs.  They just want results and someone else can pay for it.  They don't care who it comes from - or if it is borrowed, or how to pay it back.  The left doesn't need to worry about costs - they either borrow the money needed, print it, or simply 'take it' from those who have carefully saved it.

As I think Margaret Thatcher said - "the problems with socialism start when you run out of other peoples money to spend".

[henry d]

1 hour ago, Dave-G said:

That's not what I said henry, I didn't think you would twist words in the way you have.  

The fact that I CAN join any other club that for example doesn't demand I let them fish in my pond and doesn't interfere with my doings elsewhere is up to me - not them.

But that would need to be negotiated and also begs the question are you going it alone then? Minus Scotland and the oil and probably Wales and the sheep...

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, henry d said:

But that would need to be negotiated and also begs the question are you going it alone then? Minus Scotland and the oil and probably Wales and the sheep...

Well that escalated quickly 😂

We vote to leave, and Scotland votes for independence, claims all the oil in the North Sea, then presumably joins the EU and euro. 

Wales likewise votes to leave, keeps all the err, sheep, and also goes all un nationalistly europhile! 

Hard borders all round presumably? 

And you have the neck to tell others they're talking ballcocks! 

Leaving the bloc allows CHOICE, it doesn't necessarily mean any particular path is followed. 

[Gordon R]

Spain will ensure that Scotland never joins the EU. It has too many implications for them, with their own separatists.

Scotland doe not own the North Sea Oil - they are just a bit clueless about maritime law.